Prop 8 supporters move for emergency stay

posted at 11:01 am on June 30, 2013 by Jazz Shaw

And here you thought that whole Proposition 8 story was done and gone, right? It might be, but there’s apparently still a little gas left in the tank. In the wake of last week’s Supreme Court decision on California’s traditional marriage amendment, proponents have requested an emergency stay which would block gay marriages from taking place while some last bits of paperwork are wrapped up. This update comes from SCOTUSblog.

Attorneys for the parties who sought to defend Proposition 8 in federal court have filed an emergency motion in the Supreme Court seeking to block same-sex marriages from proceeding in California. The filing (via Jess Bravin) is available here.

The application was submitted to Justice Kennedy, who is the Circuit Justice with responsibility for the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. Its theory is straightforward. Same-sex marriage in California had been blocked by a stay imposed by the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals on federal judge Vaughn Walker’s ruling that Proposition 8 is unconstitutional. That stay, the court of appeals had stated, would “continue until final disposition by the Supreme Court.”

Tom Goldstein has a good layman’s explanation of what’s going on here at the link above. It does sound fairly straight forward, though what long term impact – if any – it might have is in question. On the day that the Supreme Court announces a judgement, as they did in this case on June 26th, it isn’t technically “final.” The high court generally won’t release their final, binding judgement for another 25 days after the announcement, and according to the applicants, that means that the current stay on the issuance of wedding licenses to same sex couples should remain in place until that binding judgement is on the books.

Doug Mataconis has a bit more on it, explaining how it falls into Justice Kennedy’s lap to deal with this, even though he voted against the majority in this case.

Indeed, even though Justice Kennedy was in the minority in the Hollingsworth case, he’s not going to handle this matter any differently than if it had gone to Chief Justice Roberts, who wrote the majority opinion in that case.

Each Supreme Court Justice is assigned a Judicial Circuit for which they are responsible for dealing with motions and other matters when they arise out of cases pending there, most commonly this is seen in death penalty cases but it arises in other cases as well from time to time. Since their are 9 Justices and 11 Circuits, the least senior Justice, currently Elena Kagan, is given responsibility for matters arising out of two Circuits. Justice Kennedy has had responsibility for the 9th Circuit for the balance of his time on the Court.

There seems to be some question as to whether Kennedy will even consider taking any action on this. It looks like the applicants certainly have the law on their side in terms of not lifting the ban until the ruling is official, but to what purpose? In their filing, they point out that the stay was lifted and licenses were being issued this weekend before they had ever had a chance to respond. That much is clearly true, but generally such time is needed so that the losing side can file appeals or take whatever “the next step” of the process is.

The Supreme Court has ruled on this specific request – not on Proposition 8 itself, but on the standing of the plaintiffs – and there is no further appeal for this particular line of attack. Asking Kennedy to force the state to hold off until July 22nd – the expected date of the official judgement – with no possibility of additional action the meantime, will probably just come off as being churlish at this point. If this battle is to continue it’s going to need to start over with a fresh case, or at least different plaintiffs. With that in mind, I’ll be surprised if Kennedy decides to take this question up and put another three week delay on California.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2

Read and learn: http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/tba/age-of-the-universe-1 dimwit

Foxhound on June 30, 2013 at 2:37 PM

Ummmmm….I’m not really impressed with your site.

Posting that link is a lame rebuttal of the earlier comment when you challenged another commenter who used the approximation of 40,000 years of Traditional Heterosexual Marriage Practices.

Calling me a dimwit might make you feel better because the intellectually insecure tend to do that…use ad hominem attacks.

BTW…as a Native Texan Conservative Christian I never bought into Global Warming so try again.

*blech*

workingclass artist on June 30, 2013 at 2:50 PM

>Native Texan Conservative Christian

That’s like a quadruple-word-score for “idiot”.

inklake on June 30, 2013 at 2:57 PM

workingclass artist on June 30, 2013 at 2:37 PM

I don’t believe it. Nobody would abuse “transgender rights” for the sole purpose of spying on women naked..//

melle1228 on June 30, 2013 at 2:40 PM

I know…It’s a perverts wet dream of a green light.

The Lunatics are runnin the asylum…Hide your kids & Hide your wife…

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nCXlL2MgIxA

workingclass artist on June 30, 2013 at 2:59 PM

>Native Texan Conservative Christian

That’s like a quadruple-word-score for “idiot”.

inklake on June 30, 2013 at 2:57 PM

Did I add Catholic…

So I’m a hater too.

How’s your state economy doin…inklake ?

Bite Me!

workingclass artist on June 30, 2013 at 3:01 PM

Ummmmm….I’m not really impressed with your site.

Posting that link is a lame rebuttal of the earlier comment when you challenged another commenter who used the approximation of 40,000 years of Traditional Heterosexual Marriage Practices.

Calling me a dimwit might make you feel better because the intellectually insecure tend to do that…use ad hominem attacks.

BTW…as a Native Texan Conservative Christian I never bought into Global Warming so try again.

*blech*

workingclass artist on June 30, 2013 at 2:50 PM

Rebut it then genius

Foxhound on June 30, 2013 at 3:09 PM

“Polygamy – another love that now dares speak its name again…

Long ago, and far away, we predicted that once the legal standard for equal protection of the law as to marriage became ”love” and consenting adults, without regard to gender, there would be no rational basis upon which to limit the number to two:

* The Gay Marriage Slippery Slope Is Back
* On what rational basis does NY State now deny polyamorous clusters the right to marry?
* Polyamory – at least be honest about it

That is the argument put forth by Prof. Martha Nussbaum, “Polygamy would have to be permitted”: (video at link)

Now, via BuzzFeed, Polygamists are emboldened to speak of their love and demand legal rights in the wake of the Supreme Court’s DOMA decision, Polygamists Celebrate Supreme Court’s Marriage Rulings…

Preventing loving adults from marrying is the new evil in the modern world, as Justice Scalia recited in his Dissent in the DOMA case:

By formally declaring anyone opposed to same-sex marriage an enemy of human decency, the majority arms well every challenger to a state law restricting marriage to its traditional definition. Henceforth those challengers will lead with this Court’s declaration that there is “no legitimate purpose” served by such a law, and will claim that the traditional definition has “the purpose and effect to disparage and to injure” the “personhood and dignity” of same-sex couples. The majority’s limiting assurance will be meaningless in the face of language like that, as the majority well knows. That is why the language is there. The result will be a judicial distortion of our society’s debate over marriage—a debate that can seem in need of our clumsy “help” only to a member of this institution.

Why do we hate loving adults just because they want to live and marry as a threesome?

On what rational basis do we pick the arbitrary number Two when other (allegedly) arbitrary distinctions have been declared the enemy of decency? Polygamy has a historical and social acceptance in many cultures which far surpasses gay marriage, a very recent phenomenon.

Why should the children of polygamous relationships have to live in shame and be subjected to discrimination, to paraphrase Justice Kennedy?…” – Prof Jacobson

http://legalinsurrection.com/2013/06/polygamy-another-love-that-now-dares-speak-its-name-again/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+LegalInsurrection+%28Le%C2%B7gal+In%C2%B7sur%C2%B7rec%C2%B7tion%29&utm_content=Google+Reader

Why not overthrow incest laws as well…Two consenting adults and all that…

workingclass artist on June 30, 2013 at 3:11 PM

In a collusion of government corruption, the Democrat leaders in California politics and the majority of lawless pimps on the Supreme Court have disenfranchised the People of California and thwarted their will.

