As mentioned before, I am being paid to write as the LA County Independent Examiner.
Here's the prediction that I made in November of 2008 on this issue, where I emphatically stated that Proposition 8 was unconstitutional and would be overturned. LINK LINK LINK
AND BELOW IS beginning of my latest article:
(San Francisco) A Federal Judge in Northern California, Justice Vaughn Walker, struck down the state's ban on same-sex marriage today, thus overruling the narrow passage of Proposition 8 that was voted on in November of 2008.
The voiding of Proposition 8 definitively removed the clause the measure had added to the California Constitution that said "only marriage between a man and..."
CLICK TO READ REST OF ARTICLE
Showing posts with label Constitutionality. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Constitutionality. Show all posts
11.20.2008
Prop. 8 To Be Overturned
As I had HOPED, the California Supreme Court has agreed to hear 3 cases challenging the recent passage of Proposition 8; a vote that overturned same-sex couples' marriage equality rights.
For those of you who do not know, before Prop. 8 was narrowly passed, the California court had already held that same-sex marriages must me allowed for, and legally recognized.
The 3 cases that the court has agreed to hear rightfully claim that the ban, which passed on election day, took away constitutionally guaranteed civil rights of a minority group.
Essentially the logic here is that the slim victory for those wishing to ban equal marriage rights does not hold water because: Majority vote does not equate to Constitutionality.
For those of you who do not know, before Prop. 8 was narrowly passed, the California court had already held that same-sex marriages must me allowed for, and legally recognized.
The 3 cases that the court has agreed to hear rightfully claim that the ban, which passed on election day, took away constitutionally guaranteed civil rights of a minority group.
Essentially the logic here is that the slim victory for those wishing to ban equal marriage rights does not hold water because: Majority vote does not equate to Constitutionality.
All three cases claim the measure takes away the civil rights of a vulnerable minority group.
Essentially, those bringing suit are rightfully stating that voters alone cannot enact such a ban because it is facially unconstitutional.
For those of you who do not know:
- The Court did not have to hear any of these cases.
- The Court chooses to hear cases that they deem to be important.
- The Court had already previously declared same-sex marriage bans to be unconstitutional.
MY LOGIC-BASED PREDICTION: The California Supreme Court will overturn Proposition 8, thus re-granting equal rights to same-sex couple's wishing to receive the same 1,200 rights enjoyed by persons who are heterosexual. Rights that come with the contractually based agreement that is called marriage (figure represents state and federal rights combined, varies slightly by state).
Religious people claim that they MUST ban same-sex marriage, but they cannot give any valid reasons as to why this should be.
I will give a reader $100 if they can present to me a constitutionally sound, logic-based argument for banning same-sex marriage.
Hint: There isn't one.
11.12.2008
Roman Catholic bishop's vs. Obama & U.S. Constitution
As FOXnews.com has reported this morning, the nation's group of Roman Catholic bishops "vowed" yesterday to "forcefully confront the Obama administration over its support for abortion rights, saying the church and religious freedom could be under attack in the new presidential administration."
Once again, religious people, THIS TIME THE HIGHER-UPS, have clearly demonstrated that they do not understand the U.S. Constitution or how the U.S. government must function in relation to that constitution.
(Note: This is not to say that all religious people are ignorant of the law of our land)
Specifically, these bishops have displayed their misunderstanding, willful or otherwise, of the First Amendment's right to freedom of religion.
1 minute crash course:
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof" ...
...Means that the government cannot endorse one religion or make laws for religious reasons (as the Supreme Court has made abundantly clear with its "Lemon test" from Lemon v. Kurtzman and its "Endorsement test," from Sandra Day O'Connor in the majority opinion in Lynch v. Donnelly):
So... can we really blame the bishops' followers if they are wrongly educated every Sunday on what our Constitution says and how it works in our system?
To a fairly large extent, yes. People need to start reading books and educating themselves so they can start questioning what they are told rather than regurgitating falsehoods.
The FOXnews article states that, "In an impassioned discussion on Catholics in public life, several bishops said they would accept no compromise on abortion policy" [emphasis added].
They're S.O.L. and they don't even know it.
WHAT CAN THE CHURCH DO?
The Church would need to start trying to use SCIENCE and valid secular arguments to even try to begin the long process of overturning Roe v. Wade.
We could also delve into Roe v. Wade and the establishment of the right to privacy, but there truly is no reason to. If you do not understand what I posted here, there isn't much hope for you.
;)
Once again, religious people, THIS TIME THE HIGHER-UPS, have clearly demonstrated that they do not understand the U.S. Constitution or how the U.S. government must function in relation to that constitution.
