Careful what you wish for, Kevin

March 1, 2011 at 10:36 am 93 comments

By Adam Bink

Over at Good as You, Jeremy notes that New Hampshire’s Cornerstone Action and Kevin Smith are planning on asking each Republican presidential candidate who comes through the state asking for votes to sign a “one man, one woman” pledge. And is generally gleeful about making this a “national issue”:

“It was never a plan to make it into a national issue, but it just seems like the timing is right,” Kevin Smith, executive director of the socially conservative think tank New Hampshire Cornerstone, told Roll Call.
[…]

Cornerstone will ask each Republican presidential candidate to sign a pledge agreeing marriage should be between one man and one woman.

“Why not try to leverage the influence of the candidates to get them to declare their support for traditional marriage?” Smith said. “If you have a candidate saying they’re not willing to oppose same-sex marriage, I think they’ll have a problem. … We have a wide membership list. We’ll certainly let them know.”

Two things. One, be careful what you wish for, Kevin. I wrote the other day in a post titled “Sturm und drang, or not” that for lots of activists out there, especially the younger generation, this is a non-issue. Witness the evolution of CPAC. And for other base Republicans, I have doubts that a candidate who makes him or herself the “social values candidate”, which is what Kevin would like, will skyrocket to victories. How did Sam Brownback, darling of the “social conservative” set, fare during his presidential run last cycle? Oh, right.

While I won’t discount the power of the religious right and the checkbox people want to mark on their presidential approval list vis a vis this issue, New Hampshire isn’t Alabama, and there are still more people who care about jobs and social security and whether their trash gets picked up twice or three times a week than they do about gays marrying. And a candidate becoming the “anti-gay marriage” candidate might not exactly be their cup of tea.

The second thing is that it cuts both ways. My colleague Joe Mirabella had a very wise piece a few months ago noting that for the first time, the two first Presidential states- Iowa and New Hampshire- will have legalized marriage equality by the time the caucuses and primaries start. Confronting these candidates with real, live married couples (some with kids) at candidate stops is a good organizing opportunity to gin up some press and show the faces of these couples to the public.

So if you want to make it an issue, Kevin, there are two sides to this coin, and we’ll see you at the stump speeches.

Entry filed under: Marriage equality.

Dance for Equality Two new Prop 8 developments, and Courage Campaign’s amicus curiae letter to the California Supreme Court

93 Comments Add your own

  • 1. Alan E.  |  March 1, 2011 at 10:46 am

    Subscribing and waiting to see what was just sent out in the docket (Thanks Kathleen!)

    Reply
    • 2. Ann S.  |  March 1, 2011 at 10:51 am

      Ditto.

      Reply
      • 3. Ed Cortes  |  March 1, 2011 at 10:57 am

        “”

        Reply
        • 4. Ronnie  |  March 1, 2011 at 12:34 pm

          =
          <3…Ronnie

          Reply
          • 5. JonT  |  March 1, 2011 at 3:42 pm

    • 6. Kathleen  |  March 1, 2011 at 11:05 am

      Two items just went on the 9th Circuit docket; they are both items sent over from the California Supreme Court. The first is the letter from Therese Stewart (link below). The second is an order from the Supreme Court in response to letters from counsel for Margie Reilly. See the docket items:
      02/09/2011 Received: Untimely amicus curiae letter from James Lynch, Jr., counsel for Margie Rielly supporting the request to answer question of state law.

      02/16/2011 Application for relief from default filed Submitted by James Lynch, Jr., counsel for Margie Rielly as to untimely amicus curiae letter.

      from here:
      http://appellatecases.courtinfo.ca.gov/search/case/dockets.cfm?dist=0&doc_id=1966489&doc_no=S189476

      I was hoping to have all the court filings from the Reilly matter to upload to Scribd at one time, but now that notice has gone out to the 9th Circuit mailing list, I guess I’d better upload the order. I’ve already received several questions about it.

      Reply
      • 7. Brett  |  March 1, 2011 at 12:52 pm

        Just saw this entry added there:

        “03/01/2011 Application denied The application of respondents Kristin M. Perry, Sandra B. Stier, Paul T. Katami, and Jeffrey J. Zarrillo to shorten the briefing schedule and application to set oral argument for May 23, 2011 is denied.”