Judicial-political Tyranny, ho!

profitsbeard on June 30, 2013 at 3:13 PM

That’s like a quadruple-word-score for “idiot”.

inklake on June 30, 2013 at 2:57 PM

Loser says what?

CW on June 30, 2013 at 3:14 PM

…bestiality is next…

KOOLAID2 on June 30, 2013 at 3:16 PM

Rebut it then genius

Foxhound on June 30, 2013 at 3:09 PM

I did Bucco matula!…Upthread.

You came up with a site touting your religion.

My religion uses Reason and states God’s Time isn’t the same as Man’s Time.

Believe whatever you want but your insults used to support your zealotry only reveal your limitations and obvious inability to debate intelligently…

You’re not even mildly entertaining.

workingclass artist on June 30, 2013 at 3:22 PM

In a collusion of government corruption, the Democrat leaders in California politics and the majority of lawless pimps on the Supreme Court have disenfranchised the People of California and thwarted their will.

Judicial-political Tyranny, ho!

profitsbeard on June 30, 2013 at 3:13 PM

Yeah.

The written decisions are quite revealing as to both of these cases aren’t they?

workingclass artist on June 30, 2013 at 3:25 PM

I did Bucco matula!…Upthread.

You came up with a site touting your religion.

My religion uses Reason and states God’s Time isn’t the same as Man’s Time.

Believe whatever you want but your insults used to support your zealotry only reveal your limitations and obvious inability to debate intelligently…

You’re not even mildly entertaining.

workingclass artist on June 30, 2013 at 3:22 PM

You’re the toy :D

Foxhound on June 30, 2013 at 3:34 PM

Whats wrong with polygamy if it is consensual?

libfreeordie on June 30, 2013 at 3:44 PM

Foxhound on June 30, 2013 at 3:34 PM

*shrug*

workingclass artist on June 30, 2013 at 3:44 PM

Ownership of slaves was invented by humans as well.

sentinelrules on June 30, 2013 at 1:48 PM

And that changed….

libfreeordie on June 30, 2013 at 3:45 PM

Whats wrong with polygamy if it is consensual?

libfreeordie on June 30, 2013 at 3:44 PM

What’s wrong with incest if it’s consensual?

workingclass artist on June 30, 2013 at 3:45 PM

State marriage was invented by humans. Thus, humans can change what it means.

libfreeordie on June 30, 2013 at 1:36 PM

.
Marriage was ordained (“invented”, to you) by the living God … period.

The fact that government chose to give formal recognition to it, doesn’t constitute an invention or creration.
.

Life goes on.

libfreeordie on June 30, 2013 at 1:36 PM

.
Defiance and/or rejection of the living God means life does NOT go on.

listens2glenn on June 30, 2013 at 3:54 PM

listens2glenn on June 30, 2013 at 3:54 PM

.
( s i g h ) … “creration” = creation.

listens2glenn on June 30, 2013 at 3:57 PM

libfreeordie on June 30, 2013 at 3:44 PM

So did you wash the feces off your pecker yet?
Deviant.

CW on June 30, 2013 at 4:00 PM

The fact that government chose to give formal recognition to it, doesn’t constitute an invention or creration.

Before the federal government wrote regulations concerning marraige, those regulations did not exist. Before state government wrote laws surrounding marriage, those laws did not exist. Therefore, state marriage laws were created by humans and humans can alter them at will.

libfreeordie on June 30, 2013 at 4:00 PM

humans can alter them at will.

libfreeordie on June 30, 2013 at 4:00 PM

And the California voters did.

You’re a pervert.

CW on June 30, 2013 at 4:03 PM

Libfree you do realize your lifestyle goes against humanity. With each act of perversion you lower yourself. You’re gross and disgusting….add to that you support adults having sex with minors and you really are just a nasty excuse for a human. GROSS.

CW on June 30, 2013 at 4:04 PM

The fact that government chose to give formal recognition to it, doesn’t constitute an invention or creration.

listens2glenn on June 30, 2013 at 3:54 PM

.
Before the federal government wrote regulations concerning marraige, those regulations did not exist. Before state government wrote laws surrounding marriage, those laws did not exist. Therefore, state marriage laws were created by humans and humans can alter them at will.

libfreeordie on June 30, 2013 at 4:00 PM

.
Government regulation of a pre-existing ordination doesn’t give government the authority to redefine what it is or means.

Repeating; “Defiance and/or rejection of the living God means life does NOT go on.”

listens2glenn on June 30, 2013 at 4:07 PM

that you are gay will get you killed, beaten up, imprisoned or tortured.

thuja on June 30, 2013 at 1:15 PM

If that happens to you constantly I’d look for another excuse.

viking01 on June 30, 2013 at 1:22 PM

There is a point where taking half of a sentence out of context of the rest of the sentence is out and out lying. I would argue that you way over that point.
Seriously, if are going to bother to respond to me, please at least respond to something I actually said rather just making stuff up.

thuja on June 30, 2013 at 4:25 PM

The treatment of gays under Christian culture was a crime against humanity. In the process of moving away from that evil, we have decided marriage now includes gays. Perhaps this will start a conversation about polygamy, and perhaps it won’t. Perhaps we will decide that legal recognition of polygamy is a good idea. If so, it will be because the democratic conversation lead us to that point. I don’t think it will. But if it does, it will probably be because we are wrong now about polygamy.

thuja on June 30, 2013 at 4:30 PM

Roberts was said to be concerned about the legitimacy of SCOTUS and so cast the deciding vote for Obamacare. Unfortunately, with decisions created from whole cloth, such as Roe Vs Wade, Obamacare, Lawrence, and now the two marriage decisions, SCOTUS has rendered itself utterly illegitimate.

Just 9 costumed shysters drawing a FedGov paycheck.

Quartermaster on June 30, 2013 at 4:34 PM

Maybe I’m a bit slow on this, but did the people who filed the law suit with the 9th Circuit have “standing”? Seems they had no more “standing” than those who sought to defend Prop &.

Tater Salad on June 30, 2013 at 4:41 PM

thuja on June 30, 2013 at 4:30 PM

Hate to burst your bubble but Gays weren’t treated very well by Pagans…Marxists or Fascists.

In ancient Pagan Societies Avowed Homosexuals were nominally tolerated as long as they didn’t cause trouble and instability within the Heterosexual Society. As soon as any of them did that they were usually killed…Rome went through their own culture wars long before Christians showed up.

Following the Marxist Revolutions there was a puritanical crackdown on decadents…Many of these Homosexuals.

After Hitler gained power…He kept preferred Homosexuals in the Gestapo…but rounded up the others and put them in camps. Of course Hitler’s doctors swore in affadavits that Adolf was Homosexual so I guess he betrayed his own…

workingclass artist on June 30, 2013 at 4:46 PM

The treatment of gays under Christian culture was a crime against humanity.

thuja on June 30, 2013 at 4:30 PM

Thank you for making it so obvious that you are an anti-Christian bigot.

And that is why you ran away when I pointed out examples of how you support bigotry and hate being taught in schools, and how you and your fellow promiscuous bigots consider monogamy and fidelity to be lethal.

You know what was a crime against humanity? You and your fellow promiscuous idiots screaming and ranting in the streets about how you should be allowed to have bareback sex without consequences, then screaming and ranting that society pay your billions of dollars in medical bills. You killed hundreds of thousands of people because you wouldn’t control yourself or act like responsible adults, and now you sit here and scream and rant and cry about how everything was “Christians’ fault”.

