California Intends to Defy Trump on World Stage

California dwarfs all other American states both in the size of its population (approximately 40 million) and in terms of its economy (which exceeds that of France and Brazil).  Indeed, if it were a separate country, California would currently be in the top six largest economies in the world.  In contrast, think of Wyoming or Montana that have populations and economies smaller than some counties in California (e.g. the City of Sam Jose has a population larger than Montana and a many times over larger economic output).  Combine this with a Democrat/liberal political dominance and forward thinking - in contrast to for example West Virginia or Kentucky that are at war with science and modernity - and California wields the influence of many foreign nations.  Now, with Der Trumpenführer's announcement that he wants to withdraw America from the Paris Climate Change accord, California is poised to wield its muscle.  A piece in Politico looks at this development.  Here are excerpts: 

For the past two years, California Gov. Jerry Brown has been aggressively recruiting other state and local governments to sign onto their own, sub-national climate pact.

But that campaign has taken new urgency under President Donald Trump, who announced Thursday that he’ll withdraw the United States from the Paris climate agreement. It’s a reflection of the roiling conflict between the president and the nation’s most populous state, but also the ambition of a governor who, after a lifetime in politics, is seizing an unexpected opening on an international stage.

“I’m on the side of the angels,” the former Jesuit seminarian said in an interview before flying on Friday to China, where he will rally support for his climate policies next week. “I’m going to do everything I can, and people are going to join with me.”

Brown, now 79 and in his final term, has long championed environmental causes, promoting conservation and smog-related policies when he was governor before, from 1975 to 1983, and overseeing a dramatic expansion of California’s greenhouse gas reduction standards since returning to office in 2011. Roughly 170 jurisdictions, including Canada and Mexico, have endorsed Brown’s non-binding agreement embracing efforts to limit global temperature rise to below 2 degrees Celsius, the threshold beyond which many scientists predict catastrophic consequences.

But world leaders, not governors, sign international agreements with the force of law, and for years Brown was relegated to a supporting role. Only after the election of Trump, who has called climate change a hoax, did Brown’s climate diplomacy find new prominence as a counterweight to a Republican-held White House.

Following Trump’s Rose Garden announcement Thursday, Brown told reporters, “Today’s announcement is tragic in a fundamental way. But it’s also, I guess, to be expected.”

He called the withdrawal “insane” and said, “California will resist.”

Brown and the governors of New York and Washington said they would establish a coalition of states committed to upholding the Paris accord, while 27 California state senators sent a letter to Brown urging him to convene a climate summit with “like-minded states and subnationals from around the world, to ensure that we continue to charge ahead without forfeiting all of our historic progress to date.”

California has long served as a model on climate change policy, sharing extensive regulatory experience with bureaucrats abroad.

Trump’s disengagement from international climate politics has left open a political opportunity for Brown, with climate-minded politicians abroad running into resistance in Washington seeking other partnerships in the United States. Even if Trump had remained in the Paris accord, his rejection of mainstream climate science was broadly seen as increasing the significance of climate change efforts at the local and state level, with California at the forefront. Brown, who ran unsuccessfully for president three times but is now seeking no higher office, has little to lose. His public approval rating remains high in a heavily Democratic state that contributed significantly to Trump’s loss of the popular vote last year, and the state legislature has pushed forward with a raft of climate legislation to gird against Trump administration policies.

Earlier this week, the state Senate passed one bill requiring utilities to obtain 100 percent of their electricity from renewable sources by 2045 and another folding Obama-era water, air and engendered species standards into state law, preserving them in California regardless of reversals at the federal level.

California exemplifies why it is crucial that Democrats be elected to the governorships of as many states as possible, including Virginia this November.   They are critical to the resistance against the foul policies of Der Trumpenführer and the Vichy Republicans in Congress. 

California Governor Signs Bill Requiring Schools to Teach Gay History

"History should be honest," Democratic California Gov. Jerry Brown said about the gay history legislation.