        Does that mean what I think it means? That CA Supreme Court will NOT expedite the hearing regarding standing?

        Reply
        • 8. Kathleen  |  March 1, 2011 at 1:06 pm

          It would appear that yes, the application has been denied. I’m trying to see if there’s anything more to the order and if so, get a copy of it.

          Reply
          • 9. James Tuttle  |  March 1, 2011 at 1:36 pm

            Well that is rude. I’m REALLY REALLY hoping that the supreme court is playing a little game here. By not expediting the trial it gives the 9th Circuit more cause to say that we are being irreparably harmed and to lift the stay. God I’m an optimist.

          • 10. Kathleen  |  March 1, 2011 at 1:37 pm

            You and me both, James. :)

  • 11. Kathleen  |  March 1, 2011 at 10:53 am

    UPDATE Perry:
    Letter from Therese Stewart, for City and County of SF, to California Supreme Court, in support of expediting case.

    Reply
    • 12. Kate  |  March 1, 2011 at 11:09 am

      oooooh…. she has nice handwriting, too.

      Reply
    • 13. Brett  |  March 1, 2011 at 12:44 pm

      Just saw a message from the 9th that CA has filed a motion in support of lifting the stay, Kathleen. Can you grab it? (https://ecf.ca9.uscourts.gov/docs1/009022737397)

      Reply
      • 14. Kathleen  |  March 1, 2011 at 1:02 pm

        Brett, that was the item from Kamala Harris that I just posted. I know the notice says Schwarzenegger, but it is from AG Harris.

        Reply
  • 15. Bob  |  March 1, 2011 at 10:58 am

    well that’s one way of getting marriage equality issue into main stream news,,,,,,

    Reply
  • 16. Sagesse  |  March 1, 2011 at 11:04 am

    Is he sure he wants to do this in a marriage equality state? Really? How embarrassed is Cornerstone going to be when candidates refuse to sign?

    Reply
    • 17. Dave in ME  |  March 1, 2011 at 11:17 am

      Well, I heard that 61% don’t like teh gay marry. Or something. Somewhere I heard 61% disapprove or approve something somewhere, so watch out, I guess….

      Dave in Maine

      Reply
    • 18. nightshayde  |  March 1, 2011 at 11:21 am

      I think a lot of the candidates WILL sign, unfortunately. In the primaries, most Republicans are trying to out-conservative the other Republicans to make themselves stand out. The more moderate candidates don’t tend to fare well in primaries when the religious reich gets its base all riled up. The lunatic fringe tends to have a lot of candidates at the beginning of the primary season (which lasts for freakin’ EVER) — so I’m guessing most of those fringe candidates will sign.

      The Democrats tend to either try to out-liberal each other to make themselves stand out to the liberal base — or try to out-conservative each other to show how palatable they can be to independents.

      Once the two “finalists” are determined, the candidates tend to try to move toward the political middle unless they’re speaking in front of a group of staunch liberals or conservatives, in which case they say whatever they think the group to whom they’re speaking wants to hear.

      Reply
    • 19. bJason  |  March 1, 2011 at 2:40 pm

      I read somewhere that the Arnold filed something today, also

      Reply
      • 20. Kathleen  |  March 1, 2011 at 2:42 pm

        The notice that went out with the Kamala Harris filing mis-identified it as being from Schwarzenegger.

        Reply
        • 21. bJason  |  March 1, 2011 at 3:04 pm

          I guess that was it. It surprised me that he would interject at this point.

          Reply
        • 22. Kathleen  |  March 1, 2011 at 4:51 pm

          It created a lot of confusion and got reported in several places as Schwarzenegger having filed, when he didn’t.

          Reply
    • 23. JonT  |  March 1, 2011 at 3:56 pm

      Actually, it would not surprise me if most, if not all, republican presidential candidates would sign.

      That’s just how they roll.

      Reply
  • 24. Rachel  |  March 1, 2011 at 11:04 am

    Ha! I didn’t know there was some sort of conservative person named Kevin Smith. I was thinking it was the director and sooper dooper liberal guy who made Clerks, Chasing Amy, and is now a podcast king. I was wondering if it was some kind of a joke on his part, heh.

    Reply
    • 25. nightshayde  |  March 1, 2011 at 11:15 am

      I was thinking that when he was mentioned here last week. I know it’s a “common” name, but sheesh!