“Gay rights” is just an excuse for you to be a filthy bigot. That’s all it is. No one here believes that you are anything other than that. And worse, you’re a bully, because everyone here sees you and your LGBT community cower before the Muslims who, UNLIKE Christians, have no qualms about punching back twice as hard against your hate and violence.

northdallasthirty on June 30, 2013 at 4:48 PM

The treatment of gays under Christian culture was a crime against humanity. In the process of moving away from that evil, we have decided marriage now includes gays. Perhaps this will start a conversation about polygamy, and perhaps it won’t. Perhaps we will decide that legal recognition of polygamy is a good idea. If so, it will be because the democratic conversation lead us to that point. I don’t think it will. But if it does, it will probably be because we are wrong now about polygamy.

thuja on June 30, 2013 at 4:30 PM

The conversations have already started about lawsuits. And you realize that Christianity wasn’t the ONLY culture that was “against” homosexuality. Generally groups that circumvent the moral norm or the norm in general are not viewed sympathetic by ANY society..

melle1228 on June 30, 2013 at 4:52 PM

The conversations have already started about lawsuits.

*about polygamy…

melle1228 on June 30, 2013 at 4:52 PM

So now we have complete stranger perverts who humor themselves the power of Kings and Queens trumping American voters? Not gonna happen. You can parse this statement anyway you’d like politicos, left wing, right wing judges, et al. I’d suggest those that think this the new normal and that would include the honorable Peter Puffer Kennedy to get it out of your minds right now that you have been somehow gifted the status of more import and that above the American voter. Again, not gonna happen and if it continues IMO a whole bunch of LIV’s are gonna get hurt which is precisely why we, The People, WILL be streamlining our government very soon, no? Indeed, you truly have no clue.

Tangerinesong on June 30, 2013 at 4:58 PM

So did you wash the feces off your pecker yet?
Deviant.

CW on June 30, 2013 at 4:00 PM

You are really desperate for me to pay attention to you aren’t you? Because you are doing the absolute most.

libfreeordie on June 30, 2013 at 5:25 PM

The treatment of gays under Christian culture was a crime against humanity.

thuja on June 30, 2013 at 4:30 PM

Thank you for making it so obvious that you are an anti-Christian bigot.

And that is why you ran away when I pointed out examples of how you support bigotry and hate being taught in schools, and how you and your fellow promiscuous bigots consider monogamy and fidelity to be lethal.

You know what was a crime against humanity? You and your fellow promiscuous idiots screaming and ranting in the streets about how you should be allowed to have bareback sex without consequences, then screaming and ranting that society pay your billions of dollars in medical bills. You killed hundreds of thousands of people because you wouldn’t control yourself or act like responsible adults, and now you sit here and scream and rant and cry about how everything was “Christians’ fault”.

“Gay rights” is just an excuse for you to be a filthy bigot. That’s all it is. No one here believes that you are anything other than that. And worse, you’re a bully, because everyone here sees you and your LGBT community cower before the Muslims who, UNLIKE Christians, have no qualms about punching back twice as hard against your hate and violence.

northdallasthirty on June 30, 2013 at 4:48 PM

That the Christian of gays was a crime against humanity is not a display of anti-Christian bigotry. It’s a simple, inarguable fact. Christianity had decided, for reasons clearly not rooted in the Bible, that homosexuals were moral filth and not worthy of decent treatment. The idea that homosexuality was the worst sin was a widespread idea. If your gay sexuality were someway to become public knowledge, you would be murdered or tortured by the state. Men were taught that it was alright to murder or torture gays on their own. When missionaries came to North America, they would usually be more concerned about the stopping homosexuality in the villages than would be about stopping the heinous torture of people captured in war. And let’s not forget it was the Inquisitor Priest of the Catholic Church whose burning of gay people using faggots of wood is how the word faggot come to be applied to gay men.

I’m not here to condemn Christianity. I would seem to me that the right response by Christians to a historical evil of Christianity is to correct it as some Christians are doing, rather than to prolong the spirit of the crime as much as possible.

I want to congratulate you for your notion that gay rights is a excuse to be bigot. It’s so perverse as to be interesting.

thuja on June 30, 2013 at 5:26 PM

thuja on June 30, 2013 at 4:30 PM

Hate to burst your bubble but Gays weren’t treated very well by Pagans…Marxists or Fascists.

In ancient Pagan Societies Avowed Homosexuals were nominally tolerated as long as they didn’t cause trouble and instability within the Heterosexual Society. As soon as any of them did that they were usually killed…Rome went through their own culture wars long before Christians showed up.

workingclass artist on June 30, 2013 at 4:46 PM

Gays were treated well by some pagan societies and not so well in others. Certainly, gays are treated better right now than every before. We have completely won the moral argument in Western culture and much non-Western culture. Hindus and Buddhists are in the process of becoming gay accepting.

And I don’t see any way back to the old evils. How can you get gays to go back in the closet when you can’t kill and torture them? How could you get society to think killing and torturing gays is a good idea when so many people have come out as gay that almost everyone knows they have a gay friend or relative?

thuja on June 30, 2013 at 5:31 PM

That the Christian of gays was a crime against humanity is not a display of anti-Christian bigotry. It’s a simple, inarguable fact. Christianity had decided, for reasons clearly not rooted in the Bible, that homosexuals were moral filth and not worthy of decent treatment. The idea that homosexuality was the worst sin was a widespread idea. If your gay sexuality were someway to become public knowledge, you would be murdered or tortured by the state. Men were taught that it was alright to murder or torture gays on their own. When missionaries came to North America, they would usually be more concerned about the stopping homosexuality in the villages than would be about stopping the heinous torture of people captured in war. And let’s not forget it was the Inquisitor Priest of the Catholic Church whose burning of gay people using faggots of wood is how the word faggot come to be applied to gay men.

thuja on June 30, 2013 at 5:26 PM

Oh, so you want to play “historical sins”?

Try this on for size, then
.

NAMBLA has been a member of the International Lesbian and Gay
Association for 10 years. We’ve been continuously active in ILGA longer than any other US organization. NAMBLA delegates to ILGA helped write ILGA’s constitution, its official positions on the sexual rights of youth, and its stands against sexual coercion and corporal punishment. We are proud of our contributions in making ILGA a stronger voice for the international gay and lesbian movement and for sexual justice.

But it gets MUCH better.

ILGA’s current positions on man/boy love and pedophilia are
explicit:

– In 1985, ILGA adopted a position on “Age of Consent/Paedophilia/Children’s Rights” that urged member organizations to “lobby their governments to abolish the age of consent law” so long as there is “adequate protection for youth from being sexually abused without the age of consent law.”

– In 1986, ILGA adopted a position that says the group “supports
the right of young people to sexual and social self-determination.”

– In 1988, ILGA declared “this conference recognizes that existing
same-sex age-of-consent laws often operate to oppress and not to
protect; that in many countries, existing laws on sexual coercion
and rules of evidence also often operate to oppress and not to protect; that therefore member organizations are urged to consider
how best children, adolescents, and people of all ages can be
empowered and supported against both sexual coercion and sexual oppression and to work towards that end.”

– In 1990, ILGA “calls on all members to treat all sexual minorities with respect and to engage in constructive dialogue
with them. In another position adopted that year, ILGA declared
that it “supports the right of every individual, regardless of age, to explore and develop her or his sexuality.”

So let’s see, while you’re ranting about the Inquisition from over half a millenium ago, I can show how the leadership of the gay and lesbian community was openly advocating for the sexual exploitation of minors.

Noew, let’s see you piety dance, thuja. You want to play “All Christians are to blame”, you can follow the same rules.

Of course you won’t. You’ll start bleating and screaming and crying about how you can’t be held responsible for other peoples’ behaviors, etc. etc.

And you’ll be exposed as a hypocrite and a bigot.

