Prop. 8: Bigotry Wins Again in California

Three words:  Boycott bigoted California.

Three more:  Here’s to 2010.

The California Supreme Court today upheld Proposition 8’s ban on same-sex marriage but also ruled that gay couples who wed before the election will continue to be married under state law.

The decision virtually ensures another fight at the ballot box over marriage rights for gays. Gay rights activists say they may ask voters to repeal the marriage ban as early as next year, and opponents have pledged to fight any such effort. Proposition 8 passed with 52% of the vote.

Although the court split 6-1 on the constitutionality of Proposition 8, the justices were unanimous in deciding to keep intact the marriages of as many as 18,000 gay couples who exchanged vows before the election. The marriages began last June, after a 4-3 state high court ruling striking down the marriage ban last May.

In an opinion written by Chief Justice Ronald M. George, the state high court ruled today that the November initiative was not an illegal constitutional revision, as gay rights lawyers contended, nor unconstitutional because it took away an inalienable right, as Atty. Gen. Jerry Brown argued.

Only Justice Carlos R. Moreno, the court’s sole Democrat, wanted Proposition 8 struck down as an illegal constitutional revision.

Justice Joyce L. Kennard, who voted with the majority last year to give gays marriage rights, joined George and the court’s four other justices in voting to uphold Proposition 8.

via LA Times:  Prop. 8: The state high court upholds a ban on gay marriages

Prop 8 The Web Series No. 4: Murder for Everyone

Marriage Equality: NOM’s Christian Soldiers Launch Legal Attack

A federal court has granted attorneys with a Christian legal firm a motion to intervene in a lawsuit that challenges Proposition 8 and the federal Defense of Marriage Act.

The U.S. District Court for the Central District of California, Southern Division, filed the order granting the motion on Wednesday. Alliance Defense Fund attorneys will intervene on behalf of ProtectMarriage.com, the main proponents of Proposition 8 – Californias constitutional amendment defining marriage as between a man and a woman.

“The people of California want marriage to remain as the union between one man and one woman; they made their voice clear last November at the polls,” said ADF Senior Legal Counsel Brian Raum in a statement released Friday. “Yet this lawsuit begs the court to nullify the voices of more than 7 million California voters, as well as put an end to the federal law on marriage.”

Arthur Smelt and Christopher Hammer, who have been in a committed relationship for over 10 years, filed suit against the state of California and the United States of America in December 2008, claiming that both Proposition 8 and the federal Defense of Marriage Act violate the U.S. constitution, specifically the Equal Protection Clause.

The 1996 federal Defense of Marriage Act DOMA, enacted under the Clinton administration, defines marriage as a legal union between one man and one woman for purposes of all federal laws, and provides that states need not recognize same-sex marriages from another state.

via the Christian Post:  ADF Attorneys to Defend Prop 8 and DoMA

Maine House to Vote on Equality

We have a unique opportunity: Today, the Maine House of Representatives is slated to vote on marriage equality. The issue, of course, is of massive importance to equality seekers there, as the AP explains:

For GLBT people in the Pine Tree State, a life saddled by legal inequality is “unbearable.”

Diane Sammer and her partner, Pam Dennis, were careful to sign papers giving Sammer power of attorney over Dennis’ affairs. Yet after Dennis died of a heart attack and her body was to be cremated, the undertaker refused to accept Sammer’s signature.

After some legal wrangling, Sammer signed a document to free the undertaker of any potential legal liability for taking away the remains of the woman with whom she had lived for 28 years.

“It was humiliating and just made an unbearable situation that much more so,” said Sammer, who’s from the coastal Maine town of Harpswell. …

While Maine law has evolved to treat male and female spouses equally, there are distinctions in key areas of wills and probate between married couples and same-sex couples, according to a memorandum by family law attorney Michael Levey.

In traditional marriages, for example, a portion of the deceased’s estate goes to the surviving spouse if there’s no will. Even if the will excludes the surviving spouse, he or she is still entitled to about a third of the estate. Neither provision applies to same-sex couples.

Surviving spouses are protected from creditors. Maine law also requires spouses to support each other when in need, and a partner who fails to do so can face a court order. This doesn’t apply to same-sex couples. …

_When a worker suffers a job-related death, workers’ compensation law says the surviving spouse shall receive 80 percent of the employee’s average weekly wage for nearly 10 years. That provision doesn’t apply to same-sex couples.

_State law says a spouse is considered appropriate to be a guardian for a disabled person, but same-sex partners have no such priority to appointment.

_State laws treat gay and straight couples who have children differently. For same-sex couples, there’s no assumption that the couple’s child is theirs.

Does this make you as sick as it makes me? This disparity should not be in the so-called Land of the Free. Would Jesus approve of the way his gay and lesbian children — and their children — are treated under state law? Which makes it all the more cool that, thanks to techonology, we can watch the proceedings and see the vote. Enjoy, and hopefully, you will see history made and justice finally won.

 

View the proceedings here — the debate is under way as of 10:30 a.m.

Activism: Another Reason to Skip Wal-Mart

The CEO of Wal-Mart, just like Mormons, can exercise his right to free speech and expression however he sees fit. I too have that right — and will exercise it by refusing to give the company that pays him my business and by saying so.  Why? Well, I have many reasons for not shopping Wal-Mart, but here is the newest kick in the rubber parts: The Advocate tells us that the already-suspect discount chain’s new CEO has a problem with gay people adopting children. That being the case, Wal-Mart should expect GLBT people and their allies to have reservations about spending their money there

The new CEO of Wal-Mart was among those who signed a petition to place an initiative on the Arkansas ballot last November to ban adoption and foster parenting by gay couples, reports the group KnowThyNeighbor.org.

A signature from Mike Duke, with an address that matches the known residence and birth date of the Wal-Mart head, was verified by the state and counted to place Act 1 on the ballot. The initiative, which passed with 57% approval among voters, makes it illegal for unmarried cohabitating couples — gay or straight — to adopt or foster children.

Opponents of Act 1 charged that the true intent behind the measure was to limit the family rights of same-sex couples. The proposal included straight couples to ensure its constitutional viability, given that a previous ban targeting only same-sex couples had been struck down.

Last week, KnowThyNeighbor.org posted online the names of more than 83,000 Arkansas residents who signed the petition to place Act 1 on the ballot. The public data, which was provided by the Arkansas secretary of state, can be found here.

Act 1 is evil. No melodrama or hyperbole here: Fifty-seven percent of Arkansans hate GLBT people so much, they chose to throw unmarried hets under the bus in order to keep gays from even approaching equality in their state. Let’s call it what this is: evil.

Some advice for Arkansas do-gooders from a Baltimore progressive: Get to work on a repeal effort. And KnowThyNeighbor has a huge list of folks who could stand to endure a little free expression in return.

For Baltimoeans, Wal-Mart is here too. So are bigots. And we too can send a message to the Arkansans who took such pains to stick it to the queers by boycotting bigoted people and institutions in Arkansas. Be kind and dignified — do not do a Perez Hilton, please — but, from the high road, let the bigots of Bill Clinton’s home state know in no uncertain terms: The final day for legalized discrimination in this country is coming sooner than they think. Let them know that decent people will not support the discriminators with gay and allied dollars. In other words, until this evil wrong is redressed, boycott Wal-Mart. Boycott bigoted Arkansas.