One of the reasons I believe that gays are so easily maligned by the "godly folk" is that so few Americans know about our contributions to society.  And too often the local media and even entertainment outlets censor news and movies that have positive gay themes.  A case in point?  The Imitation Game which looks at the role of Alan Turning in breaking the German enigma code in WWI has hit the theaters.  Is it playing anywhere in Hampton Roads, Virginia, an area with 1.7 million people? Nope, not at a single theater.  In fact there is an online effort to demand that the movie be shown in the region.  California Gov. Jerry Brown seeks to change this problem in his state and has signed a bill that will require public schools in the state to teach students about the contributions of lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender Americans.  One can already hear the spittle flecked rants of the Christofascists over having accurate history of gays portrayed.  A leading mouth piece is the hate group, Traditional Values Coalition ("TVC") which regularly disseminates baldfaced lies about LGBT individuals..   Here are highlights from CNN (which true to form fails to note that TVC is a hate group):

Democratic California Gov. Jerry Brown said Thursday he had signed a bill that will require public schools in the state to teach students about the contributions of lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender Americans.

The bill, believed to be the first of its kind in the nation, will also require teachers to provide instruction on the role of people with disabilities.

"History should be honest," Brown said in a statement.

"This bill revises existing laws that prohibit discrimination in education and ensures that the important contributions of Americans from all backgrounds and walks of life are included in our history books. It represents an important step forward for our state, and I thank Senator Leno for his hard work on this historic legislation."

"Today we are making history in California by ensuring that our textbooks and instructional materials no longer exclude the contributions of LGBT (lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender) Americans," Sen. Leno said in a statement.

The bill, which passed the state legislature this month and the senate in April, according to the senator's office, is not without controversy.

It has drawn criticism from some religious and conservative groups, like the Traditional Values Coalition, a lobby organization that says it speaks on behalf of more than 43,000 churches.

"It is an outrage that Governor Jerry Brown has opened the classroom door for homosexual activists to indoctrinate the minds of California's youth, since no factual materials would be allowed to be presented," Rev. Louis Sheldon, chairman and founder of the Traditional Values Coalition, said in a statement.  "If parents don't already have their children out of public schools, this should cause them to remove them," he said.

The true outrage is that hate merchants like Sheldon - who makes a nice living fanning hatred - are afforded any respect or deference whatsoever.   As for honesty, no one lies more than the "godly Christian" crowd.

California Gov. Jerry Brown Appeals 'Ex-Gay' Therapy Ban Injunction

This blog frequently looks at the lies and harm done by Christofascist backed "ex-gay" ministries and reparative therapy - a voodoo form of therapy condemned by every legitimate medical and mental health association in the country.  Seeking to end what is little more than child abuse, the state of California enacted legislation that banned therapist from subjecting minors to such therapy.  As was to be expected, Christianists desperate to make a quick buck and to keep alive the myth that sexual orientation is changeable, filed suit and an appeal is now before the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals which granted a stay of the law's effectiveness pending a full hearing of the case.  As the Los Angeles Times is reporting, California Governor Jerry Brown has appealed the stay.  Here are story excerpts:

Gov. Jerry Brown on Wednesday appealed a court injunction that has blocked enforcement of a new law that prohibits providing gay minors with therapy aimed at converting them to being heterosexual.

The notice of appeal was filed on behalf of Brown and the Medical Board of California by state Atty. Gen. Kamala Harris with the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals, which decided Dec. 21 to block the law that took effect Jan. 1 pending a decision on its constitutionality.

A small group of therapists and religious groups argued that the law infringes on their rights to free speech, but Harris has called conversion therapy "unsound and harmful."

Harris asked the court Wednesday to look at a recent decision by U.S. District Judge Kimberly Mueller upholding the law.

"Defendants wish to apprise the 9th Circuit of a related case currently pending before it … denying a motion for a preliminary injunction that would have enjoined enforcement of Senate Bill 1172," Harris wrote. "Both appeals involve the constitutionality of Senate Bill 1172 and raise the same and/or closely related legal issues."

One can only hope that the 9th Circuit ultimately revokes the stay and upholds the law.  Similar legislation is needed nationwide to stop what is child abuse.  Religious fanatic parents have no right to torment and psychologically and emotionally abuse their children.

