CA State Superintendent, "Prop 8 has nothing to do with schools"

This came out today from the No on 8 campaign, to counteract the lies still being promoted by the Yessers:


Latest No on 8 ad embedded on site.

Today, the NO on Prop 8 campaign released a tough new television ad featuring California State Superintendent of Public Instruction Jack O’Connell, who voiced his strong opposition to Prop 8 and the lies about the public education system.

“Prop 8 has nothing to do with schools or kids,” said Geoff Kors, NO on Prop 8 executive committee member. “The Prop 8 campaign continues to use scare tactics and lies to bolster their campaign. It’s despicable that children are being used for political gain.”

The television ad exposes the lies of the Prop 8 advertisements with O’Connell stating, “our schools aren’t required to teach anything about marriage.”

In fact, every education authority in the state has rejected the lies surrounding the Prop 8 campaign. The California Teachers Association and the California School Boards Association both maintain that Prop 8 has nothing to do with teaching in public schools. In addition, education leaders across the state have endorsed the NO on Prop. 8 campaign, including Los Angeles Unified School District Board of Education President Monica Garcia, Davis Joint Unified School Board President Sheila Allen and San Francisco Board of Education Vice-President Kim-Shree Maufas. [Noon8]

Wow, this kind of pumps up my adrenaline to have a strong ad like this come out, directly refuting the lies...I wonder what fear-based tactic the Yessers will try out next?

Judge okays televising Prop 8 trial (via YouTube); begins Mon, Jan 11

Wednesday, the judge overseeing the Prop 8 overturn trial, which begins Monday, January 11, signaled he would allow the filming and limited broadcast of the proceedings:

Chief Judge Vaughn Walker made it clear Wednesday that he will forge ahead with televising the federal challenge to Prop 8...But he also signaled he doesn't want to be the next Lance Ito.

The trial, which begins on Monday, will be filmed by court personnel, Walker ruled, but it will not be broadcast live. Instead, the recording will be posted on a YouTube page at some point after the close of the day's proceedings. Walker declined an offer from In Session (formerly Court TV) to broadcast live, with its own crew..."I think in view of the nature of this proceeding, it is important for this process to be completely under the court's control," he said.

Lawyers representing the Yes on 8 campaign objected to any broadcast beyond an overflow room in the San Francisco federal building, arguing that witnesses would be intimidated, or change their testimony. But Walker was skeptical, pointing out that depositions have been widely videotaped for years. [Law.com]

Many of us got an email blast in the last few days from the Courage Campaign asking us to tell the courts televise the upcoming trial to overturn Prop 8; I'm not sure how YouTube is television or if broadcast networks are allowed to stream the YouTube version, but at least it won't be closed proceedings:

U.S. District Court Judge Vaughn Walker -- who will be overseeing a federal court challenge to Prop 8 starting this Monday (January 11) -- is considering whether or not to open the court room to TV cameras.

The court just announced that it is seeking public comment on the proposal to televise the trial -- and that all comments must be submitted to the court by a Friday deadline.

The interest in this case is unprecedented. And not surprisingly, supporters of Prop 8 -- who eliminated the right of same-sex couples to marry -- do NOT want the trial to be televised.

Opponents of Prop 8 -- led by attorneys David Boies and Ted Olson -- are seeking to televise the case in the interests of full transparency. They want this historic trial to be watched by as many Americans as possible. And, of course, we agree.

A recent decision in the 9th Circuit of Federal Court recently opened up the possibility of cameras in non-criminal trials. The Prop 8 trial will be its first test-run if Judge Walker's decisions stays.

The Courage Campaign, in expectation of large resistance from the Yes on 8 side, is still asking for us to fill the petition in support of the broadcast if we have not already signed it. I have always been in favor of us telling our real stories in order to change hearts and minds. Perhaps this trial will include that in addition to all the regular court room drama.

I'll post links, clips, etc. as soon as I find them on Monday.

Prop 8 news: weekend roundup

We took our positions under the covered walkway at Raley's, Home Depot and Target

They say that in the final week of campaign work it's the personal and one-on-one contacts that matter. So, in spite of a dark, wet and cold Saturday morning (after Halloween), a dedicated group of about 15 of us showed up at the South Napa Marketplace to hand out flyers, stickers and signs for the NO on 8 campaign. We were respectfully received and shoppers responses fell mostly in 3 categories:

1. "I've already voted," they would say. I would respond with a humble, "I hope you voted NO," and smile as they walked away. Some said they did. We quietly celebrated them. According to the Napa Register, 50% of Napa's mail in votes are already in. Last year Napa converted many traditional precincts to vote-by-mail.
   
   
2. "I'm planning on voting No," they would say. To which we would offer yard signs or stickers to encourage them to spread the word. We'd send them off with a deeply felt, "Thank you for your support!"
   
   
3. "I don't want any information," they would say, obviously trying to avoid making eye contact. They didn't say it, but we could tell which way they voted.

I am not sure if the people who have voted yes on 8 (to ban same-sex marriages) are avoiding eye-contact because they feel they know the personal effect it has and they feel guilty (?) or because they don't want to look a potential homosexual in the eye.

In other Prop 8 news this weekend:

• Another Mormon family against 8: Steve Young, a famous Bay Area mormon and famous Forty-Niner proudly proclaims in a written statement from his wife and via decorations at their house, "We believe ALL families matter and we do not believe in discrimination, therefore, our family will vote against Prop 8."
  
  


• Don't believe the lies from 8: Obama's campaign, just days before the election, is reinforcing their NO stance on Proposition 8. The yessers sent out a mailer chock full of lies (again) alluding to Obama's position that marriage is between a man and a woman.
  