And that’s all you are, thuja, a filthy bigot.

northdallasthirty on June 30, 2013 at 5:40 PM

We have completely won the moral argument in Western culture and much non-Western culture.

You haven’t won a “moral” argument. Especially when the deck is stacked. You have won tolerance not acceptance. What people say in public is not what they say in private, and I would venture to guess that 9 times out of 10 (with the exception of Snookie) most people would not care to have a gay child…

. And I don’t see any way back to the old evils. How can you get gays to go back in the closet when you can’t kill and torture them? How could you get society to think killing and torturing gays is a good idea when so many people have come out as gay that almost everyone knows they have a gay friend or relative?

thuja on June 30, 2013 at 5:31 PM

Drama queen fits you.. You know that. Not wanting the state to recogize every alternate sexual relationship under the sun is not the equivalent of wanting gays to go back in the closet or torture or kill them. Your here, your qu33R— we got that in the 80′s..

melle1228 on June 30, 2013 at 5:43 PM

That the Christian of gays was a crime against humanity is not a display of anti-Christian bigotry. It’s a simple, inarguable fact. Christianity had decided, for reasons clearly not rooted in the Bible, that homosexuals were moral filth and not worthy of decent treatment. The idea that homosexuality was the worst sin was a widespread idea. If your gay sexuality were someway to become public knowledge, you would be murdered or tortured by the state. Men were taught that it was alright to murder or torture gays on their own. When missionaries came to North America, they would usually be more concerned about the stopping homosexuality in the villages than would be about stopping the heinous torture of people captured in war. And let’s not forget it was the Inquisitor Priest of the Catholic Church whose burning of gay people using faggots of wood is how the word faggot come to be applied to gay men.

thuja on June 30, 2013 at 5:26 PM

And in fact, let’s play a second round of historical sins.

Such as this one:

One longtime veteran of gay politics, Frank Kameny, said he would “advise fellow gays to lie” if the local blood bank officials proceeded with screening.

In New York, the National Gay Task Force rounded up virtually every gay leader in Manhattan to stand on the steps of teh New york Blood Center for a press conference denouncing efforts to screen donors. As he scanned the group, Michael Callen, a leader in the newly formed New York chapter of People With AIDS, relished the irony of the press conference. He knew that virtually every gay man there had had hepatitis B and that most had engaged in the kind of sexual activites that put them at high risk for AIDS. Not one of them could in good conscience donate blood, Callen thought, and here they were, exuding self-righteous indignation at the thought that someone would suggest they did not have the right to make such donations.

pp 238 – 239, And the Band Played On

And of course, on page 222, you find out why this was an issue:

Dr. Bruce Evatt of the CDC tried to reassert the data about hemophiliacs. AIDS simply did not happen among these people before 1982. In only the past year, however, 6 of just 100 hemophiliacs in Ohio were dead of AIDS, and 3 more were sufering from severe blood problems associated with the syndrome. Nearly 10 percent already were sick with something having to do with AIDS, Evatt said. What kind of proof did the blood banks need?

So in short, thousands, perhaps hundreds of thousands, of hemophiliacs, people who had surgery, and people who for whatever reason needed blood were infected with HIV and died of AIDS because gay and lesbian leaders openly advocated practicing dangerous behavior, then lying about it to get contaminated blood into the blood supply.

I want a piety dance, thuja. What sort of sick and deluded community would openly support POISONING the blood supply? You and your fellow gay bigots set out to get other people sick with a lethal disease, and you have the unmitigated gall to come here and shriek about “crimes against humanity”?

What a disgusting bigot and pig you are.

northdallasthirty on June 30, 2013 at 5:47 PM

Northdallasthirty since you are gay, I hold you and your ilk responsible for all horrible deeds by all homosexuals in the past. Especially the spread the of AIDS and the destruction of heterosexual marriage. And, please just get back in the closet and understand that you are moral, sexual deviant.

SC.Charlie on June 30, 2013 at 6:39 PM

,,,,,,,,,immoral, sexual deviant.

SC.Charlie on June 30, 2013 at 6:40 PM

Northdallasthirty since you are gay, I hold you and your ilk responsible for all horrible deeds by all homosexuals in the past. Especially the spread the of AIDS and the destruction of heterosexual marriage. And, please just get back in the closet and understand that you are moral, sexual deviant.

SC.Charlie on June 30, 2013 at 6:39 PM

At least you’re being consistent toward gays in the same fashion you are toward Christians. Can’t argue with that.

northdallasthirty on June 30, 2013 at 6:41 PM

Gays were treated well by some pagan societies and not so well in others.

thuja on June 30, 2013 at 5:31 PM

Not really.

Gay identity is a modern construct.

In ancient societies there were homosexual acts.

It was the cultural responsibility of every individual whatever their station to breed and perpetuate the population. It was the responsibility to perpetuate the family line.

Anyone who refused to do this was considered unstable and a shame to their ancestors…The only exceptions were those provided for either prostitution in brothels (For males this usually ended in adulthood) the roles of some temple avocations like Vestal Virgins or in some specialized social function like the case of eunuchs.

The essence of modern Gay Identity is to refuse this stable cultural obligation of marriage and breeding out right. Until the 1980′s most Homosexuals seemed to be content to live their lives privately.

In fact The New Guard of Modern Homosexual Activists seek to overturn the stability of cultural norms in order to justify their agenda.

To do this these New Guard of Homosexual activists overturn and warp definitions of Marriage.

These New Guard of Homosexual activists seek to overturn cultural norms of Motherhood and Fatherhood.

These New Guard of Homosexual activists seek to overturn cultural norms of gender identification, gender relations and gender balance.

The New Guard of Homosexual Activists will never be satisfied until every moral critic is silenced and all opposition to their agenda is
is crushed.

The New Guard of Homosexual Activists are so aggressive they turn on their own and vehemently attack any Homosexual who doesn’t jive with their fascistic agenda as being Not Gay enough …similar to other minority groups attacking conservatives within their own groups who don’t jive with the agenda.

workingclass artist on June 30, 2013 at 7:37 PM

At least you’re being consistent toward gays in the same fashion you are toward Christians. Can’t argue with that.

northdallasthirty on June 30, 2013 at 6:41 PM

Consistently stupid, perhaps.

The Gospel isn’t an infectious disease that kills anyone who gets it. AIDS is. Funny how there’s all those warnings AGAINST the lifestyles that are far more likely to spread such things…oh wait, that would be ‘restricting freedom’.

Funny how the enlightened modern progressives, in whatever age they crop up in, never seem to learn from the last batch who glibly climbed over the fence into ‘freedom’…and promptly became lunch for the monsters lurking past the fence.

MelonCollie on June 30, 2013 at 7:45 PM

Northdallasthirty, sadly neither Christianity nor the Gay Rights Movement have histories of divine perfection.

SC.Charlie on June 30, 2013 at 7:52 PM

And let’s not forget it was the Inquisitor Priest of the Catholic Church whose burning of gay people using faggots of wood is how the word faggot come to be applied to gay men.

I’m not here to condemn Christianity. I would seem to me that the right response by Christians to a historical evil of Christianity is to correct it as some Christians are doing, rather than to prolong the spirit of the crime as much as possible.

I want to congratulate you for your notion that gay rights is a excuse to be bigot. It’s so perverse as to be interesting.

thuja on June 30, 2013 at 5:26 PM

Where on earth did you read that.

Torquemada was a bastard…but he killed more Crypto-Jews and Arabs then Gays…Hernando del Pulgar, Queen Isabella’s secretary, wrote that 2,000 executions took place throughout the entirety of her reign, which extended well beyond Torquemada’s death.