California Bans "Ex-gay" Rparative Therapy for Minorsrs

In a huge step toward ending the fraudulent, snake oil like cottage industry of "ex-gay ministries"  and the practice of unscrupulous therapists of preying on distraught gays - and perhaps even more so their self-centered parents and family members who cannot accept having a gay family member - through "reparative therapy" services, the State of California has passed legislation that prohibits subjecting any minor to such bogus programs and "ministries."  The law, which was signed into law by California governor Jerry Brown takes effect on January 1, 2013.    It goes without saying that there will be wailing and gnashing of teeth among Christofascists organizations such as Family Research Council and Focus on the Family to name a few that have made a lucrative business out of preying on such individuals and who routinely claim that gays can "change" as a defense for discriminatory anti-gay legislation.  The San Francisco Chronicle looks at this much needed legislation that needs to be enacted on a national basis.  Here are some highlights:

California has become the first state in the country to ban controversial therapy practices that attempt to change the sexual orientation of minors after Gov. Jerry Brown signed a bill to outlaw them Saturday.  The bill, SB1172 by Sen. Ted Lieu, D-Torrance (Los Angeles County), bars mental health practitioners from performing so-called reparative therapy, which professional psychological organizations have said may cause harm. Gay rights groups have labeled them dangerous and abusive.

"This bill bans non-scientific 'therapies' that have driven young people to depression and suicide. These practices have no basis in science or medicine and they will now be relegated to the dustbin of quackery," Brown said in a statement to The Chronicle.

National gay rights organizations had been lobbying the governor intensely to sign the therapy ban. The Human Rights Campaign, the nation's largest lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender rights organization, sent Brown a petition with nearly 50,000 signatures urging him to approve the measure.

"LGBT youth will now be protected from a practice that has not only been debunked as junk science, but has been proven to have drastically negative effects on their well-being. We commend Gov. Brown for putting children first, and call on all states to take California's lead on this issue," said Chad Griffin, president of the Human Rights Campaign.

Under the new law, which will take effect Jan. 1, no mental health provider will be able to provide therapy that seeks "to change behaviors or gender expressions, or to eliminate or reduce sexual or romantic attractions or feelings toward individuals of the same sex."

Mental health professionals who violate the law, which applies to therapy for patients younger than 18, will be subject to discipline by whatever group licenses them.

The therapy often starts from the premise that a person's childhood and parental upbringing has somehow left that person deficient and thus has led him or her to same-sex attractions. Practitioners often are religious, and gay rights groups have derisively characterized the therapy as an attempt to "pray away the gay."

Truth be told, one has a higher chance of being killed by a lightning strike than being cured by reparative therapy.   The sooner this bogus "therapy" is banned nationwide, the better.

Jerry Brown Signs California Gay History Bill - Christofascists Go Berzerk

California Governor Jerry Brown has signed the landmark Fair, Accurate, Inclusive and Respectful Education Act that mandates the contributions of LGBT people be included in school lesson plans. Its legislation that in my view is long overdue and will over time result in students learning that LGBT individuals have been around throughout history and that we've often accomplished amazing things. Moreover, since California is one of the largest purchasers of textbooks, there will be an indirect impact in other states as well. Not surprisingly, the usual hate groups are beside themselves and one needs foul weather gear not to be drenched by the spittle flying as the haters convulse. Here are highlights from The Advocate on the historic law:
*
The Fair, Accurate, Inclusive and Respectful Education Act was introduced by gay state senator Mark Leno partly as a way to combat bullying of students who are gay or perceived to be. The FAIR Act passed the Senate in April and the Assembly earlier this month. Aside from ensuring that the contributions of gays and gay rights are included in textbooks, the legislation adds sexual orientation to the state's existing antidiscrimination protections that prohibit bias in school activities, instruction, and instructional materials.
*
For the sane and rational, the law should be a non-issue. But to hate groups that seek to depict LGBT individuals as depraved alcoholics, drug users, and overall failures, the law strikes at the heart of their usually propaganda. Here's a sampling of the hysteria coming from the usual suspects via Joe.My.God:
*
Catholics For The Common Good: Claims that this bill is needed to reduce bullying against children that are experiencing gender confusion or take on 'gay' or 'lesbian' identities are absurd. Children must be taught respect for all persons because of their intrinsic value, not because they agree with their behavior or like their characteristics. In fact, reducing people to merely a sexual identity obscures the fact that they are so much more than that.
*
Traditional Values Coalition: SB 48 was priority number 1 for Traditional Values Coalition. We committed all the resources we had to try to make sure that SB 48 failed. We are talking about molesting the minds of young impressionable youth, as young as Kindergarten, with an agenda and message that is not age-appropriate and that is offensive to the values of a vast majority of California’s families. We have failed at our core educational mission and yet we are now going to inject gay studies into the classrooms. It’s absurd and offensive.
*
Save California: It's ridiculous that Jerry Brown says he's making history 'honest'. The bill he signed prohibits teachers and textbooks from telling children the facts that homosexuality has the highest rate of HIV/AIDS and other STDs, higher cancer rates, and earlier deaths. These important facts about lifestyles children will being forced to admire will be omitted. And Brown calls this 'honest'? This revisionist history will actually make more children believe a lie -- that homosexuality is biological, which it's not, and healthy, which is isn't."
*
Can't you just feel the Christian "love"?

