Will the Virginia GOP Splinter Over Gay Marriage and LGBT Equality?

At the national level there is a smoldering civil war going on within the GOP  between the Christofascist/Tea Party element (which is basically a single group) and the Wall Street and big business element which views the Christofascists/Tea Party with much deserved scorn and sees it as a force driving the GOP to a permanent minority party status within a generation or less.   The Virginia GOP to date has been less divided and much more inclined to slavishly follow the dictates of the hate merchants and theocrats at The Family Foundation and its equally heinous smaller affiliates within the state.  There are signs that this may be changing, especially now that Virginia's urban areas cannot vote the knuckle dragging, spittle flecked rural areas where the Christofascists/Tea Party have the most power.  What The Family Foundation wants and demands is simply becoming more and more toxic to urban voters and the business community.  This was exemplified in last November's election when the Republican mayor of Virginia Beach and many business leaders switched and backed Terry McAuliffe.   A piece in Blue Virginia looks at the splintering elements in the Virginia GOP.  Here are excerpts:

[H]ere in Virginia, we may now be seeing a Republican schism, if not a splintering, over a key "social issue" - namely, gay marriage (and LGBT equality, more broadly). What brought this to the surface in recent days was Attorney General Mark Herring's announcement that Virginia would no longer defend the anti-gay-marriage ("Marshall-Newman") amendment in court. On the Democratic side, this announcement was greeted overwhelmingly with praise and celebration. . . . On the Republican side, though, the reaction has been all over the place, from foaming-at-the-mouth rage to pro-forma condemnation to "meh" to actual support for what Mark Herring did. A few examples. 

1. Foaming-at-the-Mouth Rage: Predictably, raging homophobe and theocrat Del. "Sideshow Bob" Marshall went NUTS, talking about "a Pearl Harbor attack on the people of Virginia" and ranting that "the advocates for this are the gay, lesbian, BISEXUAL and transgendered...well the bisexuals have to have at least one of each to be satisfied." Marshall was joined by 30 fellow GOP delegates in condemning what Mark Herring said (although interestingly, there are 36 other GOP delegates who did NOT join "Sideshow Bob"). In addition, "Sideshow Bob" was joined by the even-more-extreme-if-that's-humanly-possible Sen. Dick Black, who ranted, "I don't know what the difference between a dictatorship and this is." Finally, Marshall and Black were joined by...let's just say, some of the more excitable, less moderate voices in the Virginia right-wing blogosphere, . . . 

2. Pro-Forma Condemnation: I'd put Mark Obenshain in this category, along with RPV Chair Pat Mullins, both of whom basically stomped their feet a bit, talked about how they were "disappointed" at Herring's announcement, about how it has "the potential to deprive Virginians on both sides of this important issue of the legal scrutiny the matter clearly merits," blah blah blah. . . . politically, they had to throw SOME red meat to their far-right-wing, theocratic base. And they did...sort of.

3. "Meh": In this category, I'd put the 36 GOP delegates who did NOT sign "Sideshow Bob" Marshall's letter, along with mainstream Republicans like Brian Schoeneman (who basically argued that Herring was within his rights to do this, whatever one thinks about the issue being debated) and Bill Bolling (who stayed out of it completely, as far as I can determine). Note that you also didn't hear anything on this from the Chambers of Commerce, the NOVA Technology Council folks, and other non-theocratic, pro-business Republicans. 

4. Outright Support for What Herring Did: Here, we've got conservative and libertarian-inclined bloggers like Mason Conservative, who explained why "Mark Herring Is Right," and how he's even "glad Herring is forcing us to deal with this." Wow - actual sanity and reason from the right! :) In this same category, we've also got Republican blogger D.J. McGuire, who argued strongly that "Mark Herring was well within his mandate to do what he did, that Herring clearly "has an obligation to both the Federal and the state constitutions," and that on the merits, "adjusting and expanding marriage (for that is what same-sex-marriage advocates wish) would be beneficial."

Over time, continuing to prostitute itself to the likes of Victoria Cobb and other hate merchants is going to cost the Virginia GOP dearly.  I say this as a former Republican who exited the GOP - as did all of my extended family - years ago at this point (and the youngest generation in the family is even more anti-GOP). I concur with the author of the piece at Blue Virginia:

Let's just hope that this continues, that the GOP jettisons its theocrats, bigots, and other extremists, and that the once-great Party of Lincoln (and Eisenhower, etc.) recovers its past sanity.