The Muslims invaded Spain and dominated it regionally for almost 800 years…or didn’t you know that?

The Spanish Inquisition happened at the end of the Reconquista of Spain from The Moors and was primarily a means for The Royals (Ferdinand & Isabella) to stabilize their unified Spain. This happened before before the reformation.

workingclass artist on June 30, 2013 at 7:57 PM

Gay identity is a modern construct.

In ancient societies there were homosexual acts.

It was the cultural responsibility of every individual whatever their station to breed and perpetuate the population. It was the responsibility to perpetuate the family line.

Anyone who refused to do this was considered unstable and a shame to their ancestors…The only exceptions were those provided for either prostitution in brothels (For males this usually ended in adulthood) the roles of some temple avocations like Vestal Virgins or in some specialized social function like the case of eunuchs.

The essence of modern Gay Identity is to refuse this stable cultural obligation of marriage and breeding out right. Until the 1980′s most Homosexuals seemed to be content to live their lives privately.

It’s interesting that you parrot the views of a homosexual pervert (and I do mean he was a pervert), Michel Foucault, about whether people had a notion of gay identity. My reading of ancient Greek and Roman texts is that Foucault was wrong and that were words that indicated effiminate gay men. At least, you should be that your leftist social science profs could be wrong once again.

Until the 1980′s gays were content just not to be killed or tortured due to traditional marriage values. There is no way we are going back to that situation. And there is no way we will rest until there is gay marriage in Saudi Arabia.

thuja on June 30, 2013 at 8:13 PM

And I don’t see any way back to the old evils. How can you get gays to go back in the closet when you can’t kill and torture them? How could you get society to think killing and torturing gays is a good idea when so many people have come out as gay that almost everyone knows they have a gay friend or relative?

thuja on June 30, 2013 at 5:31 PM

See this is part of the problemo…an insistent perpetuating adolescence with almost objective knowledge of history or human nature beyond an agenda.

I could care less about closets or whatever.

History has shown that whenever any minority pushes too far at the cultural fabric in a way that promotes the destruction of that culture…it will not be tolerated. Their victory is always a Pyrrhic one…and relatively short lived at that.

That is the way it’s always been because this is indicative of human nature on the whole and despite your fantasies Homosexuals are a distinct demographic minority.

Your greater enemy historically are modern Atheists who have shown no moral restraint or cultural guilt when crushing their enemies for whatever reason.

workingclass artist on June 30, 2013 at 8:15 PM

It’s interesting that you parrot the views of a homosexual pervert (and I do mean he was a pervert), Michel Foucault, about whether people had a notion of gay identity. My reading of ancient Greek and Roman texts is that Foucault was wrong and that were words that indicated effiminate gay men. At least, you should be that your leftist social science profs could be wrong once again.

Until the 1980′s gays were content just not to be killed or tortured due to traditional marriage values. There is no way we are going back to that situation. And there is no way we will rest until there is gay marriage in Saudi Arabia.

thuja on June 30, 2013 at 8:13 PM

By all means…take your crowd and campaign in Saudi Arabia and every Muslim country you can.

Don’t forget to focus on the Pashtun region…Baachi Boyz and their pimps have Pederasty rights y’know.

workingclass artist on June 30, 2013 at 8:19 PM

And there is no way we will rest until there is gay marriage in Saudi Arabia.

thuja on June 30, 2013 at 8:13 PM

How about flying to Riyadh to make that clear to the Saudi authorities? I’ll pay your airfare.

spiritof61 on June 30, 2013 at 8:27 PM

The irony of course is that under Our Future Muslim Overlords dear little thuja will be taken outside and given one, and only one, opportunity to affirm that there is no god but Allah and Muhammad is His Messenger. After his response, he will never raise the topic of gay marriage again.

spiritof61 on June 30, 2013 at 8:32 PM

History has shown that whenever any minority pushes too far at the cultural fabric in a way that promotes the destruction of that culture…it will not be tolerated. Their victory is always a Pyrrhic one…and relatively short lived at that. – workingclass artist on June 30, 2013 at 8:19 PM

Historically, Christianity was a minority. They won over the Roman Empire and the Roman Empire eventually fell.

SC.Charlie on June 30, 2013 at 8:52 PM

The irony of course is that under Our Future Muslim Overlords dear little thuja will be taken outside and given one, and only one, opportunity to affirm that there is no god but Allah and Muhammad is His Messenger. After his response, he will never raise the topic of gay marriage again.

spiritof61 on June 30, 2013 at 8:32 PM

I have great confidence that traditional Islam will not be the global victor.
It’s also worthwhile to point out that Islam has been nearly as homophobic as Christianity. In Islamic countries, gay subcultures have often gone unmolested.
The only time in my life that I have gone to a mosque, it was to ogle men. In the Grande Mosquée de Paris, there is a Turkish bath, and undoubtedly a third or more of the men who go there are gay. I notice it hasn’t been closed.
And if you check out the demands of the protesters in Turkey, you will find gay rights among them.
Finally, I would like to mention my last experience with Saudi nationals. It was two western dressed young women. I was helping them learn to slackline, which meant I was touching them. I asked them when they thought gay marriage would come to Saudi Arabia. They said that they didn’t know, but that they hoped it would be soon.

thuja on June 30, 2013 at 9:03 PM

It’s also worthwhile to point out that Islam has been nearly as homophobic as Christianity. In Islamic countries, gay subcultures have often gone unmolested.

I meant:

It’s also worthwhile to point out that Islam has not been nearly as homophobic as Christianity. In Islamic countries, gay subcultures have often gone unmolested.

thuja on June 30, 2013 at 9:04 PM

History has shown that whenever any minority pushes too far at the cultural fabric in a way that promotes the destruction of that culture…it will not be tolerated. Their victory is always a Pyrrhic one…and relatively short lived at that. – workingclass artist on June 30, 2013 at 8:19 PM

Historically, Christianity was a minority. They won over the Roman Empire and the Roman Empire eventually fell.

SC.Charlie on June 30, 2013 at 8:52 PM

Christianity didn’t try to destroy the social fabric…But persuade the culture to improve and they did this by preaching and living the Gospel (Charitable Works)

Christianity offered solutions and answers that work…and it still does…imho

The truth is like a lion. You don’t have to defend it. Let it loose. It will defend itself. ~ St. Augustine

workingclass artist on June 30, 2013 at 9:14 PM

It is past 9PM and we are at the mental hospital. Everyone, should have already had their meds and tucked in……………….at 6AM everyone gets up and takes their meds and lines up to go to the cafeteria.

SC.Charlie on June 30, 2013 at 9:14 PM

In Islamic countries, gay subcultures have often gone unmolested.
thuja on June 30, 2013 at 9:03 PM

Achmedinnerjacket castrates them and turns them into ugly as sin psuedo-womyn.

So there’s Muslim tolerance for ya.

I hope you’re very happy over there with Muslims as you campaign for Gay Marriage…you can ogle men in Mosques all day long…The Prayer position makes that easy.

workingclass artist on June 30, 2013 at 9:19 PM

In Islamic countries, gay subcultures have often gone unmolested.
thuja on June 30, 2013 at 9:03 PM

Achmedinnerjacket castrates them and turns them into ugly as sin psuedo-womyn.

So there’s Muslim tolerance for ya.

I say “often”, and you point out a counterexample, as if I didn’t know about counterexamples. And even your counterexample is still much more kind than the traditional Christian approaches of murder and torture.

