Federal Judges Stays Harris v. Rainey Gay Marriage Case

Federal courthouse in Harrisonburg, Virginia

Since the ruling striking down Virginia's anti-gay Marshall-Newman Amendment was handed down in the case of Bostic v. Rainey in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, Virginia's other gay marriage lawsuit pending in the Western District of Virginia has been in limbo.  Now the judge presiding in Harris v. Rainey has entered an Order staying that case pending the appeal of Bostic v. Rainey to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit.   Meanwhile, the challengers in Harris have been allowed to intervene in the Bostic appeal, so their issues will be put in front of the 4th Circuit.  Here are highlights from the Richmond Times Dispatch on the development:

A federal judge in Harrisonburg on Monday stayed a ruling in Harris v. Rainey, a case aimed at overturning Virginia’s same-sex marriage ban.

Judge Michael Urbanski said the plaintiffs have been permitted to intervene on appeal in Bostic v. Rainey, which is now set for oral argument in the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Richmond on May 13 after a federal judge in Norfolk had ruled Virginia’s marriage amendment unconstitutional.

“Because of this seismic procedural development, the constitutional issue in this case is now in the hands of the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals,” Urbanski wrote. “As the Fourth Circuit’s impending decision is binding, the court will stay this case pending that decision.”

The American Civil Liberties Union of Virginia filed the Harrisonburg suit on behalf of Joanne Harris and Jessica Duff of Staunton and Christy Berghoff and Victoria Kidd of Winchester. The case, which was certified class-action status in January, was the second challenge to Virginia’s same-sex marriage ban, following the Bostic case.

Kentucky Attorney General Will Not Defend STate's Marriage Ban

The ranks of attorneys general who are declining to defend their respective state's same sex marriage bans is growing.  In Kentucky, Attorney General Jack Conway (pictured at left) has made the announcement yesterday that he would not appeal U.S. District Judge John G. Heyburn II’s ruling striking down Kentucky's ban on recognition of same sex marriages performed in other sates and further that he would not pursue any more stays of the ruling.  Like other attorneys general who have taken this position, Conway properly placed his oath to defend the U.S. Constitution over his oath to defend Kentucky's Constitution. Governor Steve Beshear announced Tuesday morning that the state will hire outside counsel to appeal .  The Courier-Journal has details.  Here are excerpts:

Gov. Steve Beshear announced Tuesday morning that the state will hire outside counsel to appeal a judicial ruling that the state must recognize same-sex marriages legally performed outside the state.

The announcement followed state Attorney General Jack Conway’s emotional announcement that he would not appeal U.S. District Judge John G. Heyburn II’s ruling and would not pursue any more stays.

“Judge Heyburn got it right,” he said at his Frankfort office. By appealing, he said, he would be defending discrimination “and that I will not do.”

Conway said he had prayed on the decision and felt he is doing what is right. He said that he was sworn to defend both the constitutions of Kentucky and the United States.

“It’s about placing people over politics,” he said.

He began choking up at the end of the statement before leaving without taking questions.

Beshear’s office emailed a statement soon after the announcement saying that an outside counsel would be hired to appeal the decision and ask for a stay pending appeal.

Expect more rage and flying spittle from the Christocascist crowd.

Indiana - The Next Gay Marriage Battleground

With all the excitement over recent court rulings in Ohio, New Mexico and Utah it is easy to overlook the coming battle in Indian where the Christofascists and their political prostitutes in the Indiana GOP are finding themselves pitted against the business community (not to mention non-religious extremists) in the battle over passage of an anti-gay state constitutional amendment.  The business community recognizes that making Indiana more anti-gay is not a winning formula for economic prosperity, especially with more and more states providing marriage equality.  An article in the New York Times looks at the battle between the business community and the spittle flecked, knuckle dragging Neanderthals of the GOP base in Indiana.  Here are highlights:

INDIANAPOLIS — Dominated by Republicans and steeped in traditional values, Indiana seemed among the least likely places to become a battleground in the nation’s debate over same-sex marriage when the legislature overwhelmingly chose in 2011 to push forward a state constitutional amendment barring gay couples from marrying.

But in the two years since, the landscape has shifted as voters, lawmakers and courts began recognizing same-sex marriage in places like Maryland, Minnesota, New Jersey and New Mexico and as the United States Supreme Court declared parts of the federal Defense of Marriage Act unconstitutional. In just the past few days, a federal judge struck down a ban on same-sex marriage in Utah, home of the Mormon Church, and a federal appeals court rejected a request to halt the marriages on Tuesday. A federal judge in Ohio found that same-sex marriages should be recognized on death certificates. 

So suddenly Indiana, where lawmakers in the coming weeks are expected to call for the second vote needed to put a ban before voters in the fall elections, is now in a far more tense, unpredictable and closely watched spot than anyone here had imagined — a test case in whether a state will impose new limits on same-sex marriage in this fast-moving political and legal environment.

“What happens in Indiana is critical,” said Brian Brown, president of the National Organization for Marriage,  . . . . Supporters of same-sex marriage, however, are pouring money and effort into defeating the measure in Indiana, a possibility that seemed unthinkable not long ago but one that advocates now insist is conceivable.

As lawmakers prepare to return for a new legislative session in January, it is an especially awkward spot for Republicans, who dominate both chambers of the General Assembly. With an election year ahead and the risk of primaries in May, the issue is pitting socially conservative groups, who are urging a constitutional ban, against sometime allies in the state’s business community, who say a ban could cause Indiana economic harm. 

Few Republicans now seem eager to talk about the issue, and some legislative aides said it was not entirely certain who would formally file the legislation in January.

To hear some Democrats tell it, many Republicans here would just as soon see the issue fade away, as they ponder navigating between socially conservative primary voters and a broader array of voters in a general election. 

“The tables have turned on this issue, and the Republican members are at a loss about what to do about it,” said Representative Scott Pelath, the House minority leader. “They’re quaking in their boots about what will happen if they don’t pass this thing. But they’re fearful about what will happen down the road if they do.”

