Gay Marriage

by

They’re not even trying to be truthful any more, are they?

Conservative wise guy Michael Medved claimed today that no state has ever banned gay marriage.  “That’s a liberal lie,” he says.

Seriously, he said that.  I am not making this up.medved

Thirty state Constitutions and dozens of state laws which are easily found contradict him, as well as about half a dozen Federal Court decisions striking down those very laws.

What he is doing, besides lying, is being deceptive. His claim, which is only accepted by the gullible and the idiotic, is that gays can always get married!  There’s no prohibition to gays getting married!  Just not to each other.

Got that?

I can’t believe he actually believes this is a legitimate argument.   It’s the same one used by bigots who fought against interracial marriage.

Anyway, I certainly hope the GOP keeps this up, as it is just another nail in their coffin.  Eventually, the current Republican party will die and perhaps a new GOP not run by the extremists will rise from the ashes, phoenix-like, and then maybe we can get back to the days when we had two parties debating issues instead of one party trying to get things done and the other one just saying “no” to everything.

by

Virginia joins the 21st Century

And the dominoes keep falling.

Virginia is the latest state where a Federal Court has ruled that prohibitions against gays and lesbians getting married violates the Constitution.  virginia-is-for-loversYes, once more, we radical liberals are forcing our views down the throats of unsuspecting bigots through the terrible practice of “using the exact words of the Constitution.”  (Hey, you ever notice that these homophobes always say we’re “shoving it down their throats”?  Is that subconscious wish fulfillment or what?)

The decision is stayed pending an appeal.  This means that either the Supreme Court will take all of these and make one final decision that will be applied to the entire country, or they will deny the appeals, thus confirming the lower court’s decision, permitting marriages in those states only.

A Federal Court yesterday also ruled that Kentucky could not refuse to accept marriages that occurred in states where the marriage would be legal.  The issue as to Kentucky’s anti-gay marriage law was not before the court, so that may still be coming in another case.

There are still plenty of other cases in the pipeline (including here in Pennsylvania, where our Attorney General has refused to support our states’ anti-marriage law).  So this trip is far from over.

by

Nation’s bigots subject of hate-filled intolerance

Gays were married on the Grammies last night. Fox News’ Todd Starns was quite hurt, calling it a “hate-filled, bigoted, intolerant diatribe against Christians.” grammy-wedding-600x450

In a related story, David Duke, a prominent member of the KKK, complained about seeing an interracial couple during the show. “It hurts, you know?” he said. “These people have no concern for my feelings. It’s so hateful the way they treat my views.”

Yes, all over the United States, bigots are finding themselves the subject of intolerance, and being completely unaware of the concept of irony, have declared that anyone who fights against their bigotry is the real problem.

An attack on their view is an attack on every single foundation of their religion — and, by God, that is just intolerant. Just look at them! What could be more hateful and mean than expressing your love for someone by marrying them?

“We should never ever disagree with someone else’s views if they are based in religion,” Starns claims, “because otherwise, you are just a hateful, mean person. Oh, except for Muslims. Screw them and everything they stand for.”

by

Oklahoma enters the 21st Century

Our devious plan is coming to fruition!  Soon every state will be forced to allow all humans to be treated as equals!  Muahahaha!   snidely

Our latest conquest is the very very red state of Oklahoma, where a federal judge has ruled unconstitutional their law prohibiting gays from getting married.

The liberal plan is shrewd, if I must say so.  We have convinced judges that it is wrong to discriminate against people for no good reason.  And how did we do this?  By using the actual literal words of the United States Constitution!   Muahahaha!

Now, admittedly, there are those who will stand in our way and demand that America is all about treating some of its citizens as inferior — that we should stand for the denial of basic human rights.  Fools!  We will show them all!  Oklahoma and Utah may have stopped gay marriages while this case is on appeal, but we will eventually prevail!

And none shall stop us!

by

Obama thumbs nose at Utah

Oh yeah?  Well, we don’t care what you think!

