-
Video: Representative Barney Frank Calls U.S. Supreme Court Justice Anton Scalia a “HOMOPHOBE”
Massachusetts Congressman Barney Frank Calls Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia A Homophobe – 03/20/09This homosexual slur or was it slur by a homosexual was in the context of the Defense of Marriage Act.
The Defense of Marriage Act, or DOMA, is the short title of a federal law of the United States passed on September 21, 1996 as Public Law No. 104-199, 110 Stat. 2419. Its provisions are codified at 1 U.S.C. § 7 and 28 U.S.C. § 1738C. The law has two effects:
- No state (or other political subdivision within the United States) need treat a relationship between persons of the same sex as a marriage, even if the relationship is considered a marriage in another state.
- The Federal Government may not treat same-sex relationships as marriages for any purpose, even if concluded or recognized by one of the states.
The bill was passed by Congress by a vote of 85-14 in the Senate[1] and a vote of 342-67 in the House of Representatives,[2] and was signed into law by President Bill Clinton on September 21, 1996.
Now with that background what does the United States Supreme Court and Justice Scalia have to do with the Defense of Marriage Act? Is there a specific case or is Frank just shooting off his mouth calling people names A BIGOT to his gay friends over at 355gay.com. How do you spell demogogue?
Probably the latter.
By the way, Representative Frank you can always try to amend or change the law in Congress but looking at the last vote of 342-67 in the House – good luck with that.
Technorati Tags: Barney Frank, Antonin Scalia
-
Poll Watch: Gay Marriage Evenly Splits Californians – Tough Race in 2010
Kate Kuykendall (R) and her wife Tori Kuykendall (L) stand with their daughter during a gay rights rally against the Proposition 8 measure at the El Pueblo de Los Angeles park, March 5, 2009.
The latest California Field Poll shows it continues to be a difficult issue for California registered voters.California voters are as sharply divided over gay marriage as they were in November when they approved Proposition 8, overturning a state Supreme Court decision that legalized same-sex marriages.
Voters passed Proposition 8, which declared marriage could only be between a man and a woman, 52 percent to 48 percent.
A new Field Poll showed voters almost evenly split, 48 percent to 47 percent, when asked if they would approve a new constitutional amendment to again allow same-sex couples to marry.
Last week, the state Supreme Court heard arguments in a lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of Proposition 8. From questions asked by the seven justices, court watchers concluded the court is likely to uphold Proposition 8 but also allow to stand the 18,000 same-sex marriages performed after the court’s original ruling in May and the November election.
A coalition of gay-rights groups have filed an initiative aimed at the 2010 ballot to make same-sex marriages legal again.
Field Poll director Mark DiCamillo said that while Californians are dramatically more supportive of same-sex marriages than they were a few decades ago, he questioned whether attitudes would be much different in 2010 than they were in 2008.
He noted that gubernatorial elections always have smaller voter turnouts than presidential elections and that younger voters most supportive of same-sex marriage are also among the least reliable voters.
“If you bring this to an election, turnout really does matter,†DiCamillo said. “Which groups turn out a little bit more and which ones turn out a little bit less have a big effect on the outcome.â€
A second difficulty, the pollster said, is that an amendment reinstating same-sex marriage would require a “yes†vote whereas Proposition 8 required a “no†vote to preserve gay marriages.
“The thing that works against the advocates’ position is now they’ve got to get a ‘yes’ vote which is harder to get than a ‘no’ vote,†DiCamillo said.It is likely that the California Supreme Court will PUNT on the issue of gay marriage in the coming weeks. By PUNT, Flap means that the court will uphold California Proposition 8 restoring the traditional definition of marriage – while on the other hand allowing the same sex marriages already completed to remain valid.
What will this mean for gay politics in 2010 – a Governor’s election year?
Dan Walters has an accurate description of the conventional wisdom on a California electoral outcome.
It will be a gamble for gay marriage proponents to come before California voters again in 2010.