The Christofascists need to become both political and social outcasts who respectable politicians and decent people give wide berth to and avoid whenever and wherever possible.

TSA Changes Airport Security for Gay Couples

When the boyfriend - he'll be my husband after April 20th - and I travel we have had varied experiences when we go through airport security or recently when we went through security for a cruise on the Carnival Glory back in October.  With Carnival, we were treated as a couple no questions asked.  At airports, the experience has been mixed.  Now, the TSA is changing its policies so that same sex couples will be treated the same way as straight couples.  The Washington Blade as coverage.  Here are highlights:

The Washington Blade has learned the Transportation Security Administration will allow same-sex couples to undergo pre-flight security screenings together in response to two recent incidents with American Airlines personnel at a Colombian airport.

Hunter Carter, a prominent same-sex marriage advocate in Latin America who said American Airlines personnel at the airport in the Colombian city of Medellín separated him and his husband, César Zapata, as they tried to check into their Miami-bound flight on Jan. 18, received an e-mail from Alec Bramlett, senior litigation attorney for the airline, on Wednesday afternoon.

“TSA has communicated to our Corporate Security folks that they are working on a technical change to its directive, and that pending that change, we can immediately begin screening same-sex spouses together,” wrote Bramlett in the e-mail the Blade obtained from Carter. “We are working on communicating this change in procedures to our stations ASAP.”

A TSA spokesperson confirmed to the Blade on Thursday the agency is “working to make clear any confusion in language included in the Aircraft Operator Standard Security Program (ASOP) document” that dictates security screenings.

“TSA policy is for every attempt to be made to accommodate all families traveling together,” said the spokesperson.

No doubt this change will result in more gnashing of teeth among Christofascists and bigots.  The world and society are changing whether they like it or not.

Saturday Morning Male Beauty

US Olympic Team Told to Not Wear USA Uniforms Outside of Olympic Venues

 

As concerns about the safety of athletes and others attending the 2014 Winter Games in Sochi, Russia, continue to grow, we now learn that members of the U.S. Olympic teams have been directed to NOT wear team uniforms anywhere except in the official Olympic venues.  The warning comes for the IOC and cites U.S. State Department concerns about the physical safety of Americans participating in the Winter Games.  As previous posts have indicated, insurgents at war with the Russian regime may seek to  inflict terrorist attacks on those attending and participating in the Games.  Here are highlights from the Wall Street Journal:

The U.S. unveiled more of its Winter Olympic uniforms Thursday, but officials are cautioning athletes to keep theirs under wraps outside the games' venues.

A memo sent to athletes by the U.S. Olympic Committee cautions them to avoid wearing team colors too prominently in Sochi amid heightened concerns about security in the southern Russian resort town.

"The U.S. Department of State has advised that wearing conspicuous Team USA clothing in non-accredited areas may put your personal safety at greater risk," says the memo, which was reviewed by The Wall Street Journal.

The memo details other steps that athletes can take to ensure their safety while in Sochi, including enrolling in a State Department traveler program.

Officials caution athletes about safety at each Olympics, but the warning about Team USA gear seemed new to Bretz, who also competed four years ago in Vancouver and said he received no such warning then.

The USOC declined to comment on the memo but reiterated a statement from Chief Executive Scott Blackmun, who said the committee is working with the State Department, local organizers and law enforcement to ensure athletes' safety. The State Department didn't respond to a request for comment.

Meanwhile, as the New York Times reports, some families of athletes and tourists are rethinking attending the Sochi Games. Here are excerpts:

Athletes and their families are becoming increasingly anxious about possible terrorist attacks at the Winter Olympics in Sochi, so much so that some families have decided not to attend and others plan to curtail their activities once they get to the Games in Russia.

No American athletes have yet canceled plans to compete because of terrorist threats. But with increasing talk about unrest in the region and threats from would-be suicide bombers, some family members say they are reconsidering long-held plans to support the athletes at the Games.

“It’s getting to the point where our lives are on the line if we go there,” said Tim Oshie, whose son, T. J., is on the United States hockey team. “They’re talking about terrorizing families. I’d rather stay in the homeland.”

Patrick Sandusky, a spokesman for the United States Olympic Committee, the organization responsible for the delegation of American athletes at the Games, refused on Friday to answer questions about whether athletes and their families had expressed concern to Olympic officials, what kind of guidance the organization was giving athletes regarding security and whether any special security measures would be provided in Sochi.

