Support NeoGAF

[Razmos]

Kentucky Judge rules against Gay Marriage Ban, deems it unconstitutional

Also this is a gem:

In a Supreme Court brief filed earlier this month, Gov Steve Besmear argued the state's ban isn't discriminatory because it bars both gay and straight people from same-sex unions.

But of course there is also bad news in Louisiana

According to MSNBC HB 707, the Marriage and Conscience Act. is being considered by the state's congress.

If passed the measure would protect state workers from punishment who do not want to process papers for same-sex marriages.

So basically, if gay marriage is legalized there, they want to be able to make it so that bigots can refuse to serve gay couples and not get in trouble for it.

They are going to be trying this shit all over aren't they? sore losers.

 

[Trouble]

Also this is a gem:

I love that argument for some reason, it's so completely silly. Gay people are free to marry people they have no interest in marrying, so everything's cool!

 

[HylianTom]

Also this is a gem:

But of course there is also bad news in Louisiana

So basically, if gay marriage is legalized there, they want to be able to make it so that bigots can refuse to serve gay couples and not get in trouble for it.

They are going to be trying this shit all over aren't they? sore losers.

Bobby "Polling-Behind-Trump" Jindal is desperate for traction in the GOP primary, so I could see him standing up to corporate pressure. Louisiana is going to be a really strong test of resolve on this issue.

 

[ivysaur12]

Kentucky Judge rules against Gay Marriage Ban, deems it unconstitutional

Also this is a gem:


But of course there is also bad news in Louisiana

So basically, if gay marriage is legalized there, they want to be able to make it so that bigots can refuse to serve gay couples and not get in trouble for it.

They are going to be trying this shit all over aren't they? sore losers.

Gov Steve Besmear

who.

 

[Metaphoreus]

Interesting historical footnote from the Washington Post:

HOLLYWOOD — “I’ve got the license and the faggot letter if you want to look at them,” Anthony Sullivan said cheerfully.

It’s a glorious California day, sunny and breezy, and a wind chime clangs relentlessly outside the vine-covered apartment building where dancer Ann Miller once scuffed the hardwood floors and the Hollywood Ten met in the basement.

Sullivan, 73, who manages the place, always has the documents handy.

The license shows that Anthony Corbett Sullivan and Richard Frank Adams were married April 21, 1975, in Boulder, Colo., years before others thought two men should be allowed to wed and decades before a majority of Americans would say it was okay with them, too.

The letter is the official response from the U.S. government after Adams informed officials of his nuptials and asked that his new husband, an Australian citizen facing deportation, be extended a spouse’s visa.

Denied, the immigration service said, for the following reason:

“You have failed to establish that a bona fide marital relationship can exist between two faggots.”

The denial sparked a first-of-its-kind lawsuit, and the eventual “exile” of the two men.

. . .

But there is one more twist, and it makes their story especially compelling as the Supreme Court considers this month whether same-sex couples have a constitutional right to marry.

The judge who wrote the final word on whether Sullivan and Adams could stay together in the United States or be forced to strike out in search of a country that would take them was Anthony M. Kennedy, then a circuit judge and now the Supreme Court’s pivotal justice on gay rights.

 

[RastaMentality]

Hype! Wish the case name was as amazing as Loving v. Virginia or had a bigoted state in it like Lawrence v. Texas but this shall do.

 

[ivysaur12]

Interesting historical footnote from the Washington Post:

While it's sort of a clear cut case by Kennedy, it does highlight his interesting evolution on this issue during his career.

More on Kennedy's gay legal mentor:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/04/14/justice-anthony-kennedy-gay-mentor_n_7064016.html

SACRAMENTO, Calif. (AP) — The Irish Catholic boy who came of age in Sacramento after World War II is an unlikely candidate to be the author of the Supreme Court's major gay rights rulings.

But those who have known Justice Anthony Kennedy for decades and scholars who have studied his work say he has long stressed the importance of valuing people as individuals. And he seems likely also to have been influenced in this regard by a pillar of the Sacramento legal community, a closeted gay man who hired Kennedy as a law school instructor and testified on his behalf at his high court confirmation hearings in Washington.

With three major gay rights opinions to his name already, the 78-year-old Kennedy is the prohibitive favorite to write the Supreme Court decision in June that could extend same-sex marriage nationwide.

Kennedy's friendship with Gordon Schaber began in the mid-1960s when Schaber recruited the young lawyer to teach at the McGeorge School of Law in Sacramento. Schaber, who served as the school's dean for 34 years, was in the process of transforming McGeorge from an unaccredited night school to a respected institution that now is a part of Pacific University.

Schaber never married and was widely believed to be gay, according to accounts from a dozen people who worked for him or were active in Sacramento's political and legal communities.

"Schaber's sexual orientation was general knowledge among the Sacramento community and the law school community," said Glendalee "Glee" Scully, the longtime director of McGeorge's legal clinic, where students got practical experience by taking on cases for people who couldn't otherwise afford a lawyer.