Bullshit from Would Be California Governor Whitman

Following up on the previous post's look at Republican lying, GOP candidate of governor of California Meg Whitman, in an obvious move to pander to the most hateful elements of the GOP base, has told the Sacramento Bee that she would appeal the decision in Perry v. Schwarzenegger if she is elected governor. First, of course, she needs to be elected and second, by the time she's in office, if even elected, it could well be too late for the state to appeal since the matter is already at the 9th Circuit and the state of California has not appealed the lower District Court ruling. The federal rules of procedure are very clear in terms of deadline's for appeal and similar matters. If a party fails to meet the deadline for appeal, that party's right to attempt to appeal at a later stage of the case is in all likelihood dead. Add to that the fact that neither Governor Schwarzenegger nor Attorney General Jerry Brown opposed the plaintiffs' case at the District Court level, and any attempt by Whitman to appeal would seem a waste of time and money. Here are highlights on the Courage Campaign's response to Whitman's shameless pandering:
*
The liberal advocacy group Courage Campaign played down Republican gubernatorial candidate Meg Whitman's announcement yesterday that she would defend Proposition 8, which prohibits same-sex marriage, if elected governor.
*
Courage Campaign director Rick Jacobs noted that the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals has already scheduled a hearing for the week of Dec. 6 to determine whether the initiative's sponsor, the advocacy group Protect Marriage, has legal standing to defend the voter-passed measure.
*
UC Hastings College of the Law professor Rory Little said Whitman's ability to defend the proposition would hinge on several factors - the biggest of which, of course, is whether she becomes governor. It would also depend on whether the 9th Circuit decides the standing issue before January 6 and how the court decides.
*
Again, I find it difficult to believe that a party can fail to appeal and then somehow try to appeal at a later date after the deadline has passed. Filing a notice of appeal even a single day late is fatal to one's case. Even I as a non-litigator know this. Thus, I don't see how Whitman could get involved in the 9th Circuit case much less appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court if the 9th Circuit affirms Judge Walker's lower court ruling. I suspect that Whitman knows this too (if she doesn't, she ought not to be running for governor), but is only too willing to say whatever she thinks the wingnuts in the party base want to hear.

California Will Not Defend Prop 8 in Federal Court

It is rare that a state refuses to defend one of its laws - or in the case of Proposition 8 an amendment to the state's constitution - when challenged in federal court. Yet that is precisely what is happening with Proposition 8. Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger has declined to defend the constitutionality of Proposition 8, telling a San Francisco judge that the legality of the anti-gay marriage measure is for the courts to decide. Thus, the Attorney General's office will take no action and any defense of the amendment will fall to others. In my opinion - as has been the case in six states now - equality under the civil laws means full equality, particularly when the only true basis for discrimination comes down to religious based discrimination against LGBT Americans. Here are some highlights from the Los Angeles Times:

*

The governor's decision to remain neutral in a federal challenge to Proposition 8 means no statewide official will be defending the measure in federal court.

*

Supporters of the measure said Wednesday they were disappointed but not surprised by the governor's stance.Ron Prentice, chairman of the ProtectMarriage.com Coalition, said the group was "fairly consistently disappointed with the governor's response to the will of the people in the case of marriage."

*

In declining to take sides in the suit, Schwarzenegger said the case "presents important constitutional questions that require and warrant judicial determination.""In a constitutional democracy, it is the role of the courts to determine and resolve such questions. . . . ," the governor said late Tuesday in his legal reply to the suit. "The Administration encourages the Court to resolve the merits of this action expeditiously."

*

California Atty. Gen. Jerry Brown, going farther than Schwarzenegger, said in his legal response to the suit last week that Proposition 8 violates the U.S. Constitution. The positions of the governor and the state's top law enforcement officer may leave the defense of Proposition 8 to its campaign proponents, who have asked the court to intervene. U.S. District Court Judge Vaughn R. Walker will consider that request and another to suspend the law pending a trial at a July 2 hearing.