(Note: This is not to say that all religious people are ignorant of the law of our land)
Specifically, these bishops have displayed their misunderstanding, willful or otherwise, of the First Amendment's right to freedom of religion.
1 minute crash course:
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof" ...
...Means that the government cannot endorse one religion or make laws for religious reasons (as the Supreme Court has made abundantly clear with its "Lemon test" from Lemon v. Kurtzman and its "Endorsement test," from Sandra Day O'Connor in the majority opinion in Lynch v. Donnelly):
(Lemon Test)
- The government's action must have a secular legislative purpose;
- The government's action must not have the primary effect of either advancing or inhibiting religion;
- The government's action must not result in an "excessive government entanglement" with religion.
So... can we really blame the bishops' followers if they are wrongly educated every Sunday on what our Constitution says and how it works in our system?
To a fairly large extent, yes. People need to start reading books and educating themselves so they can start questioning what they are told rather than regurgitating falsehoods.
The FOXnews article states that, "In an impassioned discussion on Catholics in public life, several bishops said they would accept no compromise on abortion policy" [emphasis added].
They're S.O.L. and they don't even know it.
WHAT CAN THE CHURCH DO?
The Church would need to start trying to use SCIENCE and valid secular arguments to even try to begin the long process of overturning Roe v. Wade.
We could also delve into Roe v. Wade and the establishment of the right to privacy, but there truly is no reason to. If you do not understand what I posted here, there isn't much hope for you.
;)
11.08.2008
11.07.2008
Wayne Bessen on Prop. 8
The following is an email that I received from a gay rights activist named Wayne Bessen who is a figurehead of TruthWinsOut.org.
Nov 7, 2008 - I can understand why white gay people are angry. I certainly am. But, let's take a step back and look at this dispassionately.
I believe our failure with the African American vote (70% voted in favor of Prop. 8) has more to do with education levels than race.
In general, people with lower levels of education - of any race - do not vote for gay rights.
White people are twice as likely to graduate college as black people. This accounts for the difference by race on Prop. 8.
Think of it this way. 57 percent of white people with a college education voted No on Prop. 8. Yet, 58 percent of white people with no college voted yes on 8. In other words, uneducated urban black people vote very much like uneducated rural white people.
Uneducated people - black, white and Hispanic - often derive their power from physical strength. They perceive being gay as weak and antithetical to real manhood. By voicing support for gay rights, they lose status and often fear rivals may perceive them as gay.
The easiest way to gain status is dissing faggots. I see this attitude all the time in Brooklyn - in the gym and on the basketball court, where I often play. (Not the best sample, I realize this)
Meanwhile, educated people of all races gain power by outsmarting opponents - not beating them up. This creates a safe space to support gay rights and not lose social status. (Unfortunately, the fact that the conservative black church is a central organizing point for politics makes even educated blacks less likely to vote for gay rights. But, this is secondary to education levels.)
It is understandable that black support for anti-gay efforts drives white gay people nuts. It is difficult to understand how people affected by bigotry can promote bigotry - as if they are selfish people who learned all the wrong lessons from the civil rights movement.
But, remember, uneducated people - of all races - are not students of history. They react to the environment around them, which often rewards homophobia.
(Compounding this perception problem is that the vast majority of overt homophobia experienced by urban gays comes from black people. In places like New York City, you almost never hear a white person say "faggot". But, we hear this from uneducated blacks too often. This makes the problem seem worse than it is. We often forget that we moved to places like New York to escape uneducated whites in rural areas that were just as openly homophobic. In other words - it is about education - not race.)
A few of possible solutions to ponder:
1) We must air public service announcements with people like former basketball star Charles Barkley - who is a tough guy and supporter of same-sex marriage. We must show masculine African American figures who are supportive, every chance we get.
Obama is also a huge help, because he is inclusive and is the ultimate example of power though academic success. His leadership will improve our fate.
2) We must work to raise the education levels of all Americans - which will lead to less homophobia of all races.
The fact that we have so many African Americans in prison - and not graduating is a legacy of racism and a national disgrace. This must change.
3) We must also have substantive discussion with the African American community - as many GLBT leaders have suggested. But, until we raise education levels, there is only so much we can do to win support of urban blacks - or rural whites.
In other words, scholarships for urban blacks and rural whites are as effective as spending money on education specifically about gay rights. Keep this in mind.
4) While I recognize that there are many supportive pro-gay black churches, as long as this is the central organizing place for black politics, this is not helpful for gay rights. Alternative organizing places for aspiring black leaders must be strengthened.
