The California Supreme Court decision is close.

Apparently (I'm relying mostly on posts from Pam's House Blend), based on when the court is able to announce decisions, & within the 90 window to make an announcement, & taking into account how memorial day affects their schedule that leaves 4 possible dates:

Thursday, May 21 (30th Anniversary of the White Night Riots)
Tuesday, May 26
Thursday, May 28
Monday, June 1

Tomorrow is unlikely b/c they didn't file any notices today that they would be announcing anything tomorrow. They could file a notice on Friday (Harvey Milk's Birthday) to announce the decision on Tuesday the 26th.

Just for context The White Night riots were a response to the assignation of Harvey Milk (the first openly gay elected official in CA & Mayor Moscone). The assassin was found innocent on the murder charges & convicted only of man slaughter for shooting them both in cold blood & was to serve a 5 year jail sentence.

Quote :

"A surge of people from the Castro District walked again to City Hall, chanting "Avenge Harvey Milk" and "He got away with murder".[93][135] Pandemonium rapidly escalated as rocks were hurled at the front doors of the building. Milk's friends and aides tried to stop the destruction, but the mob of more than 3,000 ignored them and lit police cars on fire. They shoved a burning newspaper dispenser through the broken doors of City Hall, then cheered as the flames grew"

Quote :

"Later that evening, May 21, 1979, several police cruisers filled with officers wearing riot gear arrived at the Elephant Walk Bar on Castro Street. Harvey Milk's protégé Cleve Jones and a reporter for the San Francisco Chronicle, Warren Hinckle, watched as officers stormed into the bar and began to beat patrons at random. After a 15-minute melee, they left the bar and struck out at people walking along the street.[18][137] The chief of police finally ordered the officers out of the neighborhood. By morning, 61 police officers and 100 rioters and gay residents of the Castro had been hospitalized.[138] Over a million dollars of damage had been done to City Hall, police cruisers, and the Elephant Walk Bar.""

-wiki

And from what I've heard the government has already started putting up barricades around government buildings & the Castro which makes me think they wont wait until June 1. My thoughts on how the supreme court of CA should rule aside, they aren't setting themselves up for a peaceful reaction if they are going to announce an anti-equality decision around the anniversary of the most infamous gay rights related riots in that state.

5/20/2009 4:40:16 PM

I can agree that announcing a negative decision for gay-rights groups around the time of the assassination of a gay-rights icon would be pretty stupid. We'll have to see what happens.

5/20/2009 7:44:51 PM

Quote :

"The court issued an order to show cause in Strauss, Tyler, and City and County of San Francisco directing the parties to brief and argue the following issues: (1) Is Proposition 8 invalid because it constitutes a revision of, rather than an amendment to, the California Constitution? (See Cal. Const., art. XVIII, §§ 1-4.) (2) Does Proposition 8 violate the separation of powers doctrine under the California Constitution? (3) If Proposition 8 is not unconstitutional, what is its effect, if any, on the marriages of same-sex couples performed before the adoption of Proposition 8? Opinions in the above cases will be filed on: Tuesday, May 26, 2009 at 10:00 a.m."

The decision day is set.

5/22/2009 2:34:54 PM

Someone might have mentioned it, but a lot of this comes down to whether or not you believe someone is born a homosexual.

Say "this will lead to polygamy/beastiality/etc" all you want, but I challenge you to come up with scientific proof as to whether or not you can be born a furry. You can be born gay just the same as you can be born black or white, so a closer analogy is, in fact, the interracial issue.

http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,978923,00.html

You could say "but what about people who were cured of the gay!?", and to that I say, "really? you don't mean they repress themselves?"

5/22/2009 2:52:17 PM

Quote :

"this will lead to polygamy/beastiality/etc"

Wait right there....
You're seriously gonna juxtapose polygamy with beastiality????!?
[edit: wait, I see that you're quoting others.... nevermind]

Beastiality is sex with animals. Animal don't and can't enter legal contracts because they're animals -- aside from the absurdity of the idea, animals simply can't consent. No consent = No legal contract.

Polygamy is 3 or more adults consensually agreeing on forming a family and spending their lives together. There is no reason why gay marriage shouldn't lead to legal polygamy, as the whole point is equality under the law.

