Posts Tagged LGBT
Why You Wanna Break My Heart?
Posted by zoboxrox in church and state, human rights, justice, malfunction, politics, tragedy on June 16th, 2009
I realize I haven’t been completely objective (not that I ever claimed to be), and for a while there, I was a member of the Obama cheer-leading squad, but I’ve got to say, for me at least, the honeymoon is now officially over. Its not that I expected the new administration to do everything right, especially considering the seemingly insurmountable trouble they are faced with; its just, I never thought they would do something so clearly wrong.
To be fair, lets give a little context.
The Defense of Marriage Act, or DOMA as it is known, was a bill signed into law by President Clinton – NOT President Bush — on September 21, 1996. It basically says that no state can be forced to recognize other state’s same-sex marriages and that the federal government is required not to. So yeah, its pretty bad.
No State, territory, or possession of the United States, or Indian tribe, shall be required to give effect to any public act, record, or judicial proceeding of any other State, territory, possession, or tribe respecting a relationship between persons of the same sex that is treated as a marriage under the laws of such other State, territory, possession, or tribe, or a right or claim arising from such relationship.
In determining the meaning of any Act of Congress, or of any ruling, regulation, or interpretation of the various administrative bureaus and agencies of the United States, the word ‘marriage’ means only a legal union between one man and one woman as husband and wife, and the word ’spouse’ refers only to a person of the opposite sex who is a husband or a wife
Arthur Smelt and Christopher Hammer, a gay couple who were married in California before Proposition 8 and had taken the two bans on marriage to Federal Court, were fought by the Obama Administration’s Justice Department. While it is rare for an administration not to defend the current laws (though not unheard of), whether or not they agree with them, it makes matters worse that Justice Department has written a brief which makes arguments comparing gay marriage to incestuous relationships.
The brief insists it is reasonable for states to favor heterosexual marriages because they are the “traditional and universally recognized form of marriage.” In arguing that other states do not have to recognize same-sex marriages under the Constitution’s “full faith and credit” clause, the Justice Department cites decades-old cases ruling that states do not have to recognize marriages between cousins or an uncle and a niece.
This is not a direction I expected this president to go in. For someone who travels the globe, preaching tolerance and understanding, he should make more of an effort to practice it at home.
Ch-ch-ch-changes
Posted by zoboxrox in international, politics on February 2nd, 2009
Up until this week, Iceland was little more to me than the country that spawned Bjork, caused insomnia, and overused the letter J. The isolated nation, however, made international history this Sunday when Johanna Sigurdardottir became the world’s first openly gay prime minister. The 66 year old former flight attendant was chosen to replace the fallen Geir Haarde following a full fledged economic crisis and the collapse of his government. (I’ve never really understood what it means when a government collapses; I try to imagine that here and it always ends up resembling the movie 28 Days Later, but in more civilized countries apparently it happens all the time!).
Now usually I like to refer to politicians by their last name (with the exception of Hil Hil), I even spent an entire evening practicing my Blagojevich pronunciation technique, but in this instance, regrettably, I’m gonna have to go with Johanna. So anyway, Johanna, the former minister of social affairs and social security in the recently collapsed cabinet, was selected by the rest of the failed cabinet members to be the new head of government until the mandatory April/May election.
So while I don’t know too much about Johanna or her policies, or Iceland for that matter, and I am in no way under the assumption that she will be successful simply because she is a lesbian, I do know that a whole new group of kids who maybe had some doubts about their future possibilities are holding their heads up a little higher today.
Sad But True
Posted by zoboxrox in human rights, malfunction, religion on January 28th, 2009
This is one of those stories you hear and have a hard time believing. Is this really still happening? After everything we think we’ve done, as far as we’ve gotten…
“School can expel lesbian students, court rules”
After a Lutheran school expelled two 16-year-old girls for having “a bond of intimacy” that was “characteristic of a lesbian relationship,” the girls sued, contending the school had violated a state anti-discrimination law.
In response to that suit, an appeals court decided this week that the private religious school was not a business and therefore did not have to comply with a state law that prohibits businesses from discriminating. A lawyer for the girls said Tuesday that he would ask the California Supreme Court to overturn the unanimous ruling by a three-judge panel of the 4th District Court of Appeal.
Kirk D. Hanson, who represented the girls, said the “very troubling” ruling would permit private schools to discriminate against anyone, as long as the schools used their religious beliefs as justification.
The girls were expelled in their junior year for “conducting themselves in a manner consistent with being lesbians…”The dispute started when a student at the school told a teacher in 2005 that one of the girls had said she loved the other. The student advised the teacher to look at the girls’ MySpace pages. One of the girls was identified as bisexual on her MySpace page, the other’s page said she was “not sure” of her sexual orientation.
McKay said the website also contained a photograph of the girls hugging.
****
“The school’s religious message is inextricably intertwined with its secular functions,” wrote Justice Betty A. Richli for the appeals court. “The whole purpose of sending one’s child to a religious school is to ensure that he or she learns even secular subjects within a religious framework.”
