Same-Sex Marriage Update

SuperFemme · 06-22-2010, 10:04 PM

Proposition 8 supporters argue 18,000 same-sex marriages should not be recognized: report

The fate of California's Proposition 8, as well as 18,000 same-sex marriages, will soon be determined.

Closing arguments in the long-running trial aimed at defeating the controversial gay marriage ban will be heard today, and reports suggest supporters of Prop 8 not only want to keep the ban, but virtually erase thousands of gay marriages.

According to the San Francisco Chronicle, attorney Andrew Pugno isn't looking to "nullify" the 18,000 marriages. His clients, however, just don't want them recognized by government agencies, courts and businesses.
The trial, which challenges the constitutionality of Proposition 8, began in January. The lawsuit was filed by two couples -- two lesbians and two gay men.

The closing arguments are expected to go all day, and cameras are not being allowed in the courtroom.

Read more: http://www.nydailynews.com/news/nati...#ixzz0re4oZWVJ

Soon · 06-24-2010, 05:58 PM

Hawaiian activists are asking for your help in a snail mail campaign to convince

Gov. Linda Lingle not to veto the state's pending civil unions bill. Lingle has deluged with letters from our enemies, so let's send her some positive messages of our own.

Two suggested lines for your letter: "We are from _____ and we would sure love to have our civil union in Hawaii," and "We recently got a civil union in _____ but would much rather have had it in Hawaii."

Letters should be mailed to:
The Honorable Linda Lingle
Governor, State of Hawaii
Executive Chambers
State Capitol
Honolulu, Hawaii 96813

You'll need to send your message this week for it to arrive on time.

Soon · 06-26-2010, 07:49 AM

MsTinkerbelly · 06-30-2010, 12:41 PM

Boutrous sends letter about yesterday’s SCOTUS ruling
By Julia Rosen

Ted Boutrous sent a letter today to Judge Walker about the relevance of the Supreme Court’s decision yesterday in Christian Legal Society v. Martinez. It turns out that I was hasty yesterday to say that there was little of relevance between Perry v. Schwarzenegger and the recent decision. Karen Ocam has the letter on LGBT POV.

June 29, 2010

The Honorable Vaughn R. Walker

Chief Judge of the United States District Court

for the Northern District of California

450 Golden Gate Avenue

San Francisco, California 94102

Re: Perry v. Schwarzenegger, Case No. C-09-2292 VRW

Dear Chief Judge Walker:

I write on behalf of Plaintiffs to bring to the Court’s attention yesterday’s decision in Christian Legal Society v. Martinez, No. 08-1371 (U.S. June 28, 2010) (attached hereto as Exhibit A).

In Christian Legal Society, the Supreme Court definitively held that sexual orientation is not merely behavioral, but rather, that gay and lesbian individuals are an identifiable class. Writing for the Court, Justice Ginsburg explained: “Our decisions have declined to distinguish between status and conduct in this context.” Slip op. at 23 (citing Lawrence v. Texas, 539 U.S. 558, 575 (2003); id. at 583 (O’Connor, J., concurring in judgment); Bray v. Alexandria Women’s Health Clinic, 506 U.S. 263, 270 (1993)). This confirms that a majority of the Court now adheres to Justice O’Connor’s view in Lawrence, where she concluded that “the conduct targeted by [the Texas anti-sodomy] law is conduct that is closely correlated with being homosexual” and that, “[u]nder such circumstances, [the] law is targeted at more than conduct” and “is instead directed toward gay persons as a class,” id. at 583 (O’Connor, J., concurring in judgment) (emphasis added). See also Romer v. Evans, 517 U.S. 620 (1996) (treating gay and lesbian individuals as a class for equal protection purposes). The Court’s holding arose in response to Christian Legal Society’s argument that it was not discriminating on the basis of sexual orientation, but rather because gay and lesbian individuals refused to acknowledge that their conduct was morally wrong. The Court rejected that argument, holding that there is no distinction between gay and lesbian individuals and their conduct.