Among those who worked at the school when Schaber was dean, not one could recall Schaber discussing his sexual orientation. "Generationally, it was not something gentlemen spoke about," said McGeorge professor Larry Levine, himself openly gay.

Scully said, "As close as he and Tony Kennedy were as friends, I would doubt they ever had a conversation about it. But how can't it have helped to some degree Tony's willingness to have an open mind?"

 

[Africanus]

H-how am I supposed to explain this to my children?

That they're allowing homosexuals in this country to marry

Spoiler

after all of this time. My word does civil rights take forever to achieve...

 

[ivysaur12]

Do we have a world map of this? We need to keep Penny dancing. Who are the next likely candidate countries to rule in favor of it?

In Europe? Ireland is voting on marriage equality this May, so that should be next. Then, things get trickier since the next big European countries without marriage equality like Austria, Germany, Italy (which doesn't even have civil unions), Northern Ireland, the Czech Republic, Greece and Switzerland.

Most polls of Eastern European and former Soviet countries show very little support for marriage equality, except for Slovenia, which just passed a marriage equality bill and blocked a referendum on the matter. There's a decent amount of support in Hungary according to some polls, but Hungary has a constitutional amendment defining marriage as between a man and a woman. Same for Belarus, Bulgaria, Croatia, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Moldova, Montenegro, Poland, Serbia, Slovakia and Ukraine.

Outside of Europe, you're probably going to see some movement in South America from the other countries where marriage equality isn't yet legal: Chile (which just legalized civil unions), Colombia, and Ecuador. Most likely Chile next, since marriage equality has crossed the 55% threshold in most polls there.

In Asia, the first country to legalize marriage equality would most likely be Taiwan. Then it's sort of ?. You have some countries like South Korea where it's possible, though much more work has to be done the same way that this grassroots campaign started in America about challenging traditional gender expectations in a more conservative country. Same with Japan, though I don't think we'll see marriage equality legalized in Japan for a very long time. I think marriage equality will be legalized in Israel in our lifetime, but not now.

And in Africa, the work is to decriminalize homosexuality. This is probably more likely in countries with more emerging economic influence.

Basically... we're going to have Penny around for a long time.

EDIT: Oh, and Australia, maybe/probably the next time there's a Labor government.

 

[CDX]

Interesting historical footnote from the Washington Post:

I was already familiar with this story, but what I never knew, or maybe just never realized that current Supreme Court Justice Anthony M. Kennedy was involved.

 

[Generalpsyduck]

It's so weird being proud for my country for once

 

[AndyD]

Once the outcome of this case is decided, I think Hollingsworth v. Perry will be remembered as more of a weird procedural footnote, since US v. Windsor has been the more influential and decisive case thus far. It's just too bad "Obergefell v. Hodges" is such a clunky name versus, say, the symbolic concision of Loving v. Virginia.

Hodges rolls off the tongue just fine. But Loving would have been a masterpiece.

 

[ivysaur12]

Hodges rolls off the tongue just fine. But Loving would have been a masterpiece.

Nah, we're calling it Obergefell.

 

[Volimar]

Nah, we're calling it Obergefell.

If you call it Oburgerfell more Americans will show interest.

 

[Monocle]

If you call it Oburgerfell more Americans will show interest.

Furiously applauding this from my Rascal scooter.

 

[Livingskeletons]

I can't wait for the salty tears.

Anyone have the link to that conservative site that people keep posting throughout this campaign?

 

[Man God]

Israel is moving away from gay marriage if anything.

 

[HylianTom]

I can't wait for the salty tears.

Anyone have the link to that conservative site that people keep posting throughout this campaign?

FreeRepublic!

Here's their "HomosexualAgenda" section. It's fun for laughs, but, oddly enough, it's been pretty useful for stories about LGBT issues.
http://freerepublic.com/tag/homosexualagenda/

I'll post links later to some of their greatest hits. Their reaction threads to Windsor were pretty entertaining.

Reaction thread to Lawrence v Texas (2003): http://freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/935915/posts
{note how there's actually some division in the discussion over this issue. And 1700 posts!}

Other Lawrence reaction threads: http://freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/935964/posts ..... http://freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/936438/posts ..... http://freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/937218/posts

Shortly after Lawrence, calls for a Federal Marriage Amendment were renewed with more gusto: http://freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/937684/posts ..... http://freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/937779/posts

And then Windsor & Perry were handed-down in 2013: http://freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3035836/posts ..... http://freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3035849/posts .....
Praise for Scalia's dissent: http://freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3035897/posts
Talk of civil war: http://freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/3035913/posts
The National Cathedral rings its bells in celebration of the ruling: http://freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3036024/posts
Limbaugh concedes that the issue is a done deal ("doom"): http://freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3036343/posts

 

[ivysaur12]

Israel is moving away from gay marriage if anything.