Will homosexual activists roll the dice?
Technorati Tags: gay marriage, California Proposition 8
-
California Supreme Court, Carol Corrigan, Gay Marriage, Joyce Kennard, Kenneth Starr, Marvin Baxter, Ronald George
California Supreme Court Appears to Be Ready to Uphold Constitutionality of Proposition 8
Shannon Minter, standing, speaks to the California Supreme Court in San Francisco, Thursday, March 5, 2009 on the constitutionality of the state’s voter-approved Proposition 8 that bans gay unions. The court will decide whether to uphold the same-sex marriage ban and whether same-sex couple marriages will remain valid
Flap watched the oral arguments before the California Supreme Court on the challenge to California Proposition 8 which was approved by California voters last November. Proposition 8 restored the traditional definition of marriage (one man and one woman) in the California Constitution.It is my sense (and others too) that the California Supremes will acquiese to the vote of the people on making traditional marriage (one man and one woman) the law of California since the election. However, the validity of prevous gay marriages (allowed by last year’s California Supreme Court ruling on Proposition 22) may be upheld in some way.
The California Supreme Court appeared ready today to vote to uphold Proposition 8, the November ballot measure that banned gay marriage, but also seemed ready to decide unanimously to recognize existing same-sex marriages.
During a three-hour televised hearing in San Francisco, only two of the court’s seven justices indicated a possible readiness to overturn the initiative. Chief Justice Ronald M. George noted that the court was following a different Constitution when it approved gay marriage last May.
“Today we have a different state Constitution,” he said.
Justice Joyce L. Kennard, who usually votes in favor of gay rights, voted against accepting the revision challenge to Proposition 8 but said she would hear arguments over the validity of existing same-sex marriages.
Kennard said during the hearing that “Prop. 8 did not take away the whole bundle of rights that this court articulated in the marriage case.”
She said that “a very important holding” – giving sexual orientation the same constitutional status as race or gender – was not changed.
“Is it still your view that the sky has fallen and gays and lesbians are left with nothing?” she asked gay rights lawyers?Kennard told them they also had the right to return to voters with their own initiative.
So, how will the vote break down in the court?
Justices supporting the overturn of the original gay marriage ban (May 2008) are:
- Chief Justice Ronald George
- Justice Kathryn Mickle Werdegar
- Justice Joyce L. Kennard
- Justice Carlos R. Moreno
Chief Justice George and Justice Moreno stand for reconfirmation to another twelve year term of office in November 2010.
Justices dissenting from the original decision to end the gay marriage ban are:
- Justice Marvin Baxter
- Justice Carol Corrigan
- Justice Ming Chin
Flap will stay with his previous opinion:
Flap can count as well. Three California Supreme Court Justices that opposed gay marriage plus Justice Kennard (who refused to sign the order and voted to deny the petitions) equals four votes upholding the Proposition and the traditional definition of marriage.
Flap bets the final vote will be 6-1 with Moreno dissenting to uphold Proposition 8 simply because a MORON would have to rule this is a revision of the Constitution and not an amendment.
The decision by the California supreme court is due within 90 days. Want to bet the Court releases its opinion on Friday prior to the Memorial Day weekend?
Technorati Tags: California Supreme Court, Gay Marriage, California Proposition 8
-
California Supreme Court Hears Oral Arguments on Proposition 8 Re: Gay Marriage Today
Wesley Gann (R) and his partner Jerry Johnson take part in a rally ahead of the California Supreme Court hearing on Proposition 8 in Los Angeles March 4, 2009. Proposition 8, passed by California voters in November, amends the state constitution to provide that only marriage between a man and a woman is recognized in California
Yes, the California Supreme Court will hear oral arguments for and against California Proposition 8 that was passed by California voters last November. Proposition 8 restored the traditional definition of marriage in the California Constitution – one man and one woman.All of the legal filings before the California Supreme Court are here.