In his closing argument, counsel for Proponents claimed that High Tech Gays v. Defense Industrial Security Clearance Office, 895 F.2d 563 (9th Cir. 1990), and its dubious statement that “homosexuality is not an immutable characteristic; it is behavioral,” id. at 573, forecloses heightened scrutiny in this case. But as this Court explicitly recognized at the hearing on Proponents’ motion for summary judgment, High Tech Gays, which relied on the now-overruled Bowers v. Hardwick, 478 U.S. 186 (1986), rested on a moth-eaten foundation.

To the extent that anything is left of High Tech Gays after Lawrence, Christian Legal Society has abrogated it entirely.

Respectfully submitted,

/s/ Theodore J. Boutrous, Jr.

Theodore J. Boutrous Jr.

Counsel for Plaintiffs

TJB/eam Attachment

Boutrous is arguing that this case further buttressed several fundamental arguments they are making, that sexual orientation is immutable and that the LGBTs are a class that can be protected.

It will be interesting to see what if anything the defendants send to Judge Walker about Christian Legal Society v. Martinez

chefhmboyrd · 06-30-2010, 12:46 PM

my brother and his lover are getting married in Iowa today

SuperFemme · 06-30-2010, 12:59 PM

Supreme Court refuses to keep petitioner IDs private

By Jesse J. Holland

Associated Press

Posted: 06/24/2010 07:50:56 AM PDT
Updated: 06/24/2010 07:50:58 AM PDT

WASHINGTON— The Supreme Court says people who signed a petition to repeal Washington state's gay rights law do not have the right to keep their names secret from the public.

The high court on Thursday ruled against Protect Marriage Washington, which organized a petition drive for a public vote to repeal the state's "everything-but-marriage" gay rights law.

Petition signers wanted to hide their names because of worries of intimidation. But the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco refused to keep their names secret. The Supreme Court stepped in and temporarily blocked release of the names until the high court could make a decision.

The court now says disclosing names on a petition for a public referendum does not violate the First Amendment

Soon · 06-30-2010, 11:02 PM

Iceland's gay prime minister weds partner

Wedding comes on day new same-sex marriage law took effect

REYKJAVIK, Iceland — Icelandic Prime Minister Johanna Sigurdardottir has married her long-term partner, her office said on Monday, making her the world's first national leader with a same-sex spouse.

Sigurdardottir, 67, married writer Jonina Leosdottir on Sunday, the day a new law took effect defining marriage as a union between two consenting adults regardless of sex.

The two had had a civil union for years and changed this into a marriage under the new law, which was approved by parliament earlier this month.

The new law was celebrated at a church service on Sunday, which was also the international day for homosexual rights.

The prime minister's office said Sigurdardottir had sent a message to the gathering saying the new law was a cause for celebration for all Icelanders and adding: "I have today taken advantage of this new legislation."

The Lutheran State Church has long been split on the issue of same-sex marriage and the church congress in April did not unanimously support the new legislation. The bishop of Iceland has urged parish ministers to comply with the law.

Sigurdardottir, who has children from a previous heterosexual marriage, is the world's only openly gay prime minister but her sexuality has never been an issue in Iceland, which, like the other Nordic states, has a history of tolerance.

Copyright 2010 Reuters.

06-24-2010, 05:58 PM	#2
Soon Infamous Member How Do You Identify?: femme Relationship Status: attached Join Date: Dec 2009 Location: . Posts: 6,896 My Photo Gallery Thanks: 29,046 Thanked 13,093 Times in 3,386 Posts Rep Power: 21474859	HAWAII: How To Help Civil Unions Fight (via JMG) Hawaiian activists are asking for your help in a snail mail campaign to convince Gov. Linda Lingle not to veto the state's pending civil unions bill. Lingle has deluged with letters from our enemies, so let's send her some positive messages of our own. Two suggested lines for your letter: "We are from _____ and we would sure love to have our civil union in Hawaii," and "We recently got a civil union in _____ but would much rather have had it in Hawaii." Letters should be mailed to: The Honorable Linda Lingle Governor, State of Hawaii Executive Chambers State Capitol Honolulu, Hawaii 96813 You'll need to send your message this week for it to arrive on time.

