Tuesday, June 21, 2011

New York's House Vote on Same Sex Marriage (June 15, 2011)

A vote YES is a vote for equality in this instance:

BILL: A08354 DATE: 06/15/2011 MOTION: YEA/NAY: 080/063

Abbate NO Castell NO Galef Y Katz NO McKevit NO Rabbitt NO Stevens NO
Abinant Y Castro Y Gantt NO Kavanag Y McLaugh NO Raia NO Sweeney Y
Amedore NO Ceretto NO Gibson AB Kellner Y Meng Y Ramos Y Tedisco NO
Arroyo Y Clark NO Giglio NO Kirwan NO Mill D NO Reilich NO Tenney NO
Aubry Y Colton NO Glick Y Kolb NO Mill JM Y Reilly Y Thiele Y
Barclay NO Conte NO Goodell NO Lancman Y Mill MG NO Rive J Y Titone Y
Barron NO Cook Y Gottfri Y Latimer Y Millman Y Rive N Y Titus Y
Benedet Y Corwin NO Graf NO Lavine Y Molinar NO Rive PM Y Tobacco NO
Bing Y Crespo NO Gunther Y Lentol Y Montesa NO Roberts Y Weinste Y
Blanken NO Crouch NO Hanna NO Lifton Y Morelle Y Robinso NO Weisenb Y
Boyland Y Curran NO Hawley NO Linares Y Moya Y Rodrigu Y Weprin Y
Boyle NO Cusick Y Hayes NO Lope PD NO Murray NO Rosenth Y Wright Y
Braunst Y Cymbrow NO Heastie Y Lope VJ Y Nolan Y Russell Y Zebrows Y
Brennan Y DenDekk Y Hevesi Y Losquad NO Oaks NO Saladin NO Mr Spkr Y
Bronson Y Dinowit Y Hikind NO Lupardo Y O'Donne Y Sayward Y
Brook-K Y Duprey Y Hooper NO Magee NO Ortiz Y Scarbor AB
Burling NO Englebr Y Hoyt Y Magnare Y Palmesa NO Schimel Y
Butler NO Farrell Y Jacobs Y Maisel Y Paulin Y Schimmi NO
Cahill Y Finch NO Jaffee Y Malliot NO Peoples Y Schroed Y
Calhoun NO Fitzpat NO Jeffrie Y Markey AB Perry Y Simotas Y
Camara Y Friend NO Johns NO McDonou NO Pretlow Y Smardz NO
Canestr Y Gabrysz NO Jordan NO McEneny Y Ra NO Spano Y

Friday, June 17, 2011

What is Bigotry?

Here is the explanation given by the Southern Poverty Law Center regarding bigotry against GLBT people:

Opposition to equal rights for gays and lesbians has been a central theme of Christian Right organizing and fundraising for the past three decades – a period that parallels the fundamentalist movement's rise to political power.

For Christian Right leaders, the gay rights movement and its so-called "homosexual agenda" are the prime culprits in the destruction of American society and culture. In the words of Focus on the Family founder James Dobson, the battle against gay rights is essentially a "second civil war" to put control of the U.S. government in the right hands, meaning those who reject gay rights.

The religious right in America has employed a variety of strategies in its efforts to beat back the increasingly confident gay rights movement. One of those has been defamation. Many of its leaders have engaged in the crudest type of name-calling, describing LGBT people as "perverts" with "filthy habits" who seek to snatch the children of straight parents and "convert" them to gay sex. They have disseminated disparaging "facts" about gays that are simply untrue — assertions that are remarkably reminiscent of the way white intellectuals and scientists once wrote about the "bestial" black man and his supposedly threatening sexuality.

Tuesday, June 14, 2011

Prop 8 Judge Walker's Rulings Stand; Motion to Vacate is Denied

Here from the actual text of the decision we find some points that clarify what is at hand:

Plaintiffs in this case are same-sex couples who claim that a California constitutional provision that redefined marriage in California solely to encompass a union between one man and one woman violated their rights under the federal Constitution.

Judge Walker entered judgment for Plaintiffs and enjoined enforcement of the state constitution against them.

Defendant-Intervenors brought this Motion before the District Court to vacate the Judgment on the ground that Judge Walker was disqualified from presiding over the case because his same-sex relationship was, or reasonably appeared to be, a nonpecuniary interest that could be substantially affected by the outcome of the case.

After considering the Oppositions to the Motion and the governing law, as discussed below, the Court finds that neither recusal nor disqualification was required based on the asserted grounds. The sole fact that a federal judge shares the same circumstances or personal characteristics with other members of the general public, and that the judge could be affected by the outcome of a proceeding in the same way that other members of the general public would be affected, is not a basis for either recusal or disqualification under Section 455(b)(4). Further, under Section 455(a), it is not reasonable to presume that a judge is incapable of making an impartial decision about the constitutionality of a law, solely because, as a citizen, the judge could be affected by the proceedings. Accordingly, the Motion to Vacate Judgment on the sole ground of Judge Walker’s same-sex relationship is DENIED.

You can click on the Title above for the link to the full 21 page opinion.

Action Alert: Calling For Equality in New York

Brian Brown of National Organization for Marriage has sent out an email alert to his minions asking them to call specific legislators, even giving them the phone numbers for ease of reference. We who support marriage equality should be rallying to do the same, so let me share those numbers here and ask anyone reading this to send this information to all on their contact list:

Stephen Saland (845) 463-0840
Roy McDonald (518) 274-4616
Andrew Lanza (718) 984-4073
Greg Ball (845) 279-3773
Kemp Hannon (516) 739-1700
Charles Fuschillo (516) 882-0630
Betty Little (518) 743-0968
Dean Skelos (518) 455-3171

We can and have made a difference in the past, we only need to do our individual part. Thank you!