When the governor of Utah announced that he wouldn’t allow his state to recognize those marriages that were performed after a federal judge ruled them legal (but before they were placed on hold pending an appeal), those of us who are in favor of basic human rights sighed. Clay Bennett editorial cartoon How can people be so mean?  How does it hurt Utah in the slightest for some of its citizens to proclaim their love?  I never have understood the mean-spirited nature of those against gay marriage.

So it was a great pleasure to see today that United States Attorney General Eric Holder announced that all of those marriages would be recognized by the Federal government.  “I am confirming today that, for purposes of federal law, these marriages will be recognized as lawful and considered eligible for all relevant federal benefits on the same terms as other same-sex marriages,” Holder said. “These families should not be asked to endure uncertainty regarding their status as the litigation unfolds.”

Ha!  Take that!

It’s not a complete win, but it shows who is on the side of justice.

by

The future of gay marriage lawsuits

The Utah Attorney General’s request for a stay pending an appeal has been denied by everyone, and now goes before the United States Supreme Court. A stay is granted when the appellant has the possibility of winning the appeal. It would stop the marriages happening in Utah now pending the results of the appeal.

Higher appeals courts do not have to take every case. If they did, they’d never get anything done. Usually they only take a case when at least some of the justices want to overturn what the lower courts did. Even then, if they can’t convince the other justices, the lower court decision will remain. If the Supreme Court refuses to grant the stay, that’s a pretty good sign that they are not interested in taking this case, which means that marriages will continue in Utah.

The Utah court based much of its decision on the Supreme Court’s decision to strike down California’s anti-gay marriage act. Prohibiting gay marriage “humiliates tens of thousands of children now being raised by same-sex couples,” the Supremes wrote, which gave the federal court ammunition it needed to strike down Utah’s laws.

Any law that discriminates must be strictly scrutinized and the state has to show that the discrimination is necessary to achieve an important end. Generic+Gay+Marriange+Legal Here, there is none. Opponents of gay marriage argue that marriage is for procreation (thus nullifying my 31-year childless marriage and prohibiting the sterile and elderly from ever getting married). They say gay marriage harms the children (when there is no evidence whatsoever to support it). They argue that it’s what the citizens of their state want (which didn’t work when they fought to save laws discriminating against minorities and women, either). And then they argue religious reasons (which have no place in our laws).

There is no legal justification to deny gay marriage, and courts are starting to recognize this.

The important thing about the Utah decision is that it may embolden other courts, both state and federal. If this can be done in Utah, the state with the largest percentage of people still against gay marriage, then why not Pennsylvania, where a majority favor it?

It’s also discouraged the fanatics who are fighting against it. Even some of the most conservative observers are now admitting that this is inevitable so it’s better to wage fights elsewhere.

What we really need is one of the conservative Supreme Court members to retire or, in the case of Thomas, be impeached. (But that’s a different topic for a different day.) If Obama could appoint one more justice, great changes could take place and many of the worst decisions made by the Supremes in the past twenty years could be reversed. (Well, except for Gore v. Bush.)

by

Utah (Utah?!!!) joins the 21st century, somewhat unwillingly

It’s been a great year for states joining the 21st century. We’ve added Illinois, Rhode Island, New Jersey, Hawaii, and New Mexico.

And now Utah!

Talk about karma. The citizens of Utah (Mormons mostly) spent millions of dollars fighting gay marriage, and were the driving force behind California’s ban (which was later overturned by the courts).Generic+Gay+Marriange+Legal Utah is still the state with the largest percentage of people who are against gay marriage.

A federal judge has now ruled that Utah’s law banning gay marriage violates the 14th amendment which prohibits discrimination. This is a great decision, and hopefully it will not be overturned. This will set a precedent for other federal courts to find that such provisions are unconstitutional.

