Open equality thread, and Sen. Kohl/DOMA update

April 13, 2011 at 10:03 am 100 comments

By Adam Bink

I’m in transit today (ending up in a land with a beach and warm weather, huzzah) so not much time to write. I’ll have more later on some things Louis has been up to.

The one thing I did want to ask is that jpmassar, one of the best LGBT diarists on DailyKos, has a diary post up about our action targeting Sen. Kohl.

Please head over and give it a recommend, and leave a comment. And if you haven’t signed our note to Sen. Kohl to ask him to become the last vote we need to move the bill in committee, please do so!

Entry filed under: DOMA Repeal.

Late afternoon equality round-up Prop 8 proponents throw fit over video of Walker’s court proceedings

100 Comments Add your own

  • 1. JPM  |  April 13, 2011 at 10:06 am

    Thanks, Adam

  • 2. JonT  |  April 13, 2011 at 10:09 am

    • 3. Straight for Equality  |  April 13, 2011 at 10:26 am

      • 4. Ann S.  |  April 13, 2011 at 11:29 am


  • 5. Kathleen  |  April 13, 2011 at 10:11 am

    An excellent analysis of yesterday’s disappointing and disturbing ruling by the 5th Circuit in the case of Adar v. Smith (reported in the comments in the previous post)

    • 6. Kathleen  |  April 13, 2011 at 10:12 am

      Here’s the direct link to the article

      • 7. JPM  |  April 13, 2011 at 10:26 am


        Really seems like the Full Faith and Credit clause means nothing these days.

        I do hope they appeal directly to the Supreme Court.

      • 8. Chris  |  April 13, 2011 at 8:12 pm

        Seems like part of the rationale was they are unmarried. Seems like one more great reason to argue for equality before other courts.

    • 9. Sagesse  |  April 13, 2011 at 11:09 am

      That is disappointing.

    • 10. Michael Ejercito  |  April 13, 2011 at 1:42 pm

      An excellent analysis of yesterday’s disappointing and disturbing ruling by the 5th Circuit in the case of Adar v. Smith (reported in the comments in the previous post)

      From the article, it seems this was a decision on jurisdictional grounds, specifically that U.S. district courts lacked jurisdiction to hear FFCC suits.

      Addressing the equal protection issue was clearly erroneous.

      • 11. fiona64  |  April 13, 2011 at 2:25 pm

        And you got your JD from where, again?

        Oh, wait. You didn’t.

        Buh-bye, boyo.

        • 12. Ronnie  |  April 13, 2011 at 3:48 pm



  • 13. Alan E.  |  April 13, 2011 at 10:38 am

    I’m working on making merit badges. I found a bunch of unused ID badge laminating pouches at the last office supply swap.

    • 14. Alan E.  |  April 13, 2011 at 11:25 am

      Badges created!

      Thanks Ann S.!

      • 15. JonT  |  April 13, 2011 at 11:29 am

        Ok, that’s too cute :)

      • 16. Ann S.  |  April 13, 2011 at 11:33 am

        I love it!!!

      • 17. Judy  |  April 13, 2011 at 12:55 pm


      • 18. Chris  |  April 13, 2011 at 8:27 pm

        So cute. I love the first one. We need to start sending those to allies.

  • 19. Linda  |  April 13, 2011 at 10:49 am

    Three requests:
    1. Please, no more letters from Louis soliciting donations.
    2. Please, no more letters from Louis clarifying his stance that he still believes that homosexuality is wrong; but he supports our right to marry, even if we are suffering from a mental disorder.
    3. Please, please, PLEASE do not put Louis on the payroll in any capacity.

    • 20. fiona64  |  April 13, 2011 at 11:26 am

      You know what? So *what* if Louis has personal feelings about homosexuality. I think that the Duggars (and other Quiverfull families) have a frigging screw loose … but I’m not out there campaigning against their right to breed. Louis is actively supporting a cause that he used to oppose. I think that’s important.