Quote :

"born gay just the same as you can be born black or white"

It doesn't matter whether gays are born gay, because sexuality shouldn't have anything to do with marriage -- that's kind of the point. If two straight guys want to get married and form a legally-recognized family unit, they should be able to. If three straight girls and a gay guy want to get married and form a legally-recognized family unit, they should be able to. If any consenting adults want to get married and form a legally-recognized family unit, they should be able to.

[Edited on May 22, 2009 at 3:23 PM. Reason : ]

5/22/2009 3:22:57 PM

Quote :

"It doesn't matter whether gays are born gay, because sexuality shouldn't have anything to do with marriage -- that's kind of the point. If two straight guys want to get married and form a legally-recognized family unit, they should be able to. If three straight girls and a gay guy want to get married and form a legally-recognized family unit, they should be able to. If any consenting adults want to get married and form a legally-recognized family unit, they should be able to."

This is a response to marriage rights opponents like NOM et al who believe that we are, by recognizing marriage equality, "condoning a lifestyle" or "confusing children", not upholding equal treatment under the law.

Unfortunately, NOM and its allies represent the most relevant and sizable opposition to marriage equality, as seen in California during prop 8.

BTW, don't miss the new NOM ad: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GpjPzhSjPqQ

Btw, if you want information about Pride Week stuff in Greensboro, join the Greensboro LGBT group on facebook or PM me or something. Publicity has been weak so far but we're trying to get the word out.

[Edited on May 23, 2009 at 3:07 PM. Reason : .]

5/23/2009 3:06:27 PM

Quote :

"You can be born gay just the same as you can be born black or white"

Not really, but that's ok. At best, if it's genetic, it's a mutation like down's syndrome.

5/23/2009 10:13:36 PM

Hint: All of our current characteristics are mutations.

5/23/2009 10:18:54 PM

Hint: most of our characteristics don't prevent us from passing on our genes...

5/24/2009 1:47:47 PM

Hint: neither does homosexuality.

5/24/2009 2:03:11 PM

Quote :

" Hint: neither does homosexuality."

Did your parents not tell you where babies come from?

Quote :

" but I challenge you to come up with scientific proof as to whether or not you can be born a furry. You can be born gay just the same as you can be born black or white, so a closer analogy is, in fact, the interracial issue."

Wait, what? So you are arguing that you CAN be born a furry? Furryism is a deviant sexual behavior just like homosexuality... this actually illustrates the point of those that believe homosexuality is an environmental trait.

I think the modern homosexual lifestyle IS almost purely environmental and has very little to do with genetics. There is a big distinction between having sex with the same sex and being a "Homosexual."

[Edited on May 24, 2009 at 4:22 PM. Reason : .]

5/24/2009 4:16:21 PM

Quote :

"Did your parents not tell you where babies come from?"

I'm sure this comes as a great shock to you, but it turns out that even homos can have babies. Their everyday sexual desires might not lead them down that route, but between science and the good old fashioned fucking, they can make it happen. I don't want to blow your mind, but fags have been having kids for thousands of years. It probably won't stop anytime soon.

Quote :

"There is a big distinction between having sex with the same sex and being a "Homosexual." "

lolwut

5/24/2009 4:44:16 PM

I'm gay, and my fraternal twin is not, even though we shared the same prenatal environment & had a very similar upbringing. My family on my mothers side also has a history of having gay family members (not something I knew until I was like 18).

But whether it is genetic or not, doesn't change a damned thing in regards to whether or not I should be able to have hospital visitation rights, & power of attorney & so forth with my husband. And while we can obtain some of those things with legal contracts which cost a lot of money, and in many cases apply on a state by state basis (so one of us getting injured or sick while vacationing out of state could end up in a pretty messy legal situation), there is still no way to come close to what marriage equality would provide.