Complicating matters is the language of the proposed amendment itself, which opponents say goes beyond banning marriage to threatening all legal arrangements allowing rights to same-sex couples. In addition to defining marriage as between a man and a woman, Indiana’s amendment says, “A legal status identical or substantially similar to that of marriage for unmarried individuals shall not be valid or recognized.” 

On the ground here, the fight is already fierce. More than 30 paid field workers from Freedom Indiana, an anti-ban campaign supported in part by business interests like Eli Lilly and Company and Cummins Inc., are pressing voters to contact their lawmakers, even as conservative groups have issued leaflets aimed at churchgoers.

[N]o one on either side can be certain what Indiana voters would do. While constitutional bans easily passed in many states years ago, public opinion has shifted.

Here, polling on the issue is mixed. At least one recent poll, a WISH-TV/Ball State Hoosier Survey, suggested that 58 percent of state residents polled were opposed to the idea of amending the Indiana Constitution but that people were nearly equally split on whether to legalize same-sex marriage. 

 Ultimately,if the Indiana GOP passes the measure this year, the voters in Indiana will have to decide between (i) modernity and equality under the U.S. Constitution or (ii) religious based bigotry and the embrace of hate and bigotry.  Should they choose the latter, it will not enhance the states image in the business community and in the eyes of large progressive corporations.

Governor of Hawaii Expected to Sign Marriage Equality Bill Today

In yet another loss for the anti-gay theocrats who seek to keep gays in an inferior status of citizenship because we do not adhere to their fear and hate based religious beliefs that cling to the writings of Bronze Age goat herders, the Governor of Hawaii (pictured at left) will sign a marriage equality bill to day that has been approved by both houses of that state's legislature.  The Christofascists will likely try to challenge the action as part of their rear guard action against modernity and equality.  Here are excerpts from Towleroad:

Hawaii Governor Neil Abercrombie plans to sign the Hawaii marriage equality bill this morning at 10 am HST/3 pm ET. You can watch it live HERE. A large crowd is expected.
Hawaii will be the 15th state in the country to legalize same-sex marriage and the law is expected to take effect on December 2.

In the past three weeks, two other states have also become marriage equality states, New Jersey and Illinois, the 14th and 16th, respectively, if order is determined by when the laws take effect.

However, expect challenges before then. We've already reported on wingnut lawmaker Bob McDermott and the lawsuit he has filed which claims that in 1998 when Hawaii passed a constitutional amendment voters thought they were voting for one man/one woman marriage rather than allowing the legislature to decide on what constitutes a marriage.

But the state Attorney General says the 1998 constitutional amendment gave the legislature authority to change the law and so the same-sex marriage will be upheld.

Virginian Pilot: Gay Marriage in Virginia - It's Only a Matter of Time

As previously noted on this blog, a bill that would have begun the process of repealing the heinous anti-gay Marshall Newman Amendment to the Virginia Constitution was quickly killed in a Republican controlled committee of the House of Delegates.  No doubt each of the Republican members of the committee were following the orders they received from The Family Foundation.  But long term, as the aging bigots and Christofascists die off and are replaced by younger voters, both the Virginia GOP and The Family Foundation are fighting a losing battle.  A reality noted by the Virginian Pilot in an editorial that calls it like it is: gay marriage will come to Virginia, it is merely a matter of time.  The only question is how long it will take for Virginia to ceasing being in the desperate rear guard that has enshrined discrimination in its constitution.  Here are editorial highlights:

SOONER or later, Virginians will reverse a 2006 referendum that enshrined discrimination against same-sex couples in the state constitution. But it’s apparently going to take time to persuade the General Assembly to let the public speak again.     

This week, a House subcommittee quietly killed a bill submitted by Del. Scott Surovell, a Fairfax Democrat, that would have started the repeal process.    The measure won the support of only one subcommittee member, Democrat Algie Howell of Norfolk. He and Del.   Daun Hester, a fellow Democrat from Norfolk, were the only lawmakers from the region to sign on as patrons .     

Virginia’s constitutional amendment defines marriage as “only a union between one man and one woman.” To strike the amendment from the Bill of Rights, the legislature would have to vote twice to schedule a statewide referendum. Repeal would not automatically allow same-sex marriage.     

In the seven years since the   amendment’s passage, the tide has begun to turn.    Last fall, voters in Mary-land, Maine and Washington approved measures to allow same-sex marriage. In Minnesota, voters rejected a constitutional ban on gay marriage — becoming the first state since 1998 to vote down such an amendment. 

[A]s Maine’s vote demonstrates, voters are already having second thoughts about the fairness of such prohibitions. Last fall’s referendum reversed a ban approved by voters just three years ago.    Today, nine states, plus the District of Columbia, allow people of the same sex to marry. That’s 15 percent of the U.S. population. And six other states, including New Jersey and Delaware, are considering measures that would allow same-sex marriage.    

Numerous polls indicate that Americans — particularly young people — have grown more accepting of the realities of sexual orientation and see no reason to block gay people from marrying.    In time, Virginia will catch up and correct its mistake. 

 I can only imagine the shrieks and spittle eruption that hit the offices of The Family Foundation  when this editorial was viewed.  As noted in an early post, The Family Foundation and its knuckle dragging followers are the biggest obstacle to progress in Virginia.  The congratulate themselves on their supposed piety yet continue to ignore the true Gospel message.  They are among the strongest arguments in Virginia as to why one would not want to be considered a Christian.

Thae Catholic Church's Misplaced Priorities

This blog has repeatedly reported om the world wide criminal conspiracy by the Roman Catholic Church hierarchy and many of its clergy to aid, abet and cover up for sexual predatory priest who globally have likely molested hundreds of thousands of children and minors. Even securing grudging and disingenuous apologies for these horrific crimes and the deliberate obstruction of justice has been difficult.  And in terms of going unpunished, individuals like Cardinal Bernard Law end up rewarded with plum positions at the Vatican outside the reach of law enforcement officials.  But let a member of the Catholic laity voice support for marriage equality and the retribution is fast and furious.  Numerous blogs and news outlets have looked at the situation of 16 year old Lennon Cihak, a high school junior in the Minnesota town of Barnesville, who experienced the full wrath of the child rapist protectors for a Facebook posting in opposition to the Minnesota anti-gay marriage initiative, but the story is worth revisiting because it underscores the moral bankruptcy and misplaced priorities of the Vatican and its sycophants throughout the clergy. Here are some highlights from a story in the Los Angeles Times:

It's a fight straight from the Vatican now landed on the wind-swept prairie of western Minnesota — all because of a Magic Marker, a yard sign and a 16-year-old boy with an iPhone.