      A story from my childhood: When I was about 8, one of my dad’s former students (an African-American man) got married to a Caucasian lady. Her own parents refused to attend. This was only a few years after Loving v. Virginia. Despite my dad’s own feelings about interracial marriage, he gave the bride away. Why? Because it was the right thing to do — regardless of his personal opinions on the matter. Supporting other peoples’ rights to do what they want (barring illegality), regardless of your personal opinions, is what equality under the law is all about.

      There. I said it.

      • 21. Ann S.  |  April 13, 2011 at 11:30 am

        Here, here!

        • 22. Ann S.  |  April 13, 2011 at 11:33 am

          Oops, I meant “Hear, hear!!”

      • 23. Linda  |  April 13, 2011 at 11:56 am

        Don’t misunderstand me, please. I appreciate the fact that he now supports our right to marry. I do not appreciate the fact that when he states his new position he is careful to make it clear that he still thinks we (homosexuals) are wrong.

        Now, that’s certainly his right. Of course we all have a right to our own personal opinions. The problem I have is putting him front and center as our new spokesperson. That just doesn’t sit well with me. It’s also just a bit unsettling to be lavishing such unrestricted praise for his new views…when he still sees us as wrong and suffering from mental disorders.

        That’s all. I’ve said my piece, too. :)

        • 24. nightshayde  |  April 13, 2011 at 12:33 pm

          I agree that “let them have rights even if they are a bunch of sickos” isn’t quite the message that we want around here. It just occurred to me, though, that his message *might* be helpful if circulated to the right(wing) people.

          I’m sure that no amount of our telling the anti-equality folks that there’s nothing wrong with being GLBT will get them to change their minds about homosexuality being “normal” rather than a “disorder,” — but I suppose “they have a disorder but should still have equal rights” is better than “they have a disorder & shouldn’t be entitled to anything.”

          Once the rights become freely-given & widespread, more and more of them will realize that marriage equality isn’t really a problem after all. At least that’s what I hope.

          • 25. Linda  |  April 13, 2011 at 12:42 pm

            @Nightshayde–And I would appreciate and welcome Louis promoting that mindset on his website. I do think it could be very helpful. I struggle with it being promoted on ours. That is certainly not how we view ourselves, nor how we want to present ourselves. That is my struggle. Acknowledge Louis’ change of mind re: SSM; thank him for his willingness to reconsider his stance on that issue. But please don’t laud him as our new hero. Please don’t broadcast his still-homophobic views as representing us. He can’t speak for us; not yet.

          • 26. Bob  |  April 13, 2011 at 12:55 pm

            nightshayde,,, thanks and Fiona too,,,, I agree, the important thing is that he stands for equality

            and so important, that his very position could actually help to change hearts and minds in the anti-equality group,,, they could use someone to explain that his opinion about homosexualtiy hasn’t changed,,, but his understanding of equality under the law, has,,,, that’s an important move which many of them may be able to make,,,,

            and that’s why I am asking Louis to help us with that,,,again he’s done his thing and going public helps, he has no obligation to go further,,,,

            however having experienced this degree of change in heart and mind would open him to exploring further, and wonder what he could do with that experience to help others,,, particularily on the anti-equality side,,,,

            Please Louis don’t severe your ties there,,, as difficult as it is you can do important work there,,,,

          • 27. nightshayde  |  April 13, 2011 at 1:07 pm

            That’s why I suggested in a comment yesterday that he consider taking a human sexuality course at a community college (in a pro-equality or at least not rabidly anti-equality state). Some of the best information I’ve ever gotten about GLBT issues was in human sexuality classes I took both at LAVC (Los Angeles Valley College – a community college in the San Fernando Valley) and at UCLA. Both courses opened my eyes in completely different ways.