The proceedings before the Court will be covered live by Flap on Twitter beginning a little before 9 AM Pacific time. Follow Flap on Twitter here or read the right sidebar ————->
Technorati Tags: California Proposition 8, Gay Marriage, California Supreme Court
-
California Proposition 8: The Ugly Specter of Intimidation
Eightmaps.com which matshes up Google Maps and Proposition 8 Donors
The New York Times today (Via Michelle Malkin) FINALLY realizes there might be a problem with gay marriage proponent’s intimidation of Proposition 8 (the California Constitutional Amendment which restored the traditional definition of marriage – one man and one woman) donors.FOR the backers of Proposition 8, the state ballot measure to stop single-sex couples from marrying in California, victory has been soured by the ugly specter of intimidation.
Some donors to groups supporting the measure have received death threats and envelopes containing a powdery white substance, and their businesses have been boycotted.
The targets of this harassment blame a controversial and provocative Web site, eightmaps.com.
The site takes the names and ZIP codes of people who donated to the ballot measure — information that California collects and makes public under state campaign finance disclosure laws — and overlays the data on a Google map.
Visitors can see markers indicating a contributor’s name, approximate location, amount donated and, if the donor listed it, employer. That is often enough information for interested parties to find the rest — like an e-mail or home address. The identity of the site’s creators, meanwhile, is unknown; they have maintained their anonymity.
Eightmaps.com is the latest, most striking example of how information collected through disclosure laws intended to increase the transparency of the political process, magnified by the powerful lens of the Web, may be undermining the same democratic values that the regulations were to promote.
Will such internet activity chill free speech and discourge voters from either donating to political causes/campaigns or donating their time/resources (which is reportable if worth more than $100)?
The California and federal courts will eventually decide the proper balance between campaign disclosure laws and the chilling of political activity/speech.
In the meantime, donors to Proposition 8 will endure public ridicule/scorn and ugly repercussions from the radical homosexual pro-gay marriage cabal as they gear up for another election in 2010 to overturn Proposition 8.
Technorati Tags: California Proposition 8, Gay Marriage
-
California Supreme Court to Hear Oral Arguments on Proposition 8 Case March 5
The battle over gay marriage in California and California Proposition 8 which was passed by California voters last November is coming to an end in the California Supreme Court.The state Supreme Court will hear arguments March 5 on the validity of California’s ban on same-sex marriage, which voters approved in November after an emotionally charged and expensive campaign.
The court said Tuesday that it would hold a three-hour hearing on Proposition 8, from 9 a.m. to noon, at its chambers in San Francisco . The proceedings will also be televised statewide on the California Channel, the court said. A ruling is due within 90 days of the hearing.
Prop. 8 amended the state Constitution to declare that marriage only between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California. It overturned the court’s May 15 ruling throwing out state laws that banned same-sex marriage.
Along with arguments over the constitutionality of Prop. 8, the court will hear views on whether 18,000 same-sex marriages performed in California before the November election should remain legally recognized if the ballot measure is upheld.
A ruling, therefore, on the constituionality of California Proposition 8 that restored the traditional definition of marriage (one man and one woman) will be made by June 5, 2009.
Flap predicts that court will uphold the decision of California voters and hold Proposition 8 constitutional.
Then, gay marriage proponents will have to decide whether they want to circulate an initiative for the June 2010 or November 2010 ballot to overturn Proposition 8.
All of the legal filings before the California Supreme Court are here.
Stay tuned……
Technorati Tags: California Proposition 8, Gay Marriage
-
Gay Marriage War: California “Prop 8 — The Musical” Set for Broadway
California Proposition 8 – The Musical – A star studded video against Prop 8Variety reports the fundraising efforts for the gay marriage promoting folks. Since it is unlikely that the California Supreme Court will overturn the vote of California voters which with Proposition 8 re-established the traditional definition of marriage (one man and one woman) homosexual marriage activists are obviously gearing up for another electoral battle – perhaps in 2010.