*

The American Foundation for Equal Rights, a group formed by a Los Angeles-based political strategist to launch the lawsuit, praised the governor's action.The "filing by Gov. Schwarzenegger bolsters our call for a swift end to the constitutionally intolerable situation created by Proposition 8," said Chad Griffin, the strategist who started the group.

California AG's Brief Finds Proposition 8 in Violation of U.S. Constitution

In what is a stunning opposite to the Obama Justice Department's brief filed in support of DOMA, California Attorney General Jerry Brown has filed a brief that states that that Proposition 8 violates the 14th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution. Would that Obama would argue the law rather than Christianist talking points and stop apparently trying to kiss Rick Warren's very wide ample ass. Like many, I continue to be seething over the nasty and gratuitously insulting brief filed by the Justice Department and written by a Mormon hold over from the Bush administration. WTF was Obama thinking. Here are highlights from Box Turtle Bulletin on Jerry Brown's very different brief:

*

What a contrast between the California Attorney General and the U.S. Department of Justice. On the same day in which the Obama administration filed a brief before the U.S. Supreme Court defending the so-called “Defense of Marriage Act,“ California Attorney General Jerry Brown filed a very different brief in Perry v. Schwarzenegger, the Prop 8 challenge brought by Ted Olson and David Boies.

*
In the brief filed on behalf of the State of California (PDF: 128KB/11 pages), Brown notes that:

*
The Attorney General of California is sworn to uphold the Constitution of the United States in addition to the Constitution of the State of California. Cal. Const., art. XX, § 3. The United States Constitution is the “supreme law of the land.” Taking from same-sex couples the right to civil marriage that they had previously possessed under California’s Constitution cannot be squared with guarantees of the Fourteenth Amendment. Accordingly, the Attorney General answers the Complaint consistent with his duty to uphold the United States Constitution, as Attorney General Thomas C. Lynch did when he argued that Proposition 14, passed by the California voters in 1964, was incompatible with the Federal Constitution..

*

The response by the Attorney General addresses each of the numbered paragraphs in the original complaint. The response begins with a stipulation that California’s Domestic Partnerships are not equal to civil marriage and therefore violates the Fourteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution”

*
In response to paragraph 1 of the Complaint, the Attorney General admits that in November 2008 California adopted Proposition 8; that Proposition 8 amended Article I of the California Constitution by adding section 7.5 which provides that “[o]nly marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California;” and that the effect of Proposition 8 is to deny gay men and lesbians and their same-sex partners access to civil marriage in California and to deny them recognition of their civil marriages performed elsewhere. The Attorney General admits that lesbians and gay men and their same-sex partners may form domestic partnerships in California pursuant to California Family Code sections 297 through 299.6, and that such domestic partnerships are not equal to civil marriage, and that this unequal treatment denies lesbians and gay men rights guarantees by the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution.

*
…In response to paragraph 7 of the Complaint, the Attorney General admits that Proposition 8 denies same-sex couples the right to civil marriage in California, and that it therefore violates the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution.

*

Brown also invokes Loving v. Virginia, the 1967 U.S. Supreme Court ruling which struck down laws banning marriage between people of different races:

*
In response to paragraph 35 of the Complaint, the Attorney General admits that the United States Supreme Court found in Loving v. Virginia, 388 U.S. 1. 12 (1967), that the “freedom to marry has long been recognized as one of the vital personal rights essential to the orderly pursuit of happiness by free men.”

*
The brief then addresses the Due Process claims: In response to paragraph 38 of the Complaint, the Attorney General admits that, to the extent that Proposition 8 took from Plaintiffs their previously held fundamental right to marry, the measure violates the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution on its face.

*

Obama may have been a constitutional law professor, but he seems more concerned with imposing Christian Right religious based beliefs on LGBT Americans than he is in upholding equality under the United States Constitution. His promises are apparently not any more trustworthy than the Chimperator's.