  
• They know not what they do: Huge anti-gay rally at Qualcomm Stadium in San Diego gathers 15,000 people to pray for gay people. At the 12-hour event, "The crowd prayed, sang, spoke in tongues, prostrated themselves, sobbed (for California, for marriage, for the homosexuals) and, on numerous occasions, whipped themselves into a true frenzy." [Wockner]
  
  
• "Honey, Bill Clinton is on the phone": Automated calls from Bill Clinton, yesterday, via NO on 8 informed voters that Prop 8 would "use state law to single out one group of Californians to be treated differently -- discriminating against members of our family, our friends and our co-workers." [NOon8]

With two days until the election, there's still time for you to donate & get involved.

Prop 8 overturn trial decision announcement Wednesday, Aug 4

[Update, 2:30p: Judge Vaughn Walker rules that Prop 8 is unconstitutional:

"Proposition 8 fails to advance any rational basis in singling out gay men and lesbians for denial of a marriage license. Indeed, the evidence shows Proposition 8 does nothing more than enshrine in the California Constitution the notion tha...t opposite-sex couples are superior to same-sex couples. Because California has no interest in discriminating against gay men and lesbians, and because Proposition 8 prevents California from fulfilling its constitutional obligation to provide marriages on an equal basis, the court concludes that Proposition 8 is unconstitutional."]

Napa has 2 events planned:

• A post-decision rally will be held at Veteran's Park, 6-8p to celebrate or pick up the torches
• A post-rally Guerilla Gay Bar mission is planned from 8-10p at Downtown Joe's

It has been months that we have been waiting. June 16, 2010, closing arguments began and Judge Walker's decision will be published tomorrow, Wednesday, August 4, 2010 between 1p and 3p.

Many in the pro-equality, pro-same-sex marriage side (the "Perry" in the Perry v Schwarzenegger) believe that the ruling will be in favor of same-sex marriage, but--as Joe.My.God. points out--it will likely be immediately appeale

d.

I know I'll be paying attention to the next steps in civil rights history...

The federal court announced today that it will release its decision in the American Foundation for Equal Right’s landmark case, Perry v. Schwarzenegger, on Wednesday.

Text “EQUAL” to 69866 to get a text message with the official decision on your mobile phone the moment the court releases its decision, or sign-up for an email alert at equalrightsfoundation.org. Join AFER on its Web site to watch a live press conference with our plaintiffs and co-counsels Ted Olson and David Boies following the release of the decision. As we receive news about the details of the release, AFER will update our Facebook and Twitter profiles, along with our Web site. [American Foundation for Equal Rights]

A short recap of the timeline:

• In 2000, CA bans (already unallowed since 1994) gay marriage
  
• SF begins issuing same-sex marriage licenses in 2004 to 4,000 couples
  
• The state forces SF to stop
• The state is sued for the law that bans gay marriage as being unequal and against the equality part of our constitution and loses
• May 2008, Same sex marriage is legal in CA for several months
• November 2008, A state election is held to change our constitution to allow inequality in marriage (and ban same-sex marriages) and the Proposition 8 passes, re-banning gay marriage
• In early 2010, the state is sued to overturn Prop 8 in Federal Court
• Judge Walker issues his ruling in early August 2010 that Prop 8 is unconstitutional
  

For those that want to read the full published ruling, you can access it on the court's website tomorrow afternoon.

CA newspapers react to Prop 8 hearing: excellent recap from Joe.My.God

This helpful (if also disheartening) recap of how California newspapers covered the wrap-up of the hearing today is brought to us by gay New York (one-time SF) blogger, Joe.My.God:

According to most of California's major newspapers, today was not our day.

San Francisco Chronicle:

California Supreme Court justices directed sharp questioning today at attorneys seeking to overturn Proposition 8, the voter-approved ban on same-sex marriage. Justice Joyce Kennard, one of the justices in the majority of the 4-3 ruling last year that legalized gay and lesbian marriages - a decision that voters overturned in approving Prop. 8 in November - said at one point that opponents of the measure would have the court choose between "two rights ... the inalienable right to marry and the right of the people to change the constitution as they see fit. And what I'm picking up from the oral argument in this case is this court should willy-nilly disregard the will of the people."

San Jose Mercury News:

The California Supreme Court today appeared inclined to uphold Proposition 8, but showed obvious reluctance to void thousands of same-sex marriages already in place when voters restored a ban on gay marriage last fall. During three hours of arguments in San Francisco, the justices peppered lawyers opposing Proposition 8 with questions that suggested they do not believe they have the authority to trump the will of the voters. At the same time, even justices who voted against striking down's California's previous ban on gay marriage, indicated that Proposition 8 should not wipe out an estimated 18,000 same-sex marriages that took place last year. "Is that really fair to people who depended on what this court said was the law?" Justice Ming Chin asked Ken Starr, the former Clinton impeachment prosecutor who argued that same-sex marriages shouldn't be recognized under Proposition 8.

Los Angeles Times:

The California Supreme Court appeared ready today to vote to uphold Proposition 8, the November ballot measure that banned gay marriage, but also seemed ready to decide unanimously to recognize existing same-sex marriages. During a three-hour televised hearing in San Francisco, only two of the court's seven justices indicated a possible readiness to overturn the initiative. Chief Justice Ronald M. George noted that the court was following a different Constitution when it approved gay marriage last May. "Today we have a different state Constitution," he said. Justice Joyce L. Kennard, who usually votes in favor of gay rights, voted against accepting the revision challenge to Proposition 8 but said she would hear arguments over the validity of existing same-sex marriages. Kennard said during the hearing that "Prop. 8 did not take away the whole bundle of rights that this court articulated in the marriage case."