Lennon Cihak, a high school junior in the Minnesota town of Barnesville — population about 2,500 — was raised Roman Catholic like his parents and grandparents. His mother and father, Shana and Doug Cihak, were baptized, confirmed and married in Barnesville's century-old Assumption Church, the same one where Lennon had been attending confirmation classes since spring.

Then on Oct. 24 — 13 days before the vote on a proposed state constitutional amendment defining marriage as between one man and one woman — everything changed.

That night, Lennon attended a run-through for the ceremony of his confirmation, the sacrament in which believers reaffirm their faith. Lennon, who was named after Beatles member John Lennon, says nothing special happened at church to set the fateful events in motion, but for weeks he had been thinking about the marriage amendment. A lot of his friends were opposed, saying it didn't seem fair.

"In the Constitution it says all men are created equal. If they can't get married, they aren't equal," he remembers thinking.

So that night he took a pro-amendment yard sign, changed "Vote Yes" to "Vote No" with a black marker and scrawled the words "Equal Marriage Rights." He then posed with the sign, snapped a photo with his phone, and posted the picture on his Facebook page.  That's when things got messy.

Shana Cihak  .  .  .  .  she says, [Father Gary]  LaMoine told her that Lennon's opinions on same-sex marriage were in conflict with the church and that her son could not be confirmed.

She was stunned. Lennon had only expressed an opinion. He wasn't even old enough to vote. Why should he be denied a sacrament when others who break church rules are not?   "Do you mean to tell me," Shana Cihak says she told LaMoine, "that when you stand up there on Sunday and you see all of those families with two or three kids, you don't know they are using birth control?" She says she was told she could no longer serve as sponsor of one of the kids in the confirmation class. She came home in tears.

LaMoine and Bishop Michael Hoeppner, who oversees the Diocese of Crookston, which includes Assumption Church, did not respond to requests for an interview. But in a strongly worded letter LaMoine sent to church members on Nov. 15, the priest tells a very different story:

"It is to my dismay that what should have been kept an internal church matter has now become a public controversy," LaMoine wrote, adding that he knew nothing about the Facebook posting until his secretary found it the day after his meeting with the Cihaks to talk about issues he did not specify. He called Lennon's Facebook picture — which was "liked" by several members of the confirmation class — a "defacement" and apologized to the parish for the Cihaks' behavior.

As for the rape and molestation of thousands and thousands of children?   It is not even on the Church's radar screen other than to try to avoid paying compensation to sexual abuse victims.  As for the starving children in the image above, the image below shows what the horrid old men in dresses at the Vatican really value: disgusting levels of wealth and the ability to condemn others while acting in the most heinous ways.  Christ must be sickened by what is claimed to be done in his name.

Austin Passes Resolution Supporting Gay Marriage

Earlier in the week I noted that the City of Austin, Texas was poised to take up a resolution endorsing gay marriage.  As it turned out, the vote to pass the resolution was unanimous.  There must be some serious spittle flying among Christofascist groups like FRC.  Here are highlights from KUT News:

Today Austin became the first city in Texas to pass a resolution in support of same sex marriage.  The measure passed the City Council unanimously this morning.

Before the vote, local civil rights groups declared their support for the resolution, which was sponsored by Mayor Pro Tem Sheryl Cole and co-sponsored by Mayor Lee Leffingwell and Council member Laura Morrison.

At a press conference, Mayor Pro Tem Cole spoke about the evolution of rights in Texas, quoting Dr. Martin Luther King: “… Injustice anywhere is injustice everywhere. Whatever afflicts once directly also afflicts one indirectly.”

Council member Morrison acknowledged the progress made within the Austin community, when it comes to civil rights, but said there was still a ways to go. Morrison pointed to practicality when making her point.

“Marriage equality provides important legal and economic protections including access to health care, parenting rights, property rights and other protections,” said Morrison.

The practical implications of the resolution are unlikely to be great. In 2005, Texas voters approved an amendment to the state constitution, banning same sex marriage and civil unions. Travis County was the only county in the state where a majority did not support the amendment.

Thomson Reuters Opposes Minnesota's Anti-Gay Marriage Amendment

The list of companies that the Bible thumping hate merchants at American Family Association and its Christiofascist allies need to boycott just keeps on growing.  While no where near as powerful or with as strong a grip on global business, Thomson Reuters has joined the list of progressive companies that are opposing the effort of the hate family values organizations that seek to drag America back into a Middle Ages mindset and force same sex couples into a 4th class citizenship status.  Minnesota United for All Families has issued a press release on this latest slap in the face to the knuckle dragging forces of the far right.  Here are highlights:

Thomson Reuters, a company with thousands of employees in Minnesota, announced today that it firmly and clearly opposes the proposed constitutional amendment that would limit the freedom to marry for committed, same-sex couples in our state. With its historic announcement today, Thomson Reuters joins Fortune 500 companies General Mills and St. Jude Medical in opposing this freedom-limiting marriage amendment.

This news comes on the heels of a statement from leaders of seven major Minnesota law firms in opposition to this amendment, saying in the Star Tribune today that, “the marriage amendment endangers our business climate, signaling that ours is a community that does not welcome members of the LGBT community. This directly impacts Minnesota businesses, including law firms, which are dependent on attracting and retaining the best and brightest talent, regardless of sexual orientation.”