06-30-2010, 12:41 PM	#4
MsTinkerbelly Timed Out - TOS Drama How Do You Identify?: ... Preferred Pronoun?: ... Join Date: Nov 2009 Location: ... Posts: 6,573 My Photo Gallery Thanks: 30,737 Thanked 22,895 Times in 5,017 Posts Rep Power: 0	From the Prop 8 Trial Tracker.... Boutrous sends letter about yesterday’s SCOTUS ruling By Julia Rosen Ted Boutrous sent a letter today to Judge Walker about the relevance of the Supreme Court’s decision yesterday in Christian Legal Society v. Martinez. It turns out that I was hasty yesterday to say that there was little of relevance between Perry v. Schwarzenegger and the recent decision. Karen Ocam has the letter on LGBT POV. June 29, 2010 The Honorable Vaughn R. Walker Chief Judge of the United States District Court for the Northern District of California 450 Golden Gate Avenue San Francisco, California 94102 Re: Perry v. Schwarzenegger, Case No. C-09-2292 VRW Dear Chief Judge Walker: I write on behalf of Plaintiffs to bring to the Court’s attention yesterday’s decision in Christian Legal Society v. Martinez, No. 08-1371 (U.S. June 28, 2010) (attached hereto as Exhibit A). In Christian Legal Society, the Supreme Court definitively held that sexual orientation is not merely behavioral, but rather, that gay and lesbian individuals are an identifiable class. Writing for the Court, Justice Ginsburg explained: “Our decisions have declined to distinguish between status and conduct in this context.” Slip op. at 23 (citing Lawrence v. Texas, 539 U.S. 558, 575 (2003); id. at 583 (O’Connor, J., concurring in judgment); Bray v. Alexandria Women’s Health Clinic, 506 U.S. 263, 270 (1993)). This confirms that a majority of the Court now adheres to Justice O’Connor’s view in Lawrence, where she concluded that “the conduct targeted by [the Texas anti-sodomy] law is conduct that is closely correlated with being homosexual” and that, “[u]nder such circumstances, [the] law is targeted at more than conduct” and “is instead directed toward gay persons as a class,” id. at 583 (O’Connor, J., concurring in judgment) (emphasis added). See also Romer v. Evans, 517 U.S. 620 (1996) (treating gay and lesbian individuals as a class for equal protection purposes). The Court’s holding arose in response to Christian Legal Society’s argument that it was not discriminating on the basis of sexual orientation, but rather because gay and lesbian individuals refused to acknowledge that their conduct was morally wrong. The Court rejected that argument, holding that there is no distinction between gay and lesbian individuals and their conduct. In his closing argument, counsel for Proponents claimed that High Tech Gays v. Defense Industrial Security Clearance Office, 895 F.2d 563 (9th Cir. 1990), and its dubious statement that “homosexuality is not an immutable characteristic; it is behavioral,” id. at 573, forecloses heightened scrutiny in this case. But as this Court explicitly recognized at the hearing on Proponents’ motion for summary judgment, High Tech Gays, which relied on the now-overruled Bowers v. Hardwick, 478 U.S. 186 (1986), rested on a moth-eaten foundation. To the extent that anything is left of High Tech Gays after Lawrence, Christian Legal Society has abrogated it entirely. Respectfully submitted, /s/ Theodore J. Boutrous, Jr. Theodore J. Boutrous Jr. Counsel for Plaintiffs TJB/eam Attachment Boutrous is arguing that this case further buttressed several fundamental arguments they are making, that sexual orientation is immutable and that the LGBTs are a class that can be protected. It will be interesting to see what if anything the defendants send to Judge Walker about Christian Legal Society v. Martinez

06-30-2010, 12:46 PM	#5
chefhmboyrd Senior Member How Do You Identify?: man Preferred Pronoun?: beef Relationship Status: Uncle Daddy Snap Join Date: Jun 2010 Location: nashvegas Posts: 1,607 My Photo Gallery Thanks: 2,411 Thanked 2,846 Times in 898 Posts Rep Power: 14271905	my brother and his lover are getting married in Iowa today __________________ what's a cowboy got to do to get a drink around here?