This month, the State Department issued a travel advisory warning Americans planning to go to Sochi that terrorists had threatened to attack the Winter Games and urging them to “remain vigilant.” 

A Pentagon official said recently that the United States would station two Navy warships in the Black Sea, next to Sochi, in case any Americans needed to be evacuated after a terrorist attack or other emergency.

Let's be clear.  The IOC is worthless and deciding to hold the 2014 Winter Games in Sochi was utterly irresponsible given the dangers of the region.  And that doesn't even begin to get into a comparison between what the IOC did in 1936 with the anti-Jewish Nazis and what it is doing now with anti-gay Russia.

Is Nevada AG Preparing to Drop Defense of Nevada Gay Marriage Ban?

While Virginia Republicans and self-styled conservatives (i.e., would be KKK members) continue to hyperventilate and convulse over Mark Herring's decision to not defend Virginia's gay marriage ban, there are indications that perhaps Nevada's Attorney General, Catherine Cortez Masto, may be considering a similar change in direction in the wake of the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals recent ruling on the application of heightened scrutiny to anti-gay legislation and policies.  Contrary to what members of the Virginia GOP want to believe, recent court rulings are cutting off the supposed justifications for gay marriage bans at the knee cap.  Moreover, as the briefs in Bostic v. Rainey set forth, the real motivations for these bans was anti-gay animus - something the U.S. Supreme Court slammed in United States v. Windsor as insufficient to support laws that further anti-gay discrimination.  RGJ.com has details on this shifting position in Nevada.  Here are highlights:

Nevada Attorney General Catherine Cortez Masto said Friday she will reconsider a brief she filed earlier this week defending Nevada’s gay marriage ban, saying her constitutional arguments are “likely no longer tenable” in light of a 9th U.S. Circuit of Appeals opinion finding it unconstitutional to exclude jurors based on sexual orientation. 

On Tuesday, Masto, a Democrat, filed the brief on behalf of Republican Gov. Brian Sandoval defending Nevada’s gay marriage ban, which is being challenged in a lawsuit filed by Lambda Legal Defense and Education Fund on behalf of several same-sex Nevada couples.

On Friday evening, Masto released a statement saying she is reviewing the brief in light of the 9th Circuit’s opinion in SmithKline Beechum Corp. v. Abbott Laboratories.

“The Ninth Circuit’s new decision…appears to impact the equal protection and due process arguments made on behalf of the state,” Masto said in the written statement. “After careful review of the SmithKlinedecision these arguments are likely no longer tenable in the Ninth Circuit.

“This office will conduct further review over the weekend in order to evaluate the state’s argument in light of SmithKline.We will be discussing this with the Governor’s Office next week.”

Despite the demands of Christofascists and their political whores in the GOP, attorneys, including state attorney generals, cannot ethically argue cases when they believe governing case law makes their arguments little more than an attempt to deceive the Court hearing the case.  I suspect e will be seeing more and more honest and ethical state AG's refusing to defend gay marriage bans.

Mike Huckabee Reminds Us of the GOP War on Women

Click image to enlarge

LGBT citizens are not the only targets of Republican bigotry and oppression.  Women are another favored target as Christofascist lunatic Mike Huckabee - Huckabee has stated on television that he wants the Bible to replace the U.S. Constitution as America's governing document - forcefully reminded us in his recent comments on women at the Republican National Committee winter meeting.  Even conservative columnist Kathleen Parker - one of the generally still sane conservatives - was offended and takes Huckabee - and by extension the Republican Party-  to task for this continued batshitery.  Here are highlights from Parker's column:

What Huckabee was saying was that women are not just packages of reproductive parts whose lives are circumscribed by access to birth control. This is the thinking he ascribes to Democrats. Instead, he said, Republicans are fighting a war for women “to be empowered to be something other than victims of their gender.”

Not bad so far, but then . . . uh-oh.

“And if the Democrats want to insult the women of America by making them believe that they are helpless without Uncle Sugar coming in and providing for them a prescription each month for birth control because they cannot control their libido or their reproductive system without the help of the government, then so be it, let us take that discussion all across America because women are far more than the Democrats have played them to be.”

That is one long sentence, punctuated with several highlight-worthy words — “helpless,” “libido,” “Uncle Sugar” and, never far from the male Republican mind, “reproductive system.”  Paging Dr. Freud . . .
 
As Republicans can’t seem to learn, it’s all in how you say things. Even if Huckabee was only describing how he believes Democrats think of women, he may have parted the curtain on his own unconscious processes. Who, really, is worried about women’s libidos? 

