Friday, August 6, 2010
Via SacBee: Irate Prop. 8 backers say gay judge not impartial
Via California Ripple Effect:
Our Constitution Is a Living, Breathing Document
By Marc Solomon, EQCA Marriage Director, Crossposted from the Bilerico ProjectReading the words of Judge Walker moves me deeply. Once again, our constitution is a living, breathing document, and today it protects our gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender people, just as it should protect all people and peoples when the government treats them unequally because of who they are.
Our community should take great pride in this ruling--all of us. For while the ruling is the direct result of a wise judge and a skilled legal team, the conditions that enabled this ruling are the result of the brave, courageous, and hard work of so, so many, in California and elsewhere. Equal protection and due process are abstract legal concepts until we, individually and collectively, bring them to life. Only nine years ago, in 2001, when I first got involved in the fight for marriage equality in Massachusetts, there were many--including a large number in our own community--who argued that asserting the right to marry would hurt our cause dramatically, even leading to the reversal of the most basic civil rights laws protecting our community.
But those fears did not prevail because same-sex couples and LGBT individuals--and those who love and care about them--knew what was right, and stood up and made strong, brave and compelling cases for their own love and dignity. It's not that they weren't afraid--many who I knew, in Massachusetts, California and elsewhere--were frightened about speaking out authentically about their lives. But they did it anyway, because they knew of its fundamental importance. And not one person that I know regretted afterwards having done so.
When I think about today's ruling, I think about Tom and Ron in Indio, CA who met when they were 19 and 23, who served their country in the military, and who have been together through thick and thin now for 57 years and are facing, together, the challenges of growing old. I think about Jill in Riverside, who married her partner of 23 years last year, only to lose her to breast cancer this past April, and who is now raising three kids on her own. And I think of the Moyas from Marino Valley, a hard-working Latino couple who have just adopted their third child. All of these people have been speaking up, in their communities, in the press, and with their families about their lives together, their commitment to one another and to their family. They and so many like them are the ones who have made marriage real for their neighbors, community, and ultimately for judges and voters.
One final thought about today's ruling. This story is far from written--and it's a story we get to write. Just as our community's hard work led to today's victory, if we are to see full marriage equality in California and throughout the country, we must stay at it. The writing of this human rights journey does not stop with any individual court ruling, powerful though it may be. Wins can be just as ephemeral as losses, and so that means that we must continue to make our case, tell our stories, share our lives.
We've all seen the power of a loss, and the powerful, complicated, and often inspired energy that results from it. My greatest hope from today's win is that--at a time when our community has seen too many disappointments both in Washington and in California--we use this win to catalyze, rejuvenate, and redouble our work. Let's use today's win to remember that it's working--our stories are working--and that there's still much more work to do.
Let's start simple--pick out a line or two from today's opinion that inspires you, and share it along with why marriage equality matters to you, with friends and family members. Then join us in going door to door and telling our stories.
The path to victory is winding and in some ways complicated, but in other, more fundamental ways, it's simple--telling our stories, sharing our lives, demonstrating our humanity.
Learn more information about Prop. 8 on trial >
Read more....
Via Poltico: California ruling puts Obama on spot
AP – Stuart Gaffney, center, holds up a sign while celebrating the decision in the United States District … The culture war is back.
A federal judge’s ruling Wednesday striking down California’s ban on same-sex marriage is a historic and possibly pivotal legal victory for gay rights advocates, but the decision also poses a formidable threat to President Barack Obama’s strategy of relegating divisive social issues to the back burner.
U.S. District Court Judge Vaughn Walker’s decision is just the latest in a series of rulings and high-profile legal challenges drawing public attention to gay rights issues in a sustained way since San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom grabbed headlines in 2004 by OK'ing same-sex marriages in that city.
As gay and lesbian activists celebrate what they hope is the leading edge of a wave of momentous court rulings and legislative successes, they remain uneasy with Obama’s nuanced position on gay marriage.
During the 2008 campaign, Obama took what many on both sides of the gay marriage debate viewed as a straddle. He publicly announced his opposition to same-sex marriage, but he also said that he opposed the California ballot measure seeking to ban it, Proposition 8 — the same ban Walker ruled unconstitutional Wednesday.
Obama explained the seeming contradiction at the time by saying that he opposes any measure singling out a group for adverse treatment by amending the U.S. Constitution or a state constitution, as Prop 8. did, even though legal experts said that was the only viable way to block gay marriage in California.