            Some sort of Psychology of Sexuality course (if there even is such a thing) would likely be helpful as well. Anything to show that the myopic “only straight people are normal” idea is a bunch of hogwash.

  • 29. Mark M. (Seattle)  |  April 13, 2011 at 11:18 am

    Anxious to haer what Louis has going on…really hopew ith his help and his contacts we can win over a few more hearts and minds.
    Granted he still has some education to do on GLBT issues…sorting the truth from the lies he’s been told all these years, but I sure see him making great strides.
    Enjoy the beach Adam (you sure deserve it)

    • 30. Gregory in Salt Lake City  |  April 13, 2011 at 12:22 pm

      Good comment Mark. Once I let the idea in that maybe its OK to be gay, I questioned other untruths I was socialized to believe since birth… what’s to say Lewis can’t to the same.

      @Linda…I have empathy/understanding to all the points you mentioned. I appreciate the tone and brevity you and Fiona are using to agree to disagree. Maybe that is what we need more of at P8TT?

      • 31. Mark M. (Seattle)  |  April 13, 2011 at 12:30 pm

        That was my feeling as well. He has just started his journey with the GLBT community…one step at a time. :-)

      • 32. Linda  |  April 13, 2011 at 1:17 pm

        @Gregory–Well see, Fiona is one of my most favorite people around!!! I hardly see us as disagreeing; merely exchanging views. :)

        And I do sincerely hope, and honestly expect, Louis to make a complete turn-around on his other views as well. And when that does happen I will feel much better about having him speak for us. I look forward to that day.

        @Nightshayde–I thought your suggestion that Louis take a course on human sexuality was a very good one. And I could tell you were making that suggestion sincerely and not in a sarcastic vein.

        Louis has come far, but (imho) he still has a ways to go before I will feel comfortable promoting him as one of our representatives.

        • 33. Gregory in Salt Lake City  |  April 14, 2011 at 5:22 am

          Good Morning Linda : ) thx for reply. Hope you have a spectacular day!

  • 34. Tim in Sonoma  |  April 13, 2011 at 11:50 am

    I cant help but feel skeptical. It’s been a long hurtful journey, but I accept Louis’s help and thank him! I just need a little time to let it soak in. The trust factor is still a little tender.
    As far as Senator kohl goes I have signed and shared the petition. Lets hope our crys are heard.

  • 35. Peterplumber  |  April 13, 2011 at 11:58 am

    The proponants in the Prop 8 case have asked that Judge Walker hand over the recordings made at trial of Prop8 in his courtroom.

    Appellants Hollingsworth, Knight, Gutierrez, Jansson, and (hereinafter, “Proponents”) respectfully move the Court to
    order that former district judge Vaughn Walker cease further disclosures of the
    video recordings of the trial proceedings in this case, or any portion thereof, and
    that all copies of the trial recordings in the possession, custody, or control of any
    party to this case or of former judge Walker be returned promptly to the Court and
    held by the court clerk under seal.

    What are they afriad of?

    • 36. Kathleen  |  April 13, 2011 at 12:26 pm

      They’re also asking that all the recordings, including the ones in possession of Plaintiffs, be returned to the court.

      • 37. Bob  |  April 13, 2011 at 1:05 pm

        who knows how many recordings are out there, and how many more have been made from those???

        this request in itself draws attention to those recordings, once again bringing public awareness to the fact that the arguements are actually documented…..

        I suppose it would also then restrict that project of acting out those recordings in public places,,,, I liked that project,,,

        wonder if it would be helpful to repeat that project or expand on it at this time

        • 38. Kathleen  |  April 13, 2011 at 1:13 pm

          The prohibition against making the trial recordings public in no way impacts re-creations of the testimony from trial transcripts.

          I know plaintiffs and plaintiff-intervenors (CC of SF) have copies of at least part of the trial.

          I can’t remember details right now, but Walker offered copies of them for use in closing arguments. If you recall, portions were played during closing. Following the trial, proponents asked Walker to compel plaintiffs to return their copy and Walker denied the request.