Nov 7, 2008 - I can understand why white gay people are angry. I certainly am. But, let's take a step back and look at this dispassionately.
I believe our failure with the African American vote (70% voted in favor of Prop. 8) has more to do with education levels than race.
In general, people with lower levels of education - of any race - do not vote for gay rights.
White people are twice as likely to graduate college as black people. This accounts for the difference by race on Prop. 8.
Think of it this way. 57 percent of white people with a college education voted No on Prop. 8. Yet, 58 percent of white people with no college voted yes on 8. In other words, uneducated urban black people vote very much like uneducated rural white people.
Uneducated people - black, white and Hispanic - often derive their power from physical strength. They perceive being gay as weak and antithetical to real manhood. By voicing support for gay rights, they lose status and often fear rivals may perceive them as gay.
The easiest way to gain status is dissing faggots. I see this attitude all the time in Brooklyn - in the gym and on the basketball court, where I often play. (Not the best sample, I realize this)
Meanwhile, educated people of all races gain power by outsmarting opponents - not beating them up. This creates a safe space to support gay rights and not lose social status. (Unfortunately, the fact that the conservative black church is a central organizing point for politics makes even educated blacks less likely to vote for gay rights. But, this is secondary to education levels.)
It is understandable that black support for anti-gay efforts drives white gay people nuts. It is difficult to understand how people affected by bigotry can promote bigotry - as if they are selfish people who learned all the wrong lessons from the civil rights movement.
But, remember, uneducated people - of all races - are not students of history. They react to the environment around them, which often rewards homophobia.
(Compounding this perception problem is that the vast majority of overt homophobia experienced by urban gays comes from black people. In places like New York City, you almost never hear a white person say "faggot". But, we hear this from uneducated blacks too often. This makes the problem seem worse than it is. We often forget that we moved to places like New York to escape uneducated whites in rural areas that were just as openly homophobic. In other words - it is about education - not race.)
A few of possible solutions to ponder:
1) We must air public service announcements with people like former basketball star Charles Barkley - who is a tough guy and supporter of same-sex marriage. We must show masculine African American figures who are supportive, every chance we get.
Obama is also a huge help, because he is inclusive and is the ultimate example of power though academic success. His leadership will improve our fate.
2) We must work to raise the education levels of all Americans - which will lead to less homophobia of all races.
The fact that we have so many African Americans in prison - and not graduating is a legacy of racism and a national disgrace. This must change.
3) We must also have substantive discussion with the African American community - as many GLBT leaders have suggested. But, until we raise education levels, there is only so much we can do to win support of urban blacks - or rural whites.
In other words, scholarships for urban blacks and rural whites are as effective as spending money on education specifically about gay rights. Keep this in mind.
4) While I recognize that there are many supportive pro-gay black churches, as long as this is the central organizing place for black politics, this is not helpful for gay rights. Alternative organizing places for aspiring black leaders must be strengthened.
11.05.2008
Religion & Ignorance Go Hand-in-Hand to Ban Same-sex Marriage
* I re-wrote this and added a video at the end, I was angry before, I think this better represents my feelings now*
California - The California Supreme Court's ruling in favor of Equality in Marriage is overturned by the religious, the less educated, and the right-wing.
As the exit polls are showing:
The Less educated-
People with only a high school, or some college education voted to ban same-sex marriage.
The More Educated-
Those with a college degree or postgraduate degree voted with the California State Supreme Court to keep same-sex marriage equality.
Religion-
Those who declared themselves to be followers of a religion voted overwhelmingly in favor of the ban.
Those who declared no religious affiliation voted 91% in favor of equality.
Those who attended church weekly voted 82% in favor of banning equal marriage rights.
Those who never attend church voted 85% in favor of equality.
White Evangelicals and "Born Again" voted 80% in favor of a ban.
Location-
People in Urban areas voted against the ban.
Those in Rural areas voted for the ban.
Presidential Supporters-
McCain supporters voted 82% in favor of the ban. John McCain favored state by state bans, as he even appeared in a state advertisement before.
Obama supporters voted 68% against the ban.
--------------------------------------
Arizona and Florida voted the same way with very similar exit poll results.
So if you haven't gathered it yet: The less educated, the religious, and the right-wing have decided that I am not an equal person - deserving of equal rights (marriage comes with about 1,200 rights depending on the state you live in)- RIGHTS that are supposed to be guaranteed under the United States Constitution as confirmed by the California Supreme Court.
Did you know that you can get married by walking into City Hall and signing papers, nothing religious required? It's 100% true.