Quote :

" 1. Joint parental rights of children 2. Joint adoption 3. Status as "next-of-kin" for hospital visits and medical decisions 4. Right to make a decision about the disposal of loved ones remains 5. Immigration and residency for partners from other countries 6. Crime victims recovery benefits 7. Domestic violence protection orders 8. Judicial protections and immunity 9. Automatic inheritance in the absence of a will 10. Public safety officers death benefits 11. Spousal veterans benefits 12. Social Security 13. Medicare 14. Joint filing of tax returns 15. Wrongful death benefits for surviving partner and children 16. Bereavement or sick leave to care for partner or children 17. Child support 18. Joint Insurance Plans 19. Tax credits including: Child tax credit, Hope and lifetime learning credits 20. Deferred Compensation for pension and IRAs 21. Estate and gift tax benefits 22. Welfare and public assistance 23. Joint housing for elderly 24. Credit protection 25. Medical care for survivors and dependents of certain veterans These are just a few of the 1400 state and federal benefits that gays and lesbians are denied by not being able to marry. Most of these benefits cannot be privately arranged or contracted for within the legal system."

Quote :

"But can’t a lawyer set all this up for gay and lesbian couples? No. A lawyer can set up some things like durable power of attorney, wills and medical power of attorney. There are several problems with this, however. 1. It costs thousands of dollars in legal fees. A simple marriage license, which usually costs under $100 would cover all the same rights and benefits. 2. Any of these can be challenged in court. As a matter of fact, more wills are challenged than not. In the case of wills, legal spouses always have more legal power than any other family member. 3. Marriage laws are universal. If someone’s husband or wife is injured in an accident, all you need to do is show up and say you’re his or her spouse. You will not be questioned. If you show up at the hospital with your legal paperwork, the employees may not know what to do with you. If you simply say, "He's my husband," you will immediately be taken to your spouse's side. "

[Edited on May 24, 2009 at 5:25 PM. Reason : copy & pasted a list & info]

5/24/2009 5:18:18 PM

bump for the decision which should be announced later today around 10 am (while I'm at work)

5/26/2009 1:34:39 AM

Although that is pacific time so it should be around 1pm for us.

5/26/2009 5:46:23 AM

Upheld the ban.

5/26/2009 1:28:58 PM

GOOD NEWS! It's still constitutional to discriminate against consenting adults in California.

5/26/2009 1:33:28 PM

DON'T WORRY SON! They wont be able to protect themselves from attackers out in Cali either.

Although, LUCKILY, everyone was deprived of that right equally.

5/26/2009 1:42:23 PM

Except it's not discremination. No rights are taken away from homosexuals in California, they have the exact same rights as every other Californian.

5/26/2009 1:42:27 PM

Quote :

"Except it's not discremination. No rights are taken away from homosexuals in California, they have the exact same rights as every other Californian."

Of course they do!

5/26/2009 1:45:38 PM

And what can they not do that anyone else can?

[Edited on May 26, 2009 at 1:51 PM. Reason : .]

5/26/2009 1:51:28 PM

Quote :

"Upheld the ban."

Except on the about 18,000 thousand marriages that already took place, those are still valid marriages.

So that means it will go to the ballots again in 2010 to see if they can get 50% + 1 to re-amend the constitution. An off year election period may change the dynamic of who is turning out to vote enough to make a difference since it was already incredibly close to start with.

And depending on how that turns out probably one side or the other will bring it back in 2012. I think CA is going to see this ballot measure on every ballot every 2 years for the next decade.

---

Equality CA or campaign courage or whatever the name of the big gay rights group in CA announced today that they concluded a poll a week or so back, and that the majority of respondents voted on 2010 vs 2012 (vote sooner while people are really engaged, or take more time to build their case) & 85% voted for 2010, so it will definitely be on the ballot again next year.

[Edited on May 26, 2009 at 2:24 PM. Reason : .]

5/26/2009 2:01:47 PM

california is a retarded state. The only reason you should be worried about the ban is if you live there or if your state is dumb enough to follow california's retarded policies.

5/26/2009 2:22:58 PM

The lack of a black presidential candidate on the ballot in 2010 will ensure that prop 8 is overturned if it's on the ballot again. I'm confused about why black voters are so homophobic, but the numbers don't lie - they're the demographic that made prop 8 happen. That won't be the case next time.

5/26/2009 2:26:20 PM

Blacks didn't make prop 8 happen.

5/26/2009 2:31:25 PM

I guess the 36,000 people who got married better not get divorced, because they wouldn't be allowed to marry anyone again.

5/26/2009 2:32:31 PM

^^^its a religious thing. not hard to figure out.