          • 39. Bob  |  April 13, 2011 at 1:41 pm

            and in his closing arguments the point he makes about those re=inactments,, including the musical (which I hadn’t seen or heard before) is which would you learn more from,,,, or wish to be spread, a dramatization,,, or the real thing,,,,

            great presentation by Judge Walker,,,, and more publication of the trial…

            my question is, would the re-inactments be possible without the recordings? and it was always my thought that the re-inatments would serve to get people to actually look at and review the transcripts…..

          • 40. Kathleen  |  April 13, 2011 at 1:55 pm

            The reenactments were made using the transcripts, not recordings of the actual trial. In fact many (likely most) of the reenactments were created by people who didn’t actually witness the trial.

          • 41. John  |  April 13, 2011 at 9:30 pm

            It was fascinating to hear even that little bit of the examination of a witness.

            This is clearly, regardless of which way it is ruled when it gets to the SOTUS, going to be one of the most important legal cases in US history. Hopefully more Brown v. Board of Education than Dred Scott v. Sandford, but either way of extreme historical significance.

            For that reason alone the US citizens should have had a chance to hear it. I can’t say that I would have fully appreciated listening to excerpts of Loving v. Virginia during high school, but my education would have furthered had that opportunity existed.

            I was disappointed future generations won’t have that opportunity to learn from the source, both to see how our system works and to hear the absurd seriousness of Cooper and their witnesses. It’s going to be important for a future generation to have proof of how bigoted people were. It’s too bad it won’t come from the trial tapes.

          • 42. Kathleen  |  April 13, 2011 at 9:32 pm

            The tapes exist. I hope one day we’ll be able to see/hear them.

    • 43. nightshayde  |  April 13, 2011 at 12:27 pm

      Truth, light, and exposure?

      • 44. Gregory in Salt Lake City  |  April 13, 2011 at 12:41 pm


    • 45. AnonyGrl  |  April 13, 2011 at 1:10 pm

      They are afraid of what they have ALWAYS been afraid of, that we and the rest of the world will SEE that they had no case.

      A picture is worth a thousand words, and when that picture is a person who is embarrassed and changes his story half way through, and has no good answers to cross examination, well, then the picture AND the thousand words are pretty compelling, don’t you think?

      • 46. AnonyGrl  |  April 13, 2011 at 1:13 pm

        Although, I have to guess that they will try to claim that showing CLIPS is prejudicial, as they can be edited to say anything.

        My answer to that would be “Then release the whole thing.”


      • 47. Peterplumber  |  April 13, 2011 at 1:28 pm

        I had pictures used against me in a court case once (worker’s comp claim that went sour). I explained that though a picture may say a thousand words, it never tells the whole story.

        (They had a picture of me with a shovel in my hand and tried to say I was digging. The truth was that my partner went to get more top soil to put into the garden and I held the shovel while he was gone.)

    • 48. Sagesse  |  April 13, 2011 at 1:59 pm

      The proponents are defending whatever victory they got out of the Supreme Court decision that the trial could not be broadcast. Any tapes that have subsequently been used in court during the trial or in closing arguments are in the public domain now. They have been agitating for the rest of the copies to be returned for some time. The counter argument is that they were made for the court’s use and may still be germane in the various levels of appeal, so let the parties hang onto them.

      The clip Walker played (it was audio, not video), by the way, was from a deposition, not from the trial, if I recall.

      Sounds like their bleating will make for a diverting read.

      • 49. Kathleen  |  April 13, 2011 at 2:04 pm

        The clip was audio, but I’m pretty sure it’s from the trial, not a deposition. When I saw it, I found the spot in the transcripts it came from.

        • 50. Sagesse  |  April 13, 2011 at 2:36 pm

          My faulty memory. I’m at work, so I didn’t go back to the clip you posted above.