Did you know that the government cannot make a law based on a religous view unless it serves a substantial government interest? This is also 100% true!
Anyone who understands constitutional law... (like say... The CALIFORNIA SUPREME COURT)... knows that this ban on same-sex marriages is unconstitutional.
I challenge anyone to provide a legitimate reason as to why the government would ban same-sex marriages. Legally speaking it cannot be based on a religious reason.
Hint: There isn't one!
If anyone ever wondered why I dislike religion and ignorance of the law THIS is just one of the many reasons.
In California the less educated, closed-minded religious people (note that I didn't say all religious people are closed-minded) who live sectioned off and away from the vast majority of (open) homosexuals and the diverse people in the cities... for some reason... think that they are allowed to judge, run, and ruin people's lives.
Thousands of same-sex couples are now suddenly no longer legally recognized as equals in California.
Those who voted for Proposition 8 were religious, less educated, and living in their made-up dream world where homosexuals aren't people, but sinners. They worship a god whose existence they cannot even prove.
If these people cannot even tolerate, much less accept me, why should I tolerate them? Why can't they just leave homosexuals alone?
At first I felt defeated today. I will admit that I even cried. But I'm not going to give up. And maybe because I refuse to give up, someday, I will be treated as an equal human being in the eyes of the law.
I do not need your acceptance, I just want the equality guaranteed to me under the United States Constitution.
10.29.2008
US versus THEM
Bush, McCain, and Palin couldn't make a speech like this to save their lives. One reason: because they simply do not have the skills.
But it goes much deeper than that!
Some people like to say that Obama is a smooth talker and nothing more, but it doesn't take much to realize the other reasons as to why Bush or McCain or Palin would never say these words. They aren't "unificators," as Bush might say. They are dividers.
They approach life with an "US versus THEM" attitude.
McCain and Palin said that there were parts of the country that were pro-American and parts that were anti-American. That some parts of the country contained real Americans and some did not.
"US versus THEM"
So many have tried to call Obama a communist because he wants to tax the rich more and give more assistance to the poor. Bush, McCain, and Palin believe that rich people should keep every penny they make. As if all poor people are lazy or undeserving of help. As if someone making $15 million a year instead of $18 million a year is being treated unfairly as other families struggle to put food on the table, to educate their children, or to make rent payments...
"US versus THEM"
McCain and Palin see homosexual marriage as a threat to straight religious people's views on how things should be. They think that LGBT people shouldn't be treated equally. They want to make an amendment to the constitution to ban same-sex marriages as if gay people are not real people. As if I am not someone's son. As if I am not someone's grandson. As if I am not someone's brother. As if my love for another person is somehow inferior...
"US versus THEM"
Taking a stance other than being in favor of the Iraq war somehow meant that you were against the troops. They said it was "unpatriotic." For some reason, it's un-American and un-patriotic to disagree on an issue as big as WAR. For some reason you are either pro-Iraq war or you are against our soldiers and against America...
"US versus THEM"
Let's face it: life is not that black and white, things aren't that simple, and this mentality and these words do nothing good for this country or the world. They spread lies, they unfairly categorize people. These are ignorant words spread by narrow-minded people. Words like these can only cause further division.
You will never hear the words like you heard here in this video coming from John McCain or Sarah Palin, because they don't understand this country or care about people who aren't just like them. They don't care about you and they don't care about me.
Let's face it: life is not that black and white, things aren't that simple, and this mentality and these words do nothing good for this country or the world. They spread lies, they unfairly categorize people. These are ignorant words spread by narrow-minded people. Words like these can only cause further division.
You will never hear the words like you heard here in this video coming from John McCain or Sarah Palin, because they don't understand this country or care about people who aren't just like them. They don't care about you and they don't care about me.
McCain pointed at Obama during the second debate and called him "That one." Well I really hope that "that one" wins. Because I've had enough division these past 8 years.
10.28.2008
California is voting soon...
So I know that there probably isn't more than a handful of persons voting on same-sex marriage bans on November 4th that will visit this blog.
But for those of you who think that Same-sex marriages are wrong for religious reasons, I ask you to read my research (CLICK).
If you think that Same-sex marriages can be legally banned, I urge you to read my research on the constitutionality of same-sex marriage bans (CLICK).
www.youreadygrandma.blogspot.com
But for those of you who think that Same-sex marriages are wrong for religious reasons, I ask you to read my research (CLICK).
If you think that Same-sex marriages can be legally banned, I urge you to read my research on the constitutionality of same-sex marriage bans (CLICK).
www.youreadygrandma.blogspot.com
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)