Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.
 

Prop 8 Trial 2010-02-02

Expand Messages
  • UMAffirmation
    Sorry. We re a bit behind. First, this item from the Bay Area Reporter via EDGE Defense witnesses agree Prop 8 discriminates against gays by Matthew S. Bajko
    Message 1 of 1 , Feb 2, 2010
      Sorry. We're a bit behind.



      First, this item from the Bay Area Reporter via EDGE



      Defense witnesses agree Prop 8 discriminates against gays

      by Matthew S. Bajko

      Bay Area Reporter

      Sunday Jan 31, 2010



      Professor Kenneth Miller

      Professor Kenneth Miller (Source:Bill Wilson)

      Email Print Share

      The only witnesses called by the backers of California's same-sex marriage
      ban in the federal court case examining whether the measure is
      unconstitutional both testified this week that the anti-gay law, known as
      Proposition 8, discriminates against gays and lesbians.



      One of the experts went so far as to say that some voters supported the
      measure due to anti-gay bias, while another admitted under oath that he
      wrote in a book that legalizing same-sex marriage would, in effect,
      strengthen America.



      The testimony from the two men could be crucial for the plaintiffs in the
      case, known as Perry vs. Schwarzenegger , as they try to convince federal
      judges that Prop 8 was based on animus toward gays and lesbians, and
      therefore, violates the U.S. Constitution.



      The trial wrapped up Wednesday afternoon (January 27) as the backers of Prop
      8 presented their last witness. U.S. District Court Judge Vaughn Walker, who
      is hearing the case without a jury, has delayed closing arguments in the
      trial until after both sides present their evidentiary briefs. Closing
      arguments are not expected until March at the earliest. Although Walker is
      not under any deadline to issue his ruling in the case, he is expected to
      render his decision rather quickly as he has prioritized speeding along the
      proceedings knowing the case is likely to land before the U.S. Supreme
      Court.



      The rest of the article is here: http://www.edgeonthenet.com/?101665







      Second, this item comes from Religion Dispatches



      When Mormons Mobilize: Anti-Gay Marriage Prop. 8 Effort 'Outed'?

      By Joanna Brooks

      January 31, 2010





      New documents introduced in the challenge to Prop. 8 reveal that the LDS
      Church sought to create "plausible deniability" in its role in supporting
      the Yes on 8 campaign. Why would the LDS hierarchy want to deny Mormon
      involvement?

      Try not to look like missionaries...



      On Wednesday, January 20, in a federal courthouse in San Francisco,
      plaintiffs in the Perry vs. Schwarzenegger trial challenging the legality of
      California's Proposition 8 introduced two documents (over strenuous
      objections from the defense) indicating close but cautious coordination
      between the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints and the Yes on 8
      campaign.



      The documents, according to plaintiffs' witness Gary Segura, a professor of
      political science at Stanford University, indicated a desire on the part of
      the Church to create "plausible deniability or respectable distance between
      the church organization per se and the actual campaign."



      Segura's words soon rippled across the gay blogosphere, as trial watchers
      from The Atlantic's Andrew Sullivan to Julia Rosen of the California-based
      Courage Campaign latched onto the phrase "plausible deniability" as an
      "explosive" indictment of the Mormon Church's allegedly behind-the-scenes
      relationship to the Proposition 8 campaign.



      But to Mormons in California (both those who supported the Yes on 8 campaign
      and those who opposed it), the relationship between the church and the
      Proposition 8 campaign has always been undeniable.



      The rest of the article is here:
      http://www.religiondispatches.org/archive/churchstate/2236/when_mormons_mobi
      lize%3A_anti-gay_marriage_prop._8_effort_%E2%80%98outed%E2%80%99







      Third, this item from the AP via Washington Post



      Hawaii nixes same-sex civil unions bill

      By MARK NIESSE

      The Associated Press

      Friday, January 29, 2010; 11:27 PM



      HONOLULU -- Hawaii lawmakers declined to vote Friday on a bill that would
      have allowed same-sex civil unions, effectively doing away with the measure.



      State House leaders said a narrow majority of representatives would have
      voted for civil unions, but they decided to indefinitely postpone a decision
      on whether to grant gay and lesbian couples the same rights and benefits the
      state provides to married couples.



      Civil union supporters in the crowded House gallery on Friday shouted,
      "Shame on you!" while opponents cheered.



      "It's an election year, and they're more concerned about keeping their seats
      than doing what's right," said Stephen Nagle of Kaaawa, wearing a rainbow
      lei in support of civil unions.



      The rest of the article is here:
      http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/01/29/AR2010012903
      706.html







      Fouth, this item from EDGE



      New Hampshire Towns Rejecting Reconsideration of Marriage Equality

      by Kilian Melloy

      Tuesday Feb 2, 2010



      Though anti-gay activists have started to pursue an attempt to overturn
      marriage equality in New Hampshire, towns in that state seem to be rejecting
      the anti-marriage push.



      Manchester, New Hampshire, news station WMUR Channel 9 reported in a Feb. 1
      article that anti-gay activists around the state have brought the issue
      before city governments at town meetings since marriage equality became law
      on Jan. 1. However, petitions to rescind marriage rights from the state's
      gay and lesbian families have so far gained little traction; the town of
      Deerfield rejected a petition to the city's government to send a letter to
      state lawmakers urging that a Proposition 8-style ballot initiative be
      placed before voters that would write anti-gay discrimination into the New
      Hampshire constitution.



      On Feb. 1, the town of Londonderry also rejected such a petition through a
      unanimous vote from the town council. The petition was brought to the town
      council by state Rep. Al Baldasaro, who now has the option of gathering more
      signatures in order to put the question to a vote by town residents.
      Baldasaro was quoted in a Jan. 20 WMUR article as saying, "My main intent is
      to repeal gay marriage and come up with a constitutional amendment and let
      New Hampshire vote." State lawmakers in Concord heard from anti-gay
      activists as well as equality advocates that day; gay state lawmaker Robert
      Thompson addressed his colleagues at the hearing, introducing his spouse
      with the words, "This is my husband, Michael Jacobson. We were married Jan.
      2, 2010. Now, I'm here to address having rights granted a year ago taken
      away."



      Even if Baldasaro chooses not to gather the additional signatures, anti-gay
      activist Martin Bove has already started gathering the required number of
      signatures to force a town vote in March, the article said.



      The rest of the article is here: http://www.edgeonthenet.com/?101838



      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.