        • 51. Sagesse  |  April 13, 2011 at 6:12 pm

          Actually, I just watched the C SPAN video again, and it does look as if they showed the video clip. The camera is so far away that you can’t see anything. I originally thought it was a shot of the lecture hall in AZ.

          Can anyone lese see more clearly?

          • 52. Kathleen  |  April 13, 2011 at 6:35 pm

            You’re right. It is a video clip.

  • 53. Kathleen  |  April 13, 2011 at 11:59 am

    UPDATE: Perry

    Proponents’ (Appellants’) MOTION in 9th Circuit for order compelling return of trial recordings. Filed 4/13/2011

    Here we go… wondered if they were going to make a fuss about Walker using that clip.

    For those who haven’t seen it, Proponents are referring to a clip Walker used in this talk (clip starts around 33:40):

    • 54. Ed  |  April 13, 2011 at 12:22 pm

      Walkers response was dead on!

      • 55. Ed  |  April 13, 2011 at 12:48 pm

        Oh man, they are pissed!!! It’s almost comical….ok, it IS funny

        • 56. Peterplumber  |  April 13, 2011 at 2:18 pm

          And, of course, NOM has something to say…

          April 13, 2011 at 4:23 pm

          “What more evidence do we need that Judge Walker is a rogue judge with little regard for ordinary judicial process and fair play?” – Brian Brown, President

          • 57. LCH  |  April 13, 2011 at 2:26 pm

            Haahaahaa. It seems like NOM has flash cards that they use to piece together sound bites. The most often used cards being: rogue, cram-down-our-throats, and activist.


          • 58. fiona64  |  April 13, 2011 at 2:30 pm

            Maybe we need to make NOM bingo cards, LOL. When I was part of (back in the days of Usenet, before the earth’s crust had cooled), we had “breeder bingo” cards because we heard so many of the same phrases over and over again.


          • 59. fiona64  |  April 13, 2011 at 2:31 pm

            I must quickly explain here that *every* CF person I know differentiates between “parent” and “breeder.” Just for the record, this has nothing to do with anyone’s sexual orientation — and everything to do with their childrearing skills (or lack thereof).


          • 60. Elizabeth Oakes  |  April 13, 2011 at 2:38 pm

            Sounds like possible defamation to me. Good thing Walker doesn’t know any good lawyers. Oh, wait……

          • 61. LCH  |  April 13, 2011 at 2:49 pm

            @fiona. Or possibly a drinking game.

            ♀♀=♂♂=♀♂=∑♡ and fellow member of the CF club.

          • 62. Elizabeth Oakes  |  April 13, 2011 at 2:54 pm

            But wait a second, wait a second: didn’t SCOTUS say the trial couldn’t be broadcast? That’s very different from sealing all recordings of the trial in perpetuity, isn’t it? And playing an audio clip is NOT broadcasting, right? So isn’t NOM overplaying their greasy hand here?

          • 63. Elizabeth Oakes  |  April 13, 2011 at 2:55 pm

            Whoops, I guess that’s sorta what Sagesse is saying above, sorry.

          • 64. Chris  |  April 13, 2011 at 9:23 pm

            @LCH – more like Mad Libs. Inset words and go…

    • 65. Gregory in Salt Lake City  |  April 13, 2011 at 12:24 pm


    • 66. Sagesse  |  April 13, 2011 at 1:11 pm

      I noticed the clip at the time, and the fact it hadn’t appeared before. Will read later.

    • 67. nightshayde  |  April 13, 2011 at 3:05 pm

      Drat! It’s blocked at work (as are most things with video) & I can’t see it on my phone.

  • 68. LCH  |  April 13, 2011 at 2:05 pm


  • 69. Joe  |  April 13, 2011 at 3:18 pm

    Regarding the emergency action in Illinois about SB 1123. I received this email from Koehler’s assistant:

    Mr. Bonnette:
    This bill was heard this morning in the Senate Executive Committee and

    Roseann Visintin
    Legislative Assistant to
    State Senator David Koehler

    One down so so many to go.