      Hmm. Come to think of it, this conservative Kevin Smith probably had the name before the fun-loving liberal film-making Kevin Smith.

      Reply
    • 26. Straight Ally #3008  |  March 1, 2011 at 1:04 pm

      Reply
  • 27. Dave in Maine  |  March 1, 2011 at 11:06 am

    I don’t understand the sentence “the two first Presidential states- Iowa and New Hampshire- will have legalized marriage equality by the time the caucuses and primaries start.” They have it now-this seems to say that it’s not there yet but will be by the time the caucuses and primaries start.

    It does seem like a non-issue, but I don’t think that we should forget that those who see it as a non-issue are less likely to vote and those who absolutely see it as an issue will make damn sure that they do vote.

    Dave in Maine

    Reply
    • 28. Straight Dave  |  March 1, 2011 at 11:32 am

      If you’re implying that the anti-equality crowd is likely to care more, and thus vote, then that may yield a more conservative GOP nominee. 20 long months into the future from now (Nov ’12), I’m hoping/expecting that many independent voters nationwide will already have turned the corner on SSM and not view such a candidate in a favorable light.

      I think these guys are hopelessly chasing a past that might have been a good bet a few years ago, but not next year.

      Reply
      • 29. Dave in ME  |  March 1, 2011 at 11:39 am

        Hopefully things will be different then, but based on the election here in Maine in Nov 2009, I am not sure.

        Motivating young people to actually get out and actually vote is hard if it doesn’t directly affect them. We had LOTS of kids support us, share links on Facebook, sign the postcards when we approached them, but getting them all to actually step up on that day was hard. Knocking door-to-door on election day to get out the vote was very frustrating.

        Maybe in November 2012 it will be different, but whatever happens, it shouldn’t be taken for granted that the young people who support us will be there on the day that matters. That should be addressed and dealt with.

        Dave in Maine

        Reply
  • 30. Straight Ally #3008  |  March 1, 2011 at 12:02 pm

    Here’s what will happen, bank on it. If the question is asked, Romney, Huckabee, Gingrich, Palin, Pawlenty, Barbour, Santorum, Cain, will for sure sign on to the pledge. I’m not absolutely sure about Daniels and Huntsman, but I’ll bet they would, too (please feel free to edify me, I’m going on statements I’ve seen from the others offhand). So GOP = no marriage equality in the 2012 election; if it matters to a voter, the issue will be black and white.

    Reply
  • 31. Michelle Evans  |  March 1, 2011 at 12:23 pm

    This is OT, but I just had to pass it along. I know many of you may have already received the hate mail/money grab letter from “Public Advocate.” For those who have not seen this, I wanted to pass along just a few of the things he mentions, so that we can see how truly sick and twisted this guy Delgaudio is. This is the mind set we are fighting with Brian and the rest, too. We can’t forget that. With that, here are just some of the quotes from what he had to say today. (I had to definitely pass along the info he said specifically could not fall into the hands of “Radical Homosexuals.”

    <I must ask you to keep the information I am about to give you confidential. If it gets into the hands of the Homosexual Lobby, they will use it to destroy me while we are weak:

    This man is truly sick. I am not a health professional, but considering what he has to say, and the delusions he imparts of the secret armies of homosexuals, I would even venture that he may have some mental impairments and should seek professional help.

    Reply
    • 32. Michelle Evans  |  March 1, 2011 at 12:26 pm

      Okay, maybe there is a conspiracy. :-) Most of what I tried to quote of his letter didn’t translate into my post. I’ll try again. This is what he had to say:

      I see well-known agents of the radical Homosexual Lobby everywhere. (It’s getting worse by the day). They are huddled in dark corners scheming and plotting. They met secretly with newly elected members of Congress in hopes of tempting them to advance their perverse agenda with campaign cash and the promise of votes.

      If it gets into the hands of the Homosexual Lobby, they will use it to destroy me while we are weak:

      My office owes $72,349.72 to Larry and other small businessmen in Virginia.

      Just outside of Washington, D.C., a fanatical army of sodomites has a secret warehouse where they have been generating hundreds of thousands of petitions.