Look, I think we need to take the threat of Islam seriously. I like the jihadwatch.org website. I don’t think your whiny approach helps.

thuja on June 30, 2013 at 9:40 PM

I say “often”, and you point out a counterexample, as if I didn’t know about counterexamples. And even your counterexample is still much more kind than the traditional Christian approaches of murder and torture.

Look, I think we need to take the threat of Islam seriously. I like the jihadwatch.org website. I don’t think your whiny approach helps.

thuja on June 30, 2013 at 9:40 PM

You hate Christians.

You also like to go to Mosques to ogle men.

You also like to spout historical absurdities so it fits your social-nihilist agenda.

You make a fool of yourself…But maybe you’re a masochist.

*shrug*

*shrug*

workingclass artist on June 30, 2013 at 10:08 PM

Northdallasthirty, sadly neither Christianity nor the Gay Rights Movement have histories of divine perfection.

SC.Charlie on June 30, 2013 at 7:52 PM

Right, because the Stonewall riots is comparable to the Crucifixion.

sentinelrules on June 30, 2013 at 10:13 PM

It’s interesting that you parrot the views of a homosexual pervert (and I do mean he was a pervert), Michel Foucault, about whether people had a notion of gay identity.

oop! Read for points!

libfreeordie on June 30, 2013 at 10:14 PM

Unintended consequences…

“LOS ANGELES (AP) — The adult film industry is citing a U.S. Supreme Court ruling on gay marriage in an effort to muzzle its main opponent in the legal battle to keep condoms off of its actors.

Porn industry attorneys filed a motion Wednesday in U.S. District Court asking that the AIDS Healthcare Foundation be removed from the industry’s legal battle to repeal the condom requirement that Los Angeles County voters approved last year.

Shortly before the motion was filed, the Supreme Court ruled that a group that had campaigned successfully for Proposition 8, the voter-approved measure banning gay marriage in California, had no legal standing when it came to appealing lower court rulings overturning the law.

“Because we find that petitioners do not have standing, we have no authority to decide this case,” the high court declared.

Porn industry officials are hoping U.S. District Court Judge Dean Pregerson will reach a similar conclusion following a July 11 hearing on Measure B, the condom law. It was the AIDS Healthcare Foundation that successfully lobbied Los Angeles County voters to adopt it.

In ruling on gay marriage, the Supreme Court said a private group has never been granted the standing to defend a state law in court when local officials decline to do so.

“I think that the ruling parallels what is happening in our case,” said Steven Hirsch, chief executive officer of Vivid Entertainment Group, the industry’s lead plaintiff in the case. “AHF, they really do have no role in the enforcement of Measure B. They have no authority to enforce Measure B. They have no stake in defending its enforcement and as a result they should have no standing.”

Foundation attorney Samantha Azulay did not immediately return a call for comment.

Porn industry officials also plan to ask next month that Pregerson issue a preliminary injunction against the measure’s enforcement until their case is decided.

The lawsuit argues that the law requiring the use of condoms as a health and safety measure is an unconstitutional violation of free expression.

Since the law’s adoption, Los Angeles County health officials have confirmed they are investigating at least one alleged violation…”

http://losangeles.cbslocal.com/2013/06/28/porn-industry-connects-gay-marriage-to-condom-law/

workingclass artist on June 30, 2013 at 10:15 PM

Until the 1980′s gays were content just not to be killed or tortured due to traditional marriage values. There is no way we are going back to that situation. And there is no way we will rest until there is gay marriage in Saudi Arabia.

thuja on June 30, 2013 at 8:13 PM

Yup, all those thousands of homosexuals being killed and tortured during the 1970′s.

Instead of promoting homosexual marriage, how about doing more in preventing homosexuals from entering the Catholic Church to molest boys?

sentinelrules on June 30, 2013 at 10:15 PM

You hate Christians.

You also like to go to Mosques to ogle men.

You also like to spout historical absurdities so it fits your social-nihilist agenda.

You make a fool of yourself…But maybe you’re a masochist.

*shrug*

*shrug*

workingclass artist on June 30, 2013 at 10:08 PM

Your arguments have become rather cheap and untrue accusations (except for the ogling part). Maybe you are no longer able to justify your belief system? There is point when admitting you are wrong is OK.

thuja on June 30, 2013 at 10:20 PM

Instead of promoting homosexual marriage, how about doing more in preventing homosexuals from entering the Catholic Church to molest boys?

sentinelrules on June 30, 2013 at 10:15 PM

The gays on the faculty in the seminaries have driven the straight seminarians out for years.

This is changing though…The Gay’s are dying out and Pope Francis will get rid of what he described as the “Gay Lobby” in the Vatican.

The Anglicans who have become Catholic Priests have made a big difference as well…More and more conservative clergy are being ordained.

workingclass artist on June 30, 2013 at 10:26 PM

There is no way we are going back to that situation. And there is no way we will rest until there is gay marriage in Saudi Arabia.

thuja on June 30, 2013 at 8:13 PM

Good luck with that. I don’t think that Saudi will be as easy as pushing down a Christian old lady with a sign, but hey Saudi may have evolved when I wasn’t watching.

I’ll just sit over here with a bucket of popcorn while you lead the charge..

melle1228 on June 30, 2013 at 10:27 PM

thuja on June 30, 2013 at 10:20 PM

I think it’s rather cheap to invade religious spaces in order to pick up men to have sex with.

Your posts speak for themselves.

workingclass artist on June 30, 2013 at 10:31 PM

Good luck with that. I don’t think that Saudi will be as easy as pushing down a Christian old lady with a sign, but hey Saudi may have evolved when I wasn’t watching.

I’ll just sit over here with a bucket of popcorn while you lead the charge..

melle1228 on June 30, 2013 at 10:27 PM

Well, my Palestinian ex-boyfriend got weird that night in the 90′s when I insisted on gay marriage in Saudi Arabia. You may have enjoyed the popcorn then.

But let you something surprising. There is the internet in Saudi Arabia. Just as the internet threatens China’s government, it threatens the Islam of Saudi Arabia.

thuja on June 30, 2013 at 10:53 PM

It’s also worthwhile to point out that Islam has not been nearly as homophobic as Christianity. In Islamic countries, gay subcultures have often gone unmolested.

thuja on June 30, 2013 at 9:04 PM

.
If it is a true “sub-culture”, then it is kept very clandestine. In other words, “out of sight, out of mind”.

If those “sub-cultures” were to “come out of the closet”, and begin protesting for equal civil-rights in ANY of those Islamic countries, they wouldn’t last a day.

I don’t believe Christians (with exceptions) are “homophobic”. They’re disgusted … with, and/or by the flagrant out-of-the-closet-in-your-face homosexuality that has become ‘militant’.

This is the only country in the world that tolerates the militant “out-of-the-closet-in-your-face” homosexuals.

Islamic, or otherwise.

listens2glenn on July 1, 2013 at 1:33 AM

I love how thuja equivocates and spins and makes excuses for radical Islam while screaming for Christians to be suppressed and punished.

I also love how thuja ran away from my clear evidence of how LGBT leaders pushed sexual exploitation of children and proudly poisoned the blood supply, killing thousands of innocent people — after its screaming fit blaming all Christians everywhere for the Inquisition.

Bigot. Hypocrite. Failure. No wonder it screams and cries for laws to force people to give it welfare and punish anyone for criticizing it. Typical gay liberal.

northdallasthirty on July 1, 2013 at 8:45 AM

I love how thuja equivocates and spins and makes excuses for radical Islam while screaming for Christians to be suppressed and punished

It’s also interesting that he has to go back several centuries (and to another continent) to find examples of the “torture and murder” of homosexuals by a “Christian” state, while today in time there are Islamic states who publicly execute homosexuals.

