Perry v. Schwarzenegger - Day 3

Click image for larger view.

Unfortunately, by a 5-4 decision the U.S. Supreme Court - which doesn't allow its own sessions to be broadcast - barred the televising of the Prop 8 trial. Obviously, the defenders of Prop 8 do not want their true motivations and behind the scenes conspiracies to be shown to the wider public. Thus, it will be even more important that the media, including the blogosphere, get that information out across the Internet. Hatred of gays, not the "protection of marriage" is what it's really all about.

*

One of the issues that will play out during this trial along with constitutional arguments is that of the motivation behind Proposition 8. I suspect most readers already know full well that anti-gay animus IS the basis behind Prop 8 no matter what its supporters try to say otherwise. The material distributed by William Tam - one of the original Proposition 8 sponsors and one of the intervenors in defending the law in the federal court case - in the screen shot above makes his hatred of homosexuals pretty apparent. Why this fear of by the Prop 8 supporters of the plaintiffs demonstrating animus as the motivation behind the amendment? Because in 1996, the U. S. Supreme Court in Romer v. Evans, 517 U.S. 620 (1996), an amendment to the Colorado state constitution that would have prevented any city, town or county in the state from taking any legislative, executive, or judicial action from recognizing homosexual citizens as a Protected class. Part of the Court's reasoning was that the Colorado amendment seemed "inexplicable by anything but animus toward the class that it affects [homosexuals]; it lacks a rational relationship to legitimate state interests."

*

Today, the defenders of Prop 8 aimed at fighting plaintiffs’ contention that Prop. 8 was motivated by animus for gays and lesbians. They also seek to claim that gays are not harmed by homophobia and the denial of equal marriage rights. One of the plaintiffs expert witnesses today was Letitia Ann Peplau (Bachelor in Psych from Brown, PhD social Psych from Harvard). Peplau discussed research on heterosexual and same sex couples which not surprisingly found adverse impact on gays because they cannot marry.

*

Interestingly enough, as noted on NGBlog, last week, Mr. Tam - author of the message on the screen shot above - asked to be let out of the case as a defendant because of concerns he faces threats and harassment from same-sex marriage advocates. One has to wonder why he didn't think of that issue back before he signed on to Prop 8 last year and intervened in the Perry case. Could it be that he's finally figured out that his hatred of gays will be on full display and that he himself will help demonstrate that anti-gay animus is the sole real motivation supporting Prop 8? Queerty has a review of his supposed reasons for wanting to withdraw here and you can read the motion here. I suspect that Tam doesn't want his ass put on the witness stand and having to explain the poison he has disseminated. Judge Vaughn Walker has not yet decided on whether to accept his withdrawal request. Tam's videotaped deposition has been played and reportedly those who saw the video say it was quite homophobic. Since his statements are on videotape, Tam cannot now easily disavow his prior statements without looking like a gay hating liar. As the saying goes, pay back can be hell.
*

Readers wanting regular updates can go to the American Foundation for Equal Rights web page located here. The website also has links to media stories on the trial. Check out the website. Better yet, make a donation.