      Reply
      • 33. AnonyGrl  |  March 1, 2011 at 12:55 pm

        Indeed… this man is in need of mental health assistance. I wonder of “Larry and other small businessmen in Virginia” are, in fact, persons in the profession of loaning money high rates and collecting body parts if payment is not forthcoming?

        I am sure we wish this man would seek professional help. We do not want him destroyed while he is weak, we want him safe in a secure facility if that is what he needs.

        The good news, such as it is, is that he is unlikely to be impressing anyone on his side of the table any more than any of us, and thus his hoped for funding is most certainly not a high probability.

        Reply
      • 34. Philly Karl  |  March 1, 2011 at 3:13 pm

        I am really pissed off right now. WHO SPILLED THE BEANS ABOUT OUR SECRET SODOMITE WAREHOUSE!! Because it wasn’t me! I never betrayed our secret handshake, never exposed the location of the SSW, not even when they waterboarded me. Well, almost waterboarded me. In that I was made to shower with BAR soap. But that’s not the point. The point is that I never squealed. But someone did. And I want to know who!

        Reply
        • 35. Philly Karl  |  March 1, 2011 at 3:47 pm

          Sorry to go off like that. I know this thread is focused on the maddening court delay, and the knowledge that actual citizens are being measurably harmed in significant ways each and every day they cannot marry. I feel that anger, too. I desperately want to marry my foreign partner for many reasons, So we don’t have to move to Canada for one thing.. But people, if they know about our secret sodomy warehouse, how long before they find out the secret sodomy toaster-oven factory? And then what?

          Reply
          • 36. Straight Ally #3008  |  March 1, 2011 at 4:10 pm

            I thought the factory was in Greece?

          • 37. AnonyGrl  |  March 1, 2011 at 4:13 pm

            It’s ok, Philly Karl. A little silliness to blow off steam is perfectly all right.

            I hope we get this worked out soon and that you and your partner can live a long, happy and healthy life together. No one deserves the wait that so many are suffering through.

            You think they might find out about the toaster-oven factory? But… but… if they find that, then what are we going to use for recruitment bonuses???

          • 38. Richard A. Jernigan  |  March 1, 2011 at 8:42 pm

            Kitchen-Aid Artisan Stand mixers? Wolfgang Puck Chef’s Quality Cookware? Williams-Sonoma Franchises? Beth Bath & Beyond gift cards?

          • 39. AnonyGrl  |  March 1, 2011 at 8:51 pm

            Oooh… I need a Kitchen-Aid Artisan Stand mixer.

          • 40. Richard A. Jernigan  |  March 1, 2011 at 9:14 pm

            So do I. If I am going to make my own icing for cakes, as well as the cakes themselves, I need another mixer so I can have two things going at once. Icing in one, the cake in the other. It would save so much time.

      • 41. JonT  |  March 1, 2011 at 4:06 pm

        Oh yeah, this guy is a True Loon™.

        Although, I don’t think I’m high on his list anymore – I only get some of the emails he sends out these days.

        …a fanatical army of sodomites has a secret warehouse

        LOL. I wonder if his True Believers™ actually buy into his bullshit. Sound like a great party!

        But anyways – last week he was in debt some 143K IIRC, so he must be whittling that down (or more likely, just making it up).

        I keep trying to figure out where he is spending this money… Running a website is not that expensive, ans as far as I know, he doesn’t actually do anything other than send emails and run his website.

        Reply
      • 42. Dave in ME  |  March 2, 2011 at 4:53 am

        Oh, my. I thought those warehouses were where those people held raves!

        What’s interesting about this is that it makes more sense if you replace “homosexual” with “evangelical” and “sodomite” with “Christian fanatic.”

        But I like that he capitalized the name of our lobby!

        What is this organization? What is the website?

        Dave in Maine

        Reply
        • 43. Richard A. Jernigan  |  March 2, 2011 at 11:53 am

          I don’t know about the full name of the website, Dave in ME, but I do know that the letterhead on the emails BZ gets read Public Advocate of the United States. I guess he is trying to make it sound as if he works for the federal government. I’m sure if you type in Public Advocate, or Eugene Delguadio, it will pop up for you. But I will try to find the email in BZ’s account again and get the URL for you.