Yet liberals stills think Christian fundamentalism is a greater threat to our way of life than militant Islam. I would love for some of these people to have to go live in one of these oppressive Islamic regimes for a while. If they were fortunate enough to come back alive, maybe they would then shut up about how “opressive” and “barbaric” Christianity in America has been.

frank63 on July 1, 2013 at 9:44 AM

Thuga suffers Mom’s Basement Syndrome. As long as the plate of Beanie Weenies magically appears at the top of the stairs three times a day he’s deluded that out in the adult world all is as he hallucinates it.

It is good to force Anthony Kennedy to out himself (pun optional) as a collaborationist in nullifying a vote of The People.

Kennedy’s legacy won’t simply be something he can blame on activist Judge Walker; he too owns it as regards overturning an legitimate election having a result his highness disdains.

viking01 on July 1, 2013 at 11:02 AM

This is the only country in the world that tolerates the militant “out-of-the-closet-in-your-face” homosexuals.

Islamic, or otherwise.

listens2glenn on July 1, 2013 at 1:33 AM

I appreciate that not everyone has the funds or the desire to travel, but you should try to read about other countries before making up stuff about them.

thuja on July 1, 2013 at 11:09 AM

As a Christina who opposes the so called “marriage” of gays I see the day coming where religious freedom is gone. No doubt we will be jailed for our convictions .

Bullhead on July 1, 2013 at 11:12 AM

What a cowardly response to the issue at hand.

If their goal was to uphold the unconstitutionality of Prop 8, which they knew this decision does by default, they should have had the courage to decide as much and let the American citizens react. If they wanted to preserve state’s rights they should have thrown out the federal court’s decision and let California’s voters handle it at a state level. What they have done with this cowardly ruling is neither.

With Prop 8 the Supreme Courts cowardly eviscerates citizen’s rights

http://www.imperfectamerica.com

imperfectamerica on July 1, 2013 at 11:24 AM

I read the Jihadwatch website and I am well aware of the dangers of radical Islam. If it were up to me, I would forbid Muslim immigration into America.

But just because Islam is more evil than Christianity doesn’t excuse the past injustices of Christianity anymore than because Mussolini was much less evil man than Hitler doesn’t make Mussolini a good man. You should deal with the past evils of Christianity rather making the excuse that Islam is worse. And let me emphasize that the Christian tradition that homosexuality is among the worst of sins is not Biblical. It’s not quite clear how such a notion came into the tradition, but it probably reflected some social anxieties as Rome was nearing its end.

I only bring up the past evils of the Christian tradition about homosexuality, because some people here want to appeal to that tradition. It’s not to attack Christianity. The Catholic Church has admitted some of its past sins before such as its treatment of Jews in other time periods. I hope that the Christian churches will ask forgiveness for their crimes against gay people.

thuja on July 1, 2013 at 11:32 AM

This is the only country in the world that tolerates the militant “out-of-the-closet-in-your-face” homosexuals.

Islamic, or otherwise.

listens2glenn on July 1, 2013 at 1:33 AM

.
I appreciate that not everyone has the funds or the desire to travel, but you should try to read about other countries before making up stuff about them.

thuja on July 1, 2013 at 11:09 AM

.
If you have information that contradicts my statements, would you please present it?

I’m not perfect, but I stand by my previous statements made here (July 1, 2013 at 1:33 AM) until proven otherwise.

listens2glenn on July 1, 2013 at 11:32 AM

I only bring up the past evils of the Christian tradition about homosexuality, because some people here want to appeal to that tradition.

thuja on July 1, 2013 at 11:32 AM

.
E . X . P . L . E . T . I . V . E
.
We don’t have any members of the Westboro Baptist Church commenting here.

Demanding that homosexuals keep their behavior/lifestyle “in-the-closet” doesn’t constitute an “appeal to that tradition”.

listens2glenn on July 1, 2013 at 11:40 AM

But just because Islam is more evil than Christianity doesn’t excuse the past injustices of Christianity anymore than because Mussolini was much less evil man than Hitler doesn’t make Mussolini a good man.

thuja on July 1, 2013 at 11:32 AM

.
What are you claiming? ….. that today’s Christians owe some kind of a “debt” due to the illegitimate behavior of previous Christians back in the Dark Ages?

NOBODY HERE IS TRYING TO “EXCUSE” THE BAD BEHAVIOR OF CHRISTIANS, PAST OR PRESENT.

listens2glenn on July 1, 2013 at 11:49 AM

We need a Constitutional amendment that protects Churches.

I could care less about gay rights, other than that they are coming for my rights to practice my religion.

You can see it up there in the comments. If Gayness is a protected class then the Bible will be declared hate speech and Churches will be forced to do the will of the Gays.

Religion will go underground and straight people will be criminals because their skin crawls at the thought of Gay sex.

Weren’t we born this way? Why is that phrase only about Gays?

Stop persecuting me for the way I was born.

Or are you going to claim that sexuality is learned now?

petunia on July 1, 2013 at 11:57 AM

WHY don’t the Prop 8 supporters sue the state government to defend and enforce the law???? There is a serious question here that needs to be settled. Is it constitutional for the state to refuse to defend its own laws duly passed by its own people??

Why am I not hearing about this being done? Can any one explain it to me? It seems like a no-brainer.

Texene on July 1, 2013 at 11:59 AM

We need a Constitutional amendment that protects Churches. – petunia on July 1, 2013 at 11:57 AM

We do, it is called the First Amendment.

SC.Charlie on July 1, 2013 at 12:20 PM

Public Approval of Supreme Court Falls to All-Time Low

The U.S. Supreme Court finished its term with big decisions on voting rights, affirmative action and same-sex marriage. Following those rulings, public approval of the court has fallen to the lowest level ever recorded in more than nine years of polling.

A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that just 28% believe the Supreme Court is doing a good or an excellent job. At the same time, 30% rate its performance as poor.

That’s the highest-ever poor rating. It’s also the first time ever that the poor ratings have topped the positive assessments.

Resist We Much on July 1, 2013 at 12:47 PM

Public Approval of Supreme Court Falls to All-Time Low – Resist We Much on July 1, 2013 at 12:47 PM

So what. I think they are doing the best job they can with the stench the flows from Congress and the Executive Branch.

SC.Charlie on July 1, 2013 at 1:05 PM

We do, it is called the First Amendment.

SC.Charlie on July 1, 2013 at 12:20 PM

It sure worked in the case of the church in Lansing, MI…not.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yzFyPnvz-iI

kingsjester on July 1, 2013 at 1:12 PM

It sure worked in the case of the church in Lansing, MI…not.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yzFyPnvz-iI – kingsjester on July 1, 2013 at 1:12 PM

There blockheads any movement. Certainly, if they persist, charges should be filed and they should thrown in jail.

SC.Charlie on July 1, 2013 at 1:34 PM

If you have information that contradicts my statements, would you please present it?

I’m not perfect, but I stand by my previous statements made here (July 1, 2013 at 1:33 AM) until proven otherwise.

listens2glenn on July 1, 2013 at 11:32 AM

Your statement was so out of touch in a global world that I didn’t see much point, but I will oblige. I’ve been to the Le Marais neighborhood in Paris. It’s not that different than any gay neighborhood in an American city. I had a friend living in Paris who had friends in the neighborhood, and I talked to them some. I did not detect any difference in their political stances about gayness than those of the gay movement in America.

I’ve never been to the Netherlands, but I can’t imagine that the Netherlands was the first country with gay marriage because the gays there were quietly closeted.