No one in the debate about health insurance coverage of birth control has concerned himself with libido-related concerns except, notably, Rush Limbaugh. It was he who made the leap from Sandra Fluke’s insistence that health insurance should cover birth control to his conclusion that Fluke is, therefore and obviously, a “slut.”

One is justified in wondering: Why do these men concern themselves so much with what women do with their, ahem, “reproductive systems”? 

Does Huckabee really think that Democrats are wedded to the idea that women can’t function without “Uncle Sugar” offering medications to thwart ovulation and fertilization? Even Uncle Sugar is creepy. No doubt intended as a clever twist on Uncle Sam, he sounds like the lurking uncle who trades chocolate for a smooch on the upstairs landing.

Rather than end the idea of a Republican war on women, Huckabee has merely provided fresh fodder to Democrats, while reminding women why they don’t want to associate with this crowd. Clue-less.

One does indeed have to wonder why this angry aging white men are so utterly obsessed with sex whether it be gay sex or women's body parts.  To me it suggests that they all need a serious mental health care intervention.

GOP Pressures McAuliffe on Gay Marriage Lawsuit; Virginian Pilot Applauds Mark Herring

The differences in the reactions to Mark Herring's decision to not defend Virginia's unconstitutional gay marriage ban continue to reverberate.  The Virginia GOP, no doubt under extreme pressure from the Christofascists in the party base, are acting as if the world were ending as if an huge asteroid is about to strike Virginia.  Meanwhile, the Virginian Pilot has released a main editorial supporting Mark Herring's decision.  Here are excerpts from the editorial:

As attorney general, Mark Herring has the responsibility to defend Virginia's laws and constitution - so long as he has a good-faith basis on which to do so.

That basis no longer exists when it comes to the state's constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriage.

Twenty-eight other states have amended constitutions to include such a prohibition; four more have done so through statute. But in recent years, federal courts have systematically dismantled the legal underpinnings of this position. Virginia is now one of several states defending lawsuits filed by gay residents seeking the right to marry, and legal precedent leaves the outcome all but written.

Herring recognizes this and, on Thursday, announced that he could not "and will not defend a law that violates Virginians' fundamental constitutional rights."

Herring's actions aren't without precedent; in fact, he pointed to his predecessor, Republican Ken Cuccinelli, who refused to defend a state law approved last year. That measure created a statewide school district to take over local schools that fail to achieve accreditation.

The marriage-related court cases, of course, will go on, as the lawsuit against Virginia's statewide school district has. Defendants will be represented by other counsel already in place. Oral argument in one of the marriage lawsuits is set for Jan. 30 in Norfolk.

But Herring's decision shifts the state's official position on a matter of major social import, a significant development for a state that once defended an unconstitutional ban on interracial marriage.

Even the often reactionary Richmond Times Dispatch conceded that Herring was correct on the substance of  the Marshall-Newman Amendment's unconstitutional status, although it disagrees wit the process by which Herring has sought to hasten its demise.  None of this, of course means anything to the Virginia GOP which, as the Washington Post reports is demanding that Governor McAuliffee defend the unconstitutional marriage ban.  Here are story highlights:

Dozens of Republican lawmakers signed a letter Friday calling on Gov. Terry McAuliffe to provide legal counsel to defend Virginia’s constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriage. “Our attorney just quit on us,” said C. Todd Gilbert (R-Shenandoah), one of 32 delegates who signed the letter. “I guess we need someone to stand up for us in court.”

All but one of the delegates signing the letter were Republican, including House Majority Leader M. Kirkland Cox (R-Colonial Heights), Timothy D. Hugo (R-Fairfax) and David B. Albo (R-Fairfax). The Democrat was Johnny S. Joannou of Portsmouth. Del. Robert G. Marshall (R-Prince William) drafted the letter, circulated it and delivered it to the governor’s staff Friday.

The House GOP took a separate step Friday to fight the decision by Herring not to defend the marriage ban. Over strenuous objections by Democrats, Republicans on the House Courts of Justice Committee approved a bill giving the General Assembly the right to intervene and hire counsel when the governor or attorney general declines to defend Virginia law.



On Thursday, Herring called the Republican proposal to let the legislature defend state laws “unnecessary.” He said, “Virginia has one attorney general, and I think it’s going to stay that way.”
Nonetheless, legislators put the bill on a speedier-than-usual path Friday to the full House of Delegates. The House’s top Democrat, David J. Toscano (D-Charlottesville) called the move “a classic case of nontransparent legislating.”

