AMERICAblog: Obama poster guy is ticked about Warren
LTMidknite
· 11 months ago
Nice article. I especially like the last sentence.
"I think it is important to speak one’s mind, but also to not let the narcissism of petty differences sabotage our unity and progress."
Some of you here can learn a lot from that statement.
Gary SF
· 11 months ago
Thanks master. Now will you allow us to get married? I know that I was being narcissistic in wanting to marry my partner.
LTMidknite
· 11 months ago
Did you read any of the sentence beyond "narcissism"?
Gary SF
· 11 months ago
Oh, you are asking me to understand how you feel based upon what you wrote? Maybe you could do the same. While I can agree that some of the posts here are a bit on the extreme, it is no wonder. Most of us view proposition 8 as a 'gay bashing.' That many of us are now 'reactive' because of it should not surprise anyone. That Obama was mistaken (at best), insensitive or worse - abandoning us - for the sake of politics is left for us to figure out. Regardless of his attempts to reassure us, what is clear is that he really doesn't understand us. This is a slap to our very raw faces.
LTMidknite
· 11 months ago
Okay, let's forget Obama's record of championing gay/lesbian rights that span over a decade for a moment.
Do you really think inviting Warren to do his invocation is Obama way of saying "f--- the gays. they are garbage"?
Gary SF
· 11 months ago
Obama is homophobic. He is against same-sex marriage and has said so several times. He knows that civil unions will never equate marriage - each and every right will have to be negotiated and deals will be made - at the expense of same-sex couples. That he supports the end of DADT etc. is good, but that doesn't erase his homophobia in the marriage issue.
As to your question, no I think it is Obama being political. He thinks that he has our vote no matter what - and he may be right. But the white Evangelicals voted against him. Regardless, if there had been no Proposition 8 or if it had failed, his choice of Warren would not feel so bad. But we don't live in a vacuum - everything happens in context and our context is the 'gay bashing' referred to as Prop 8. Sorry, we can agree to disagree. One can only drive in the middle of the road for so long. To arrive at a destination, one has to turn right or left.
LTMidknite
· 11 months ago
"Obama is homophobic."
Homophobia (n): fear of homesexuals
So explain why he just appointed Nancy Sutley.
coolcatdaddy
· 11 months ago
I once worked for a homophobic boss at a university. He'd talk in public about diversity, unicorns, flowers and light and how we had a wonderful little team of workers.
In the workplace, however, he'd ask the women if they were "having their period" if they got upset about something or suggest that one of our student workers, an out lesbian, "wasn't wearing enough make up" and wasn't feminine enough. He complained to one (straight) staff member that he had a "limp" handshake that made him seem like a "faggot".
Sometimes people who are uncomfortable with gays can put on a good face in public if they think it will help their career.
I'm not saying Obama's like this, but just hiring someone who is Gay or Lesbian doesn't make you comfortable with them.
justmy2
· 11 months ago
This is the problem that Obama doesn't realize...
He has now opened the door for people to question his true beliefs.
For what?
Invite Warren to a summit of faith in his first 100 days if he is so hellbent on putting on a kabuki show.
But to give him a singular stage, worldwide, in front of what will likely be the largest worldwide television audiences in history, likely on par with the Olympics....is patently outrageous.
I do have a question though. Does the Pope have the same views as Warren?
If so, what if he would have invited the Pope? Interesting thought experiment.
I just thought of that when thinking about the size of the audience.
Steve_in_CNJ
· 11 months ago
yeah, kinda.
LTMidknite
· 11 months ago
Well then......
"I think it is important to speak one’s mind, but also to not let the narcissism of petty differences sabotage our unity and progress."
......is referring to you.
Steve_in_CNJ
· 11 months ago
"Calling people names because they care more about injustice than you do" obviously refers to you.
timncguy
· 11 months ago
Maybe you could think of it this way. Obama's invitation wasn't a way to say "f... the gays", instead, it was his way of thelling the fundies that their anti-gay hatred is a valid alternative position WORTH of discussion to find common ground.
Well, i don't like that. I don't believe for one minute that Obama would take that position with a white supremicist, do you? No, of course not. So, why is it acceptible to take that position with anti-gay bigots?
RobertSanDimas
· 11 months ago
I'm missing something. Where's the article? I clicked on everything I could click on and nuttin'!
sharksfansd
· 11 months ago
It's on the hyperlink that says "Nice." Right above the picture.
mmedefarge
· 11 months ago
click on "nice"
EdNSted
· 11 months ago
Ya gotta scroll way down the page if you're using Internet Explorer. The page appears to be written with a Firefox bias.
RobertSanDimas
· 11 months ago
Thanks to all. Got it.
monitor
· 11 months ago
The only word in the post, Nice, is a link to the article.
sitemonitor
sharksfansd
· 11 months ago
Slightly off topic, but relates to Prop 8...
He's back: Kenneth Starr is going to argue the case in front of the CA Supreme Court to keep Prop 8 on books. Could not stand him ten years ago and can't stand him now! Info at end of the story: http://www.cnn.com/2008/US/12/19/california.pro...
Gary SF
· 11 months ago
That news is SO 'this afternoon.' Early this evening, our Attorney General (Jerry Brown) asked the California Supreme Court to overturn Prop 8. See the article here:
Please let go of this. It is not that important and it makes us look like idiots to be picking on something so trivial.
Anthony Look
· 11 months ago
President Elect Obama is an enemy of the gay community. Black Americans are not friends of the gay community. It is gutterly understood that right wing fundi White Christians are truely enemies of the gay community; but, political correctness, especially this past election year, gave the gay community pause in uttering the fact of the inherent Christian based gay racism in the Black community. Not some, not few, not here and there; but, most Black Americans are gay racists. Black Americans must be viewed for the enemy that they are of the gay community along side with their Christian White counterparts. The gay community must work to impede Black political interests and rights insofar as that is what Black Americans are doing unto gay interests. THEY ARE ALSO THE ENEMY. Just as the gay community would do no less to obstruct the interests and rights of any conservative republican white or otherwise; the gay community must direct the same vigor to obstruct, and impede any political gains of the Black community. They have no qualms about doing as much to the gay community. The gay community must rise above the political correctness of aligning itself to a fellow Democratic Party faction and recognize Black America is as much an enemy as is as the Conservative right wing American. Let’s work to vote against any and all Black American political interests at every level; be it school board or the office of the presidency. Work as hard as possible to minimize their hateful bigotted gay racist influence. There is no difference between a Black homophobe and a Conservative one. Ask yourself would have Hillary Clinton invited such a vile gay racist to her inaguration. Obama not only threw the gay community under the bus; he condoned gay racist speech. I regret voting for this man.
Gary SF
· 11 months ago
Hillary's stance on gay issues was slightly worse than Obama's. Stop turning this into a race war. The majority of every race voted for Proposition 8. The No on 8 people ran a shitty campaign. We lost, but only by a little. We will eventually win.