Thomson Reuters said, “As we’ve heard from employees, recruiters and customers, one thing has been very clear: we’re a better place when we have a rich variety of perspectives, talents, backgrounds, lifestyles and experiences in our workplace, and within the broader community from which we recruit. We believe that building a culture that thrives on diversity and inclusion and provides equal opportunities to everyone is a critical factor in our ability to serve our customers and be successful. …We believe the Minnesota Marriage Amendment, if passed, would limit our ability to recruit and retain top talent. For this reason, we do not believe that the Amendment would be good for Thomson Reuters or the business community in the state.”

The law firms noted in the Star Tribune piece include among others Oppenheimer Wolff & Donnelly LLP, a large international firm for which I have served as local counsel in the past.  Here's portion of what these legal powerhouses had to say on the vicious anti-gay amendment on the ballot in November:

As leaders of law firms, we write in our individual capacities to express our personal opposition to the Minnesota marriage amendment that will be on the ballot this fall.

The marriage amendment would embed in the Minnesota Constitution a definition of marriage as being solely between one man and one woman. In so doing, it strives to prevent future judicial or legislative action that could allow our gay and lesbian citizens to marry and enjoy a right that is available to all others.

 

As lawyers, we also believe that this issue is more important than just its impact to the business climate. The amendment uses the ballot to restrict the rights of our fellow citizens, and to embed those restrictions in our state Constitution. Simply put, it is a bad precedent to use the Constitution to deny the civil liberties of a few.

We will be voting "no" on the marriage amendment and encourage our fellow members of the bar to join us.

Priest Defies Pope: Catholics Should Vote Against Minnesota Anti-Gay Amendment

Given the Vatican's crackdown on American nuns who actually put the Gospel message in action and who use the intelligence that God gave them, one can only wonder how soon it will be before Minnesota priest Father Bob Pierson is forced from the priesthood.  You see, Pierson not only had the moral integrity to stand up to the Vatican's anti-gay jihad but used Pope Benedict XVI's own writes from many years ago to justify his stance.  In a nutshell, one's conscience trumps the dictates of the Vatican.  Hopefully, more and more American Catholics are waking up to this fact.  Here are highlights from Raw Story:

An openly gay priest on Sunday urged Catholics to go against the Pope’s wishes and vote “no” a November ballot measure that would enshrine Minnesota’s same sex marriage ban in the state’s Constitution.

Father Bob Pierson argued that Paragraph 1782 of the Catechism of the Catholic Church allows Catholics to make their own decisions in cases where their conscience is not in agreement with the church’s doctrine.
The priest recalled that a “young theologian” named Joseph Ratzinger, who is now Pope, used to teach that people should follow their own inner voice.

“Our Holy Father taught in 1967 that we must obey our own conscience, even if it puts us at odds with the Pope,” Pierson told the crowd of about 200 Catholics at an event in the Minneapolis suburb of Edina. “I doubt that he knew that he was going to be Pope when he said that.”

“As Catholics we must follow our own conscience in making decisions such as how to vote,” he continued. “My conscience tells me to vote no on the amendment because I have yet to hear a convincing reason why we need such an amendment to our state constitution. In fact, I believe the church does not have the right to force its moral teaching on others outside the fold.”

Too many of us have been thought to think of God in terms of God’s judgement, rather than God’s tremendous love and mercy,” Pierson explained. “I believe this amendment violates an important principle in Catholic teaching, and that as Catholics, we can vote no.”

As I said, I suspect the bitter old men in Rome must be having fits over Pierson's well argued case.  I love the way he states that the Church does not have the right to force its views on all citizens.  That surely counts as heresy at the Vatican. 

The Pitifully Few Gay Friendly North Carolina Counties



Click Image to Enlarge



As the this map from WRAL-TV indicates, yesterday's vote on Amendment One confirmed that most counties in North Carolina are hostile to LGBT rights including neighboring Currituck County where 68% of the vote supported anti-gay bigotry (Currituck County includes part of the Outer Banks and the towns of Duck, Kill Devil Hills, Kitty Hawk, and Nags Head).  I feel sorry for those putting on OBX Pridefest next month who now face an uphill battle convincing would be attendees that the area isn't outright hostile to LGBT individuals.  The boyfriend and I attended last years OBX Pride and had a great time. 

Bob Felton at Civil Commotion shared these caustic but accurate thoughts on yesterday's anti-gay vote:

In the cities, where the universities are, and the best educated work, and the ambiance tends toward cosmopolitan, Amendment One failed decisively. But out in the boonies, where banshees still flit through the trees at night and Holy Men are known to have magical powers, the numbers were almost exactly reversed.

In my own county, just outside Raleigh, Amendment One passed by a wide margin, and the vote tallies reveal that many people went to the polls and voted on only Amendment One. They cast no vote in the gubernatorial primary, that is, or the presidential primary, or their congressional primary; they bestirred themselves to go to the polls and outlaw those scary gays — and that’s it.

I never saw an advertisement advancing a public policy argument in favor of Amendment One. The pro-Amendment campaign relied exclusively on some notion of “God’s intention,” making the vote a religious referendum. This tells us two things: First, the average Tarheel knows next to nothing about his country’s founding ideals and, second, the average Tarheel knows next to nothing about his Bible.

Feel the Love: North Carolina Pastor Wants Gays Prosecuted As in the Past

The hate and venom coming out of North Carolina make one thing very clear: Amendment One has NOTHING to do with "protecting marriage" and everything to do with punishing gays for not subscribing to Christianist religious beliefs.  Indeed, rather than simply deny us legal recognition of our relationships, the pro-Amendment One crowd wants us to be criminally prosecuted.  The only thing left unsaid is whether capital punishment is their preferred punishment.  In an explosion of spittle spraying verbal diarrhea over the weekend Ron Baity, founding pastor of Winston-Salem's Berean Baptist Church (another pastor at this church advised parents to beat the gay out of the boys) and head of the anti-marriage equality organization Return America, made the Christianist agenda painfully clear to anyone with their eyes and ears open.  Baity makes it clear what a vote in favor of Amendment One truly signifies.  Here are highlights from Huffington Post:

A prominent North Carolina pastor has joined the chorus of voices speaking out in favor of Amendment One, which would define marriage as being between a man and a woman in the state's constitution.  Ron Baity . . .
referred to homosexuality as "a perverted lifestyle" in a Sunday sermon before telling his congregation that lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) people should be prosecuted, Good as You is reporting.