          Reply
    • 44. Richard A. Jernigan  |  March 1, 2011 at 8:45 pm

      BZ is still on his list, even after repeatedly showing him from the Ancient Hebrew, point by point, exactly where he is wrong! He reads the emails to me when we both need a good laugh. And he opens this latest one with “I’m Desperate!” All I can say to Eugene Delgaudio is–Deapair on, baby!

      Reply
      • 45. Dave in ME  |  March 2, 2011 at 4:57 am

        Oh-he’s the guy who said this, “It’s the federal employee’s version of the Gay Bill of Special Rights… That means the next TSA official that gives you an ‘enhanced pat down’ could be a practicing homosexual secretly getting pleasure from your submission.”

        I’ve had these pat downs twice and both times it did not appear that the man doing it to me was “secretly getting pleasure from” my submission. So, they must not have been a gay, clearly.

        I don’t like his glasses. He needs “Queer Eye for the Straight Guy.”

        Dave in Maine

        Reply
  • 46. Kathleen  |  March 1, 2011 at 12:54 pm

    UPDATE: Perry

    Attorney General Kamala Harris’s statement in support of lifting stay.

    Yay, Kamala!!

    Reply
    • 47. AnonyGrl  |  March 1, 2011 at 1:02 pm

      Brilliant!

      Kathleen, what do you think the chances of the stay being lifted are?

      Reply
    • 48. Ed  |  March 1, 2011 at 1:10 pm

      What would be awesome is if other high profile people come out in support of lifting the stay. Is it possible (or has this happened before) that a president can support lifting this stay? It would give some major backing if Obama could come out in support. Wishful thinking, I know…..but just maybe?

      Reply
      • 49. Kathleen  |  March 1, 2011 at 1:13 pm

        There would be no reason for Obama to weigh in on this. The federal government isn’t a defendant here. However, the California state officials are, in the official capacity.

        Reply
  • 50. Ronnie  |  March 1, 2011 at 12:59 pm

    Longtime Harvard Chaplain and Theologian Peter Gomes Dies at 68
    http://www.towleroad.com/2011/03/longtime-harvard-chaplain-peter-gomes-dies-at-68.html

    “Harvard’s longtime chaplain, Reverend Peter J. Gomes, has died of a brain aneurysm and heart attack at 68, the Harvard Crimson reports.”

    The NYT:

    Then in 1991, he appeared before an angry crowd of students, faculty members and administrators protesting homophobic articles in a conservative campus magazine whose distribution had led to a spate of harassment and slurs against gay men and lesbians on campus. Mr. Gomes, putting his reputation and career on the line, announced that he was “a Christian who happens as well to be gay.”

    When the cheers faded, there were expressions of surprise from the Establishment, and a few calls for his resignation, which were ignored. The announcement changed little in Mr. Gomes’s private life; he had never married and said he was celibate by choice. But it was a major turning point for him professionally.

    “I now have an unambiguous vocation — a mission — to address the religious causes and roots of homophobia,” he told The Washington Post months later. “I will devote the rest of my life to addressing the ‘religious case’ against gays.”

    Influential Gay Rev. Dies at 68
    By Michelle Garcia
    http://www.advocate.com/News/Daily_News/2011/03/01/Influential_Gay_Rev_Dies_at_68/

    “Gomes, who was openly gay, was the first black minister of Harvard’s Memorial Church, according to Reuters. He was named one of the seven most distinguished preachers in America in 1979 by Time magazine. In his career, Gomes has been awarded 39 honorary degrees, written several best-selling books, and taught classes for Harvard’s school of arts and sciences and divinity school.”

    “Our whole constitutional history has been the enlargement of rights, not their restriction,” Rev. Gomes told Massachusetts state senators, …….quoted in Evan Wolfson’s (Freedom to Marry) book “Why Marriage Matters”

    (me) Rest in peace Rev. Peter Gomes…..<3…..Ronnie

    Reply
    • 51. AnonyGrl  |  March 1, 2011 at 1:05 pm

      Thanks for sharing that, Ronnie.

      Rest in peace, indeed sir, with a job well done.

      Reply
  • 53. Kathleen  |  March 1, 2011 at 1:11 pm

    UPDATE: Perry

    As Brett notes above, the following has appeared on the Perry case docket at the California Supreme Court:

    “The application of respondents Kristin M. Perry, Sandra B. Stier, Paul T. Katami, and Jeffrey J. Zarrillo to shorten the briefing schedule and application to set oral argument for May 23, 2011 is denied.”