LTMidknite
· 11 months ago
I am so glad to hear this from you. Hopefully more people on this blog will get this.
Gary SF
· 11 months ago
I have been sick with the racism surrounding Prop 8. That homophibia is sometimes extensive in the 'black community' turns into an excuse for blatant racism is so wrong. But there are blacks who don't help because they are bigoted too. For example, check this out:
I don't understand why so many blacks see same-sex marriage as being all about whites. I am not black, but I am going working with a group to put together an 'educational program' for people of color - we are starting this in my workplace. We will be reviewing Marlon Brigg's Tongue's Untied next week. I loved the film, but I can't remember if it is suitable for a 'general audience.' I am also trying to put together a famous black gays and lesbians exhibit - Bayard Rustin, Langston Hughes, etc. I have several motivations, not the least is that black gays have so much crap to deal with.
LTMidknite
· 11 months ago
Hope it works out for you.
RitornaVincitor
· 11 months ago
Actually, no. The majority of every race did not vote yes on 8. White and Asian majorities voted no. Just fact checking.
Gary SF
· 11 months ago
Thanks for keeping me on my toes. My comments about racism still stand.
RitornaVincitor
· 11 months ago
I'd rather not comment.
Ben Dover
· 11 months ago
Doesn't your white hood and robe get in the way of the keyboard?
Barack Obama supported gay rights during his Illinois Senate tenure. He sponsored legislation in Illinois that would ban discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation.
Barack Obama in the United States Senate:
Every two years the Human Rights Campaign, the largest national gay and lesbian organization, issues a scorecard for members of the Senate based on their sponsorship and voting on key issues of importance to gay and lesbian citizens. Barack Obama scored 89 out of 100% in the 2006 scorecard. Here’s how HRC rated Barack Obama:
Barack Obama on Hate Crimes:
Barack Obama co-sponsored legislation to expand federal hate crimes laws to include crimes perpetrated because of sexual orientation and gender identity.
Employment Non-Discrimination:
Barack Obama supports the Employment Non-Discrimination Act and believes it should be expanded to include sexual orientation and gender identity.
Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell – Gays in the Military:
Barack Obama believes we need to repeal the “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” policy and allow gays and lesbians to serve openly in the military. His campaign literature says, “The key test for military service should be patriotism, a sense of duty, and a willingness to serve.”
Gay & Lesbian Adoption:
Barack Obama believes gays and lesbians should have the same rights to adopt children as heterosexuals.
Barack Obama and Gay Marriage/ Civil Unions:
Although Barack Obama has said that he supports civil unions, he is against gay marriage. In an interview with the Chicago Daily Tribune, Obama said, “I’m a Christian. And so, although I try not to have my religious beliefs dominate or determine my political views on this issue, I do believe that tradition, and my religious beliefs say that marriage is something sanctified between a man and a woman.”
Barack Obama did vote against a Federal Marriage Amendment and opposed the Defense of Marriage Act in 1996.
He said he would support civil unions between gay and lesbian couples, as well as letting individual states determine if marriage between gay and lesbian couples should be legalized.
“Giving them a set of basic rights would allow them to experience their relationship and live their lives in a way that doesn’t cause discrimination,” Obama said. “I think it is the right balance to strike in this society.”
Steve_in_CNJ
· 11 months ago
Is this a serious comment? If I were a black supporter of GLBT equality I'd call you a POS. actually, I'm going to call you that anyway.
ShirleyGoodnessanMercy
· 11 months ago
The Black Caucus in the US Congress is the most pro-gay group in Washington DC. Most black politticians are pro-gay.... and Coretta Scott King herself was outspoken for justice for gay citizens.
LTMidknite
· 11 months ago
BTW, kid. Your trolling would somewhat makes sense if it was for the tiny little fact that there are gay "Black Americans" as well.
justmy2
· 11 months ago
Stop trolling....
Indigo
· 11 months ago
Sweet guy! He's got his act together, unlike the local trolls. Even better, he's talented and uses it responsbily. That he's also ultra-cute might just be the fiction of my aging eyes but I bet not.
Gary SF
· 11 months ago
The video is pretty cool. Check it out.
happycozy
· 11 months ago
John, is it going to be like this for the next 30+ days? If so, I'm going to have to take a break from your blog.
I hate that Obama invited Warren. I hate even more that Obama hasn't appointed any openly gay or lesbian cabinet members.
But, John, Obama can't uninvite Warren now. If he does, it will be political suicide. Christians--who have been waiting for centuries for a good 'ol persecution--will cream their pants if Warren is dropped. They will start bitching about how they're victims of the left and a commie president. Republicans will smell blood and go after Obama incessantly. The 2010 election will be a repeat of 2004 as Evangelicals, Catholics, and Mormons come out of the woodworks to vote out democrats.
I'm all for the LGBT community boycotting the inauguration. But can you PLEASE write about something else.
ShirleyGoodnessanMercy
· 11 months ago
I agree. Rick Warren Watch has grown old. The best we can hope for is that Obama now invites a gay minister like Bishop Robinson to the inauguration to balance things out.
Steve_in_CNJ
· 11 months ago
mr. obama needs to stop agreeing to disagree and denounce gay-bashing in all its forms as morally unacceptable. then we can move on. there ain't no way "balance out" rick warren.
LTMidknite
· 11 months ago
He already said he doesn't agree with his views on homosexuality
Steve_in_CNJ
· 11 months ago
he hasn't said what he needs to say. that there is no moral alternative to treating everyone with respect. he has basically said the opposite with his selection of Warren.
and then explain why he also invited Rev. Joe Lowery who is for gay/lesbian rights.
Steve_in_CNJ
· 11 months ago
well clearly their only qualification is being homosexual. tokens perhaps?
LAMatt
· 11 months ago
Just fact checking here: chair of WH Council on Enivironmental Quality, Ms. Sutley's soon-to-be job, is not a Cabinet level position.
Obama nominated no gay people to be in the cabinet or to any of the 21 senior staff positions.
And to clarify: Rev. Lowery, though a great civil rights leader, really isn't there as a champion of gay rights. He has said some wonderful things about gay civil rights and has been warmly inclusive, but he is not gay and is not, strictly speaking, a gay civil rights leader.
timncguy
· 11 months ago
Yes, Obama has said that he "personally" doesn't agree with many of Warren's position. Although Obama does share Warren's opposition to gay marriage.
Also, what Obama has expressed in the past is that anti-gay positions are valid, strongly held religiously based moral positions. This is the position that he needs to rebuke. He needs to openly state that anti-gay bigotry based in religious beliefs is every bit as repugnant now as racist beliefs were when they were based in religious beliefs. PERIOD
justmy2
· 11 months ago
You may be hitting on something. If this could be used to force Obama to give the equivalent of a Philadelphia speech to denounce Warren's hate speech, maybe this would indeed begin the dialogue.