He said the bill raises serious constitutional and practical questions.  “What we’re going to do with this bill is create 140 little attorney generals,” Toscano said. “It’s a recipe for chaos.”

Today's Virginia GOP is little better than the segregationists who cited the Bible as their justification as they pushed "Massive Resistance" and closed public schools in parts of Virginia rather than  allow black children attend.  These are NOT nice and decent people and I hope history's judgment of them is scathing.  The sooner conservative Christianity becomes a dead form of religious belief, the better off Virginia and America will be. It is a blight on human existence.

More Friday Male Beauty

Bob Marshall and Other Republicans Show their Extremism in Attacks on Mark Herring

Mark Herring (center) - October 12, 2013 at a fundraiser at our home.  Yours truly is at left and 1st Vice President of the Democrat Party of Virginia is at right.

The Christofascist/GOP rants and spittle flecked batshitery and hyperventilating continued today in the wake of Virginia Attorney General Mark Herrings decision to NOT defend Virginia's unconstitutional gay marriage bans. And in the process, the Christofascists and Republicans - who in my view make tawdry whores look virtuous in comparison - have shown the true level of their rank hypocrisy and disingenuousness. Moreover, they have shown their ignorance as to the ethical restrictions placed on attorneys. Surprisingly, one post on Bearing Drift supported Herring's actions. However, the blow back from the commentors shows the bankruptcy of today's conservationism. First, here are highlights from the supportive post on Bearing Drift:

There are some who claim Herring went beyond his reach in deciding the amendment conflicted with the federal constitution. I disagree. Herring’s oath (which Virginia Virtucon was kind enough to reproduce – albeit in a far different conclusion than my own) makes clear he has an obligation to both the Federal and the state constitutions. The question then becomes: which one should have priority? I would humbly submit that the answer is abundantly clear.

That leads to the next question: can Herring determine what parts of Virginia statute is (or isn’t) compatible with the federal constitution? I believe he is, and if this were a mere piece of legislation, there is precedent from previous (read: Republican) Attorneys General. While some would consider the state constitution to have more importance than legislation, I just don’t see it. Neither can stand up to the federal constitution, period.

Finally, what basis would Herring have for arguing (and this is an argument – the fellow actually deciding the issue is still a judge) that the state amendment would not pass federal muster? I would humbly submit the Supreme Court decision of 2013 – which did declare heterosexual-only marriage unconstitutional at a federal level – was ample evidence.

Of course, when one is a Christofascists or one of their servile political whores, logic, reason and even common decency do not matter.  Exhibit 1 of this hypocritical bullshit is Bob - a/k/a slideshow - Marshall, a man who has previously admitted to desiring to drive all gays from Virginia.  Blue Virginia reports on some of Marshall's over the top insanity:

A few classic quotes by "Sideshow Bob," responding to questions about Attorney General Mark Herring's (correct) decision that the Marshall-Newman/anti-gay-marriage amendment violates the U.S. constitution:

*Should Moses and Jesus apologize to anybody for affirming that marriage is between one man and one woman?"
*"I mean, who's Mark Herring, Louis XIV...Why didn't he tell everybody when he was running for office what he was doing, no he kept this very cleverly to himself and sprung this like a Pearl Harbor attack on the people of Virginia after he takes an oath to defend the constitution."
*"Let me tell you what's going on: Republicans for years now have been wanting to duck all these social issues, and their refusal to face up to this....their refusal to frame the issue in terms that the people understand the common good - because marriage is most essentially beneficial to the common good..."
*"Who gave [Mark Herring] the ability to become prince, prophet, and wordmaster? Nobody. This is a total act on his own effort to take power to himself."
*[Yelling at Christina Bellantoni, sitting in for Kojo Nnamdi as host of the show] "OH GET OFF IT, DON'T TELL ME THAT [Marshall's anti-gay-marriage amendment has created hardship for same-sex couples in Virginia]...you can do anything you want, [but] you can't pretend you're married if it's two guys." 