Marc Shaiman’s online tuner “Prop 8 — The Musical†gets a Broadway bow next month as part of “Defying Inequality: The Broadway Concert.â€
One-night-only benefit will feature perfs by “Hairspray†composer Shaiman, “Wicked†composer Stephen Schwartz, playwright Douglas Carter Beane and thesps Harvey Fierstein, Lynda Carter, John Gallagher Jr., Jonathan Groff, Cheyenne Jackson, Adriane Lenox and Rue McClanahan, among others. Also on the bill are the casts of Rialto tuners including “Jersey Boys,†“The Lion King†and “Wicked.â€
Concert will be helmed by Schele Williams and Anthony Galde and produced by 4Good Prods.
Event benefits equal-rights orgs Family Equality Council, Empire State Pride Agenda, Equality California, Garden State Equality and the Vermont Freedom to Marry Task Force.
Show will play Feb. 23 at the Gershwin Theater, currently home to “Wicked.â€
Flap supposes the “industry” will turn out or be compelled to turn out and they will raise some money for the Prop. 8 redux. But, the skit falls flat and is full of demeaning/ridiculing Christian lies that will appear in the TV ads during their next campaign to legalize gay marriage.
Good luck with their production and who will be taking OPPO video for the Yes on 8 folks?
Technorati Tags: Gay Marriage, California Proposition 8
-
Sorry: Tom Hanks Apologizes for Calling Traditional Marriage Supporting Mormons – “UNAMERICAN”
Tom Hanks, left, executive producer of the HBO series ‘Big Love,’ poses with cast members, from left, Ginnifer Goodwin, Jeanne Tripplehorn, Bill Paxton and Chloe Sevigny at the show’s third season premiere in Los Angeles, Wednesday, Jan. 14, 2009
Remember last week when Tom Hanks exposed his anti-Mormon bigotry at the premiere of the show in which he is executive producer, “Big Love?” The controversial HBO show deals with a Mormon polygamist family.Tom Hanks, Executive Producer for HBO’s controversial polygamist series “Big Love,†made his feelings toward the Mormon Church’s involvement in California’s Prop 8 (which prohibits gay marriage) very clear at the show’s premiere party on Wednesday night.
“The truth is this takes place in Utah, the truth is these people are some bizarre offshoot of the Mormon Church, and the truth is a lot of Mormons gave a lot of money to the church to make Prop-8 happen,†he told Tarts. “There are a lot of people who feel that is un-American and I am one of them. I do not like to see any discrimination codified on any piece of paper, any of the 50 states in America, but here’s what happens now. A little bit of light can be shed and people can see who’s responsible and that can motivate the next go around of our self correcting constitution and hopefully we can move forward instead of backwards. So lets have faith in not only the American, but Californian constitutional process.â€
Now, Hanks has apologized.
Last week, I labeled members of the Mormon church who supported California’s Proposition 8 as “un-American.” I believe Proposition 8 is counter to the promise of our Constitution; it is codified discrimination. But everyone has a right to vote their conscience – nothing could be more American. To say members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints who contributed to Proposition 8 are “un-American” creates more division when the time calls for respectful disagreement. No one should use “un- American” lightly or in haste. I did. I should not have.
Sincerely,
Tom Hanks
The Mormon church has voiced its objection to Hank’s original statement.
A spokesperson for the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints, Kim Farah, took offense at Hanks’s comments, telling FOX News, “Expressing an opinion in a free and democratic society is as American as it gets.”
Business trump politics Tom? Or did you receive a revelation?
Not smart to bash Mormons when you are producing a show about polygamy and MORMONS, now is it? FAIL
How contemptible. Flap won’t be paying to see any more of Hank’s shows at the movies or otherwise.