Gay activists lauded Obama's stance but remain disappointed and a tad puzzled by his unwillingness to simply endorse gay marriage.
Click image to see reaction to the Proposition 8 ruling
Thursday, August 5, 2010
Via PFAW:
 |  |
|
Dear Daniel,
Yesterday, a Federal Judge in California ruled that Proposition 8 violated the fundamental right of gay and lesbian Americans to marry the person they love. The decision was an important milestone on the road to full equality, and it thoroughly dismantled every defense Proposition 8's proponents put forth in their attempts to justify discrimination.And just last month, a Federal Judge in Massachusetts ruled that the federal government couldn't discriminate against legally married gay couples.
It's becoming clear that the walls preventing LGBT Americans from equality under the law are coming tumbling down-and I couldn't be happier. For far too long, anti-gay activists have claimed that LGBT people should be excluded from the promises of our Constitution. And while in too much of the country, discrimination and intolerance are still enshrined in the law, it's clear that momentum is on our side.
But this is no time to rest on our laurels and we can't just leave this up to the courts. On our RightWingWatch.org blog, we're chronicling the howls of protest from the Religious Right. They know that they've been dealt a serious blow, but they're not giving up. Neither will we.
That's why I hope you'll join me in calling on Congress to Dump DOMA.
The Judges who ruled in favor of equality have done their jobs. Congress and the President need to do theirs. We need to make it clear through every branch of government-the courts, the Congress and the White House-that anti-gay discrimination isn't the American Way.
Tell Congress to repeal the discriminatory Defense of Marriage Act.
In the months and years to come, I look forward to standing with you as we fight for equal rights for all people. With your energy, your commitment, and your passion, it's a fight I know we can win.
Sincerely,
Michael B. Keegan, President
via gayagenda: Orthodox Rabbis Sign Declaration of Acceptance
A group of approximately 150 Orthodox rabbis have signed and issued a statement which list 12 reasons why gay men and lesbians should be accepted within the Orthodox community.The statement reads:
“Embarrassing, harassing or demeaning someone with a homosexual orientation or same-sex attraction is a violation of Torah prohibitions that embody the deepest values of Judaism.”and..
“Jews with homosexual orientations or same sex-attractions should be welcomed as full members of the synagogue and school community.”This is a huge step forward for a both the Orthodox Jewish and gay communities.
Read more by CLICKING HERE!
Via Independent Gay Forum:
Judge Walker: A Reagan Appointee, Opposed by Progressives and Gays
by Stephen H. MillerPosted on August 4, 2010
The Cato Institute's David Boaz blogs that Judge Vaughn Walker, who just struck down the California ban on same-sex marriage, is no "San Francisco liberal" (as some marriage equality opponents are claiming). In fact, "progressives" and gay activists fought his appointment. As Boaz writes:Judge Walker was first appointed to the federal bench by President Ronald Reagan in 1987, at the recommendation of Attorney General Edwin Meese III. ... Democratic opposition led by Sen. Alan Cranston (D-CA) prevented the nomination from coming to a vote during Reagan’s term. Walker was renominated by President George H. W. Bush in February 1989. Again the Democratic Senate refused to act on the nomination. Finally Bush renominated Walker in August, and the Senate confirmed him in December. ...It almost makes you doubt whether progressives really are smarter and more insightful than the rest of us.
[C]oalitions including such groups as the NAACP, the National Organization for Women, the Human Rights Campaign, the Lambda Legal Defense Fund, and the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force worked to block the nomination.
In other words, this "liberal San Francisco judge" was recommended by Ed Meese, appointed by Ronald Reagan, and opposed by Alan Cranston, Nancy Pelosi, Edward Kennedy, and the leading gay activist groups. It's a good thing for advocates of marriage equality that those forces were only able to block Walker twice.
More. James Taranto of the Wall Street Journal predicts that Justice Kennedy, based on the consistency of his pro-gay equality rulings, will vote to uphold Judge Walker's decision:
Yet while Kennedy cannot be pigeonholed in terms of "ideology," on this specific topic, he has been consistent in taking a very broad view of the rights of homosexuals. He not only voted with the majority but wrote the majority opinions in two crucial cases: Romer v. Evans (1996) and Lawrence v. Texas (2003). ... Those who see Justice Kennedy's position in Perry as difficult to predict in effect entertain "the belief that principle and logic have nothing to do" with his decisions on the court.Kennedy, too, was a Reagan appointee opposed by liberal advocacy groups.
Permalink | 7 Comment(s)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)