[Edited on May 26, 2009 at 2:39 PM. Reason : a]

5/26/2009 2:38:49 PM

http://obsidianwings.blogs.com/obsidian_wings/2008/11/prop-8-and-the.html

They aren't the sole reason, but we'll see if without high black and latino turnout prop 8 can still stand. My guess is, it won't.

Quote :

"My assumptions are: 1. that the vote among black people was as reported (69% Yes on 8). 2. that black people make up 6.7% of the CA population 3. that black people represented a share of the votes equal to their share of the population I further assume that 8 passes with 52% which seems the likely number at this point. Given each 1000 voters, black people in CA represent 67 of them. There are 520 Yes votes and 480 No votes for each 1000. At 69%, Black voters voted 46 Yes and 21 No for each 1000. If they voted like White voters (55% No) they would have voted 31 Yes votes and 36 No votes. That would make the final tally 505 Yes and 495 No votes. (50.5% to 49.5%). [numbers very slightly rounded] But this analysis is VERY sensitive to assumption #3. It appears that black people in CA may have voted in a greater share than that of their representation of the population. Right around 10% of the vote. That would mean that given each 1000 voters black people in CA represent 100 of them. At 69% Yes on 8 that would be 69 Yes and 31 No for each 1000. If they had voted like White voters they would have voted 45 Yes and 55 No. That would make the final vote equal 496 Yes and 504 No (proposition loses 49.6% to 50.4%). Interestingly, at the 10% vote share level, if a small majority of black people voted against the measure it would have lost (49% Yes, 51% No gives the measure a loss at 49.9%)."

5/26/2009 2:40:36 PM

Quote :

"Not really, but that's ok. At best, if it's genetic, it's a mutation like down's syndrome."

You could have just said "many traits are products of mutation" but instead you went the "being gay is like being retarded" route, good job.

8 Year Old Organizes Gay Marriage Rally: http://www.thedenverchannel.com/politics/19475925/detail.html

5/26/2009 3:03:36 PM

A revamped 60 sec version of this online video designed for TV is going to start being aired, before the 2010 ballot initiative.

Quote :

"viewed by more than 1.2 million people, making it the most-watched video ever in the history of California politics"

5/26/2009 4:23:52 PM

upheld ban in cali


Now if this was a supreme court ruling, I bet you would wish the states then had the rights. correct?

5/26/2009 5:09:40 PM

^^^^

Quote :

" A new study on California’s Proposition 8 voting trends released Tuesday found that far fewer African-Americans voted to pass the gay marriage ban than the 70% suggested by exit polling and concluded that race was not the most significant factor affecting people’s vote for or against marriage equality. After conducting in-depth analysis of election returns from five key California counties and using census data to estimate the racial makeup of the voters in those counties, researchers found that between 57% and 59% of African-Americans voted in favor of Proposition 8, which amended the state's constitution to prohibit same-sex marriage. "

http://www.advocate.com/news_detail_ektid70200.asp

Quote :

"its a religious thing. not hard to figure out."

Pretty much. Polling found frequency of church attendance was a much stronger predictor of how someone voted. Latching on to black people just allowed dumbfucks (not calling DirtyGreek a dumbfuck) to express their thinly veiled racism. Even if black people had voted at the same rate as white people, it would've still passed.

[Edited on May 26, 2009 at 6:25 PM. Reason : ,]

[Edited on May 26, 2009 at 6:47 PM. Reason : .]

5/26/2009 6:24:34 PM

Well, I don't see any protest events in NC, and since it is in regards to something happening on the other coast I understand why. But I don't think this night should pass with nothing happening whatsoever, so I'm throwing together a last minute event to hold up signs & pass out equality NC brochures at the Court House (symbolic right?) in downtown Chapel Hill. At 8pm for 8 minutes (mostly symbolic, its a work night & I have to be up at 5:00 in the morning).

Not that I expect in tdubbers to come, I fully expect I'll probably be standing alone, but its something I gotta do.
http://www.facebook.com/event.php?eid=97720298896

5/26/2009 6:43:17 PM

Standing by the road in front of the Chapel Hill Courthouse in protest of the court ruling upholding Prop 8's ban on marriage equality.