 In my view, Marshall belongs in an insane asylum.   But in addition to ignoring the reality that the U.S. Constitution overrides the Virginia Constitution. the hyperventilating Christofascists ignore Herring's duty as an attorney to not try to dupe and defraud the U.S. District Court.  This provision of the Virginia State Bar Code of Professional Responsibility makes this clear:

Rule 3.3 Candor Toward The Tribunal

    (a) A lawyer shall not knowingly:

        (1) make a false statement of fact or law to a tribunal;

        (2) fail to disclose a fact to a tribunal when disclosure is necessary to avoid assisting a criminal or fraudulent act by the client, subject to Rule 1.6;

        (3) fail to disclose to the tribunal controlling legal authority in the subject jurisdiction known to the lawyer to be adverse to the position of the client and not disclosed by opposing counsel; or

        (4) offer evidence that the lawyer knows to be false. If a lawyer has offered material evidence and comes to know of its falsity, the lawyer shall take reasonable remedial measures.

Lastly, it is important to remember that right wing darling Ken Cuccinelli advocated for doing exactly what Herring has done.  Here are excerpts from Think Progress:

Herring’s description of his obligation is also absolutely correct. The oath of office for the Attorney General of Virginia — which Herring took earlier this month — includes a solemn vows first to “support the constitution of the United States” and second to support “the constitution of the Commonwealth of Virginia.” Article VI, Clause 2 of the United States Constitution makes clear that the federal constitution takes precedence over state constitutions — so when the two are in conflict, it is absolutely up to the Attorney General to make that decision. 

Moreover, two recent Republican Attorneys General of Virginia — both Family Foundation favorites who had the support of Howell and Marshall — also made clear that they would not defend what they believed to be unconstitutional. 

Herring’s immediate predecessor, Ken Cuccinelli II, also refused to defend laws he deemed unconstitutional. Last year, one of his spokesmen noted, “If the attorney general’s analysis shows that a law is unconstitutional, he has a legal obligation to not defend it.” Indeed in 2009, Cuccinelli himself said in a debate, “I will not defend what I, in my judgment, deem to be an unconstitutional law.” “If I determine it not to be constitutional,” he explained then, “I will not defend it. My first obligation is to the Constitution and the people of Virginia.” That pledge did not stop the Family Foundation and from frequently hosting Cuccinelli at events, accepting his sponsorship, and cheer-leading for his political career.

By refusing to continue the false and deceptive arguments of his predecessor Ken Cuccinelli and by laying out why existing case law precedent makes Virginia's gay marriage bans unconstitutional under the U. S. Constitution, Herring is in fact fulfilling his ethical duty.  And let's not forget that Herring's critics are the descendants of those who (i) supported slavery, (ii) supported segregation, (iii) supported "Massive Resistance, and (iv) bans on interracial marriage.  This reality needs to be thrown in the face of these critics by responsible journalists EVERYTIME this critics want to vent on a media outlet.

Virginia AG Filing Causes Flurry of Activity in Bostic v. Rainey

In addition to a flurry of condemnation from Virginia Christofascists and their puppets in the Republican Party of Virginia, Virginia Attorney General Mark Herring's decision to cease defending Virginia's gay marriage bans has also caused a flurry of filings in the federal court lawsuit, Bostic v. Rainey, pending in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia.  Among the filings were motions to intervene by Liberty Counsel, including the vehemently homophobic Matt Staver (The Family Foundation,an extremely anti-gay "family values" organization had previously sought to intervene in the case and file an amicus brief).  In addition, per the Case website on Pacer, an Order has been entered by Judge Wright Allen asking for status reports and additional briefing.  Here is the content of the Court's Order:

ORDER taking under advisement  Plaintiffs' Motion for Summary Judgment. All pending motions for summary judgment are taken under advisement.

In light of the compelling Notice from the Office of the Attorney General of Virginia indicating that the Attorney General has concluded that Virginia's laws denying the right to marry to same-sex couples violate the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution, counsel for the parties and the Intervenor are ordered to file Status Reports addressing:

(1) whether oral argument on the issues presented remains warranted, or whether the Court should instead rule promptly on the briefs without a hearing;

(2) if oral argument is desired by a party or Intervenor, the requested scope and duration of that party's argument (with the understanding that duplicative or cumulative arguments are strongly discouraged); and

(3) whether, in light of the change of position by the Attorney General, any parties or other entities have grounds to present argument that the laws denying the right to marry to same-sex couples should be construed as constitutional.

Additionally, the Intervenor and Defendant Schaefer, III, are ordered to each file supplemental briefing not to exceed five pages responding to the Virginia Attorney General's position that the laws at issue are unconstitutional.

The Status Reports from the parties and the Intervenor are ordered to be filed no later than 3 PM Friday, January 24, 2014. The Court will determine whether the hearing scheduled for January 30, 2014 should be held and, if so, its scope and duration, upon receipt of these Reports.