  • 70. Martin the Brit  |  April 13, 2011 at 3:37 pm

    Not sure if anyone’s seen this before. I just stumbled across it on youtube o_O

    • 71. Kathleen  |  April 13, 2011 at 3:39 pm

      That question – “do you think you’ll marry a boy or a girl”…. seems perfectly normal to me!

    • 72. John  |  April 13, 2011 at 4:14 pm

      Did he really trace the fall of families to contraception? These people really are nuts.

      • 73. Kathleen  |  April 13, 2011 at 4:18 pm

        It was certainly a profound step in women’s independence. So in the sense that it made it easier for women to take charge of their bodies and thus their own life, it probably did signal the end of his view of the family.

    • 74. Gregory in Salt Lake City  |  April 14, 2011 at 5:34 am

      amazing how he says all this with a “straight” face…. : /

  • 75. Martin the Brit  |  April 13, 2011 at 3:44 pm

    No! No, Kathleen. It’s vile and disgusting! You just haven’t given it enough thought yet. Giving people autonomy over their own lives? There’d be anarchy if we allowed something like that to happen :-O

    • 76. Kathleen  |  April 13, 2011 at 4:01 pm

      I know! What was I thinking!?!

    • 77. Elizabeth Oakes  |  April 13, 2011 at 8:06 pm

      It’s not giving PEOPLE autonomy over their own lives that’s disgusting and the downfall of the American family, just WOMEN. Other people who aren’t women having autonomy is okay.

  • 78. Kathleen  |  April 13, 2011 at 3:45 pm

    Gay Immigrants Allege Human Rights Abuses at ICE Detention Centers

  • 81. Ronnie  |  April 13, 2011 at 4:00 pm

    I just shared this video on FB that I got from…but I thought some of the trackers would enjoy it…..

    Guyanese alternative soul singer, Nhojj, was the 1st gay indie artist to reach #1 on the MTV charts for his song titled “Love”. Here he is again with an awesome video for his rendition of “Amazing Grace” in support of Marriage Equality.

    From the video’s description:

    “Recorded by OUTMusic Award winner Nhojj. Directed by OUT 100 nominee Kirk Shannon-Butts. This new version of “Amazing Grace” expands the innate power of this hymn to affirm the LGBT community and support Gay Marriage. It represents a step forward for homosexuals in reclaiming their spiritual lives and healing wounds. This is the first time a well known Christian hymn has been used in a music video to express the “rightness and godliness” of same gender love — portraying a male interracial couple exchanging marriage vows and living in a loving committed relationship.”

    Nhojj’s soulful voice is peaceful but powerful & you can tell that he feels the music & wants you, the viewer & listener, to feel its energy as well. Anywho….enjoy….<3…Ronnie:

    • 82. Gregory in Salt Lake City  |  April 14, 2011 at 11:36 am

      pretty, feel-good video. Thx Ronnie : )
      p.s. Manilla or Raja!?

      • 83. Ronnie  |  April 14, 2011 at 5:08 pm

        You’re welcome…..This season is a tuff one…..I love Manila & she came out really strong in the last 2weeks but Raja owns that runway….I want them both to win…gurrr….I don’t know…I can’t choose…. ; ) …Ronnie

        • 84. Ronnie  |  April 14, 2011 at 5:10 pm

          lol..tough one… :”> ….Ronnie

          • 85. Gregory in Salt Lake City  |  April 15, 2011 at 5:41 am

            LOL! Me too….can’t choose! Guess we’ll know April 25th!

  • 86. Kathleen  |  April 13, 2011 at 7:03 pm

    Lawrence O’Donnell talks about Louis Marinelli’s encounter with Courage Campaign’s Arisha and Ant.