    I’m trying to locate a copy of any opinion that accompanied the decision, if there is one.

    Reply
    • 54. AnonyGrl  |  March 1, 2011 at 1:15 pm

      A thought… is it any more likely that the 9th will take into account CASC’s denial and be moved to lift the stay on Walker’s decision because CASC refuses to move things along?

      Reply
      • 55. Kathleen  |  March 1, 2011 at 1:23 pm

        I would think it would factor into the decision. But how much weight it will carry, I just don’t know. I’ve always thought the stay pending appeal was based on a rather disingenuous analysis of the factors that go into issuing a stay. We’ll just have to see what the 9th Circuit does.

        Reply
        • 56. AnonyGrl  |  March 1, 2011 at 1:47 pm

          Then I am just going to harbor a tiny little spark of hope that one day very soon, without any fanfare, the 9th Circuit is going to spring “stay lifted” on us… ok?

          Can you imagine…?

          :)

          Reply
    • 57. Straight Ally #3008  |  March 1, 2011 at 1:23 pm

      This is so frustrating. I’m so sorry about what you’re going through, guys. I’m impatiently waiting on the right side of history with you for this to be resolved.

      Reply
  • 58. Rhie  |  March 1, 2011 at 1:40 pm

    Who is Sam Brownback? I pay pretty close attention to politics and he only sounds vaguely familiar. I suppose that proves the point of the article, heh.

    Reply
    • 59. JonT  |  March 1, 2011 at 4:10 pm

      A member of “The Family”.

      Very hardcore bible thumper and not a fan of teh ghey.

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sam_Brownback#Gay_rights

      Reply
      • 60. Dave in ME  |  March 1, 2011 at 4:23 pm

        Interesting…

        This site doesn’t show as much information…

        http://www.conservapedia.com/Brownback

        Dave in Maine

        Reply
        • 61. JonT  |  March 1, 2011 at 4:31 pm

          Well, it *is* conservapedia….

          With these guys, the more information available, the worse it is.

          Reply
          • 62. Rhie  |  March 2, 2011 at 12:20 am

            Exactly. Any encyclopedia by and for Conservatives is going to be lacking in the facts department. Did you read their article on why the theory of relativity is a liberal plot to ruin the US?

          • 63. Felyx  |  March 2, 2011 at 1:52 am

            You know Rhie,

            I was skeptical and wondering if you were just given to hyperbole… but evidently you were serious!

            “Political aspects of relativity

            Some liberal politicians have extrapolated the theory of relativity to metaphorically justify their own political agendas. For example, Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama helped publish an article by liberal law professor Laurence Tribe to apply the relativistic concept of “curvature of space” to promote a broad legal right to abortion.[47] As of June 2008, over 170 law review articles have cited this liberal application of the theory of relativity to legal arguments.[48] Applications of the theory of relativity to change morality have also been common.[49] Moreover, there is an unmistakable effort to censor or ostracize criticism of relativity.[50] ”

            I get the feeling that some people just really don’t even get what science is or why we have it!!!

            BTW, How do you pronounce your name? Re? Rye? /R/ with an aspirate /h/?

          • 64. Dave in ME  |  March 2, 2011 at 5:10 am

            Ha! I did not read that, but last year when I discovered this treasure trove of knowledge I was impressed by the conservation of electrons in their Harvey Milk entry. I can copy it right here for you! The WHOLE entry!

            “Harvey Bernard Milk (May 22, 1930 – November 27, 1978) was an American politician, and the first openly gay man to be elected to public office in California. He served as a member of the San Francisco Board of Supervisors. On November 27, 1978, he and Mayor George Moscone were shot and killed by Dan White, a disgruntled former Supervisor who had resigned earlier.
            At his trial, Dan White’s lawyers insisted that his judgment had been impaired by depression caused by a poor diet. This argument (dubbed the “twinkie defense” by the media) led to a lenient sentence, provoking rioting and protests within San Francisco’s gay community.’

            The “Trustworthy Encyclopedia’s” founder is Andrew Schlafly, by the way.

            I will say, though, that Wikipedia does seem to have a left leaning

            Dave in Maine

          • 65. JonT  |  March 2, 2011 at 12:27 pm

            @Felyx:

            :) Yes, a friend told me about it some time ago.

