If you follow gay news as much as I do, you’ve likely been overwhelmed with the plethora of happy endings happening all over the country: New York state passed anti-bullying legislation; in the Gill case, the Federal Court ruled that Section 3 of DOMA; two proteins were isolated that makes a cure for HIV/AIDS much less fantasy and much more plausible…
Today, closing statements began in the Prop 8 trial. Prior to the closing arguments, Judge Walker submitted numerous thought provoking questions to both sides. Both sides answered all questions, although many of the questions were directed only to one side of the issue. The Defendant-Intervenors (the ones who oppose marriage equality), responded, in my opinion, very poorly to all questions, but one stood out.
During her testimony at the hearing, Elaine Donnelly, President of the Center for Military readiness, invoked the argument against a repeal of Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell we hear all too often – that a repeal would result in :”exotic forms of sexual expression”, “forcible sodomy” and declaring a repeal would lead to a “sexualized atmosphere.”
School board members in Fulton, Mississippi have taken a harsh stance against girls dating girls. On February 5, 2009, the school board circulated a memorandum stating that same-sex couples will not be allowed to attend prom, in direct violation of legal protections against discrimination. Constance McMillen, however, wanted to take another girl to the prom as her date.
It didn’t take long for the opponents of equal rights to scream “BIAS!” when the San Francisco Chronicle reported that the justice presiding over the Perry case (the Prop 8 case) is a homosexual. On the blog for the leading anti-equality organization, the National Organization for [Heterosexual Only] Marriage (NOM), its executive director, Brian S. Brown, had this to say about the justice:
“He’s been an amazingly biased and one-sided force throughout this trial, far more akin to an activist than a neutral referee.”
To begin with, let’s take a brief quiz. For each statement listed below, answer which person made the statement
“By increasing the number of married couples who might be interested in adoption and foster care, same-sex marriage might well lead to fewer children growing up in state institutions and more growing up in loving adoptive and foster families.”
(A) George W. Bush;
(B) Barack Obama;
(C) David Blackenhorn, President of the Institute for American Values;
(D) Joe Solomenese, President of HRC;
(E) Lady Gaga;
(F) Rachel Maddow?
Stupid Things People Say About Gays: The Prop 8 Trial Series, Part 5 | Prostituion and Sex with Kids
Yesterday, William Tam, who previously won a jaysays.com Stupid Things People Say About Gays nod, not only won the title again while be questioned by Attorney Boies, but set the bar to a new level. During testimony, Tam advised that he thinks legalizing gay marriage would result in legalizing prostitution.
Boies: You said that you thought Prop. 8 would lead to legalizing prostitution. Why?
Tam: *** I saw some homosexuals hanging around there. [Regarding “Measure K”, which if passed by voters, would have stopped the enforcement of laws against prostitution in California, among other things.]
On Day 4 of the Proposition 8 trial, the Defendants (those opposed to same-sex marriage) attempted to make the Plaintiffs’ expert, San Francisco’s Chief Economist, Edwin A Egan, say that allowing gay marriage will increase the costs to the city. The theory of the Defense being that clerks will be required to use their time to issue marriage licenses to more people and print more marriage licenses increasing paper and ink costs.
This argument fails at “common sense” but also fails because there is a fee (as pointed out by Egan) for anyone seeking to obtain a marriage license. That fee covers the costs associated with the clerk’s time, printing and other such expenses that would otherwise be borne by the city.
San Francisco Deputy City Attorney Therese Stewart took the stage in the Proposition 8 trial this afternoon with a redirect examination of Yale Professor Chauncey. During the examination, Ms. Stewart asked Professor Chauncey to read from a Vatican statement regarding same-sex marriage. These are the words of the Vatican:
“Allowing children being adopted by gay couples would do violence to these children. Their condition of dependency would stunt their full human development.”
Yesterday, the judge and lawyers assembled in the courtroom at 8:24 a.m. Pacific Time to debate, and ultimately decide, upon the rights of same-sex couples to marry. The case, Perry v. Schwarzenegger, resulted after a “majority” of California voters decided that the judicial granting of equal marital rights to same-sex couples violated their sense of… uhm… of… well, ego.
Since the trial started (and even before) we’ve heard the opponent’s of equality claiming that the majority spoke and such majority rule must be honored. In fact, the news keeps repeating an annoying little phrase whenever they talk about the case, referring to Proposition 8 as a “voter approved” measure.