Sacramento Bee:

The seven justices, who will render their decision on Proposition 8 within 90 days, immediately questioned opponents' view that the November initiative was an improper revision of the state constitution. Justice Joyce Kennard noted that the Proposition 8 added just 14 words to the state constitution: "Only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California," and so could not be considered a revision based simply on length. Chief Justice Ron George noted that the California constitution has been properly amended hundreds of times, much more frequently than the U.S. constitution. He raised the possibility that the change gay-marriage proponents oppose is simply the result of California's system, which gives the people the right to amend the constitution through the initiative process.

Hundreds attend Prop 8 rally and counter-protest in Napa

[Update: looking for info on Prop 8 protests after the November vote? Click here.
This current post is about protests and rallies that occurred in Napa in October 2008]


Lianne Milton/Register (...my pics were on my friends cam. )

Saturday's rally and counter-protest saw a pretty even split between Yes on 8 supporters and the counter protesters at the intersection of Jefferson St. & Lincoln in front of Napa's School District Auditorium. Estimates from reliable sources said that at peak periods there were about 100 supporters on each side of the issue. The rally started late in the morning, around 11:30 and went on for over 2 hours.

The Yes on 8 folks had a mini stage set up on the grass area at the corner of the intersection and were giving testimonies and speeches about the (ridiculous and unfounded) dangers of continuing to allow gay marriage...

• continuing loss of the "sanctity" and cheapening of marriage
• they will teach gay marriage in schools at young ages
• gays will show up in the churches and DEMAND gay marriage in church
• abortion

Yeah...what?

The Yes on 8 group's focus was also on Prop 4--parental notification of a minor's abortion--but the signs saying "Yes on 4, Protect Children from Predators" just looked out of place amongst the sea of people for and against 8. (By the way, for the truth behind some of the oppositions claims about what 8 would and would not do, click here.)

And I'm still confused about the signs that proclaimed that "Yes on 8 = less government"... and also about how the Mormon church is leading a campaign that says that marriage should be (and has been) between one man and one woman, when they were and believe in the future that God might want polygamy...

For the most part, the testimonies and speeches--loaded with fear-mongering and other conservative propaganda--continued every 10 minutes or so while the main bulk of people walked a loop from Lincoln down towards Jefferson and back. Yes and No on 8 backers were intermingled and respectful, although at times the No on 8 group got vocal with chants like, "No on 8, No on Hate!" and "Shame on you! Shame on you!" when the Yes on 8 speeches got more absurd (and yes, they actually used that tired line, "God created Adam and Eve, not Adam and Steve").

It was good to see such a good turn out from the No on 8 folks, including Napa Valley Unity League members, recently married same-sex couples, straight allies and others. And, it looks like we need to continue our involvement, our talking to friends and family (especially in the more rural and less-open parts of the State), and donate to No on 8.

There's still other options to get involved this weekend and in the weeks ahead.

Anything about the rally or protest that I missed?

...and here's the Register's take on it.

Same-sex marriage "stay" lifted, not in effect until Aug 18

[Update, 2:00pm, August 12: Early reports claiming the stay was lifted are factually correct, but later news corrected details...it does not go into effect until August 18]

What a roller coaster!

Judge Vaughn Walker has issued his ruling on the temporary stay regarding the resumption of same-sex marriages in California and they are ordered to resume as early as August 18th. He lifted the stay, but gave proponents of Proposition 8 six days to file an appeal.

As I mentioned in an earlier post today, Napa County is ready to issue same gender marriage licenses as soon as the stay is fully lifted.

Next in this political saga and march towards Civil Rights/Equality is our wait to see if the appeal by Proposition 8 supportors will be heard--and if "Yes on 8" (listed as Prop 8 proponents in the official documents) even have a right to file an appeal. Marriages might only be legal in the short window of time between Walker's lifting of his own stay and the Ninth Circuit Court issuing their own.

For reactions to today's ruling from LGBTQ rights groups and others, check out this post by Joe.My.God.

More from SFGate:

(08-12) 19:11 PDT SAN FRANCISCO -- Gay and lesbian couples in California can begin marrying next week, a federal judge ruled Thursday - that is, unless the Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals steps in to stop them.

Chief U.S. District Judge Vaughn Walker last week invalidated Proposition 8, the state's ban on same-sex marriage, saying it was discriminatory and unconstitutional, but put enforcement of that ruling on hold with a stay. Then on Thursday Walker lifted that stay but simultaneously ruled that his order not take effect until 5 p.m. Wednesday.

That gave proponents of Prop. 8 time to ask a three-judge panel of the Ninth Circuit court for another stay preventing same-sex marriages while that court - and perhaps the U.S. Supreme Court - reviews Walker's invalidation of the ban.

And by the end of Thursday, the ban's supporters had done just that. In a 95-page motion, they said a stay would "avoid the confusion and irreparable injury that would flow from the creation of a class of purported same-sex marriages." The Ninth Circuit court has not indicated when it might weigh in on the stay request...

...Moreover, Walker noted, the state did not defend Prop. 8. Instead, private organizations stepped in - but they might not have standing to appeal.

"It appears at least doubtful," Walker wrote, "that proponents will be able to proceed with their appeal without a state defendant ... In light of those concerns, proponents may have little choice but to attempt to convince either the governor or the attorney general to file an appeal."

That likelihood is less than slim: Opponents of Prop. 8 were joined in their request that the stay be lifted by Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger and Attorney General Jerry Brown.