"For 300 years, we had laws that would prosecute that lifestyle," he is quoted as saying. "We've gone down the wrong path. We've become so dumb that we have accepted a lie for the truth, and we've...discarded the truth on the shoals of shipwreck!"

Baity's commentary come on the heels of anti-gay marriage remarks made by two other North Carolina religious leaders, Beacon Baptist Church Pastor Tim Rabon and Pastor Sean Harris, also of Barean Baptist Church.

As Jeremy Hooper at Good As You also notes, Baity also is preaching that marriage equality supporters are not only bringing on God's condemnation, but also man-on-child and man-on-horse marriage.  Sadly, in our current society, conservative white Christians seem best recognized by their hatred towards others: gays, blacks, Hispanics, immigrants, non-Christians.  Indeed, toward almost everyone.

Bill Clinton Robo Calls North Carolina As the Haters Pull out the Stops

During the National Equality March, the boyfriend and I met this couple who coincidentally were from North Carolina.  The sign they exemplifies the type of legacy that North Carolina will be returning to if Amendment One passes on this coming Tuesday.  The hate and vitriol being unleashed in a final push by the Christianists is truly sickening.  Particularly heinous are the claims of North Carolina pastor Tim Rabon who claims that gay marriage will lead to "man and Beast marriage."  I suspect that in Rabon's eyes, the boyfriend and I are not even fully human.  It speaks to the ugliness that is Christianity under the Christofascists.  And it's not just the Protestants who are piling on the hatred.  The two Catholic bishops in North Carolina - you know, the guys who belong to the club that protect child rapists - are sending a letter to every registered Catholic in their dioceses urging a vote for hate and bigotry.  Would that they showed as much concern when it comes to stopping the rape and sexual abuse of children and youths.  It truly is enough to make one want to vomit.

 

On the positive side, former President Bill Clinton is robo calling North Carolina residents in a recorded message urging them to vote against Amendment One.  Details can be found here.  Here's the text of the message:

 

"Hello, this is President Bill Clinton.  I’m calling to urge you to vote against Amendment One on Tuesday May 8.  If it passes, it won’t change North Carolina’s law on marriage.  What it will change is North Carolina’s ability to keep good businesses, attract new jobs, and attract and keep talented entrepreneurs.  If it passes, your ability to keep those businesses, get those jobs, and get those talented entrepreneurs will be weakened.  And losing even one job to Amendment One is too big of a risk.  Its passage will also take away health insurance from children and could even take away domestic violence protections from women.  So the real effect of the law is not to keep the traditional definition of marriage, you’ve already done that.  The real effect of the law will be to hurt families and drive away jobs.  North Carolina can do better.  Again, this is Bill Clinton asking you to please vote against Amendment One.  Thanks."

I have not always been a Bill Clinton fan, but in this action, he is truly on the side of religious freedom, common decency and the concept of equality under the civil laws.  Thanks Bill!

Billy Graham and Neo-Nazi Group Endorse Amendment One

For many years Billy Graham has managed to maintain an apparently false image that he's not an extreme gay hating bigot.  Or at least he did so until today when he came out in support of North Carolina's heinous anti-gay Amendment One.  Highlighting the extent of Graham's bigotry was another announcement of support for Amendment One by Neo-Nazi and white supremacist site World-Wide White Pride.  One can only hope that Graham's legacy will become irrevocably associated with his actions today and that he will seen by future generations as no better than the segregationists of fifty years ago.  Here are highlights from the Charlotte Observer on Graham's belated coming out as a flaming gay hating bigot:

The Rev. Billy Graham urged North Carolina voters Wednesday to support an amendment to the state constitution banning gay marriage, a move that an observer said was highly unusual but another said was in keeping with the minister's moral beliefs.

His complete statement about Amendment One will be part of full-page ads slated to appear in 14 North Carolina newspapers throughout the weekend.  Graham's statement was issued by the Charlotte-based Billy Graham Evangelistic Association, which is led by Graham's son, the Rev. Franklin Graham. Franklin Graham recorded a message last month in support of Amendment One, which is on the ballot in the election Tuesday.

William Martin, who wrote the authorized Graham biography "A Prophet With Honor," couldn't recall another effort by the Billy Graham Evangelistic Association like the one the ministry plans in support of Amendment One.

Read more here: http://www.charlotteobserver.com/2012/05/02/3214145/billy-graham-backs-nc-anti-gay.html#storylink=cpy

"I am somewhat surprised that he would take that strong a stand," said Martin, professor emeritus of religion and public policy at Rice University. "In the past, I have heard him say with respect to homosexuality, there are greater sins. Franklin has been more outspoken about it, but it sounds as if this is Mr. Graham expressing his own will."

Read more here: http://www.charlotteobserver.com/2012/05/02/3214145/billy-graham-backs-nc-anti-gay.html#storylink=cpy

If this is truly Graham's view point - and not that of his far sleazier son, Franklin, then I believe he's buying himself a reserved seat in Hell, if Hell exists, where he will be amongst scores of the "godly Christina" crowd.  One also cannot help but wonder how many of the ranks of the poor and homeless could have been helped with the funds being used to pay for this 14 messages of bigotry.  Why is the phrase "modern day Pharisee" springing to mind?

I did mention another announcement of support for Amendment One which demonstrates the company in which Billy Graham and homophobes like him have yoked themselves.  Joe.My.God and Pam's House Blend both have coverage on the Neo-Nazi support Amendment One is garnering.  Here are Joe's thoughts on the issue:

Neo-Nazi and white supremacist site World-Wide White Pride today happily posted the report that North Carolina's Amendment One was actually written to prevent the Caucasian race from extinction. There's no apparent editorializing on their link-heavy post on this latest scandal, which since yesterday has moved into the mainstream media. But I think it's safe to call this a Nazi endorsement.