            Amazing and sad — all at the same time.

          • 66. Felyx  |  March 2, 2011 at 12:42 pm

            @Dave

            Wikipedia is about being a factual reference. Facts, in general, have a ‘left leaning’ these days.

          • 67. Rhie  |  March 4, 2011 at 2:50 pm

            Felyx

            Oh I don’t blame you for thinking that I was exaggerating. I thought that too when I was pointed to that. It isn’t satire, unfortunately. Crazy, crazy people in this country.

            My name is pronounced “Ree”, a nickname short for Maria.

          • 68. Rhie  |  March 4, 2011 at 2:56 pm

            Heh that’s a funny entry.

            Dave, I am curious what you read in Wiki that seemed left-leaning. I haven’t found anything like that, and read it all the time. If anything, I think they are prone to false equivalency. But then, I think facts have a Liberal bias :).

      • 69. Rhie  |  March 2, 2011 at 12:22 am

        Thanks! Wow.

        Reply
  • 70. aaron in SF  |  March 1, 2011 at 1:58 pm

    I am now going through a divorce with the man I thought I knew. He turned out to be addicted to meth and hiding it from me the whole time. He’s done reprehensible things to me that I did not know about until he left me. … And I still want gay marriage nationally. Sometimes I wonder if I’ll ever trust someone enough to get one again, but I still want it for everyone.

    Reply
    • 71. James Tuttle  |  March 1, 2011 at 2:11 pm

      Aaron my partners mom went through the same thing with his father and she is now stronger than ever despite is all. You will find love again and hopefully be able to marry him, too!!

      Reply
      • 72. aaron in SF  |  March 1, 2011 at 3:36 pm

        thank you James. I am in so much pain. That drug continues to ravage our community

        Reply
        • 73. Marlene  |  March 1, 2011 at 6:31 pm

          Thst’s due to the constant oppression the TLBG community continues to suffer from, Aaron.

          The religious reicht uses this as a way to attack us, claiming that we’re so disgusted with ourselves that the only way we can cope is by drug and alcohol abuse.

          No doubt racists use the same tactic when they demonize racial minority communities, obviously ignoring the fact that if there were decent jobs and decent stores in the area, and/or public transportation went to the places where there *are* decent paying jobs, their drug and alcohol abuse and obesity would vanish.

          Reply
      • 74. Kathleen  |  March 1, 2011 at 4:56 pm

        I know the pain of being married to a drug addict. I’m really sorry you’re going through this and hope you have a good support system around. It’s crazy-making dealing with addicts, even more so if it’s someone we love.

        Reply
        • 75. Richard A. Jernigan  |  March 1, 2011 at 8:53 pm

          That is why addiction is termed a family disease. Precisely because it affects everyone who loves the addict. Friend of Bill W. since 15 July 1996, and feel so much better now, even when I am in a down mood, thank I did when I was allowing the alcohol to abuse me.

          Reply
    • 76. Richard A. Jernigan  |  March 1, 2011 at 9:05 pm

      Aaron, while you will never trust anyone blindly again, you will, as time goes on and you heal, regain trust in yourself and then in others, and you will find love again. It won’t be easy, and it may not arrive immediately, but it will happen. Right now, you are hurting so bad that you can’t think normally. You have been betrayed by someone to whom you gave you whole heart. That will take time to recover from. Allow yourself that time, and do all you can to help yourself heal. And be good to yourself.

      Reply
  • 77. Felyx  |  March 1, 2011 at 2:17 pm

    NOM ALERT!!!

    I was trolling on the NOM website when I came across their page for DOMA Defense.

    This is seriously jaw dropping. I am not sure but that they might have some new major league legal defense team or something possibly in reaction to the DOJ announcement. I wish I had the legal expertise to comment on what I saw but I am afraid I might misinterpret something. This is the most, actually only, defense I have seen proffered by NOM that I would consider a game changer. The real shocker is that there is NO mention of responsible procreation, ‘save the children’ rhetoric, religious rights or any of the other arguments we all gnaw and loath.

    I am not sure that anyone was supposed to see this DOMA defense page so I took a screenshot for legal analysis in the event that it disappears and our side isn’t prepared for what I consider is the only DOMA Defense strategy that could seriously end all the legal challenges dead in their tracks!

