Posts Tagged ‘Queer Rights’

Stalling for the lord

Wednesday, March 17th, 2010

It’s pretty clear that the christianist right wouldn’t know (or tell) the truth if it bit them on their holier-than-thou asses. While Lying for the lord is as traditionally Mormon as having a rumpus room full of backup wives, who would have imagined the Mormon’s new found allies among the extremist religious reich and the Ratzi Crime Family would so quickly adopt and master the art.

Now, vis-à-vis the Perry v Schwarzenegger Prop 8 trial, we learn the latest tactic from the lying liars for the lord is stalling for the lord. While nobody’s certain what the long-range objective is, my guess is they’re buying time to set up a case for a mistrial based on witness intimidation, because several of their star homo-hating witnesses like San Diego pastors Jim Garlow and Miles McPherson showed their true color (spine-free yellow) when they attempted to worm out of testifying (find PDFs of their court filings at the links).

Now we learn, via the Associated Press’ Lisa Leff, that the decision in the trial on the constitutionality of Prop 8 will likely be delayed thanks to the theocrat’s latest legal maneuvering:

Evidence skirmish could delay end of Prop 8 trial

SAN FRANCISCO — An attempt by civil rights groups to keep sponsors of California’s same-sex marriage ban from obtaining internal campaign documents could delay a verdict in the federal trial on the constitutionality of Proposition 8, lawyers on both sides said Tuesday.

Attorneys warned of the possible bottleneck during a hearing where a federal judge was asked to overrule a magistrate who ordered organizations that fought the 2008 ban to turn over memos and e-mails to lawyers defending the voter-approved measure.

[ ... ]

Three groups that opposed Proposition 8 are challenging U.S. Magistrate Joseph Spero’s order earlier this month requiring them to hand over all documents “that contain, refer or relate to arguments for or against Proposition 8,” with the exception of private communications between their core leaders.

The hypocrisy of the radical religious reich will never cease to amaze. When the shoe was on the other foot and those who toiled — and spent huge amounts of Mormon money — to eliminate the existing right of California gay and lesbian couples to marry were asked to produce their internal documents, they bristled and labeled the order a “fishing expedition.”

Brian Brown of the National Organization for Opposite Marriage, in a missive dated 12 February 2010, wrote:

The San Francisco Chronicle broke the news that Judge Vaughn Walker is gay. I don’t know if it’s true or not, but here’s the really big indisputable fact the mainstream media should be focusing on: Judge Walker has been incredibly biased in his rulings from start to finish.

He ordered an expensive trial over the objections of Protect Marriage, in a case where frankly the issues are primarily matters of law. He further ruled that the private and personal feelings and attitudes of Protect Marriage folks and their campaign consultants–things by definition never communicated to voters–were properly subjected to subpoena power. This was a fishing expedition of a major order: Judge Walker tried to give gay-marriage advocates access to more than a million emails by ordinary Californians who worked on the campaign, and also to internal campaign strategy memos. (The Ninth Circuit rapped his knuckles on that one.) He refused to play fair by ordering opponents of Prop 8 to open up their strategy, too. Worst of all, he broke all the rules to try to get this case televised, over the objections of Protect Marriage (who are the defendants in this case).

(emphasis: mine)

And what exactly are the anti-gays fishing for? Well, kids, it ain’t exactly plastic Jesus fish:

A federal appeals court eventually ruled that exchanges among top campaign officials about strategy and messaging could be withheld, but information disseminated more broadly was fair game in the trial.

Jesse Panuccio, a lawyer for Proposition 8 supporters, told Walker that it was only reasonable to require opponents of the ban to abide by the same disclosure requirements as supporters.

Plaintiffs have tried to prove that outlawing same-sex marriage serves no legitimate purpose, and the defense wants to see if their private conversations showed they thought otherwise during the campaign, Panuccio said.

Of course, at this point, asking the No-on-8 side (the good guys) to produce their internal documents serves no useful purpose other than to delay the inevitable. It’s a ploy, a strategy, a time-wasting tactic. It’s nothing more than a Hail Mary that consists of stalling for the lord while the theocons attempt to come up with some other strategy to deny gay and lesbian Americans the full rights of citizenship.

Humanist association files SCOTUS brief

Wednesday, March 17th, 2010

Here’s a follow-up to my post from yesterday about the case currently before the US Supreme Court that began as a 2004 lawsuit brought by a Christians-only campus club against the University of California Hastings College of the Law. The Christian Legal Society was denied official recognition and funding due to its bigoted, discriminatory policies that excluded LGBT and non-Christian students.

The American Humanist Association has filed an amicus brief. From the group’s media release this morning:

The American Humanist Association files Amicus Brief in Christian Legal Society v. Martinez

(Washington, DC, March 17, 2010) The Appignani Humanist Legal Center, legal arm of the American Humanist Association, filed a friend-of-the-court brief with the Supreme Court Monday, arguing that the Court should affirm a decision made by a federal appeals court that the University of California Hastings College of the Law acted appropriately when the they denied recognition to a Christian-only student group.

The brief can be found [at this link].