To recap, Amendment One is supported by child abusers, shotgun-toting creeps, racists, AND Nazis. All we need now is a serial killer for a royal fucking flush in Evil Poker.

Such is the company now kept by self-congratulatory Christianists and the professional Christian crowd.  WWJD?

Read more here: http://www.charlotteobserver.com/2012/05/02/3214145/billy-graham-backs-nc-anti-gay.html#storylink=cpy

Read more here: http://www.charlotteobserver.com/2012/05/02/3214145/billy-graham-backs-nc-anti-gay.html#storylink=cpy

North Carolina - Gratuitous Bigotry on the Ballot

A number of newspapers have slammed North Carolina's foul, GOP and Christianist backed Amendment One  that seeks to make LGBT North Carolina residents 4th class citizens as was done here in Virginia in 2006 (even the Virginian Pilot has surprisingly done so).  Now the New York Times joins the list and correctly calls out Amendment One for what it truly is: gratuitous bigotry that will harm many families.  Even though there is no proof whatsoever that same sex marriage in any way adversely impacts heterosexual marriage or society as a whole.  Again, it's gratuitous bigotry that clings to a fear and hate based form of religion as its sole justification.  Here are editorial highlights:

North Carolina already has a law barring same-sex marriage, but the state’s Republican-controlled Legislature is not satisfied. It devised a measure to enshrine this obvious discrimination in the State Constitution and placed it on the ballot of the state’s May 8 primary election — a test of tolerance versus bigotry that ought to be watched closely nationwide.


In their zeal, lawmakers got careless with the wording of the measure, known as Amendment One. It would constitutionally prohibit recognition not just of same-sex marriages, but of other legal arrangements like civil unions and domestic partnerships. That could harm all unmarried couples, imperiling some children’s health insurance benefits, along with child custody arrangements and safeguards against domestic violence.

The campaign against the amendment is being spearheaded by a coalition of civic, religious, business and civil rights leaders and groups. One of Amendment One’s most vocal opponents is the Rev. William Barber II, president of the state chapter of the N.A.A.C.P. Mr. Barber draws a strong link between the proposed amendment and struggles against racial unfairness, an appeal with special resonance following the publication in March of memos from the National Organization for Marriage, one the most prominent groups fighting same-sex marriage, about driving “a wedge between gays and blacks.”

Polls suggest that defeating this measure remains an uphill struggle, but at least its approval is no longer an entirely foregone conclusion. Much will depend on turnout, especially by voters on college campuses, who will need to vote in larger-than-usual numbers to defeat this declaration of officially sanctioned discrimination.

Opponents of marriage equality have never been able to show any evidence that any harm is caused to heterosexual marriages by granting all American adults the right to marry as they choose — because there is no such evidence. With little more than a week to go before the May 8 contest, and early voting already under way, North Carolinians need to consider whether they really want to inflict this gratuitous bigotry on their fellow citizens and their children. 

North Carolina's Amendment One is All About Religion

Frankly, I am so over the Christianists' - and that term now has includes the Catholic bishops - efforts to destroy the separation of church and state and inject their fear and hate based version of Christianity on everyone that it has come to the point when I hear the term "Christian" my first reaction is negative.  Very negative.  It can be anything from an ad for "Christian Singles" to religion columns in the local paper.  My first reaction is to simply want to vomit.  Yes, this reaction is unfair to the "good Christians" who exist, but by the same token most of them act like the "good Germans" who sat by and watched Hitler rise to power in the early 1930's.  Fortunately, some Christian leaders have belatedly awakened in North Carolina and have begun to oppose the Christianist inspired Amendment One.  But more needs to be done - and quickly - to expose Amendment One as a power grab by those who despise freedom of religion for other citizens.  The true question is whether it will turn out to be too little too late.  My blogger friend, Pam Spaulding has a post that zeros in on the religious based bigotry that is the sole and central basis for Amendment One.  Here are excerpts:

When you don’t have any other card to play when it comes to discriminating against LGBTs, out comes the Bible. Without fail; it’s been clear from Day One that the people at Vote for Marriage NC could not find a way to make the case to add a measure to the state constitution to “protect marriage” without conflating church and state and preying upon fears and ignorance of voters. Its latest volley – recruiting Franklin Graham, the anti-gay preacher son of Billy Graham for its radio ad, released Friday (N&O):

Franklin Graham asks listeners to “take a stand on God’s definition of marriage” between a man and a woman and vote for the amendment on the May 8 primary ballot. Anne Graham Lotz – Franklin Graham’s sister – also has said she supports the amendment.

The ballot initiative is a complete legal over-reach — the original intent by its proponents was to ensure gay and lesbian couples would never have access to ANY legal recognition such as civil unions or domestic partnerships in addition to marriage — and Vote for Marriage NC has run into a lot of trouble here because of it:

• The collateral harms that the amendment could cause to all unmarried couples — rollback of existing domestic partnerships, effect on domestic violence laws and health benefits for children, have the organization completely on the defense.

• An epic level of public condemnation of Amendment One from conservative judges, elected officials and organizations, has rendered V4MNC silent, since it cannot trot any public officials out on camera to support its position. Its most embarrassing moment to date has to be that an original sponsor of the Amendment, Rep. Jim Crawford, announced in a public forum that he plans to vote against it because “it goes too far.”

• There are direct challenges to the notion that this is a religious or moral battle against “godless, evil secularism.” There’s no other way to read V4MNC’s ads, which prominently feature the National Organization for Marriage’s racial wedge strategy — showing black families and clergy to purportedly represent all Christians should be for the Amendment.

The last point is particularly damning because of the hundreds of clergy of all colors and denominations — including Baptists, usually seen as conservative — have publicly come forward to condemn Amendment One. Just this week, a group of 15 interfaith African American Clergy in Greensboro took out a full page ad in the Carolina Peacemaker, a well-known black newspaper in Guilford County. In the Greensboro-High Point-Winston-Salem region alone, 100 black clergy have come out against the amendment.