Group of pastors across State and Nation against Prop 8

It's good to hear news trickling in that groups of Pastors and leaders, religious and otherwise, are asking the State of California to vote No on Proposition 8.

As I shared yesterday, in spite of my good Catholic upbringing and urging from the Catholic hierarchy I believe that the best moral decision is to vote No on Proposition 8. A God of love would not be one that supports writing discrimination into our Constitution.

The Yes on 8 campaign has fairly convincingly spread the lie that to be religious--especially, to be Christian--means that you value traditional families and thus will vote yes on 8. On Saturday I stood on the corner of Jefferson and Lincoln to proclaim (by my presence) that I am a person of faith, a person that values families of love and commitment and that I am vowing to vote No on 8. Often I feel alone in walking the line of integrating religion with my homosexuality.

In Monday's news, I heard this:

More than a dozen pastors Monday stood on the steps of San Francisco City Hall, where the fight for same-sex marriage in California began four years ago, to urge Californians to reject a ballot measure that would make gay marriage illegal.

They also announced that more than 2,200 faith leaders from across the country have signed an open letter to religious leaders calling for the recognition of same-sex marriage.

Among those taking part in the event organized by the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force, were the Rev. Bishop Mark Holmerud of the Sierra Pacific Synod of the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America; the Rev. Rick Schlosser, Executive Director of the California Council of Churches; the Rev. Mary Susan Gast, Conference Minister of the Northern California Nevada Conference, United Church of Christ; the Rt. Rev. Marc Handley Andrus, Episcopal Bishop of California; and the Rev. Lindi Ramsden, Executive Director of the Unitarian Universalist Legislative Ministry.

The presence of the high profile clergy was meant to dispel attempts by evangelical Christians, the Roman Catholic Church and Mormons that people of faith support the proposed amendment.On Friday, a group of Mormons who support gay marriage delivered protest letters and bundles of carnations to church headquarters in Salt Lake City in an appeal to end the church’s support of the ballot initiative in California. [365Gay]

Thank God for their support and public witness! We know locally that the United Methodist Church, Covenant Presbyterian, and faithful from other religious communities in the Valley have been working to support their LGBTQ brothers and sisters here, including through phone banking for No on 8.

Additionally, today on Pam's House Blend, Pam wrote about Black leaders coming out against Prop 8.

For me, as a Catholic against Proposition 8, Father Geoff's story has been particularly inspiring. I wrote about him yesterday. As I said recently, I know I couldn't do this--this standing up, this speaking out, this coming out--alone.

After yesterday's post I got more than a handful of very kind emails and comments from folks offering their support and their company on this journey. Thank you, I was very touched by your unexpected reaching out. Together we can be strength for the journey.

Who for you has been the most inspirational or supportive in the battle for Prop 8 or in your journey of coming out?

Post Prop-8 news roundup: lots more protests, Schwarzennegger, the black vote, boycott on Utah

Instead of a million post recap I thought I could cover most of the Prop 8 protest and reaction news in one. I'm almost sick of posting about this issue, but then again, the FIGHT is just warming up and that's kinda getting me excited to be part of a bigger movement. Of course, there are lots of raw footage of all the protesting.

Here's what else been going on:

• Protests continued over the weekend, some saying the biggest yet in the state, in San Diego and Los Angeles (Silver Lake) and then on Sunday in Oakland, Sacramento and San Jose
  
  
• Conservatives and Pro-Prop-8 folks ("traditional marriageists"?) are calling all the protesting "Anti-Family Rioting". Talk about bullshit spin, it makes me sick.
  
  
• Protests are planned to continue at least throughout the rest of the month, with some calling for a special day of protest next Saturday, November 15th. I have yet to hear of anything in Napa or nearby
  
  
• Some of the focus of the reaction news is to the supposedly 70% of african-american voters who voted for Barack Obama yet voted to ban gay marriage. Gavin Newsom responds philosophically and also Rachel Maddow interviews a political scientist about it. Some doubt the poll data in the first place.
  
  
• Arnold Schwarzennegger is interviewed and says "the people have spoken again", yet also expresses hope that the courts will overturn Prop 8 so again "California may lead" in that area and so on and so forth (video included)...
  
  
• There are rumblings of a winter Boycott on Utah as retaliation for all their support towards Prop 8, although--other than bringing attention to the matter--I'm not sure what good that would do to change our state constitution.
  

Marriage Equality Action Alert! Call your state reps now

Action alert from Equality California:

Anti-equality groups are currently flooding the Capitol with threatening phone calls demanding members of the Senate and Assembly Judiciary committees oppose the two resolutions to overturn Prop 8 when they come up for a vote on Tuesday.

We cannot let their attacks and threats go unanswered! We need to make sure that legislators hear from those who support equality.

Please call key members of the Senate and Assembly Judiciary Committees who have supported LGBT equality in the past (sample script and phone numbers are below). Ask them to support the resolutions to overturn Prop 8 to protect all minorities from the risk of losing their rights at the ballot box.

If passed, the two EQCA-sponsored resolutions, SR 7 and HR 5, authored by two of our champions in the Legislature, Senator Mark Leno and Assemblymember Tom Ammiano, will put the California Legislature on record as supporting the invalidation of Prop 8, declaring it an illegal revision to the state constitution.

This is our fourth of five actions leading up to our giant lobby day to overturn Prop 8 on Tuesday, the day of the vote, when over 2,000 activists will come together at the Capitol to urge their lawmakers to support these critical resolutions. Take Action Today! Call Now!