Holding up the sign & passing out brochures (I'm on the far right)

5/26/2009 10:11:10 PM

Andrew Sullivan posted this:

Quote :

"Have been through the Prop 8 opinion and dissents. It appears that this is a blockbuster pro-gay-rights decision, restricting the effect of Prop 8 to the effect of removing the designation of gay civil unions as "marriage," but upholding all equal rights previously declared by the Court; and, suggesting that if the opponents of gay rights were to try to restrict equal union rights for gays by constitutional change, such change would be an Amendment (not a revision) and thus would be procedurally much more difficult to accomplish."

http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/the_daily_dish/2009/05/reading-the-decision.html#more

5/26/2009 11:11:41 PM

http://www.wral.com/news/local/video/5223445/

Here is a promo commercial for the Definition of Marriage story that WRAL is doing tomorrow at 6 that I was interviewed for. You can see a few of my wedding & reception pictures mixed in that ad as well as our wedding cake. I hope the story turns out well. I've done live & pre-recorded radio both statewide & locally many times before, but you always have more content control there... especially when it is live. This is only my 2nd time appearing on local television news, and you never know how it is going to turn out.

5/27/2009 6:01:36 PM

[Edited on May 27, 2009 at 8:24 PM. Reason : figured out how to embed it]

5/27/2009 8:22:45 PM

oh look, another video

5/27/2009 11:31:09 PM

whats your problem? The video is related to the topic at hand. It is about an interview that I was a part of, and how people view marriage in NC so its not like I'm going off on some wild tangent.

I mean you’re like some kind of internet etiquette nanny. You don’t come into threads to say "I have a differing point of view & here’s why", instead you have argued with me over whether or not I discuss a wide enough variety of topics within a give section of the message board, and now how many video’s I’m allowed to embed in a given time period.

No amount of rolly eyes from you is ever going to effectively enforce your ideas of appropriate message board etiquette, all your doing with 'em is bumping my thread.

[Edited on May 28, 2009 at 6:10 AM. Reason : .]

5/28/2009 5:57:14 AM

5/28/2009 8:34:48 AM

Greensboro Prop 8 Ruling Protest
An old high school buddy of mine heard about this event & decided to get in on it by organizing one in Greensboro this weekend.

Full event details here:
http://www.facebook.com/event.php?eid=83529848151

Date:
Saturday, June 6, 2009
Time:
1:00pm - 5:00pm
Location:
Greensboro's Governmental Plaza (In front of the cop/kid statue)
Street:
Washington Street
City/Town:
Greensboro, NC

5/28/2009 4:38:31 PM

Another video!

The story that aired earlier today.



[Edited on May 28, 2009 at 10:03 PM. Reason : maybe they used the same code for what was used for the ad before?]

5/28/2009 10:03:20 PM

I c u on wral

5/28/2009 10:13:13 PM

haha, I came to post in this thread to say I saw you on WRAL.

5/29/2009 11:13:08 PM

In regard to the Greensboro Protest I mentioned in my previous post I both said this weekend (which was wrong) but gave the correct date. So to clarify it is NEXT weekend in Greensboro at 1pm.


http://www.new.facebook.com/event.php?eid=83529848151
Date:
Saturday, June 6, 2009
Time:
1:00pm - 5:00pm
Location:
Greensboro's Governmental Plaza (In front of the cop/kid statue)
Street:
Washington Street
City/Town:
Greensboro, NC

5/30/2009 5:52:47 AM

protests only serve to polarize those already against your cause

5/30/2009 11:28:34 AM

I like how the camera guy positioned himself to cut off the hair spikes on that one gay dude.

5/30/2009 11:43:25 AM

There was actually a lot of footage where it was included, but there was footage they couldn't use because the cats jumped up during the middle & started sniffing at the camera. And they chopped it down from 15 minutes, to a few clips to make it into a story, but there was much of it that included the spikes that they used on the website for the extended video, slide show & everything.

5/30/2009 11:51:08 AM

I thought it was a great piece Jake, you made your points well.

I would've added the point that no one had to vote for the other couple's ability to marry the person they loved.

Separation of Marriage and State!
It would be difficult to do, but worth it. Less gov't interference in your personal life, no more unequal taxation between married couples and singles, and less information the gov't would have on everyone.

5/30/2009 11:12:28 PM

set em up

5/31/2009 12:16:00 AM