Using religious advocacy as the main justification for voting for Amendment One exposes the fact that these people want everyone to live under their religious worldview to the exclusion of all others. That is a theocracy, and the lengthy list of people of faith who are against Amendment One are well aware of the use of biblical justification for all sorts of discriminatory human behavior in the past, thus their opposition and willingness to be very public about it. The amendment is a danger to religious freedom. 

Pam has more on developments and is a treasure trove in terms of spotlighting the religious based hate that the Christianist proponents of Amendment One are aiming at LGBT citizens in North Carolina.  For the Christianists, Christianity has truly become a religion of hate pure and simple.

Obama's Disinterested Approach to Gay Rights

One can feel as if they are going to experience whiplash at times from Barack Obama's approach to LGBT rights and ending legalized anti-gay discrimination.  Sadly, it often seems that only when the LGBT community becomes truly pissed off and inclined to stop writing checks for Obama and/or other Democrats that Obama will have a brief epiphany and take a step to advance equality.  But more often, he seems most inclined to either throw gays under the bus - as with his refusal to sign an ENDA like executive order despite polling that shows the vast majority of Americans support employment protections  - or to close his eyes and pretend he's unaware of issues that have monumental impact on gays.   While I applaud his belated efforts for the repeal of DAD and his refusal to defend DOMA, there's so much more to be done, especially in states like Virginia where LGBT citizens barely rate as 4th class citizens.  A piece in the Washington Post looks at Obama's continued ability to frustrate LGBT Americans while assuming that we have no viable option but to vote for him in November.  Here are highlights:

Two weeks from now, North Carolina will hold a public referendum on what could become one of the toughest anti-gay measures in the country: a far-reaching proposal to amend the state constitution to ban civil unions and domestic partnerships. But President Obama is not expected to touch the subject when he appears in Chapel Hill on Tuesday — even though it is roiling the electorate there.

Instead, Obama will talk about college loans, his aides said, kicking off a two-day, three-state tour designed to energize the youth vote. His delicate sidestep of Amendment One, a ballot initiative to be decided May 8 that would recognize marriage between a man and a woman as the only legal domestic partnership in North Carolina, is seen by some as another sign that he is not fully committed to gay rights — an interpretation that could dampen the enthusiasm of the young voters he is trying to court.

“It’s a little bit of a missed opportunity,” said Josh Orol, 20, a sophomore at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill and a leader of a campus movement to defeat Amendment One. “I didn’t expect him to talk at length about it. I know he has come out publicly against it. But I sort of hoped he would at least name-drop a little bit. It’s disappointing.”

 The issue is particularly complicated in historically conservative North Carolina. .   .   .   North Carolina is widely seen as a bigger challenge this year for Obama than it was in 2008, when he won with a margin of roughly 14,000 votes. Not only does the state’s unemployment rate continue to hover near 10 percent, but its Democratic Party is in disarray and is expected to be of little help to president  .  .  

It will also be up to Obama to navigate the political crosscurrents of a complicated state in which he must court multiple constituencies that do not all agree on all the same issues.  The fate of Amendment One, for instance, is uncertain, with one public poll predicting that it will pass easily and another projecting a loss. Quietly opposing Amendment One, but keeping his distance from on-the-ground efforts to defeat it, could be an essential strategy for Obama to pull back together the diverse coalition that elected him last time.

Nonetheless, that approach is frustrating younger activists, many of whom have come to view marriage equality as the defining civil rights cause of their generation. They are impatient with Obama’s self-described “evolving” position on gay marriage — he supports civil unions but stops short of endorsing legal protections for marriage — and they are looking for signs that he is ready to embrace their cause more fully.

Campaign officials also drew a stark contrast between Obama’s positions on marriage issues and those of the presumptive Republican nominee, Mitt Romney, whose opposition to legal protections for gay couples drew an endorsement last week from the National Organization for Marriage.

Particularly frustrating to DeLuca and others is the prospect of Amendment One passing despite growing opposition. Corporate leaders, advocates for victims of domestic violence and even moderate Republicans, faith leaders and the NAACP have joined forces in an attempt to defeat it 

Whatever Obama does or does not say about Amendment One in the coming two weeks, he could benefit, at least somewhat, from the push to defeat it. Across the state, particularly on college campuses, diverse coalitions of students, gay rights activists, libertarians and others have been collecting e-mail addresses and registering voters in advance of the May 8 referendum.  

I often am left with the feeling that the issue of gay rights is just a matter of political gamesmanship with Obama.  He constantly forgets that there are real lives involved and real LGBT headed families that face discrimination.  It is soul killing to always find oneself hoping and waiting for the day when one will be a full, equal citizen.  I often feel I will not live to see that day arrive.  At least not if we rely on Obama to set the timetable.

Former Charlotte, North Carolina Mayors (Including a Republican) Condemn Amendment 1

With Rick "Man On Dog" Santorum now out of the GOP presidential nomination race, the odds of large numbers of Republicans going to the polls next month in the North Carolina GOP primary are certainly reduced. That's not to say that hate groups such as NOM won't be doing their best to turn out the knuckle dragging Bible beater set like modern day examples of Pavlov's dog. Returning to good news, two former mayors of Charlotte - North Carolina's largest city - have come out strongly against the anti-gay Amendment 1. Better yet, one of the former mayors condemning the Christianist effort is a Republican. Pam's House Blend has details. Here are highlights followed by a video clip:

“[Amendment One] is unnecessary and may have serious unintended consequences,” says Vinroot. Gantt adds, “And some of those consequences may harm women, children and families throughout North Carolina.”

As former mayors of the state’s largest city and national financial hub, the advertisement also features Vinroot and Gantt pointing out the economic impact of Amendment One. “It may hurt our ability to attract business and job opportunities into North Carolina,” says Vinroot. “But we do know this: if you vote against it, it won’t harm anybody.”