Judge Robert Shelby didn’t mince words, either:

The State’s current laws deny its gay and lesbian citizens their fundamental right to marry and, in so doing, demeans the dignity of these same-sex couples for no rational reason. Accordingly, the court finds that these laws are unconstitutional.

He also hit hard against the bigots who say marriage is for procreation, thus making my 31-year marriage invalid in their opinion:

The court does not find the State’s argument compelling because, however persuasive the ability to procreate might be in the context of a particular religious perspective, it is not a defining characteristic of conjugal relationships from a legal and constitutional point of view. The State’s position demeans the dignity not just of same-sex couples, but of the many opposite- sex couples who are unable to reproduce or who choose not to have children. Under the State’s reasoning, a post-menopausal woman or infertile man does not have a fundamental right to marry because she or he does not have the capacity to procreate.

Of course, conservatives who love it when courts take proactive roles in striking down campaign finance reform laws or deciding Presidential elections are all shouting about “judicial activism” (which, as defined by conservatives, means “deciding in ways we don’t like.”).

Screw them. As Judge Shelby points out, this is not just a simple lawsuit. This is about basic fundamental rights:

The Constitution guarantees that all citizens have certain fundamental rights. These rights vest in every person over whom the Constitution has authority and, because they are so important, an individual’s fundamental rights may not be submitted to vote; they depend on the outcome of no elections.

Absolutely correct. Rights are not subject to opinion polls or votes.

by

New Mexico joins the 21st Century

New Mexico is the latest state to stop discriminating against gay couples.  new_mexico_rainbow

There’s been a lot of progress this year as more and more states recognize the inequality of it all.  The sad news is that almost all of the states left are Republican states and many of them have Constitutional amendments the specifically prohibit gay marriage.  Those will take either another amendment to repeal it or a decision from federal courts stating that these amendments are unconstitutional.

And then there is my home state of Pennsylvania again, the only state in the northeast behind the times. It’s also the only state in the northeast with a Tea Party governor and a legislature dominated by Republicans (thanks to gerrymandering, since more people voted for Democrats). Despite the fact that a majority of Pennsylvania citizens support gay marriage, it’s not going to happen until we get rid of the politicians who do not represent us.

Gay marriage (or as we like to call it “marriage”) will happen over the United States eventually.  It’s inevitable.   Deal with it.

by

Hawaii joins the 21st Century

Hawaii yesterday became the 15th state to allow gay marriage (including DC).  Or, to put it another way, 36 states continue to deny that gays are “people” entitled to the same rights as everyone else under the 14th amendment.

Illinois looks like it’s about to become the 16th, and apparently is just waiting for the governor to sign the bill.

It’s sad that we have to wait for states to vote to give these rights, but you also have to admit that this particular civil rights movement is changing fast and there’s no denying that it will ultimately be successful.

So here’s for a day of good news.

by

Pa. AG refuses to support unconstitutional law

When Kathleen Kane was elected Attorney General here in Pennsylvania, I cheered — we haven’t had a Democratic AG in, well, forever it seems. Surely things would change.

I’m happy to report that they have.

The ACLU recently sued Pennsylvania (and some other states) over the gay marriage ban. Our Attorney General has announced that she will not defend a law she believes is unconstitutional. “If there is a law that I feel that does not conform with the Pennsylvania state constitution and the U.S. Constitution, then I ethically cannot do that as a lawyer,” she said.

It’s not like the law won’t be defended; our conservative governor vows to fight this and he has a legal staff to do so. He’s also, based on current polls, the most unpopular governor in the country, and I can only imagine this will hurt him even more in a state that has a majority of the population supporting gay marriage.

Chances are, nothing will happen here in Pennsylvania since we have a Republican-dominated Supreme Court. (One Republican Justice was recently removed — that happens when you get convicted of a felony — but she was replaced by someone almost as bad). So chances are this will move through the courts and get combined with the cases from the other states to later get before the US Supreme Court.

Still, it’s a step in the right direction, and it’s nice to know we have an Attorney General who has ethics.