_____

Sample Script

Thank you for past support for equality. My name is [Your Name] and I am calling to ask for you to vote in favor of SR 7 / HR 5 because Prop 8 is a drastic and radical revision to the California Constitution that puts all Californians at risk. I believe in equal protection under the law and do not want a simple majority of voters to be able to take fundamental rights away from any minority.

Thank you. [Your Name]
_____

If you live in Northern California, please call:

Senate Judiciary Committee members (for SR 7)

* Senator Ellen Corbett, chair: (916) 651-4010
* Senator Dean Florez: (916) 651-4016

Assembly Judiciary Committee members (for HR 5)

* Assembly Member Noreen Evans: (916) 319-2007

If you like in the Central Valley, please call:

Senate Judiciary Committee members (for SR 7)

* Senator Ellen Corbett, chair: (916) 651-4010
* Senator Dean Florez: (916) 651-4016

Assembly Judiciary Committee members (for HR 5)

* Assembly Member Dave Jones: (916) 319-2009
* Assembly Member William W. Monning: (916) 319-2027

If you live in Southern California, please call:

Assembly Judiciary Committee members (for HR 5)

* Assembly Member Mike Feuer, chair: (916) 319-2042
* Assembly Member Julia Brownley: (916) 319-2041
* Assembly Member Paul Krekorian: (916) 319-2043
* Assembly Member Ted W. Lieu: (916) 319-2053

Ballot Update: Proposition 8 "eliminates rights"

Election officials updated how Proposition 8 will read on Novemeber's Ballot:

[Prop 8] Changes California Constitution to eliminate right of same-sex couples to marry. Provides that only a marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California. Fiscal Impact: Over the next few years, potential revenue loss, mainly sales taxes, totaling in the several tens of millions of dollars, to state and local governments. In the long run, likely little fiscal impact to state and local governments.

It used to read:

[Prop 8] Amends the California Constitution to provide that only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California.

Think that language change will make a difference at the ballot box? Latest polling shows 51% still (since last polling in May) in favor of gay marriage... What I've heard from polling experts is that Proposition campaigns are supposed to start strong to be successful. Prop 8 seems to be already losing, we better hope it stays that way. [Remember, a NO VOTE means to keep the CA State Constitution as it is and keep same-sex marriage legal.]

Is there any organizing going on in Napa to inform people about what they'd be really voting for/against with Prop 8?

Breaking news: Mar 5 date for Supreme Court Prop 8 challenge oral arguments

This just in, via the tipline:

BREAKING NEWS!
California Supreme Court to Hear Oral Arguments
in Prop 8 Legal Challenge on March 5

The California Supreme Court announced today that it will hear oral arguments on Thursday, March 5, 2009 in the Proposition 8 legal challenge.

On November 19, 2008, the California Supreme Court agreed to hear the legal challenges to Proposition 8 and set an expedited schedule. Briefing in the case was completed on January 21, 2009.

The California Supreme Court must issue its decisions within 90 days of oral argument.

On January 15, 2009, 43 friend-of-the-court briefs urging the Court to invalidate Prop 8 were filed, arguing that Proposition 8 drastically alters the equal protection guarantee in California’s Constitution and that the rights of a minority cannot be eliminated by a simple majority vote. The supporters represent the full gamut of California’s and the nation’s civil rights organizations and legal scholars, as well as California legislators, local governments, bar associations, business interests, labor unions, and religious groups.

In May of 2008, the California Supreme Court held that laws that treat people differently based on their sexual orientation violate the equal protection clause of the California Constitution and that same-sex couples have the same fundamental right to marry as other Californians. Proposition 8 eliminated this fundamental right only for same-sex couples. No other initiative has ever successfully changed the California Constitution to take away a right only from a targeted minority group. Proposition 8 passed by a bare majority of 52 percent on November 4.

The National Center for Lesbian Rights, Lambda Legal, and the ACLU filed this challenge on November 5, representing Equality California, whose members include many same-sex couples who married between June 16 and November 4, 2008, and six same-sex couples who want to marry in California. The California Supreme Court has also agreed to hear two other challenges filed on the same day: one filed by the City and County of San Francisco (joined by Santa Clara County and the City of Los Angeles, and subsequently by Los Angeles County and other local governments); and another filed by a private attorney.

Serving as co-counsel on the case with NCLR, Lambda Legal, and the ACLU are the Law Office of David C. Codell, Munger, Tolles & Olson LLP, and Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe LLP.

The case is Strauss et al. v. Horton et al. (#S168047). Click here for more information.

Same-sex marriage support grows

With the sprouting of a "million signs" in support of the ban against gay marriage around California's front lawns (by mostly religious followers and ativists) supposedly only four days away (they are supposed to be placed on supporters lawns on September 22 according to some reports), I was worried that supporters of same-sex marriage had been complacent.

Good news, however from a Field Poll, released today:

The poll found that just 38 percent of likely voters support the measure, while 55 percent intend to vote no. That compares with 42 percent in support and 51 percent opposed in July. [State Attorney General Jerry] Brown amended the Proposition 8 summary language after the state Supreme Court's decision on May 15 to overturn California's previous ban on same-sex marriage.

The pollsters found the amended language played a role in that growing opposition, especially among the 30 percent of likely voters interviewed who had never heard of Prop. 8. Those voters were much more likely to oppose the measure when read Brown's wording (58 percent against it and 30 percent for it) than those in the same category who were read the old version of Prop. 8 (42 percent against and 37 percent for it), according to the Field Poll. The Brown language reads, in part: "Eliminates the right of same-sex couples to marry." The original version read, in part: "Limit on marriage." [SFGate]

That's definitely heartening to know that support for gay marriage is growing, but I still encourage us to not count on the polls and to keep working hard to tell people to Vote No on Proposition 8. We still don't know who will actually turn out and vote on election day and need to keep it in our friends and allies minds. Click here for our earlier write-up of ways to get involved.