Protect All NC Families underscored how this joint statement against Amendment One from representatives on both sides of the political spectrum represents a trend emerging throughout the state. “This powerful new web ad illustrates the growing consensus among North Carolinians against the dangerous harms of Amendment One,” said Jeremy Kennedy, campaign manager for Protect All NC Families. “It’s remarkable how such a divisive referendum has, in turn, brought together so many people from all political stripes, personal backgrounds, and perspectives, for one common purpose: to protect our state’s families by voting against on May 8.”

People should compare and contrast the calibre of spokespeople on the anti-Amendment side in the ad below vs. what the Vote for Marriage NC people have featured in their latest ad, covered by Alvin McEwen on the Blend (Vote for MarriageNC ad filled with misrepresentations and false views) – none other than Rev. Patrick Wooden, who said “I don’t have any animus against the gay community” but in interviews has gone on at length about gay men needing diapers and using cell phones as sex toys.

The Archdiocese of St. Paul and Minneapolis Contributed $650,000 to Support Anti-Gay Amendment

While continuing to go to great lengths to protect child rapists, closing long established parishes because of supposed financial deficits, and closing down Catholic Charities operations rather than cease anti-gay discrimination, the Catholic Church hierarchy is none the less finding plenty of money to contribute to support anti-gay legislation around the country. In fact, as the St. Cloud Times is reporting, the Archdiocese of St. Paul and Minneapolis alone contributed $650,000 last year to support the proposed constitutional amendment now pending in Minnesota that would ban gay marriage. The priorities (and moral bankruptcy) of the bitter old men in dresses is striking: close schools and parishes, resist paying compensation to the victims of clerical sex abuse, but spend lavishly to interfere with the CIVIL legal rights of LGBT citizens. Here are highlights from the St. Cloud Times:

MINNEAPOLIS — The Archdiocese of St. Paul and Minneapolis says it contributed $650,000 last year to support a proposed constitutional amendment that would ban gay marriage.

The archdiocese said today that it spearheaded a statewide effort of Minnesota’s Catholic bishops. Archbishop John Nienstedt has come out strongly in support of the ban. He says it’s in line with fundamental church teaching that marriage should be between one man and one woman.

The archdiocese says the money comes from investment income.

The largest group working to defeat the amendment, Minnesotans United for All Families, said last week it had raised $1.2 million.

As I have noted often, I do not understand how anyone who is truly moral can remain a Catholic. Loving gay couples are demonized and targeted for second class citizenship while child molesters are protected and the church goes to extreme lengths to compensate the victims of sexual abuse.

Have the Odds Improved to Defeat North Carolina's Anti-Gay Amendment?

Watching the progress of the Christianist effort to pass an anti-gay marriage constitutional amendment in North Carolina has in some ways been a replay of what happened here in Virginia in 2006. The Christianists have used the same lies and underhanded tactics to dupe voters and if passed, the amendment would do far more than only bar "marriage" for same sex couples just as is the case in Virginia. Making matters worse, the vote on the amendment was set to take place on the date of the North Carolina primary in May. With no Democrat presidential primary, the anti-gay forces thought that the tactic would help insure passage since fewer Democrats and non-Christofascists would be likely to go to the polls. Now, fortuitously, a possible wrench has been thrown into the equation: the incumbent Democrat governor will not be seeking re-election and there will, therefore, be a primary contest for the governor slot on the Democrat ticket. WECT-TV 6 looks at this new factor. Here are highlights:

Democratic Gov. Beverly Perdue unexpectedly announced last Thursday that she won't seek re-election. That means more Democrats could turn out to the polls for the May 8 primary to pick a new candidate for governor.

Before that, mostly Republicans were expected to show up to pick their candidates for governor and president. They were expected to approve the ban.

"When the Republicans decided to use the primary election instead of the general election..they were probably thinking boy this is going to be a nice, quiet sleepy little election..not many folks are going to be showing up..this is going to be the time for us to try and get this passed," Michael Bitzer, a professor of politics at Catawba College said.

Now supporters of gay rights hope that an influx of Democratic voters could defeat the ban.

I sincerely hope that the voters in North Carolina vote against writing hate into that state's constitution.

North Carolina Family Policy Council Depicts Gays as Assassins

Here in Virginia LGBT citizens are unfortunately all too accustomed to being depicted by the "godly Christian" set as child molesters, alcoholics, drug users, victims of early deaths, and worse. No one seems to spew hate and nastiness more than the "Christians." Now, with an anti-gay constitutional amendment on the ballot in North Carolina, many of the tactics used in Virginia by The Family Foundation to push for passage of the foul Marshall-Newman Amendment in 2006 have been exported to North Carolina. It's not surprising that the North Carolina Family Policy Council, like The Family Foundation links with Family Research Council, a certified hate group, and Focus on the Family. Like The Family Foundation, North Carolina Family Policy Council disingenuously describes itself as "nonpartisan, nonprofit research and education organization dedicated to the preservation of the family and traditional family values." It also claims "We are engaged in a battle to retain the Judeo-Christian values that are the foundation of western civilization." Can't you just feel the "love" emanating from the image above? How long before some nut with a gun decides to murder one or more LGBT North Carolinians because they are sch a threat to civilization. My friend Jeremy Hooper has some on point remarks at Good As You:

This is the actual graphic that the North Carolina Family Policy Council, the leading anti-equality group in the Tar Heel State, is running in its quarterly publication in order to scare citizens into voting for the state's proposed constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriage.

Yup, that's right: Their emblematic representation for our side is that of an assassin poised to take out a pair of heterosexual newlyweds as they embrace in a wheat field. That's where their mind goes. More importantly: That's where they want their supporters' minds to go.

Now, NCFPC will of course say they were just being allegorical and that everyone uses symbolic graphics like this. But no, not everyone does. Unless through the vehicle of some deep and drippingly obvious parody, I would never put a human couple behind the sites of some sort of deadly weapon. But we see it ALL THE TIME from the "nice," "loving" "values" crowd. Quite frankly, it scares me.

If anyone is a threat to western civilization (unless one wants a return of the Dark Ages), it's the "family values" crowd that exults in hate, division, ignorance and, of course, the suppression of religious freedom for other citizens. They want nothing less than a Christianist theocracy.