Posts
Remember the big brouhaha when the major LGBT legal organizations filed to intervene as plaintiffs in the federal challenge against Prop 8 because they wanted a say in how the Olson/Boies power team ran the case, but then were subsequently denied?
Well, the Prop 8 proponents pointed to that incident and quipped that we couldn't get our act together and surmised it was a sign of ineffective leadership. (That was them talkin', not me.)
But what's this? Do I see the same thing happening on their side? Why yes I do.
The Campaign for California Families (CCF) is the rival to the Yes on 8 folks, but they're even more extreme in their beliefs, not only believing that same-sex marriage should be illegal but also any sort of recognition of gay relationships whatsoever.
CCF attempted to intervene on Strauss vs. Horton, which the Yes on 8 folks opposed, and they were denied. Then on August 19 they tried to intervene on Perry vs. Schwarzenneger (aka Prop 8 case), but Judge Walker denied their motion. They appealed to the 9th Circuit Court and appeared in a hearing earlier this month.
The Recorder reported that the panel's judges appeared unsympathetic to CCF's Attorney Staver's attempt to identify CCF's particular interest as a proposed Perry party. Staver argued "that the official Prop 8 forces weren't adequately litigating the case and had stipulated away far too many facts" about gays and lesbians.
"As an alleged result, if Prop. 8 were upheld on narrow grounds, Staver claimed that it may be easier to show that gays and lesbians are a 'suspect class' - that they are a minority deserving heightened constitutional scrutiny when they seek constitutional protections," reported Proposition 8 and the Right to Marry.
Let's just say the Yes on 8 folks didn't like this very much because they do in fact intend to argue all the points that CCF are concerned will be ignored, including whether or not sexual orientation is immutable.
Thursday, the 9th Circuit Court ruled, and it declared that CCF does not have a right to intervene. So it will simply be the Yes on 8 folks.
Judge Margaret McKeown wrote, "It is apparent to us that the ultimate objective of the campaign and the proponents is identical—defending the constitutionality of Proposition 8 and the principle that the traditional definition of marriage is the union of a man and a woman."
McKeown added, "Any differences are rooted in style and degree, not the ultimate bottom line."
The full order is below.
9th Circuit Court Ruling Against CCF
So all I have to say is that people in glass houses shouldn't throw shit.
It's ironic that these people claim the Gay Community [LGBT People] are trying to change the definition of marriage, yet they are the ones changing it to read a union between a man and a woman.
ReplyDeleteOur constitution doesn't say between a man and a woman, and I don't believe any ever have because it's an old Pagan custom of civil law representing a Union between two people for the purpose of the law that we all inherited.
Religion uses religious marriage for the purpose of having sex, and if they are not married they can not have sex [at least their not suppose to], so civil marriage, and religious marriage are to different practices. The church only adopted this custom later in the 8th century. The only reason why they documented marriages is because they ended up being the people in places that had no civil office, and prior to them adopting it people where married just by stating they were married. The church later gained political control over just about everyone through fear tactics, hate, torture and possessing lands by calling land owners heretics, and through these dark times and subsequent later generations people began to believe the lies.
The church is trying to redefine civil marriage to suit their religious views, and that has always been about control, control of the people to submit to their god, or face ridicule and torture[their invention], but this is a civil matter, not a religious one, yet they want to control it. If you ask a lot of the proponents of 8, many bring up religious views, but you won't hear that talk in court because they know they'll lose.
The only reason Gay people have not been able to marry is because of discrimination toward them, and fears of death and torture by the church, so why do people think Gay people have gone into hiding or closets today? They wish to continue that discrimination through denying us our equal rights.
All are free and subject to our laws equally, the church is not free to force their practices on the rest of us.