In similar news, Brad Pitt just donated $100,000 in support of same sex marriage.

And this is what VP Dick Cheney's wife, Lynn said about their lesbian daughter and the right to marry:
<span style="font-style:italic;"><span style="font-weight:bold;">Clip of Lynn Cheney "endorsing" same-sex marriage right embedded on site.</span></span>

To recap (because some of my friends are even still confused):

• A YES vote on Prop 8 is in support of writing a ban on same-sex marriage into CA's constitution
  
• A NO vote on Prop 8 will keep things as they are, and continue to allow the civil right of marriage to all in California
  

Prop 8: we're probably "not just going to get over it"; Thousands protest; Etheridge, Hollywood and others respond

As thousands marched in San Francisco and across the State on Wednesday, Thursday, Friday and throughout the weekend, more voices joined the chorus of outrage, pain and rejection.

Have you heard of any protests or gatherings in Napa or the North Bay? Should we all gather downtown? In San Fran?

I don't often read C.W. Nevius in the Chronicle, but found his recent commentary on Prop 8 resonant:

Now that the election is over, there's a refrain coming from those who supported Proposition 8, the constitutional amendment to ban same-sex marriage:

Well, they say, we're glad that's over. Now we can move on and get back to everyday life. Hope there are no hard feelings.

It's a lovely sentiment and an optimistic thought. There is just one problem. It isn't happening. "There ARE hard feelings," said Lisa Geduldig, a San Francisco resident. "If I voted against your social group having equal rights, you'd be sore too. You might be lovely people, but you voted in favor of discrimination."

This isn't like a disagreement between two co-workers about who should be president or a debate about whether city funds should be set aside for affordable-housing projects. This is a deep, visceral divide between two cultures. And, with more protests scheduled this weekend in San Francisco and in the state, it seems the anger and resentment will only increase. [SFGate]

And this is what Melissa Etheridge had to say about Prop 8 passing:

"Okay. So Prop 8 passed. Alright, I get it. 51% of you think that I am a second class citizen. Alright then. So my wife, uh I mean, roommate? Girlfriend? Special lady friend? You are gonna have to help me here because I am not sure what to call her now. Anyways, she and I are not allowed the same right under the state constitution as any other citizen. Okay, so I am taking that to mean I do not have to pay my state taxes because I am not a full citizen. I mean that would just be wrong, to make someone pay taxes and not give them the same rights, sounds sort of like that taxation without representation thing from the history books.

Okay, cool I don't mean to get too personal here but there is a lot I can do with the extra half a million dollars that I will be keeping instead of handing it over to the state of California. Oh, and I am sure Ellen will be a little excited to keep her bazillion bucks that she pays in taxes too. Wow, come to think of it, there are quite a few of us fortunate gay folks that will be having some extra cash this year.
What recession? We're gay!

Oh and too bad California, I know you were looking forward to the revenue from all of those extra marriages. I guess you will have to find some other way to get out of the budget trouble you are in.

When did it become okay to legislate morality? I try to envision someone reading that legislation "eliminates the right" and then clicking yes.
What goes through their mind? Was it the frightening commercial where the little girl comes home and says, "Hi mom, we learned about gays in class today" and then the mother gets that awful worried look and the scary music plays? Do they not know anyone who is gay? If they do, can they look them in the face and say "I believe you do not deserve the same rights as me"? Do they think that their children will never encounter a gay person? Do they think they will never have to explain the 20% of us who are gay and living and working side by side with all the citizens of California?

I got news for them, someday your child is going to come home and ask you what a gay person is. Gay people are born everyday. You will never legislate that away."

Video embedded from CBS5 showing thousands of people in the protest winding down Marktet Street through the Castro on Friday evening:

Prop 8 overturned, temporary stay issued

photos courtesy Jessica Cortez

As you must've heard all over the news, blogs, facebook and twitter, Federal Judge Vaughn Walker overturned Proposition 8 with his ruling on Wednesday, August 4, 2010:
‎

"Proposition 8 fails to advance any rational basis in singling out gay men and lesbians for denial of a marriage license. Indeed, the evidence shows Proposition 8 does nothing more than enshrine in the California Constitution the notion that opposite-sex couples are superior to same-sex couples. Because California has no interest in discriminating against gay men and lesbians, and because Proposition 8 prevents California from fulfilling its constitutional obligation to provide marriages on an equal basis, the court concludes that Proposition 8 is unconstitutional."

and...

Because Proposition 8 is unconstitutional under both the Due Process and Equal Protection Clauses, the court orders entry of judgment permanently enjoining its enforcement; prohibiting the official defendants from applying or enforcing Proposition 8 and directing the official defendants that all persons under their control or supervision shall not apply or enforce Proposition 8...
IT IS SO ORDERED.

Visit here for the full text of Judge Walker's ruling.

For now, same-sex marriages are still on hold. Judge Walker issued what's called a temporary stay (for two days) to pause the resuming of same-sex marriages while a short trial can be held to see if they should be on hold until the appeal is heard:

On Wednesday, at least, the purely practical impact of the decision was limited, and gay and lesbian couples such as Perry and Stier were unable to rush to the altar. Walker attached a stay order to his ruling, freezing it for at least a few days until a separate hearing can be held on whether to allow same-sex marriages while the case is appealed.

The decision did not affect 18,000 gay and lesbian couples who wed before voters passed Prop. 8. Those unions are still legal.