You know what's grown old? Being thrown under the bus and then having to listen to people like you whine that outrage against it is old.
happycozy
· 11 months ago
I never said discrimination was old. You're putting words in my mouth. You should reread my post. I'm saying there are few options right now. Boycott the inauguration. I'm all for that, and I'll join in. Demand campaign contributions back. I'll do that, too. DO SOMETHING BESIDES BITCH! Let the rest of us know, and I'll sign on to it. But you're kidding yourself if you think Obama is going to uninvite Warren. That would be considered a sign of weakness.
With that said, I'm angry about Warren, but reading post after post--some falling into the same guilt-by-association that we all decried during the election--isn't going to change anything. There are other stories in the news that are worth writing about, and it seems like they're being neglected here.
justmy2
· 11 months ago
What is this can't ...
I seem to remember a message related to the fierce urgency of now....
I seem to remember a message of yes we can, not no we can't....
You have just said Obama and the Democratic Party for that matter are more inclined to cater to the right than the very people who voted for them...
There is no better example of why I refuse to put the word Democrat any where near my voter registration card.
ShirleyGoodnessanMercy
· 11 months ago
Sarah Palin's new in-law just got arrested for drug possession and sales. ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha!!!!
doug
· 11 months ago
It's obvious we need to keep pressure on the Obama Admin. Stay organized and stay strong.
RitornaVincitor
· 11 months ago
I see this great guy, and it just makes me feel worse. He's one of the people Obama just slapped in the face. I think we have to keep making a noise about this. Otherwise, as we know all too well, it just keeps happening.
Mark in Florida
· 11 months ago
yup. keep it up...don't let it fade.
AngelaChanning
· 11 months ago
I feel like I have been punched in the stomach by all of this. Obama is now in a corner and cannot uninvite him and Rick Warren appears to be enjoying the attention he is now getting. For an astute and well managed organization like Obama's to make such a blunder is beyond me -- and yet they don't even acknowledge it as one. They fail to see that they have completely blown away the enthusiasm and motivation of many people -- not just LGBT. It is almost like the political tone deafness of the Bushies. Now don't get me wrong, Obama is no W....but....as a gay man, I did not expect to be under the Greyhound bus before he took office.
Part of me wants to watch the historic innaugural and part of me feels like I would be better off not watching.
Remember that empty feeling you had when all your friends but you were invited to a fabulous party? (And you were stuck home watching Love Boat?) That's how I feel now. Thank you for listening.
coolcatdaddy
· 11 months ago
i know what you mean. For me, it's more a feeling of embarrassment.
I live in an area of NC where there many Gay progressives who abandoned the Democratic Party and were planning on voting for the Greens or another third party (or not vote at all) because they felt that Obama was just another politician that wasn't that different from Clinton. I worked hard to convince and changed some minds.
Now, I feel like apologizing to them. It's like I sold them a vacuum cleaner that belched up a pile of crap in their living room.
never drank the kool-aid
· 11 months ago
It's not a blunder. It's the rankest, most cynical triangulation.
Obama is presenting himself to the religious fanatics whose favor he has been pursuing as a reasonable person by pissing off the queers and feminazis and other members of the right wing demonology.
Remember Sister Souljah?
Some of us are not shocked because we had him pegged as a triangulating "centrist" when he did this same damn thing with McClurkin.
justmy2
· 11 months ago
As you stated...this hits many people in the stomach....not just the LGBT community...
it demonstrates everything that is wrong with our political system today...
and the saddest part is that is everyone doesn't stand up for what is right...and say NOT.THIS.TIME...we are in for another 4 years of Clintonian triangulation and running over of the blogosphere....
Mark in Florida
· 11 months ago
Well said. I feel the exact same way.
devlzadvocate
· 11 months ago
If Marianne Williamson would have been selected or maybe is selected to speak in addtion to those already on the agenda, none of this would be happening.
Add Marianne and things could turn around.
LTMidknite
· 11 months ago
"Obama is homophobic." - Gary Hussein SF
Homophobia (n): fear of homesexuals
So explain why he just appointed Nancy Sutley.
Gary SF
· 11 months ago
Explain to my why he is against same-sex marriage. He is part of the power structure that will decide if we can be fired or evicted for being gay or not. That same power structure will decide if they will 'allow' us to marry. There is NO logical reason to deny us the right to marry. There are degrees of racism and degrees of homophobia. I would agree that Obama's homophobia is 'low-grade.' But it is what it is. Hey, I enthusiastically voted for the guy knowing this. I think he will be good for the country and his presidency has got to be 'healing' for people of color. But I am not sure just how this is going to be for those of us who are gay.
LTMidknite
· 11 months ago
And when has he given the indication he plans to enact laws that you can be "fired or evicted for being gay"? See how you may be jumping to conclusions?
And technically, the "right to marry" isn't even a right among heterosexuals.
Gary SF
· 11 months ago
Uh, don't mess with me here. My partner and I are 'bi-national' meaning that we cannot live together here because we don't have the right to marry and he is a foreigner. We have been together for more than 9 years, and I will be moving out of the US because of this. But if I were heterosexual, I could spend 20 minutes on the Internet, find a Russian mail-order bride and she could eventually live here with me. But my relationship does not rise to that standard. I have accepted moving to another country, but there will be financial consequences.
Call marriage a right or call it a privilege or whatever you want. But if 'it' is limited to heterosexuals, 'it' is discriminatory. And those who chose to limit it to heterosexuals are bigots and homophobic.
LAMatt
· 11 months ago
fact checking here: The Supreme Court, in Loving v. VA, referred to marriage as a 'fundamental freedom.' 12 years later, in Zablocki v Redhail, the court called marriage 'a fundamental right.'
Where are you getting your 'facts' LTMidknite?
Mark in Florida
· 11 months ago
I don't believe Obama is homophobic...I honestly believe some lower level clown did not do the research on this Warren thing....
mmedefarge
· 11 months ago
omg will you just go away--bah humbug
Jay
· 11 months ago
The Yes on Prop.8 folks are now trying to invalidate the 18,000 same-sex marriages in California.
These people make me sick!
1billinnj2
· 11 months ago
are we gays now the new blacks?
pdxprobert
· 11 months ago
In the hyerarchy of oppression, do you think they would allow that comparison? That would mean our quest for equality is equal to theirs and just as worthy... Ive heard more black people say its not and use things like how they were lynched and beaten and suffered more oppression than homosexuals did...
its as though our quest for equality isnt equal to theirs, because we havent suffered as much as they did.... I guess they don't know gay history very well, as the term "fag" came from homosexuals being tied up and placed in the kindling of the fire that was about to be set in the days when witches were burned at the stake (another compassionate act of christian supremacy towards people who they don't like or had property they wanted).... fag is a British term for cigarettes in its current day usage.. in the days of witch burning it referred to a burning stick, hence kindling where fags were placed...
hal
· 11 months ago
Who's they? There are gays of all races, not just white.
pdxprobert
· 11 months ago
I think you know that answer.... and I don't need to be reminded their are non-white gay people...
justmy2
· 11 months ago
you are making the same mistake Warren is being attacked for...