06-22-2010, 10:04 PM	#1
SuperFemme Timed Out How Do You Identify?: Permanently Banned 10/24/2010 Preferred Pronoun?: She. Relationship Status: Married (one of 18,000) Join Date: Nov 2009 Location: Atascadero, CA Posts: 4,933 My Photo Gallery Thanks: 2,309 Thanked 7,108 Times in 2,327 Posts Rep Power: 0	Proposition 8 supporters argue 18,000 same-sex marriages should not be recognized: report The fate of California's Proposition 8, as well as 18,000 same-sex marriages, will soon be determined. Closing arguments in the long-running trial aimed at defeating the controversial gay marriage ban will be heard today, and reports suggest supporters of Prop 8 not only want to keep the ban, but virtually erase thousands of gay marriages. According to the San Francisco Chronicle, attorney Andrew Pugno isn't looking to "nullify" the 18,000 marriages. His clients, however, just don't want them recognized by government agencies, courts and businesses. The trial, which challenges the constitutionality of Proposition 8, began in January. The lawsuit was filed by two couples -- two lesbians and two gay men. The closing arguments are expected to go all day, and cameras are not being allowed in the courtroom. Read more: http://www.nydailynews.com/news/nati...#ixzz0re4oZWVJ

06-26-2010, 07:49 AM	#3
Soon Infamous Member How Do You Identify?: femme Relationship Status: attached Join Date: Dec 2009 Location: . Posts: 6,896 My Photo Gallery Thanks: 29,046 Thanked 13,093 Times in 3,386 Posts Rep Power: 21474859

06-30-2010, 12:59 PM	#6
SuperFemme Timed Out How Do You Identify?: Permanently Banned 10/24/2010 Preferred Pronoun?: She. Relationship Status: Married (one of 18,000) Join Date: Nov 2009 Location: Atascadero, CA Posts: 4,933 My Photo Gallery Thanks: 2,309 Thanked 7,108 Times in 2,327 Posts Rep Power: 0	Supreme Court refuses to keep petitioner IDs private By Jesse J. Holland Associated Press Posted: 06/24/2010 07:50:56 AM PDT Updated: 06/24/2010 07:50:58 AM PDT WASHINGTON— The Supreme Court says people who signed a petition to repeal Washington state's gay rights law do not have the right to keep their names secret from the public. The high court on Thursday ruled against Protect Marriage Washington, which organized a petition drive for a public vote to repeal the state's "everything-but-marriage" gay rights law. Petition signers wanted to hide their names because of worries of intimidation. But the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco refused to keep their names secret. The Supreme Court stepped in and temporarily blocked release of the names until the high court could make a decision. The court now says disclosing names on a petition for a public referendum does not violate the First Amendment

06-30-2010, 11:02 PM	#7
Soon Infamous Member How Do You Identify?: femme Relationship Status: attached Join Date: Dec 2009 Location: . Posts: 6,896 My Photo Gallery Thanks: 29,046 Thanked 13,093 Times in 3,386 Posts Rep Power: 21474859	Iceland's gay prime minister weds partner Wedding comes on day new same-sex marriage law took effect REYKJAVIK, Iceland — Icelandic Prime Minister Johanna Sigurdardottir has married her long-term partner, her office said on Monday, making her the world's first national leader with a same-sex spouse. Sigurdardottir, 67, married writer Jonina Leosdottir on Sunday, the day a new law took effect defining marriage as a union between two consenting adults regardless of sex. The two had had a civil union for years and changed this into a marriage under the new law, which was approved by parliament earlier this month. The new law was celebrated at a church service on Sunday, which was also the international day for homosexual rights. The prime minister's office said Sigurdardottir had sent a message to the gathering saying the new law was a cause for celebration for all Icelanders and adding: "I have today taken advantage of this new legislation." The Lutheran State Church has long been split on the issue of same-sex marriage and the church congress in April did not unanimously support the new legislation. The bishop of Iceland has urged parish ministers to comply with the law. Sigurdardottir, who has children from a previous heterosexual marriage, is the world's only openly gay prime minister but her sexuality has never been an issue in Iceland, which, like the other Nordic states, has a history of tolerance. Copyright 2010 Reuters.