But the broader legal and political repercussions are weighty, as the trial was the first ever held in federal court on the issue. Legal experts said that if Walker's ruling is affirmed on appeal, the U.S. Supreme Court would almost certainly take up the case and establish law for the rest of the country.

If the appeals court reverses Walker's decision and restores the ban, the experts said, the Supreme Court may leave the case alone.

The appeal to the Ninth Circuit could be decided within months - or the process could take more than a year. [SFGate]

Hundreds of celebrations and 40+ community rallies took place across the state, including a rally at Veteran's Park in downtown Napa.

What was your reaction to the ruling? Thoughts on what's next?

Large crowd gathers, marches in Napa rally against Prop 8 and in support of future equality

Photo by (and used w/ permission) Israel Valencia/Infinity Visuals

After Tuesday morning's (May 26) somewhat predicted ruling--affirming the legality of Proposition 8, maintaining California's ban on gay marriage and at the same time allowing the 18,000 same-sex couples that got married to stay married--a movement was already underway.

The rally and march in downtown Napa--as in over 100 other places across the United States and even in Canada--had been planned for a while. Originally it was called, "Day of Decision: Celebration or Protest" as we weren't sure of how the Supreme Court would rule.

Tuesday morning's ruling put a somber tone over the day for many, but for some reason or another, Tuesday night's rally and march had a happy energy to it, a certain joy--and the evening even ended with a large group of youth dancing to Lady Gaga's Poker Face in the Veteran's Park Amphitheater.

There aren't any official crowd estimates that I could find, but I'd say at the time of the march there were a couple hundred people who gathered together as community in support of future equality.

Speakers at Tuesday's Napa rally included: Deb Stallings of the Napa Unity League, Rev. Bonnie Dlott of the Unitarian Universalist Fellowship of the North Bay, PFLAG North Bay, Renee Fannin, Rick Turko, and (I think) a few others). There was also a guy dressed like the Statue of Liberty (whom I wanted to ask the whole time if he borrowed his costume from Liberty Income Tax), and a friend of The Fruit, Victor, waving the American Flag near the stage area. There was also a lone "Yes on 8" supporter in flourescent yellow, riding his bike along side us as we marched, calling us "sodomites", telling the smaller children in our group that "it's just sick how they're indoctrinating you to become a homosexual", and videotaping everything. (We need to remember to be on our best behavior, as the footage will be used against us if anything dramatic were to happen. Remember the lady with the styrofoam cross in Southern California? Or the Yes on 8 protester who claimed he was assaulted by someone on the side for equality?)

As I said, however, Napa's rally felt overwhelmingly positive, with dancing, uplifting music and speakers encouraging us that our work and fight for equality was continuing on. There will surely be more to come...

...and as you'll see in the photos (to come) even Downtown Joe's was in on the support, clearly (although subtly) hanging a rainbow flag facing Veteran's Park for the rally.

Who's ready for Napa Valley Pride 2009 on June 20th?

Here's the Napa Register's supportive coverage of the rally and march in Napa on Tuesday, May 26th.

In National news:

• As with other recent LGBT happenings, the White House remains silent
• Stop8.org is ready with what's next for our movement
• Governor Schwarzennegger urges calm and and believes that "one day either the people or the courts will recognize gay marriage".
• ACLU responds to Prop 8 loss
• Equality California is ready to work on repealing Prop 8 in 2010
  

Prop 8: The Musical

What are your thoughts on this one?
Video embedded on the site.
I thought it was fun and catchy...but I still don't think the argument about same-sex weddings and the spending being good for the economy will win over very many people.

Still, I chuckled. :)

Glad to see Doogie Howser, Maya Rudolph and others in the mix.

More details (tip o' the hat to Towleroad):

Hairspray composer Marc Shaiman (whose boycott lead to the resignation of Sacramento's California Musical Theatre creative director Scott Eckern following his donation to Prop 8) wrote and conceived this hysterical short piece (presented with a wink and a nod by the 'Sacramento Community College Players'), which was directed and staged by Hairspray director and choreographer Adam Shankman and features plenty of folks you will recognize.

Shaiman plays the piano. Jordan Ballard, Margaret Cho, Barrett Foa, J.B. Ghuman, John Hill, Andy Richter, Maya Rudolph, Rashad Naylor, Nicole Parker star as 'California Gays and The People That Love Them'. John C Reilly as a Prop 8 leader, and Alison Janney as his wife. Kathy Najimy as his second wife. Jenifer Lewis as a riffing Prop 8'er. Craig Robinson as a preacher. Rashida Jones, Lake Bell, Sarah Chalke as Scary Catholic School Girls from Hell. Katharine "Kooks" Leonard, Seth Morris, Denise "Esi!" Piane, Lucian Piane, Richard Read, Seth Redford, Quinton Strack, and Tate Taylor as The Frightened Villagers.

Jack Black stars as Jesus Christ, and Neil Patrick Harris is billed as 'A Very Smart Fellow'.

I'm 22, I like to BBQ & I have lesbian parents

<span style="font-style:italic;"><span style="font-weight:bold;">Cute No on 8 video from ProudParenting worth clicking through on the site to watch.</span></span>

Also, word from Ellen on 8:

"You know how usually I talk about cell phones or kitty cats or cheese pizza… well, this is sorta like that… without the cell phones, the cats, or the pizza.

"There’s a California Proposition on the ballot that’s a little confusing. It’s Proposition 8. It’s called, “The California Marriage Protection Act” -- but don’t let the name fool you. It’s not protecting anyone’s marriage. Not yours. Not mine.