I hope you realize it and reconsider you comment...
pdxprobert
· 11 months ago
Please explain... what mistake?
Mitch Hussein
· 11 months ago
I'm gay and Black and I am offended from that comment. When you walk down the street noone know your gay unless you wear a sign...I don't have to wear a sign just my skin. Be careful my gay family - if we push too hard we might find ourselves up against a wall. Right now Obama's on our side. Let's not give him a reason to agree with the Warrens in the world.
An Other Greek
· 11 months ago
First things first: Hooray for Sheppard Fairey! (excellent name BTW!!) I have so much respect for him, I been seeing his Obey projects through the years, in guerrilla locations throughout the States... And the fact that he did the HOPE poster for Obama is amazing: The POTUS' -most- iconic image is done by a guerrilla street artist ! ! ! We've come a long way.
But not apparently far enough.
Surprised?
I am not. I fully supported Obama, agaist Hillary, and particularly against McCain (duh!), but I did not forget McKlurkin, and I did net let myself get drunk on delusion... Obama is no messiah, and Nov 4 is only the beginning.
Fact is that every inch of progress is going to come through struggle, our "issues" will not all get resolved through an election.
Of course I think Obama supports gay rights, WITHIN A REASONABLE POLITICAL CONTEXT. He IS a master politician (again, duh!). Having said that, I don't mind so much some of our more dramatic and histrionic brothers and sisters, angry at Obama calling him a homophobe etc...
Let the extremes from all bases fight it out, and let the discourse get light.
That IS change.
If Obama delivers, we will inherit an amazing civic and political legacy. If he doesn't, let's fight and scream, but not because we "expected" change, and it didn't come, simply from the vote. This is America, not Scandinavia... Every step is a struggle, and hopefully we will have 8 years of an ally instead of an outright enemy...
Look either Obama's invitation of Warren was 'from the heart' or it was a political action. I don't think that his intention is to 'throw gays under the bus' but I also don't think that he understands just how sensitive we are right now in the post-Prop 8 era. But I do think we need to keep up the heat - not to the 'boiling point' - but he needs to understand our anger and our strength. Hopefully, we will see some pro-LBGT bills signed by him in his 1st 6 months in office.
postdamnit
· 11 months ago
Dream on.
LTMidknite
· 11 months ago
He's already said he plans to repeal the Defense of Marriage Act and Don't Ask, Don't Tell.
So we'll see.
name
· 11 months ago
Out of everything that could be done, DADT is the last thing on my list.
postdamnit
· 11 months ago
(CNN) -- Sponsors of the California ballot measure that banned same-sex marriage are seeking to nullify thousands of marriages between gay and lesbian couples performed after the state Supreme Court ruled them constitutional. The passge of Proposition 8 left the future of thousands of marriages between same-sex couples unclear.
The passge of Proposition 8 left the future of thousands of marriages between same-sex couples unclear.
The sponsors Friday filed responses to three anti-Proposition 8 lawsuits with the state Supreme Court. The briefs also defend Proposition 8 against opponents' legal challenges, including an argument that the amendment needed a constitutional convention to be added to the state's constitution.
"We are confident that the will of the voters and Proposition 8 will ultimately be upheld," said Andrew Pugno, General Counsel for ProtectMarriage.com and the Proposition 8 Legal Defense Fund.
California Attorney General Edmund "Jerry" Brown called on the court to reject the initiative.
"Proposition 8 must be invalidated because the amendment process cannot be used to extinguish fundamental constitutional rights without compelling justification," Brown said in a written statement.
Rick Jacobs, founder and chair of the anti-Proposition 8 Courage Campaign, said he was "appalled" that the initiative's supporters wanted to nullify the same-sex marriages that are already on the books.
"The motivation behind this mean-spirited and heart-breaking action should not be allowed to be buried in legal brief," he said. "If Proposition 8's sponsors plan to destroy lives, they should at least have the courage to admit it publicly." Don't Miss
* iReport.com: Your thoughts on same-sex marriage * Map: How California voted * In Depth: Same-sex mariage
Opponents filed suit quickly after the November 4 election in which Proposition 8 passed 52 percent to 48 percent, effectively reversing a California Supreme Court decision that it was unconstitutional to deny marriage licenses to same-sex couples.
The vote also prompted a series of protests, some aimed at supporters of the proposition.
The proposition, which added an amendment to the state constitution, defined marriage as between one man and one woman.
Opponents argue that the amendment cannot be applied retroactively, but proponents say the amendment is clear on that issue.
"Proposition 8's brevity is matched by its clarity," one of the briefs read. "There are no conditional clauses, exceptions, exemptions, or exclusions: 'Only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California.'
" ... Its plain language encompasses both pre-existing and later-created same-sex (and polygamous) marriages, whether performed in California or elsewhere. With crystal clarity, it declares that they are not valid or recognized in California."
Opponents are also seeking to have the amendment nullified, arguing that it alters the state's constitution -- meaning the state Supreme Court's May ruling -- and therefore, according to state law, is a revision that requires a constitutional convention. Proponents of the amendment disagree.
"Petitioners' challenge depends on characterizing Proposition 8 as a radical departure from the fundamental principles of the California Constitution," their briefs said. " ... But that portrayal is wildly wrong. Proposition 8 is limited in nature and effect. It does nothing more than restore the definition of marriage to what it was and always had been under California law before June 16, 2008 -- and to what the people had repeatedly willed that it be throughout California's history."
California voters passed a ballot initiative in 2000 that changed the state's Family Code to formally define marriage in the state between a man and a woman. After San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom performed same-sex marriages in 2004, which were promptly annulled, Newsom and others sought to have the ballot initiative struck down.
The California Supreme Court did so in May, and same-sex marriages were performed legally in California a month later.
The court's ruling said the right to marry is among a set of basic human rights "so integral to an individual's liberty and personal autonomy that they may not be eliminated or abrogated by the legislature or by the electorate through the statutory initiative process."
But opponents had already been at work on Proposition 8, seeking to enshrine the marriage definition in the constitution, and the initiative was approved for the November 4 vote.
Proposition 8 supporters also announced the addition of Kenneth Starr to their legal team. Starr will serve as lead counsel and argue their case to the Supreme Court.
Starr, the dean of Pepperdine Law School, investigated the suicide of Clinton deputy White House counsel Vince Foster and the Whitewater affair. The $70 million investigation turned up evidence of President Clinton's affair with Monica Lewinsky and led to Clinton's impeachment by the House of Representatives. He was acquitted by the Senate. E-mail to a friend E-mail to a friend Share this on: Mixx Digg Facebook del.icio.us reddit StumbleUpon MySpace | Mixx it | Share
Steve_in_CNJ
· 11 months ago
I just read that AG Jerry Brown has decided NOT to defend proposition 8,even though that would have been standard procedure. Instead he will be asking the court to nullify it. Seems like a big development.