The supplemental briefing by the Intervenor and Defendant Schaefer, III shall be filed no later than noon on January 27, 2014. Signed by District Judge Arenda L. Wright Allen on 01/23/2014. (Allen, Arenda) (Entered: 01/23/2014)

The indication that the Motions for Summary Judgment are being taken under advisement suggests that even if the hearings set for January 30, 20124 goes forward, it may be some time before we know how the Court will rule.  

Friday Morning Male Beauty

Catholic Church: Break the Rules All You Want, Unless You’re Gay

The administrators at Eastside Catholic High School ignited a far bigger controversy than they expected when they fired a popular vice principal for marrying his partner.  Not only has the student body revolted but the incident has brought into sharp focus how the Catholic Church hierarchy and its subordinates happily turn a blind eye to all kinds of things contrary to "Church teaching" unless, of course, one is gay in which case strict application of the rules can be assured.  Adding to the utter hypocrisy is the fact that not a single bishop has yet to face meaningful punishment for aiding and abetting and covering up for priests who sexually molested children and youths.  A piece in The Daily Beast looks at the Church's hypocrisy.  Here are some highlights:

A Catholic high school cited its vice principal’s same-sex marriage as the reason for firing him. But what about everyone else violating church doctrine?

 

During my freshman year at Eastside Catholic High School, in Bellevue, Washington, my unmarried science teacher got pregnant. Despite the dearth of decent sex education, most of us could figure out what had happened. A few students wondered whether the school would fire her; unless this was some sort of miracle, we were pretty sure that having a baby out of wedlock was a big no-no. Fortunately for my teacher and her child, the closest thing to an official condemnation was from an English teacher who pondered during a lesson on Greek mythology whether any swans had been seen stalking the science building.


Ten years later, Eastside’s laissez-faire Catholicism has taken a hard right turn. On December 20, the school’s vice principal and swim coach, Mark Zmuda, was forced to resign after it came to light that he had married his longtime boyfriend over the previous summer. In an e-mail to an alumnus, Principal Polly Skinner explained that the Eastside was “bound by Catholic teaching regarding same-sex marriage.”


Bound by teachings on same-sex marriage, yes, but there was apparently some wiggle room on the issue of marriage in general. Before Zmuda resigned, school president Sister Mary Tracy offered him a choice: he could keep his job, but only if he and his husband filed for divorce. It wouldn’t do to have a gay, married vice principal working at a Catholic school, but Sister Mary could somehow make do with a gay divorcée.


The school has couched its response to the ensuing controversy—hundreds of students walked out of class after the popular vice principal’s resignation was announced—in the fact that the school’s affiliation with the Archdiocese of Seattle left it no choice but to follow Church doctrine on the issue of gay marriage.
[E]ven a cursory look at Eastside’s personnel practices show that the school is picking and choosing just what counts as behavior “inconsistent” with Church teachings. Just off the top of my head, I can recall teachers who became pregnant outside of marriage, teachers who advocated for the death penalty, teachers who handed out condoms to students, even a few openly gay teachers. . ..

Abuse allegations against teachers, extramarital affairs by board members, even student-produced sex tapes were hushed-up and hidden from sight.  In every case, the school demurred or ignored any conflict with church doctrine.

Firing an employee for violating a rule that doesn’t make sense is wrong, but selectively firing such an employee is even worse. If Eastside really wants to hang its hat on the argument that religious institutions must abide by canon law, then the school can at least actually abide by canon law.

The school has continued to muddy the waters. Before resigning from her position on Tuesday, Sister Mary asked an ECS senior to share this comment: “I look forward to the day when no individual loses their job because they are married to a person of the same sex.”


The only group that hasn’t exercised back-bending feats of hypocrisy is the student body. Students have walked out, picketed, debated with church leaders, and are even organizing a national “Mr. Z” day, asking people across the country to wear orange on January 31. As the administration continues to waffle on whether or not the Vatican dictates its HR policy, the students continue to demonstrate Eastside’s only real leadership.

And people wonder why the younger generations are leaving institutional religion in droves.  If one is ethical and honest, nowadays, there is no other option but to walk away.