"The wording of Prop 8 is tricky. It’s like if someone asked you, “You don’t want dessert, right?” But you do want dessert so you say, “Yes,” which really means you don’t want dessert. And if you say, “No,” which means you do want dessert -- it sounds like you don’t. Either way, you don’t get what you want. See -- confusing. Just like Prop. 8.

"So, in case I haven’t made myself clear, I’m FOR gay marriage. And in order to protect that right -- please VOTE NO on Proposition 8. And now that you’re informed, spread the word. I’m begging you. I can’t return the wedding gifts -- I love my new toaster."

From her blog. Did you know she was recently voted more popular than Oprah? Go Ellen!

PS - I still haven't seen any YES on 8 signs around. Glad (and still hoping) that the million signs to "protect" straight marriage thing didn't happen. You seen any for or against?

Napa Councilmember Van Gorder pushes City to support equality, overturn Prop 8; Register commenters react

As reported here first, Napa City Council member Mark Van Gorder, at Tuesday's Council meeting, asked the City to take up a resolution to support equality and overturn Proposition 8. The wording of the resolution is:

The city of Napa supports equal protection, which prohibits unequal government treatment of historically targeted minority groups and ensures that laws enacted by a majority must apply equally to all people.

How very telling it will be if the City Council declines to approve this measure. What does it mean if our City doesn't support equal protection? Sadly, it would only confirm what many minority residents and visitors have felt: that Napa is a City for a select few--the rich, the white, those with power and property.

What a very empowering, and surprising turning point it would be to live in a City, like Napa, that would make a proclomation in support of equality and justice for all. Isn't it sadly ironic that in a democratic land where equality and justice are American ideals that any would call for the City to not pass such a resolution?

And yet, meanwhile, the comments at the Napa Register's website are telling about what people (at least a very vocal, opinionated few) really think. Here are a select few:

krusty wrote on Mar 6, 2009 12:28 PM:

" Good luck, savenapa. I believe 60% of Napa's voters voted in opposition to Prop. 8. I fully support Van Gorder and his position.

An interesting side note is that LGBT tourism is one of the fastest growing tourist segments. The gay and lesbian segment is estimated at $55 billion annual market as of 2007. The city is wise to promote itself as LGBT friendly. And with San Francisco close by, it makes even more sense. "

CaliGirl wrote on Mar 6, 2009 1:12 PM:

" I voted against same sex marriages......I will continue to vote against, protest against, stand out against same sex marriages until my last breath is taken.

I live in Napa......Napa has no place telling anyone that I support the idea of same sex marriages.....which is what they would be doing if they followed Mr. Van Gorder's request

The City of Napa MUST stay neutral in this debate. Unless 100% of the citizens of Napa were for same sex marriages their is no place for the City of Napa to be putting it's nose into this matter......PERIOD end of story.

I will remember this request by Mr Van Gorder the next time I am in the voting booth.....as I am sure many others will do also......I wont be punching his name......that's for sure. "

Straight Talk wrote on Mar 6, 2009 2:14 PM:

" Taking up public issues "fraught with controversy" is why we are elected to public office.

A majority of Napa voters opposed proposition 8. A ban on same-sex marriages will have an effect on how our city does business. The resolution states: “The city of Napa supports equal protection, which prohibits unequal government treatment of historically targeted minority groups….”

A council resolution on this issue will not interfere with street and sidewalk repair; has no impact on local schools or our economy; does not impact the city budget; is not lobbying the State Supreme Court; will not reverse the majority vote of Californians; and I am not “grandstanding purely for publicity purposes.” I believe with all my soul that opposing proposition 8 is the right thing to do.

The validity and implementation of proposition 8 is in the hands of the courts. Each city council member is free to support or oppose proposition 8.

“We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.”

“I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America, and to the Republic for which it stands: one Nation under God, indivisible, with Liberty and Justice for all.”

In the future, I will look back at this time in history and say that I reaffirmed my belief that all men and women are created equal. I will always be a voice for liberty and justice for all. I’m sorry to see those long-held American beliefs are no longer valued by so many people.

Mark van Gorder "

Of course, there are plenty more comments at the main article on the Register's site. Visit and/or comment with caution, as I don't believe hardly any of the commenters actually read to try and understand others' viewpoints. It seems most are there purely to argue their point. Yet, as some have mentioned here before, if we don't comment and we remain silent on the Register's site, it will seem as if all believe the same as the vocal opposition and we'll remain just as invisible in the community.

When will Supreme Court issue Prop 8 decision? 4 3 probable dates

This update comes way of Pam'sHouseBlend who's putting their money on the following dates for the Supreme Court's Announcement regarding the Proposition 8 decision (Should Prop 8 get thrown out? Should the 18,000 legally married couples be able to stay legally married even if Prop 8 remains?). Because of the way the court issues it's rulings, their best educated predictions for the Day of Decision are:

Thursday, May 21
Tuesday, May 26
Thursday, May 28
Monday, June 1

Please notice that Decision Day can now be on a TUESDAY because the Supreme Court will be closed on Memorial Day Monday.

All California courts will be closed on Monday, May 25 for Memorial Day. So the filing of any opinion by the California Supreme Court that would normally occur on this day will shift to TUESDAY, May 26 at 10:00 a.m.

Apparently the court only issues rulings on Mondays and Thursdays. And, in spite of TONS of swirling e-rumors, the Court issued their calendar of rulings for tomorrow (Thursday, May 21) and it did not make the list.

Remember, Napa's pro-equality folks have an event planned for either way the Court rules. Stay tuned...

With Napa's Chef's Market starting this Thursday and going through summer, there's a 1/3 chance that we'll be celebrating or angrily marching on the same night as the Market. That might be a good thing.