California Attorney General Says Prop. 8 Unconstitutional

Amidst all the blogosphere controversy over bloated, obese homophobic Rick "Gays Can Change" Warren giving the inaugural invocation, a welcome diversion is California Attorney General Jerry Brown's filing of a brief arguing that the California Supreme Court should strike down Proposition 8, arguing that "the amendment process cannot be used to extinguish fundamental constitutional rights without compelling justification." Rather the more complex procedure involving the legislature need to have been used. Needless to say, the Christianist/Mormon crowd that believes that a simple majority can strip minority groups of legal rights will be none too pleased with Brown. But then, these folks only give lip service to honoring civil laws and constitutions anyways. Obviously, if the Christianist/Mormons prevail, no minority group will be safe from the tyranny of the majority. Here are some highlights from the Los Angeles Times:

*

California Atty. Gen. Jerry Brown asked the state Supreme Court on Friday to invalidate the voter-approved ban on gay marriage, declaring that "the amendment process cannot be used to extinguish fundamental constitutional rights without compelling justification."Brown's argument on Proposition 8, contained in an 111-page brief filed at the last possible moment before the court's deadline, surprised many legal experts. The attorney general has a legal duty to uphold the state's laws as long as there are reasonable grounds to do so.

*

The California Constitution protects certain rights as "inalienable," Brown wrote. Those include a right to liberty and to privacy, which the courts have said includes a person's right to marry.The issue before the court "presents a conflict between the constitutional power of the voters to amend the Constitution, on the one hand, and the Constitution's Declaration of Rights, on the other," Brown wrote. The issue "is whether rights secured under the state Constitution's safeguard of liberty as an 'inalienable' right may intentionally be withdrawn from a class of persons by an initiative amendment."

*

Goodwin Liu, associate dean and professor of law at UC Berkeley's Boalt Hall School of Law, said it was "extraordinary for the chief law enforcement officer of the state to decline to enforce a law -- even on the grounds that it is unconstitutional.""The chief law enforcement officer of the state is charged with enforcing laws, even laws with which he disagrees," Liu said.

Sponsors of Proposition 8 to Drop Challenge to Ballot Description

At the risk of using the word rational in the same sentence as Christianist, the San Francisco Chronicle is reporting that the Christianist organizations backing the passage of Proposition 8 are acting in an unexpectedly rational manner and dropping the challenge to Attorney General Jerry Brown's revised ballot summary of Proposition 8. As I noted in previous posts, the Christianists were in a snit (to put it mildly) because the revised summary clearly shows the true impact of Proposition 8 and - God forbid - makes it crystal clear that the proposed amendment would deprive gay couples of what is now a civil legal right. These anti-gay bigots always prefer to use vague and/or euphemistic language that makes it easier to hide their bigotry and at the same time falsely market the proposed amendment to the uninformed and unwary. Hence their dismay over an accurate description of the initiative's impact if passed. Obviously, they fear a clear description of the consequences decreases the chances of Proposition 8 being approved. Here are some highlights from the SF Chronicle:

*

13:15 PDT SAN FRANCISCO -- The state's official description of Proposition 8 on the November ballot will remain as is, a statement that the measure would eliminate same-sex couples' right to marry in California. Sponsors of the measure argued that the title and summary drafted by Attorney General Jerry Brown were argumentative and designed to encourage voters to oppose Prop. 8. But after two defeats in court last week, the Yes on 8 campaign said today it would not appeal to the state Supreme Court.

*

But after the state's high court ruled in May that gay and lesbian couples have the right to marry under the state Constitution, the attorney general changed the title, saying Prop. 8 would now eliminate rights that the court had established. The new title states the measure "eliminates (the) right of same-sex couples to marry."

*

[A] Sacramento Superior Court judge ruled Friday that Brown's reference to an elimination of rights was an accurate description of the purpose and effect of Prop. 8, and a state appeals court in Sacramento turned down an emergency appeal by the Yes on 8 campaign late Friday. Today is the deadline for court action on the wording of ballot summaries and arguments in the voter pamphlet, which are due at the state printer's office after the close of business this afternoon.

Court Rejects Christianist Challenge to Proposition 8 Ballot Summary

As I previously posted, the enemies of gay marriage in California are apoplectic that California Attorney General Jerry Brown's,office re-wrote the summary of Proposition 8 for the November ballot to correctly describe the amendment initiative as eliminating the right of gay and lesbian couples to marry. Such an accurate description of the consequences of passage of Proposition is too much for the disingenuous Christianists who prefer to use vague description and euphemisms so that the uninformed can be more easily duped into voting the way the Christianists want without often realizing the full consequences. Yesterday a California Court ruled in favor of Brown's summary and the Christianists are shrieking like a cat with its tail caught in a meat grinder saying they will appeal the ruling.