Bob McDonnell and Wife Due in Federal Court Today

One of the reasons that the Virginia Republicans are making so much noise about Mark Herring's decision to not defend Virginia's gay marriage ban is because they want to take attention away from headlines like this: "Former Va. Governor, Wife Due in Federal Court."  It is headlines like this that show how rotten things are under the supposedly "family values" crowd that preaches one thing while doing something very different in practice.  And let's not forget that the evangelical Christians hyperventilating over Herring's action as a group  have the highest divorce rate in America.  So much for the sanctity of marriage.  NBC 4 in Washington looks at today's court appearance by Bob and Maureen McDonnell.  Here are excerpts:

Former Virginia Gov. Bob McDonnell and his wife, Maureen, are set to make their first court appearance on federal corruption charges. 

A bond hearing is scheduled for 10 a.m., followed by an arraignment at 11 a.m. Friday in U.S. District Court in Richmond.

The former Republican governor and his wife were indicted Tuesday after a lengthy federal investigation of his relationship with a former CEO of a dietary supplement maker.

The 14-count indictment accuses the McDonnells of accepting gifts totaling more than $135,000 including loans, a Rolex watch, rounds of golf at an exclusive club and designer clothes, among other gifts. It connects those gifts to support that Maureen and Bob McDonnell gave to Star Scientific, a Glen Allen, Va.-based company that makes dietary supplements.

McDonnell and his wife are charged with one count of conspiracy to commit honest-services wire fraud; three counts of honest-services wire fraud; one count of conspiracy to obtain property under color of official right; six counts of obtaining property under color of official right; and one count of making false statements to a federal credit union.

McDonnell is also charged with an additional count of making a false statement to a financial institution, and Maureen McDonnell is charged with one count of obstruction of an official proceeding.

Yep, those are the type of "conservative" and "family values" that the Virginia GOP doesn't want people to notice.  Hence the increased hysteria over gay marriage.  Any thing to change the topic.

Christofascist and GOP Hysteria Continues After Mark Herring Court Filing

The hysteria among Virginia Christofascists and their tawdry whore like political puppets in the Republican Party of Virginia continues in the wake of Attorney General Mark Herring's decision to not defend Virginia's unconstitutional gay marriage ban.  It is important to remember that those reacting so hysterically are the successors of those who supported "Massive Resistance" and closed public schools rather than desegregate, opposed interracial marriage until the bitter end and now are working diligently to disenfranchise minority voters and block Medicaid expansion that would benefit 400,000 uninsured Virginians.  In short, these are NOT nice and decent people.  They make the Pharisees of the Bible look like kind and generous philanthropists.  The Washington Post looks at more of the spittle flecked hysteria from these foul people. Here are excerpts:

Outraged Virginia Republicans quickly began searching for a way to preserve the state’s gay marriage ban Thursday after Attorney General Mark R. Herring announced that he would join a lawsuit seeking to have it declared unconstitutional.

Some GOP legislators were exploring ways to defend the ban without Herring’s help. Herring’s most ardent opponents sought to take legal action against the attorney general for what they described as his misuse of the office. The National Organization for Marriage, which opposes same-sex unions, called for Herring’s impeachment on grounds of alleged “malfeasance” and “neglect of duty,” though legislators did not go that far.

“I don’t know what the difference between a dictatorship and this is,” said state Sen. Richard H. Black (R-Loudoun).

While Democrats cheered Herring’s move as a victory for civil rights, Republicans said the attorney general had made an outrageous attempt to thwart the will of the people.
Certainly, Herring propelled himself onto the national stage, perhaps eclipsing Lt. Gov. Ralph S. Northam (D) in the early positioning for the 2017 governor’s race. He also placed Virginia, already a political battleground, at the center of the national debate on gay marriage. He may also have positioned himself to come under more pressure from liberal interest groups to take similar actions on other issues.

Herring’s move could make it harder for Gov. Terry McAuliffe (D) to get anything done with the Republican-dominated House of Delegates.
Further, Herring’s move added to a sense of upheaval in a Capitol still in a tailspin over the indictment of former governor Robert F. McDonnell and his wife, Maureen, just two days earlier.

Reaction did not fall strictly along party lines.  “I don’t think he should do it, but I think he can do it, and I think it’s probably within his job description to do it” if he thinks the ban conflicts with the U.S. Constitution, said state Sen. Thomas A. Garrett Jr. (R-Goochland), a former prosecutor.

As they opposed the move, some Republicans deliberately avoided weighing in on the merits of such a ban, focusing instead on the process. They said they would continue to promote already-submitted legislation to allow the General Assembly to fund a legal defense for state laws that the attorney general declines to defend.