LTMidknite
· 11 months ago
And since most of you like to throw the word "homophobic" without the tiniest friggin clue to what it means, let it break it down to you.
Homophobia (n):unreasoning fear of homosexuals and homosexuality.
Get that? "Fear", not "hatred"
The majority of american "fear" homosexuals in that they don't understand them or can relate to them. It's human nature to "fear" what they don't understand.
In other words, opposition of gay marriage does not equal hatred of homosexuals.
Fortunately, people with fear can be educated.
Webster
· 11 months ago
I've always preferred "heterosexist" myself.
Steve_in_CNJ
· 11 months ago
homophobia is commony used to connote hatred and bigotry, simply because there is no good alternative in the language. some people have resorted to "homobigot" but even that is awkward because it could mean bigoted homosexuals. (PS: however, see webster below).
coolcatdaddy
· 11 months ago
In other words, opposition of gay marriage does not equal hatred of homosexuals.
Certainly, opposing gay marriage alone doesn't make someone homophobic. But ranting on about someone and equating them with pedophiles, stereotyping them as being incapable of thinking of anything but sex, or grossing folks out with talk about how being gay is unnatural because the "parts don't fit" is probably a wee bit of a sign that someone might have some fear of Gays and Lesbians.
Fortunately, people with fear can be educated.
Yes, that's true - people who want to overcome irrational fears can do so. However, there are some people who don't and never will.
Liberals seem to think that, somehow, through intelligent discussion, one can engage in dialogue with someone who has an irrational fear. You can't.
After living in the South for forty years, I've seen my share of racists, bigots and homophobes. The only times I've seen people change their attitude is when there's something that happens in their own lives to change their minds - having a son or daughter who is gay, being forced into working with someone of color and changing over time, or going through an emotional trauma that makes them really examine their own fears and prejudices.
Fears are built with psychological barriers that aren't broken down by some teary-eyed guests on "Oprah" or a public service ad campaign.
LTMidknite
· 11 months ago
Never said Warren wasn't a homophobe.
I'm saying the evidence doesn't show Obama is one.
Gary SF
· 11 months ago
Well there are definitions and then there is 'common usage.' Folks still say 'dial the number' even though telephones have not had 'dials' for 20 years or so. There are many examples. But since this bothers you, I will confine myself to using bigot. Obama is a bigot. Warren is a bigot. There are degrees of bigotry - Warren's bigotry is very 'high' and Obama's is very 'low.' Lincoln 'freed the slaves' but he was still a bigot. Obama wants to end DADT but he won't 'allow' us to marry. He is still a bigot. Get it?
no comment
· 11 months ago
i tend to agree that some of the reaction to warren does seem to be a bit overcooked, but warren tends to make matters worse with what is minimally a very poor articulation of his views. as you stated, some of it probably is a matter of education.
for example, some years ago i was in san francisco and needed to take a bus to the castro district for a project on which i was working. i had no idea of the character of the castro district beforehand but the place is world homo HQ. when i got off the bus i was terrified - the sidewalks were wall to wall full of homosexuals; my first thought was to want to get back on the bus and get the hell out of there but by that point the bus had pulled off. totally outnumbered, i feared that i would be gang butt-raped on the sidewalk. in retrospect, it was a ridiculous fear but i had never been in an environment so thick with homosexuals.
and while warren claims to have contacts with homosexuals that doesn't tell you anything about the character of those contacts or what he learns from them. but when i heard some of warren's comments - it's easy to condemn them intellectually but some of them do strike a visceral core. for example, warren's comments likening homosexuality to pedophilia; on the surface those comments seem ridiculous. but on the other hand, if someone had children in the boy scout, it would not surprise me if the parents would feel very uneasy about having their boys go on a camping trip with a scout leader who was a practicing homosexual. i mean, there is a visceral sense of unease that one would feel about having young boys around a practicing homosexual. you can condemn that sense intellectually but it's not enough to say "that's ignorant" and leave it at that. but i think that too many people do just that.
Bush Bites
· 11 months ago
Obama really stepped in it this time.
You guys really have to think of an alternative in case he doesn't back down, tho.
Perhaps pressuring other pols to boycott the ceremony, or at least do some kind of silent protest during what's his name's prayer?
Maybe having everybody were down with prop 8 buttons?
Just throwing out ideas here.
Gary SF
· 11 months ago
He can't back down. Boycotts are not a good idea for this historic event. But if we show just how angry we are leading up to the event, I think we will have everyone's attention. I've got a hunch that Jerry Brown acted to overturn Prop 8 in part because of this and in part because the Yes on 8 folks decided to try to nullify all of the marriages that took place before the election. Just as Obama had a strategy when he invited Warren, we have now been dealt a very powerful hand. Let's play it wisely.
houstonray
· 11 months ago
Maybe everyone could take their shoes off and hold one or both of them up in the air during his invocation/speech?
We don't need to be throwing them (much as I'd like to suggest that, that's the last thing we need on a day like that). But holding up shoes would really make an impact. After all, it is considered an insult and everyone who's watched or read any news in the last week, knows all about it...
Shlomo
· 11 months ago
We all have extra shoes in our closets. I have some steel toed boots I'd love to hurl Warren's way. Right boot or left. You pick.
Of course, next time my neighbor asks me over to throw 'shoes' (horseshoes), the game will never be quite the same as before.
Professor_Farnsworth
· 11 months ago
This was very well said.
no comment
· 11 months ago
when i listen to warren's comments, it appears to me that his primary beef is that he is against calling gay marriage by the name "marriage". i would not call that an inherently unreasonable position; i don't think that heterosexual union and homosexual union should be called the same thing because they are different. i think that when it involves homosexuals it should be called "civil union" while the term "marriage" should be the term used when it involves heterosexuals.
however, even if i am reading warren's comments correctly, his statements likening homosexual union to pedophilia, incent and statutory rape constitute very inartful ways to support his position -- it takes what would otherwise be an arguably reasonable position and makes it an unreasonable one.
in general, the problem with the "gay marriage" discourse is that it is too often poisoned by the highly vocal "defense of marriage" idiots. while i am definitely no proponent of homosexual practice, i fail to see how homosexual union constitutes any "threat" to marriage that would require a "defense". the real threats to marriage have more to do with easy divorce and the decline in general social cohesion and the lack of stigma that once attached to divorce.
Mark in Florida
· 11 months ago
No my friend. You need to watch his interview with Ann Curry recently. And other transcripts...it's shocking beyond belief. Truly....we are not over reacting. I wish I were. Warren is a nutbag of the highest order. I am pretty middle of the road politically....and I am not a 'one issue' voter. Warren is intollerable.
no comment
· 11 months ago
i actually did see excerpts from warren's interview and if you listen closely, there places where he makes it pretty clear that he has a beef with use of the term "marriage" in connection with homosexual union. i actually agree with that part of his comments - i don't think that it should be called "marriage". but i also agree with you - some of the stuff that i heard warren say seemed rather nutty.