I have met gay people from Australia, Mexico (Mexico City), Germany, and Slovenia who claim to be quite open in their home countries. Mexico City has gay marriage now.

I want to mention one more country which doesn’t permit militant out gay people, Turkey. I read a few of the blogs of the protesters in Turkey. The protesters want their gay friends to be treated better. One day, these protesters will rule in Turkey.

thuja on July 1, 2013 at 2:21 PM

I actually sympathize with both sides. But if the NOM wants any win whatsoever–and they have completely lost the legal battle, either today or with more lawsuits–they should change the game. Call on the gay movement to come talk with them, to “dialogue” to use the phrase of the liberal left, and find understanding between the parties.

Call them out, make them live up to their statements.

PattyJ on July 1, 2013 at 2:55 PM

“Today’s talk of tolerance and acceptance of gay marriage will soon give way to intolerance and rejection of those who hold a traditional view of marriage.

The next offensive in this culture war will involve wielding government to force individuals to accept the new definition of marriage, falsely invoking analogies to civil rights.

As a prototype, consider the assault on the liberty of Elaine Huguenin, the wedding photographer in New Mexico. In 2006, a couple asked her to photograph their wedding. When she learned the couple were lesbians, she declined, explaining that pursuant to her faith, she only photographed man-woman weddings.

The couple got a different photographer, but they sued Huguenin. In New Mexico, there is no gay marriage. In a recent poll, most New Mexicans said they oppose gay marriage. But the state outlaws discrimination based on sexual orientation.

The New Mexico Human Rights Commission found Huguenin had broken the law, and ordered her to pay $7,000. Huguenin, with the aide of the pro-bono civil liberties law firm Alliance Defense Fund, has sued and the case is now before state Supreme Court.

Try to live your own life according to traditional values, and the state will come after you, and compel you live according to its values.

Florist Barronelle Stutzman owns Arlene’s Flowers in Richland, Wash. A gay man, who was a long-time customer of Arlene’s, asked Stutzman to arrange flowers for his wedding. She declined, citing her belief that marriage is a union between a man and woman. Now Washington

Attorney General Bob Ferguson is coming after Stutzman, saying, in effect, she must participate in this gay wedding.

How does Ferguson justify using the power of the state to impose his morality? “If Ms. Stutzman sells flowers to heterosexual couples,” the Seattle Post-Intelligencer quotes Ferguson saying, “she must sell them to same-sex couples.”

But obviously Stutzman did sell flowers to same-sex couples, happily – that’s why this particular client was a long-time customer. What she refuses to do is participate in a ceremony that the state calls marriage, but which she doesn’t consider to be marriage.

This is why the civil rights analogy doesn’t work. Huguenin’s case and Stutzman’s case aren’t about small businesswomen refusing to serve gay people. They are about businesswomen refusing to endorse the novel definition of marriage.

Now that a majority of the U.S. Supreme Court has asserted that the only reason to object to gay marriage is to “demean” gay people, expect this offensive in the culture war to escalate.

President Obama promised that he won’t try to force churches to administer gay weddings. That’s very kind of him. But Obama’s contraception mandate has shown us how narrowly he views religious liberty.

Maybe Obama or his successor won’t use an executive order to rewrite the Sacrament of Holy Matrimony, but government will go after churches all the same. The Cardinal O’Boyle Hall that your parish occasionally rents to outside groups? Better allow gay wedding receptions there or face the wrath of the state.

You’re allowed to be religious, of course, but only on the Sabbath. If you dare step into the world of commerce or public service, the government will impose its morality on you.

You see it in Obama’s rhetoric: he talks of “freedom of worship” rather than freedom of religion. It’s a push to bring to heel all rivals of government.

Liberal writer Kevin Drum made it pretty explicit during the contraception mandate debate:

“I’m tired of religious groups operating secular enterprises (hospitals, schools),” he wrote, “hiring people of multiple faiths, serving the general public, taking taxpayer dollars — and then claiming that deeply held religious beliefs should exempt them from public policy.”

The thrust: religious groups should only do religion–they shouldn’t feed the poor, clothe the naked, educate the young.

And individuals who adhere to religions? Leave your faith at the church door.

The Obama administration has argued in the contraception mandate cases that we lose our freedom of conscience the second we enter into commerce with other people.

The Left has long been the aggressor in the culture war. The crushing power of government has long been their weapon.

Many politically involved writers and advocates concerned with liberty and equality fought to open marriage to gay couples. Now that they’ve won, here’s hoping that those who care about liberty will defend the liberty of cultural conservatives to live their lives according to their faith…”

http://washingtonexaminer.com/gay-marriage-fight-now-becomes-a-religious-liberty-fight/article/2532529

workingclass artist on July 1, 2013 at 3:05 PM

Seems like as Citizens these days we have little or no standing with any federal courts… foreign nationals on the other hand – WTFO!

rgranger on July 1, 2013 at 3:17 PM

But obviously Stutzman did sell flowers to same-sex couples, happily – that’s why this particular client was a long-time customer. What she refuses to do is participate in a ceremony that the state calls marriage, but which she doesn’t consider to be marriage.

This is an important point that needs to be stressed because liberals keep telling everyone that to deny wedding services to gay couples is the moral equivalent to restaurants denying service to African Americans (as was common in the pre civil rights era South). This is the drum they will continue to beat in order to sway public opinion against religious believers, and unfortunately many in our dull thinking culture will fall for it. But there is no equivalence. In the case of photographers or florists declining to participate in gay weddings, what we are talking about is denying services for a particular event (ie. a gay wedding), not for a particular group of people. I know of no case where Christian florists or photographers refused all services to gay customers. If that were to happen, then that would be the equivalent to denying restaurant services to blacks. The restaurant owners who denied services to blacks were clearly motivated by hate because they didn’t want blacks in their restaurant at any time whatsoever. The fact that the florist still welcomed the gay customer for all other floral services except a wedding shows that she was motivated by conscience not hate. There is absolutely no moral equivalence to what was done to blacks in the South. But I guess I shouldn’t expect a liberal to understand the difference here.

frank63 on July 1, 2013 at 4:32 PM

listens2glenn on July 1, 2013 at 11:32 AM

.
Your statement was so out of touch in a global world that I didn’t see much point, but I will oblige. I’ve been to the Le Marais neighborhood in Paris. It’s not that different than any gay neighborhood in an American city. I had a friend living in Paris who had friends in the neighborhood, and I talked to them some. I did not detect any difference in their political stances about gayness than those of the gay movement in America.

I’ve never been to the Netherlands, but I can’t imagine that the Netherlands was the first country with gay marriage because the gays there were quietly closeted.

I have met gay people from Australia, Mexico (Mexico City), Germany, and Slovenia who claim to be quite open in their home countries. Mexico City has gay marriage now.

I want to mention one more country which doesn’t permit militant out gay people, Turkey. I read a few of the blogs of the protesters in Turkey. The protesters want their gay friends to be treated better. One day, these protesters will rule in Turkey.

thuja
on July 1, 2013 at 2:21 PM

.
No doubt about it … listens2glenn is wrong … well, I mean about the U.S. being the only country in the world that tolerates “out-of-the-closet-in-your-face” homosexuals.
.
Is this also wrong?

If those “sub-cultures” were to “come out of the closet”, and begin protesting for equal civil-rights in ANY of those Islamic countries, they wouldn’t last a day.

listens2glenn on July 1, 2013 at 1:33 AM

.
What about the other two comments/replies?

listens2glenn on July 1, 2013 at 11:40 AM

listens2glenn on July 1, 2013 at 11:49 AM

listens2glenn on July 2, 2013 at 10:46 AM

Comment pages: 1 2