    Anyone care to explain this?… !!!

    Reply
    • 78. Ann S.  |  March 1, 2011 at 2:23 pm

      LOL

      Reply
    • 79. James Tuttle  |  March 1, 2011 at 2:31 pm

      LOL thats a very appropriate and succinct defense they have going on.

      Reply
    • 80. AnonyGrl  |  March 1, 2011 at 2:37 pm

      I LOVE that… well done!!!

      Reply
    • 81. Lar  |  March 1, 2011 at 2:41 pm

      Totally Shocking, I never thought that NOM would be able to come up a defense that strong! We need to make sure that the legal teams on our side get this information quickly so they can come up with a counter-strategy.

      Reply
    • 82. Felyx  |  March 1, 2011 at 2:42 pm

      You think this is what he had in mind when he said, “We have not yet begun to fight for marriage”?

      Reply
      • 83. AnonyGrl  |  March 1, 2011 at 4:17 pm

        LOL!!!

        Reply
    • 84. bJason  |  March 1, 2011 at 2:43 pm

      at least one can tell that they have finally applied logic and reasoning to their arguments!

      Reply
      • 85. Straight Dave  |  March 1, 2011 at 4:22 pm

        Yes, after they they’ve removed all the BS

        Reply
    • 86. Steve  |  March 1, 2011 at 2:45 pm

      “DONATE”

      That’s the most important thing there

      Reply
    • 87. JonT  |  March 1, 2011 at 4:15 pm

      Ahh… The NULL defense.

      Brilliant. As soon as the ‘fanatical sodomite army‘ tries to dereference that pointer in court, they’ll coredump with a SEGV!

      /end Unix/C humor

      fanatical sodomite army‘ – I just can’t stop giggling over that one. Thanks delguado!

      Reply
      • 88. Ed Cortes  |  March 1, 2011 at 4:56 pm

        Sort of gives a new meaning to the term “close order drill” doesn’t it?

        Reply
      • 89. Esther  |  March 1, 2011 at 5:07 pm

        Gotta love programmer jargon humor…someone needs to tell NOM, etc. to redirect their hatred to /dev/null!

        You know, unix, although not user-friendly, is quite wise. If you need proof, try this command:

        % “How would you rate NOM’s idiocy and future irrelevance?

        Unmatched “.

        /End unix joke…sorry, I know it wasn’t that funny.

        Reply
      • 90. Rhie  |  March 2, 2011 at 12:24 am

        *dies laughing* Oh wow. A fanatical…sodomite…army. They really are obsessed with sex aren’t they?

        When I read that I had much the same reaction as I did when I first read The Truth About D&D. Shock, anger and then amusement. They aren’t worth the energy for anger honestly.

        Reply
    • 91. Straight Dave  |  March 1, 2011 at 4:20 pm

      I love that Donate button. “Here, throw some money into this empty white box. Maybe that will help – we got nothin’ else.”

      LOL !!

      Reply
  • 92. Richard A. Jernigan  |  March 1, 2011 at 2:21 pm

    Yes, Kevin, be careful what you wish for. Before you make any wishes, you would do well to read “The Monkey’s Paw.”

    Reply
  • 93. Mechelle Burch-Marafon  |  March 1, 2011 at 3:14 pm

    Hiya all hope all is well!! Were still in Italy awaiting prop 8 2 end so we can go home 2 our kidz!!! We have news that Brian Brown has been sending out petitions for people to send to their reps that hide who he is making you think it is an equal rights group!!!! so be very very careful when signing your petitions!!! We just sent him an email making him think we were against Obama’s decision but sneakingly trying to make him see how wrong he is lmao hope it works lmao we’ll keep ya’ll posted!!!

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Trackback this post  |  Subscribe to the comments via RSS Feed


Support the Prop 8 Trial Tracker

Connect with us

Get to know your fellow Prop 8 Trial Trackers on Facebook.

Please send tips to prop8trial@couragecampaign.org

Follow us on Twitter @EqualityOnTrial

Sign-up for updates on the Prop 8 trial, including breaking-news alerts.

Categories

TWITTER: Follow us @EqualityOnTrial

Share this

Bookmark and Share

SITE STATS (by Wordpress)

  • 4,585,301 views of the Tracker and counting as of today...