Bitsy
· 11 months ago
That was a great statement. I think the HOPE poster is fantastic, what a creative artist. I enjoyed the vid at the link too.
Go Shepard! Fuck off Rick Warren!
justmy2
· 11 months ago
I kind of wish he would have pulled it. It certainly would have gotten Obama's attention.
Every time people tolerate this nonsense, it only enables it.
Torture...let's keep our powder dry,
Warrantless Wiretaps...we have an election to win
Let a city drown....now is not the time to play the blame game....
It is unreal. I can not stand by when a divisive figure attacks a community, albeit not my own, and say and do nothing, and then expect that same community to stand up for mine if needed. Silence is no longer an option.
Mark in Florida
· 11 months ago
Excellent points. You are noble in your support, and vision. You get it.
Mark in Florida
· 11 months ago
It's all so sad. I really had high hopes. I feel they are dashed with this pandering. Never again. NOT one cent of mine, my resources, my time, my rich friends resources. NOTHING. I refuse to help any more democratic candidates untill they wake up. If every angry pro human rights person active in the democratic party boycotted, guess what folks, they would feel it. And elections would be lost.
I have had it.
jonnierae
· 11 months ago
You need to pick your battles. This is not one of them, as Rick Warren is not going to be involved in the Obama administration. Don't waste your ammunition on this. Obama is not the enemy; he is trying to show us how to find common ground with those who hold different views. (on AIDS work in Africa, on poverty, on the problem orphans worldwide, on churches giving 90% to work for others and keeping only 10% for themselves) Lowery will be there too on the same stage and he is a champion of gay rights. Afraid to have someone who disagrees with you? Into exclusion of the mainstream? yes. this guy represents the mainstream, for now. Watch out for a backlash. Vilifying people is what FOX news does, and the right and the Bushies. How are you different?
All Comments
"I think it is important to speak one’s mind, but also to not let the narcissism of petty differences sabotage our unity and progress."
Some of you here can learn a lot from that statement.
Do you really think inviting Warren to do his invocation is Obama way of saying "f--- the gays. they are garbage"?
As to your question, no I think it is Obama being political. He thinks that he has our vote no matter what - and he may be right. But the white Evangelicals voted against him. Regardless, if there had been no Proposition 8 or if it had failed, his choice of Warren would not feel so bad. But we don't live in a vacuum - everything happens in context and our context is the 'gay bashing' referred to as Prop 8. Sorry, we can agree to disagree. One can only drive in the middle of the road for so long. To arrive at a destination, one has to turn right or left.
Homophobia (n): fear of homesexuals
So explain why he just appointed Nancy Sutley.
In the workplace, however, he'd ask the women if they were "having their period" if they got upset about something or suggest that one of our student workers, an out lesbian, "wasn't wearing enough make up" and wasn't feminine enough. He complained to one (straight) staff member that he had a "limp" handshake that made him seem like a "faggot".
Sometimes people who are uncomfortable with gays can put on a good face in public if they think it will help their career.
I'm not saying Obama's like this, but just hiring someone who is Gay or Lesbian doesn't make you comfortable with them.
He has now opened the door for people to question his true beliefs.
For what?
Invite Warren to a summit of faith in his first 100 days if he is so hellbent on putting on a kabuki show.
But to give him a singular stage, worldwide, in front of what will likely be the largest worldwide television audiences in history, likely on par with the Olympics....is patently outrageous.
I do have a question though. Does the Pope have the same views as Warren?
If so, what if he would have invited the Pope? Interesting thought experiment.
I just thought of that when thinking about the size of the audience.
"I think it is important to speak one’s mind, but also to not let the narcissism of petty differences sabotage our unity and progress."
......is referring to you.
Well, i don't like that. I don't believe for one minute that Obama would take that position with a white supremicist, do you? No, of course not. So, why is it acceptible to take that position with anti-gay bigots?
sitemonitor
He's back: Kenneth Starr is going to argue the case in front of the CA Supreme Court to keep Prop 8 on books. Could not stand him ten years ago and can't stand him now!
Info at end of the story:
http://www.cnn.com/2008/US/12/19/california.pro...
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/...
Just as the gay community would do no less to obstruct the interests and rights of any conservative republican white or otherwise; the gay community must direct the same vigor to obstruct, and impede any political gains of the Black community. They have no qualms about doing as much to the gay community. The gay community must rise above the political correctness of aligning itself to a fellow Democratic Party faction and recognize Black America is as much an enemy as is as the Conservative right wing American. Let’s work to vote against any and all Black American political interests at every level; be it school board or the office of the presidency. Work as hard as possible to minimize their hateful bigotted gay racist influence.
There is no difference between a Black homophobe and a Conservative one.
Ask yourself would have Hillary Clinton invited such a vile gay racist to her inaguration. Obama not only threw the gay community under the bus; he condoned gay racist speech.
I regret voting for this man.
http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/la-oe-canni...
I don't understand why so many blacks see same-sex marriage as being all about whites. I am not black, but I am going working with a group to put together an 'educational program' for people of color - we are starting this in my workplace. We will be reviewing Marlon Brigg's Tongue's Untied next week. I loved the film, but I can't remember if it is suitable for a 'general audience.' I am also trying to put together a famous black gays and lesbians exhibit - Bayard Rustin, Langston Hughes, etc. I have several motivations, not the least is that black gays have so much crap to deal with.
Barack Obama and Gay Rights in Illinois:
Barack Obama supported gay rights during his Illinois Senate tenure. He sponsored legislation in Illinois that would ban discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation.
Barack Obama in the United States Senate:
Every two years the Human Rights Campaign, the largest national gay and lesbian organization, issues a scorecard for members of the Senate based on their sponsorship and voting on key issues of importance to gay and lesbian citizens. Barack Obama scored 89 out of 100% in the 2006 scorecard. Here’s how HRC rated Barack Obama:
Barack Obama on Hate Crimes:
Barack Obama co-sponsored legislation to expand federal hate crimes laws to include crimes perpetrated because of sexual orientation and gender identity.
Employment Non-Discrimination:
Barack Obama supports the Employment Non-Discrimination Act and believes it should be expanded to include sexual orientation and gender identity.
Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell – Gays in the Military:
Barack Obama believes we need to repeal the “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” policy and allow gays and lesbians to serve openly in the military. His campaign literature says, “The key test for military service should be patriotism, a sense of duty, and a willingness to serve.”
Gay & Lesbian Adoption:
Barack Obama believes gays and lesbians should have the same rights to adopt children as heterosexuals.
Barack Obama and Gay Marriage/ Civil Unions:
Although Barack Obama has said that he supports civil unions, he is against gay marriage. In an interview with the Chicago Daily Tribune, Obama said, “I’m a Christian. And so, although I try not to have my religious beliefs dominate or determine my political views on this issue, I do believe that tradition, and my religious beliefs say that marriage is something sanctified between a man and a woman.”