*

I continually find it ironic that those who claim to be such devout Christians are among the most dishonest and disingenuous people one is likely to ever meet. The push to pass Virginia's "Marriage Amendment" to amend the Virginia Constitution's Bill of Rights to LIMIT rights is a perfect example of false advertising by these modern day Pharisees. All of the Christianist blather was about stopping gay marriage in Virginia leaving out the inconvenient fact that ALL couples, gay or straight, would be impacted. Since the amendment's passage, many unmarried heterosexual couples - particularly the senior citizen set where re-marriage can result in the loss of medical coverage and/or retirement benefits - have learned to their horror that are total legal strangers to one another and that full sets of legal documentation - often costing more than some can afford - are required to protect their relationships. Duplicity is the one consistent hallmark of the Christianists. Here are highlights from the Los Angeles Times:

*

A Sacramento judge on Friday said state officials do not have to rewrite the ballot summary describing Proposition 8, the gay marriage ban voters will consider in November. The ruling is a setback for the initiative's supporters, who say the title and summary written by Attorney General Jerry Brown are argumentative and could prejudice voters.

*

In his 8-page ruling, the judge said the title and summary is an "accurate statement" of the proposition by saying it would eliminate the right of gay and lesbian couples to marry. "The court is not willing to fashion a rule that would require the Attorney General to engage in useless nominalization," Frawley wrote.

*

Brown wrote a new title and summary after the measure qualified. He said he did so to reflect the state Supreme Court ruling in May that overturned California's voter-approved ban on same-sex marriage. The new summary says the proposition would "eliminate the right of same-sex couples to marry." Brown responded to Friday's decision by saying the court properly dismissed a lawsuit that "was more about politics than the law." The initiative's supporters said they would appeal.

*

Supporters of Proposition 8 also had asked Frawley to order state officials to modify arguments against the measure that will appear in voter pamphlets, including one saying the initiative will not affect school instruction. He denied that request.

California AG: Proposition 8 Not Retroactive

I am a day or two behind on this story, but believe that it is important in that if the legal reasoning holds up - and I believe it is sound - then there will be married gays in California no matter the out come of the vote on Proposition 0 in November. Thus, the Christianists horror of gay marriage being referenced in school, especially government classes, will be guaranteed. What am I talking about? the fact that California Attorney General, Jerry Brown, poked a big hole in the Christianists' balloon with the release of an opinion that concludes that marriages performed before November 4th would continue to be valid even if Proposition 8 were to pass. Thus, thousands of same-sex marriages would continue to exist. This is for two reasons: (1) most legislation is effective from the date of passage and (2) under the U.S. Constitution there are bans against abrogation the right of contracts and ex-post facto laws. Here are highlights from the San Francisco Chronicle on Brown's opinion Also note how the corrupt and hypocritical Catholic Church is supporting Prop. 8 rather than focusing on cleaning its own disgusting dirty linen):

*
If voters approve a November ballot measure banning same-sex marriages in California, thousands of gay and lesbian weddings conducted since the state Supreme Court legalized the unions on May 15 will probably remain valid, Attorney General Jerry Brown said Monday. . . . Brown's position is significant because his office will represent the state in lawsuits over Prop. 8's validity and meaning if it passes.

*
Brown's office said in a court filing Monday that he believes the ballot measure would not invalidate existing marriages. "I believe that marriages that have been entered into subsequent to the (May 15) Supreme Court opinion will be recognized by the California Supreme Court," Brown told The Chronicle. Noting that Prop. 8 is silent about retroactivity, he said, "I would think the court, in looking at the underlying equities, would most probably conclude that upholding the marriages performed in that interval (before the election) would be a just result."

*
Brown defended his ballot language as neutral and accurate Monday, while opponents of Prop. 8 pressed their challenge to a section of the Yes on 8 argument. That argument declares that teachers will be required to tell students as early as kindergarten that "gay marriage is OK" unless the ballot measure passes, a claim that the No on 8 campaign calls baseless.

*
n another development Monday, the California Catholic Conference, representing Catholic bishops, endorsed Prop. 8, declaring that "same-sex unions are not the same as opposite-sex unions" and that only a relationship that can produce children should be called marriage.

*

I guess per the Catholic Church all marriages of childless couples need to be voided.