Technorati Tags: Tom Hanks, Gay Marriage
-
Shocker: Tom Hanks is an Anti-Mormon BIGOT – Calls Traditional Marriage Supporters “Un-American”
Courage Campaign’s television ad: “Home Invasionâ€: Vote NO on Prop 8Oh the tolerance of the Hollywood LEFT. Remember the anti-Mormon video released by the Homosexual Courage Campaign during the California Proposition 8 campaign? It is above.
Tom Hanks is the latest Hollywood ass-clown anti- Mormon bigot to open his mouth supporting gay marriage in California. But, calling California Proposition 8 supporters (Prop. 8 restored the traditional definition of marriage – one man and one woman – to the California Constitution Last November) “anti-American” is over the top.
Tom Hanks, Executive Producer for HBO’s controversial polygamist series “Big Love,†made his feelings toward the Mormon Church’s involvement in California’s Prop 8 (which prohibits gay marriage) very clear at the show’s premiere party on Wednesday night.
“The truth is this takes place in Utah, the truth is these people are some bizarre offshoot of the Mormon Church, and the truth is a lot of Mormons gave a lot of money to the church to make Prop-8 happen,†he told Tarts. “There are a lot of people who feel that is un-American and I am one of them. I do not like to see any discrimination codified on any piece of paper, any of the 50 states in America, but here’s what happens now. A little bit of light can be shed and people can see who’s responsible and that can motivate the next go around of our self correcting constitution and hopefully we can move forward instead of backwards. So lets have faith in not only the American, but Californian constitutional process.â€
Flap will now wait for Tom Hank’s portrayal of all of the homosexual Catholic priests who have been sexually abusing children for decades.
Think it will happen?
Technorati Tags: Tom Hanks, California Proposition 8, Gay Marriage, Mormon
-
California Proposition 8 Supporters File Federal Suit Challenging California Campaign Finance Laws
Today supporters of California Proposition 8 that restored the traditional definition of marriage (one man and one woman) to the California constitution filed a federal lawsuit which challenges the constitutionality of California’s campaign finance laws.
Acting on behalf of hundreds of supporters of Proposition 8 who have experienced various acts of harassment including death threats at the hands of opponents, the ProtectMarriage.com – Yes on 8 committee today filed a challenge in US federal court to the constitutionality of California’s campaign finance laws that compel disclosure of personal information of Prop 8 donors.
“There has been a systematic attempt to intimidate, threaten and harass donors to the Proposition 8 campaign,†said Ron Prentice, Chairman of ProtectMarriage.com. “This harassment is made possible because of California’s unconstitutional campaign finance disclosure rules as applied to ballot measure committees where even donors of as little as $100 must have their names, home addresses and employers listed on public documents. These disclosure rules violate the US constitution in numerous ways. We are standing up for our contributors to ensure that the harassment stops.â€
This suit will test the rights of an individual’s freedom of speech versus the compelling state interest in assuring disclosure of campaign contributions to avoid corruption of the political process. the suit alleges the California Political Reform Act is unconstituional for a number of reasons:
- The right of contributors to exercise their First Amendment rights free from threats, harassment and reprisals outweighs the state’s interest in compelled disclosure;
- The Act’s requirements that committees report all contributors of $100 or more is unconstitutionally overbroad in violation of the First Amendment because it is not narrowly tailored to serve a compelling government interest.
- The Act’s requirement for ballot measure committees to file any reports after the election is unconstitutional under the First Amendment because it is not narrowly tailored to serve a compelling government interest.
- The Act is unconstitutional under the First Amendment because it does not contain a mechanism for purging all reports related to a ballot measure after the election has occurred.
If anything the $100 contribution level for disclosure appears to be inordintely low for this day and age. But, will the federal appellate courts tinker with a California Legislature’s limit or throw out the entire process in an internet era which makes “chilling” free speech easier?
Ultimately, the United States Supreme Court will weigh into these issues.
Stay tuned…….
Technorati Tags: California Proposition 8, California Political Reform Act