Barack Obama did vote against a Federal Marriage Amendment and opposed the Defense of Marriage Act in 1996.
He said he would support civil unions between gay and lesbian couples, as well as letting individual states determine if marriage between gay and lesbian couples should be legalized.
“Giving them a set of basic rights would allow them to experience their relationship and live their lives in a way that doesn’t cause discrimination,” Obama said. “I think it is the right balance to strike in this society.”
Most black politticians are pro-gay.... and Coretta Scott King herself was outspoken for justice for gay citizens.
I hate that Obama invited Warren. I hate even more that Obama hasn't appointed any openly gay or lesbian cabinet members.
But, John, Obama can't uninvite Warren now. If he does, it will be political suicide. Christians--who have been waiting for centuries for a good 'ol persecution--will cream their pants if Warren is dropped. They will start bitching about how they're victims of the left and a commie president. Republicans will smell blood and go after Obama incessantly. The 2010 election will be a repeat of 2004 as Evangelicals, Catholics, and Mormons come out of the woodworks to vote out democrats.
I'm all for the LGBT community boycotting the inauguration. But can you PLEASE write about something else.
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/blogs/sfgate/deta...
and then explain why he also invited Rev. Joe Lowery who is for gay/lesbian rights.
Obama nominated no gay people to be in the cabinet or to any of the 21 senior staff positions.
And to clarify: Rev. Lowery, though a great civil rights leader, really isn't there as a champion of gay rights. He has said some wonderful things about gay civil rights and has been warmly inclusive, but he is not gay and is not, strictly speaking, a gay civil rights leader.
Also, what Obama has expressed in the past is that anti-gay positions are valid, strongly held religiously based moral positions. This is the position that he needs to rebuke. He needs to openly state that anti-gay bigotry based in religious beliefs is every bit as repugnant now as racist beliefs were when they were based in religious beliefs. PERIOD
That being said, I am not holding my breath.
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/blogs/sfgate/deta...
Meet Nancy Sutley
You know what's grown old? Being thrown under the bus and then having to listen to people like you whine that outrage against it is old.
With that said, I'm angry about Warren, but reading post after post--some falling into the same guilt-by-association that we all decried during the election--isn't going to change anything. There are other stories in the news that are worth writing about, and it seems like they're being neglected here.
I seem to remember a message related to the fierce urgency of now....
I seem to remember a message of yes we can, not no we can't....
You have just said Obama and the Democratic Party for that matter are more inclined to cater to the right than the very people who voted for them...
There is no better example of why I refuse to put the word Democrat any where near my voter registration card.
Part of me wants to watch the historic innaugural and part of me feels like I would be better off not watching.
Remember that empty feeling you had when all your friends but you were invited to a fabulous party? (And you were stuck home watching Love Boat?) That's how I feel now. Thank you for listening.
I live in an area of NC where there many Gay progressives who abandoned the Democratic Party and were planning on voting for the Greens or another third party (or not vote at all) because they felt that Obama was just another politician that wasn't that different from Clinton. I worked hard to convince and changed some minds.
Now, I feel like apologizing to them. It's like I sold them a vacuum cleaner that belched up a pile of crap in their living room.
Obama is presenting himself to the religious fanatics whose favor he has been pursuing as a reasonable person by pissing off the queers and feminazis and other members of the right wing demonology.
Remember Sister Souljah?
Some of us are not shocked because we had him pegged as a triangulating "centrist" when he did this same damn thing with McClurkin.
it demonstrates everything that is wrong with our political system today...
and the saddest part is that is everyone doesn't stand up for what is right...and say NOT.THIS.TIME...we are in for another 4 years of Clintonian triangulation and running over of the blogosphere....
Add Marianne and things could turn around.
Homophobia (n): fear of homesexuals
So explain why he just appointed Nancy Sutley.
And technically, the "right to marry" isn't even a right among heterosexuals.
Call marriage a right or call it a privilege or whatever you want. But if 'it' is limited to heterosexuals, 'it' is discriminatory. And those who chose to limit it to heterosexuals are bigots and homophobic.
Where are you getting your 'facts' LTMidknite?
These people make me sick!
its as though our quest for equality isnt equal to theirs, because we havent suffered as much as they did.... I guess they don't know gay history very well, as the term "fag" came from homosexuals being tied up and placed in the kindling of the fire that was about to be set in the days when witches were burned at the stake (another compassionate act of christian supremacy towards people who they don't like or had property they wanted).... fag is a British term for cigarettes in its current day usage.. in the days of witch burning it referred to a burning stick, hence kindling where fags were placed...
I hope you realize it and reconsider you comment...
But not apparently far enough.
Surprised?
I am not. I fully supported Obama, agaist Hillary, and particularly against McCain (duh!), but I did not forget McKlurkin, and I did net let myself get drunk on delusion... Obama is no messiah, and Nov 4 is only the beginning.
Fact is that every inch of progress is going to come through struggle, our "issues" will not all get resolved through an election.
Of course I think Obama supports gay rights, WITHIN A REASONABLE POLITICAL CONTEXT. He IS a master politician (again, duh!). Having said that, I don't mind so much some of our more dramatic and histrionic brothers and sisters, angry at Obama calling him a homophobe etc...
Let the extremes from all bases fight it out, and let the discourse get light.
That IS change.
If Obama delivers, we will inherit an amazing civic and political legacy. If he doesn't, let's fight and scream, but not because we "expected" change, and it didn't come, simply from the vote. This is America, not Scandinavia... Every step is a struggle, and hopefully we will have 8 years of an ally instead of an outright enemy...
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
So we'll see.
The passge of Proposition 8 left the future of thousands of marriages between same-sex couples unclear.
The passge of Proposition 8 left the future of thousands of marriages between same-sex couples unclear.
The sponsors Friday filed responses to three anti-Proposition 8 lawsuits with the state Supreme Court. The briefs also defend Proposition 8 against opponents' legal challenges, including an argument that the amendment needed a constitutional convention to be added to the state's constitution.
"We are confident that the will of the voters and Proposition 8 will ultimately be upheld," said Andrew Pugno, General Counsel for ProtectMarriage.com and the Proposition 8 Legal Defense Fund.
California Attorney General Edmund "Jerry" Brown called on the court to reject the initiative.
"Proposition 8 must be invalidated because the amendment process cannot be used to extinguish fundamental constitutional rights without compelling justification," Brown said in a written statement.
Rick Jacobs, founder and chair of the anti-Proposition 8 Courage Campaign, said he was "appalled" that the initiative's supporters wanted to nullify the same-sex marriages that are already on the books.
"The motivation behind this mean-spirited and heart-breaking action should not be allowed to be buried in legal brief," he said. "If Proposition 8's sponsors plan to destroy lives, they should at least have the courage to admit it publicly."
