Wednesday, January 28, 2009
Monday, January 26, 2009
It's amazing how much more support bad policy gets in the courts than in the ballot box.
Friday, January 23, 2009
The "marriage equality" training talked about in the article will become part of every Californian's life when SSM finally comes to California. We will all be required to take sensitivity training in the workplace, schools, etc., so that we can better "understand" SSM.
Determined to avoid the mistakes of their last, losing campaign for gay marriage, gay rights activists are launching the first of what they hope will be many “marriage equality training camps” in Los Angeles this weekend.
The idea is to train activists in “the practical, hands-on skills to organize in their communities to restore marriage equality for same-sex couples to California.”
Tuesday, January 20, 2009
Google has filed an amicus brief in several legal challenges to Proposition 8, which make gay marriage illegal in California.
The company argues that it has many gay, lesbian and bi-sexual employees and many come to work for the company because they can get married in California. If those marriages are annulled then the company says it would lose key talent and be placed at a competitive disadvantage.
“In the wake of the election many were concerned with the impact Proposition 8 could have on the personal lives of people they work with every day, and on California's ability to attract and retain a diverse mix of employees from around the world,” said the company on its blog.
Tuesday, January 13, 2009
"In its Introduction, the report noted that, according to the APA’s three studies, released earlier this month, residents of states where voters have approved anti-gay ballot initiatives have suffered elevated stress as 'a direct result of the negative images and messaged associated with the ballot campaign and the passage of the amendment.'
"Study respondents also disclosed that they were /alienated from their community, fearful they would lose their children, and concerned they would become victims of anti-gay violence."
Where is the study from the APA detailing the effect of the actual (as opposed to the No Crowd's speculative "fears") violence and alienation from the community that those who supported Proposition 8 have experienced? Where's the report detailing the effect of the No Crowd's intolerance for religion?
The propaganda never stops, but luckily many of us can see right through it. I'm sure this is only the first of many reports which will be released to convince everybody of the benefits that gay "families" will have on society.
Friday, January 9, 2009
Read about it here.
SACRAMENTO, Calif. — Alliance Defense Fund allied attorneys together with ADF attorneys filed a lawsuit Wednesday on behalf of ProtectMarriage.com and the National Organization for Marriage California to prevent harassment of citizens who gave as little as $100 to support Proposition 8. The lawsuit documents incidents of harassment and retaliation by opponents who have targeted Proposition 8 supporters after their identities and employers were made public by the state as required by California campaign finance law.
“Putting the names and employers of the people who supported Proposition 8 on the Internet for anyone to see has caused serious problems. No one should worry about getting a death threat because of the way he or she votes,” said James Bopp, Jr., lead attorney for the supporters of Proposition 8. “This lawsuit will protect the right of all people to help support causes they agree with, without having to worry about harassment or threats.”
In November, over 7 million Californians approved Proposition 8. Under a California law, people who gave money to support Proposition 8 had their names, employers, and other personal information listed on the Web site of the Secretary of State of California.
After Proposition 8 passed, people who did not support Proposition 8 used the list of names to go after people who supported Proposition 8. Some people who supported Proposition 8 had their homes and churches vandalized, were forced to resign their jobs, and were even threatened with violence and death. To stop this harassment and these threats, this lawsuit asks the court to stop the release of the names and personal information of people who gave money to support Proposition 8.
“Our laws should ensure free participation in the democratic process, and not result in compromising the free speech and association rights of guaranteed to all Americans,” said ADF Legal Counsel Tim Chandler, who is serving as local counsel in the case. “Citizens shouldn’t have to choose between being involved in the democratic process and subjecting themselves to acts of vengeance.”
The lawsuit challenges parts of California’s campaign finance laws that require people who donate as little as $100 to have personal information revealed on the Internet as unconstitutional violations of free speech. The lawsuit also challenges parts of the campaign finance laws that require reporting of donations after a proposition has been voted on as unconstitutional.
Tuesday, January 6, 2009
The Prop 8 Campaign responded that the highest authority in determining what will be part of the California Constitution is the people, and the judiciary must so defer. Read it here.