The lawsuit was launched in 2004 by a chapter of the Christian Legal Society (CLS), a group that was barred from receiving school funds, priority access to facilities and use of Hastings’ logo because they did not permit non-orthodox Christians and gays to become voting members or leaders. Hastings had denied a request from the group that they be exempt from the school’s nondiscrimination policy, which prohibited student groups from discriminating on the basis of “race, color, religion, national origin, ancestry, disability, age, sex or sexual orientation” as a condition for receiving access to school resources. The District Court ruled that Hastings’ policy was permissible and did not constitute a violation of the groups’ free speech rights, contrary to CLS’s argument. The 9th Circuit Court affirmed the policy was permissible because it was viewpoint neutral and reasonable.

“A University has every right to prohibit discrimination on the basis of religion or sexual orientation among student groups that receive school resources,” said Bob Ritter, AHLC attorney and counsel of record for the brief. “Public schools have an interest in making sure all students feel welcome, whether they are religious, non-religious, straight or gay. And ensuring that their resources don’t go to groups that violate policies of nondiscrimination is an appropriate measure to keep universities inclusive.”

“To be clear, this case is not about the school limiting student groups’ free speech rights,” Ritter added. “Groups that wish to discriminate in their membership are free to do so as privately operated entities, but they are not entitled to school sanction of their discriminatory policies.”

The AHLC’s brief argues that Hastings and other publicly-run institutions or entities can establish a conditional limited public forum for free speech, as long as the conditions for using the forum are neutral and generally applied. “A university can require student groups to abide by certain policies as long as those policies are applied universally, without bias or favor,” Ritter clarified.

The Appignani Humanist Legal Center filed the friend-of-the-court brief on behalf of the American Humanist Association, The American Ethical Union, Atheist Alliance International, Freedom From Religion Foundation, Institute for Humanist Studies, Military Association of Atheists and Freethinkers and Secular Student Alliance.

The American Humanist Association advocates for the rights and viewpoints of humanists. Founded in 1941 and headquartered in Washington, D.C., its work is extended through more than 100 local chapters and affiliates across America.

Humanism is a progressive philosophy of life that, without theism, affirms our responsibility to lead ethical lives of value to self and humanity.

(link: added by me)

Earlier posts on christianist campus clubs suing
for the right to discriminate
:

The Quotable Henry Rollins

Tuesday, March 16th, 2010

“Let the record speak for itself. The Catholic Church does not approve of homosexuality; their position on pedophilia, however, is not as clear. I am sure most Catholics do not approve of pedophilia, but the executive branch of Catholicism seems to have difficulty convincing some of us that they are willing to do what is necessary to make sure that the members of their staff who are active sexual predators are brought to justice. I can’t see any sane person not wanting someone who harms innocent children taken out of circulation as soon as possible. Relocating them is tantamount to enabling them further. Maybe there should be a television show called To Catch A Priest. I’ll watch.”

Henry Rollins, poet, activist and punk rock legend, on the Catholic church’s expulsion of the pre-school-aged child of two Boulder, Colorado lesbians, from his editorial It’s Time for Gays to Start Discriminating Against the Catholic Church

NOM peas itself in new California ad

Tuesday, March 16th, 2010

Two Peas Same Liberal Pod – Tom Campbell Barbara Boxer Proposition 8 California (video: NOM at YouTube)

They’re back! The carpetbagging con artists of the Washington DC-based National Organization for Marriage are back in California trying to win friends and influence elections.

According to Eric Ross, writing at The Examiner:

On March 15th, the National Organization for Marriage (NOM) launched a new TV ad to attack a Republican candidate for supporting marriage equality. Their new video titled, “Two peas, same liberal pod,” compares Republican Senate candidate Tom Campbell with Democratic Senator Barbara Boxer.

NOM’s strategy is as transparent as its interstate double-dealing is not. The California candidates aren’t extreme enough on marriage equality? Surprise. And, for good measure, NOM thinks they can sucker a few fiscal conservatives into supporting the lunatic theofascist wing of the Republican party by mentioning the right’s great Satan — taxes.

Fancy that coming from the comedy team of Maggie Gallagher and Brian Brown — the radical religious reich’s go-to grifters when it comes to the elimination of the fundamental rights of gay and lesbian Americans. Gallagher and Brown are two peas in a pod that’s barely managing to stay a step ahead of the IRS and their ethics and legal challenges in multiple states.

Maddow takes down JD Hayworth

Tuesday, March 16th, 2010

Rachel Maddow calls manure on the GOP’s JD Hayworth
(video: The Rachel Maddow Show)

Last night, Rachel Maddow called out Arizona’s potential candidate for the US Senate, JD Hayworth, for making shit up about marriage equality in Massachusetts. The MSNBC host pointed out that despite Hayworth’s insistence, the Massachusetts Supreme Court never defined marriage solely as “the establishment of intimacy.” It’s clear the Republican wannabe candidate made his remarks about marrying horses for no reason other than to denigrate gay and lesbian relationships and to score big brownie points with the GOP’s freaky, animal-sex-obsessed theofascist wing.