In addition to their discrimination claim, the girls complained that the school invaded their privacy and detained them unlawfully. The girls complained the principal sat “very close” to them and asked them if they were bisexual, if they had kissed each other, and whether they had done anything “inappropriate,” the court said.
The school also did not break the law when it disclosed the girls’ “suspected sexual orientation” to their parents, the court said. The parents, “in light of their right to control their children’s upbringing and education, had a right to know why” they were being expelled, the court said.“Labeling a young person or telling her she is ’sinful’ can be psychologically devastating,” Minter said. “Regardless of one’s religious beliefs, all adults have a responsibility to treat young people with compassion and respect.”
School officials could not be reached for comment.
The church should really ease up when it comes to homosexuals. I mean, in all honesty, what would happen to religious establishments without them? They practically run the entire Catholic Church. 
What Happens When Democracy is Wrong?
Posted by zoboxrox in church and state, human rights, malfunction, politics, tragedy on December 21st, 2008
The funny thing about democracy is that it really does put the power in the hands of the people, and quite often, quite frankly, the people end up being wrong. Take, say, 2004, when they re-elected George Bush. Or 2000 for that matter. Or the people of Illinois and the fallen Governor Blagojevich. Or Richard Nixon. Joseph McCarthy. Newt Gingrich. Ted Stevens. Tom DeLay. Even Adolf Hitler was democratically elected into office.
Proposition 8 recently passed in California state-wide elections with a definitive majority, despite the fact that the Supreme Court of California has previously defended the rights of gay marriage. The Court is once again faced with a decision regarding marriage rights, but they must view the question now in a post-8 setting.
Sponsors of the California ballot measure that banned same-sex marriage are seeking to nullify thousands of marriages between gay and lesbian couples performed after the state Supreme Court ruled them constitutional.
The sponsors Friday filed responses to three anti-Proposition 8 lawsuits with the state Supreme Court. The briefs also defend Proposition 8 against opponents’ legal challenges, including an argument that the amendment needed a constitutional convention to be added to the state’s constitution.
“We are confident that the will of the voters and Proposition 8 will ultimately be upheld,” said Andrew Pugno, General Counsel for ProtectMarriage.com and the Proposition 8 Legal Defense Fund.
So what can the California Court do now? In 2004 when faced with the same issue, they determined the following:
The court’s ruling said the right to marry is among a set of basic human rights “so integral to an individual’s liberty and personal autonomy that they may not be eliminated or abrogated by the legislature or by the electorate through the statutory initiative process.“
It reminds me of a quote I learned in grammar school and never forgot, and I have a horrible memory but I’m pretty sure it goes like this: “There comes a point when a man must refuse to answer to his leader if he is also to answer to his own conscience.” 
So I wonder, are these comparable times? Is it up to the Justices of California, and perhaps ultimately the Supreme Court, to defy the majority in favor of what is right, both morally and under our Declaration of Independence, which ensures all inalienable human rights, including the pursuit of Happiness.
Are we creating a dangerous distinction between democracy and freedom? I say, as far as marriage equality is concerned, the answer is yes.
Why Warren Works
Posted by zoboxrox in church and state, human rights, malfunction, politics, religion on December 18th, 2008
So, apparently it suddenly matters who gives the Benediction at the Inauguration of the incoming President. Bush’s Benediction was delivered by Texas mega-church pastor Kirbyjon Caldwell, twice, and I never heard anything about him until he endorsed Barack Obama for President last year. Anyway, liberal and conservative groups alike are getting their panties all in a bunch over B-rock’s choice, Evangelical Prop-8 loving pastor Rick Warren. So I looked Rick Warren up and found out a whole bunch of stuff, but what I want to share with you are some pictures and the following question: Does this really look like a man who hates the gays?
His church is called “SADDLEBACK” for Christ’s sake.
Rehearsing for the musical
He’s ready for his close-up!
Talking about his new curtains, which, coincidentally, match his shirt!!
In all seriousness, the selection was disturbing but at the same time politically brilliant. By choosing a socially conservative but economically liberal figurehead for the religious center of his inauguration, he is inviting an entire group of formerly disenfranchised voters to join his new majority. The left may not like it, and it may not be right or fair, but this Warren guy represents the views of the majority of the country, and whether we like it or not, they are here to stay.
Small Step for Family, Giant Leap for Mankind
Posted by zoboxrox in church and state, crime, human rights, malfunction, politics on November 26th, 2008
Just yesterday, a Miami-Dade Judge ruled in favor of Martin Gill, backed by the ACLU, who was applying for legal and permanent adoption of his two sons, whom he has been raising for the past four years. Martin Gill is gay and Florida has, since 1977, had a ban on adoption by gay parents, similar to the one recently passed in Arkansas. Judge Cindy Lederman, however, “ruled Tuesday that there is no rational, scientific or moral reason that sexual orientation should be a barrier to adopting children.“ AMEN sister!
For the Gill family, which is already cohesive and established, little will change aside from the children’s last names and Martin’s legal rights as father. For the state of Florida and the rest of the United States, on the other hand, the battle has only just begun.
Recent Comments