Don't Miss
* iReport.com: Your thoughts on same-sex marriage
* Map: How California voted
* In Depth: Same-sex mariage
Opponents filed suit quickly after the November 4 election in which Proposition 8 passed 52 percent to 48 percent, effectively reversing a California Supreme Court decision that it was unconstitutional to deny marriage licenses to same-sex couples.
The vote also prompted a series of protests, some aimed at supporters of the proposition.
The proposition, which added an amendment to the state constitution, defined marriage as between one man and one woman.
Opponents argue that the amendment cannot be applied retroactively, but proponents say the amendment is clear on that issue.
"Proposition 8's brevity is matched by its clarity," one of the briefs read. "There are no conditional clauses, exceptions, exemptions, or exclusions: 'Only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California.'
" ... Its plain language encompasses both pre-existing and later-created same-sex (and polygamous) marriages, whether performed in California or elsewhere. With crystal clarity, it declares that they are not valid or recognized in California."
Opponents are also seeking to have the amendment nullified, arguing that it alters the state's constitution -- meaning the state Supreme Court's May ruling -- and therefore, according to state law, is a revision that requires a constitutional convention. Proponents of the amendment disagree.
"Petitioners' challenge depends on characterizing Proposition 8 as a radical departure from the fundamental principles of the California Constitution," their briefs said. " ... But that portrayal is wildly wrong. Proposition 8 is limited in nature and effect. It does nothing more than restore the definition of marriage to what it was and always had been under California law before June 16, 2008 -- and to what the people had repeatedly willed that it be throughout California's history."
California voters passed a ballot initiative in 2000 that changed the state's Family Code to formally define marriage in the state between a man and a woman. After San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom performed same-sex marriages in 2004, which were promptly annulled, Newsom and others sought to have the ballot initiative struck down.
The California Supreme Court did so in May, and same-sex marriages were performed legally in California a month later.
The court's ruling said the right to marry is among a set of basic human rights "so integral to an individual's liberty and personal autonomy that they may not be eliminated or abrogated by the legislature or by the electorate through the statutory initiative process."
But opponents had already been at work on Proposition 8, seeking to enshrine the marriage definition in the constitution, and the initiative was approved for the November 4 vote.
Proposition 8 supporters also announced the addition of Kenneth Starr to their legal team. Starr will serve as lead counsel and argue their case to the Supreme Court.
Starr, the dean of Pepperdine Law School, investigated the suicide of Clinton deputy White House counsel Vince Foster and the Whitewater affair. The $70 million investigation turned up evidence of President Clinton's affair with Monica Lewinsky and led to Clinton's impeachment by the House of Representatives. He was acquitted by the Senate.
E-mail to a friend E-mail to a friend
Share this on:
Mixx Digg Facebook del.icio.us reddit StumbleUpon MySpace
| Mixx it | Share
Homophobia (n):unreasoning fear of homosexuals and homosexuality.
Get that? "Fear", not "hatred"
The majority of american "fear" homosexuals in that they don't understand them or can relate to them. It's human nature to "fear" what they don't understand.
In other words, opposition of gay marriage does not equal hatred of homosexuals.
Fortunately, people with fear can be educated.
Certainly, opposing gay marriage alone doesn't make someone homophobic. But ranting on about someone and equating them with pedophiles, stereotyping them as being incapable of thinking of anything but sex, or grossing folks out with talk about how being gay is unnatural because the "parts don't fit" is probably a wee bit of a sign that someone might have some fear of Gays and Lesbians.
Fortunately, people with fear can be educated.
Yes, that's true - people who want to overcome irrational fears can do so. However, there are some people who don't and never will.
Liberals seem to think that, somehow, through intelligent discussion, one can engage in dialogue with someone who has an irrational fear. You can't.
After living in the South for forty years, I've seen my share of racists, bigots and homophobes. The only times I've seen people change their attitude is when there's something that happens in their own lives to change their minds - having a son or daughter who is gay, being forced into working with someone of color and changing over time, or going through an emotional trauma that makes them really examine their own fears and prejudices.
Fears are built with psychological barriers that aren't broken down by some teary-eyed guests on "Oprah" or a public service ad campaign.
I'm saying the evidence doesn't show Obama is one.
for example, some years ago i was in san francisco and needed to take a bus to the castro district for a project on which i was working. i had no idea of the character of the castro district beforehand but the place is world homo HQ. when i got off the bus i was terrified - the sidewalks were wall to wall full of homosexuals; my first thought was to want to get back on the bus and get the hell out of there but by that point the bus had pulled off. totally outnumbered, i feared that i would be gang butt-raped on the sidewalk. in retrospect, it was a ridiculous fear but i had never been in an environment so thick with homosexuals.
and while warren claims to have contacts with homosexuals that doesn't tell you anything about the character of those contacts or what he learns from them. but when i heard some of warren's comments - it's easy to condemn them intellectually but some of them do strike a visceral core. for example, warren's comments likening homosexuality to pedophilia; on the surface those comments seem ridiculous. but on the other hand, if someone had children in the boy scout, it would not surprise me if the parents would feel very uneasy about having their boys go on a camping trip with a scout leader who was a practicing homosexual. i mean, there is a visceral sense of unease that one would feel about having young boys around a practicing homosexual. you can condemn that sense intellectually but it's not enough to say "that's ignorant" and leave it at that. but i think that too many people do just that.
You guys really have to think of an alternative in case he doesn't back down, tho.
Perhaps pressuring other pols to boycott the ceremony, or at least do some kind of silent protest during what's his name's prayer?
Maybe having everybody were down with prop 8 buttons?
Just throwing out ideas here.
We don't need to be throwing them (much as I'd like to suggest that, that's the last thing we need on a day like that). But holding up shoes would really make an impact. After all, it is considered an insult and everyone who's watched or read any news in the last week, knows all about it...
Of course, next time my neighbor asks me over to throw 'shoes' (horseshoes), the game will never be quite the same as before.
however, even if i am reading warren's comments correctly, his statements likening homosexual union to pedophilia, incent and statutory rape constitute very inartful ways to support his position -- it takes what would otherwise be an arguably reasonable position and makes it an unreasonable one.
in general, the problem with the "gay marriage" discourse is that it is too often poisoned by the highly vocal "defense of marriage" idiots. while i am definitely no proponent of homosexual practice, i fail to see how homosexual union constitutes any "threat" to marriage that would require a "defense". the real threats to marriage have more to do with easy divorce and the decline in general social cohesion and the lack of stigma that once attached to divorce.
Go Shepard! Fuck off Rick Warren!
Every time people tolerate this nonsense, it only enables it.
Torture...let's keep our powder dry,
Warrantless Wiretaps...we have an election to win
Let a city drown....now is not the time to play the blame game....
It is unreal. I can not stand by when a divisive figure attacks a community, albeit not my own, and say and do nothing, and then expect that same community to stand up for mine if needed. Silence is no longer an option.
I have had it.