    • 87. Gregory in Salt Lake City  |  April 14, 2011 at 5:59 am

      that link is about Donald Trump/Celebrity Apprentice…though SS marriage is mentioned.

      Here is the link:

      • 88. Gregory in Salt Lake City  |  April 14, 2011 at 6:05 am

        Kathleen, I’m glad you mentioned, otherwise would have missed the clip. I got pretty emotional when watching it. ((HUGS)) to you!

      • 89. Kathleen  |  April 14, 2011 at 6:06 am

        Thanks for fixing the link. I just copied what Ant had posted on facebook.

  • 90. Bob  |  April 13, 2011 at 7:15 pm

    I love that Louis made mainstream news,,,,, would really really love if someone actually interviewed him and Louis was able to talk about his experience…..

    Love seeing the rainbow flag on mainline news too,,,

  • 91. Matthew  |  April 13, 2011 at 7:38 pm

    I watched the video. I’m having trouble figuring out what NOM is freaking out about? It was 2 audio clips. The clips made their expert witness sound like an idiot, of course. But I didn’t see any video broadcast, which is what I thought the scotus shot down. Actually iirc it was shot down on a procedural issue?

  • 92. Canadian JAG Officer  |  April 13, 2011 at 10:04 pm

    So NOM is ramping up efforts against New York Equality….

    If youre from New York please contact your Senator!!!!

  • 93. New  |  April 14, 2011 at 8:11 am

    Rep. Trent Franks prepares secretive hearing on Defense of Marriage Act:

    • 94. New  |  April 14, 2011 at 8:15 am

      “People For the American Way Senior Fellow Peter Montgomery predicts Franks’ hearing will be a parade of “extremists.””
      “Montgomery would not speculate on who would be called as witnesses. But according to a recent article in The Washington Blade, Maggie Gallagher, chair of the anti-gay National Organization for Marriage (NOM) said that she would appreciate the chance to speak at a hearing on DOMA. (Update: Gallagher is scheduled to appear at the hearing.)”
      “(Update: Gallagher is scheduled to appear at the hearing.)” > Hhuhm It will be VERY productive!

    • 95. Kathleen  |  April 14, 2011 at 8:31 am

      Ed Whelan mentioned his planned testimony

      • 96. New  |  April 14, 2011 at 9:03 am

        “Defending Marriage” sounds and feels like it’s 1996 again.
        Déjà vu. :)=)

        • 97. Ann S.  |  April 14, 2011 at 1:04 pm

          Should be interesting! I note with some surprise that one of the three scheduled witnesses, Prof. Carlos Ball of Rutgers Law School, is a gay man who is raising two children with his partner. The other two are Maggie Gallagher and Ed Whelan.

          Uh, one out of three ain’t bad?

          • 98. Mark M. (Seattle)  |  April 14, 2011 at 1:11 pm

            Prof. Ball

          • 99. AnonyGrl  |  April 14, 2011 at 1:34 pm

            My BET is that Whelan will be first, as his remarks will be most likely the most inflamatory, Ball second, so that he can be buried in the middle, and Maggie will be scheduled for last, so that her points will not be subsequently refuted (and then she will claim she ‘won’).

            Anybody want to take me up on this bet?


            P.S. Have I been a bit too sarcastic lately? I think I may have been… but I haven’t been feeling well. However, the weather is getting nicer, and I think a bit more sunshine will sort me out. Love you all!!!

          • 100. Mark M. (Seattle)  |  April 14, 2011 at 1:41 pm

            Naw, that would be a losers bet sweetie cause you are dead on :-)
            Feel better soon….get out and enjoy some Spring
            Love you too!!!

Leave a Reply

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

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

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ 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 )


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

Follow us on Twitter @EqualityOnTrial

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


TWITTER: Follow us @EqualityOnTrial

Share this

Bookmark and Share

SITE STATS (by Wordpress)

  • 4,585,331 views of the Tracker and counting as of today...