In a lifetime? It'll probably happen. Not soon,.

 

[davepoobond]

It'll be interesting to see presidential nominees positioning themselves to "repeal Obergefell"

 

[TacticalFox88]

It'll be interesting to see presidential nominees positioning themselves to "repeal Obergefell"

No they won't.

That'd be political suicide in 2020, let alone 2024 and up

 

[davepoobond]

No they won't.

That'd be political suicide in 2020, let alone 2024 and up

Talking about 2016. There are plenty of republican candidates who won't mind touting the line.

 

[HylianTom]

For anyone interested in reviewing media coverage, I also started keeping bookmarks of news segments from 2013 onward. The first link below is ABC News' first breaking news segment from June 26.


June 26, 2013:
ABC Breaking News at Supreme Court
Prop 8 Plaintiffs Kris Perry and Sandy Stier talking to President Obama by phone (MSNBC)
SCOTUS Axes DOMA But Marriage Litigation Likely To Live On (MSNBC)
Watch the best moments from gay day (CNN - Jeanne Moos!)
A scramble to change federal rules after gay rights ruling (NBC Nightly News)
The nation absorbs DOMA decision (NBC Nightly News)

(I have a metric TON of videos bookmarked on this timeline..)

 

[Gentleman Jack]

It'll be interesting to see presidential nominees positioning themselves to "repeal Obergefell"

I think the more palatable position to right-wing voting bases will be to couch homophobia as an issue of the first amendment, allowing Christians everywhere to condemn and exile any hint of homosexuality from their businesses, homes, etc. A new Southern Strategy, if you will: Don't say 'faggot' say 'religious freedom.'

 

[Skellig Gra]

I'm honestly concerned what the reaction to a nation wide mandate for gay marriage will be. They always say the South will rise again. This could do it.

 

[Yaboosh]

I'm honestly concerned what the reaction to a nation wide mandate for gay marriage will be. They always say the South will rise again. This could do it.

What? No it couldn't. That is melodramatic bunk.

 

[Skellig Gra]

What? No it couldn't. That is melodramatic bunk.

Well not effectively but it could certainly get violent.

 

[hateradio]

Well not effectively but it could certainly get violent.

Violent? If it does, then it would simply show how awful the other side is.

 

[Skellig Gra]

Violent? If it does, then it would simply show how awful the other side is.

Sure but we already know these people are awful. I'm just worried things could get out of hand. This isn't an insignificant amount of people we are talking about unfortunately.

 

[ivysaur12]

I'm honestly concerned what the reaction to a nation wide mandate for gay marriage will be. They always say the South will rise again. This could do it.

Not one bit. There are gay people marrying in South Carolina, north Florida, and Oklahoma right now.

 

[Escape Goat]

I'm honestly concerned what the reaction to a nation wide mandate for gay marriage will be. They always say the South will rise again. This could do it.

Having just driven through central/northern Florida, Alabama, Mississippi and Louisiana it is safe to say the South isnt going to rise anytime soon.

 

[Paskil]

Dat Daughtrey dissent, tho. I might be sitting in the room for arguments.

 

[shem935]

re: one of my favorite things, polling, a new study out of UCLA shows that states with marriage equality have a more rapid progression at the polls than states without marriage equality.

In their 2014 support tabs, all but 14 states had support that was 50% or above:


Kansas: 50%

Yeah Kansas scraping by on the bottom of the list! That honestly surprises me. Figured we would be one of the 14.

 

[ivysaur12]

http://www.buzzfeed.com/chrisgeidner/how-the-idea-of-marriage-equality-became-reality#.yvbD8RXXz

On Mary Bonuato, the lawyer who argued the Massachusetts gay marriage case (and Vermont), and is arguing in front of the SCOTUS. My browser won't let me copy, for some reason. But it's a great article.

May 17, 2004

 

[Escape Goat]

Remember when we didnt have color film back in 2004? Weve come a long way.

 

[Trouble]

I'm honestly concerned what the reaction to a nation wide mandate for gay marriage will be. They always say the South will rise again. This could do it.

It's not like violence against LGBT people isn't already a very real thing.

Also, I heard this exact same thing said about electing a black president. The south didn't 'rise' for that.

 

[Link]

It's not like violence against LGBT people isn't already a very real thing.

Also, I heard this exact same thing said about electing a black president. The south didn't 'rise' for that.

Didn't they? Now we have the Tea Party running around like inmates escaped from an asylum.

 

[Trouble]

Didn't they? Now we have the Tea Party running around like inmates escaped from an asylum.

Yeah, but they are largely incompetent and just make the entire Republican party look bad. The Tea Party isn't really a particularly southern phenomenon, either.

 

[Link]

Yeah, but they are largely incompetent and just make the entire Republican party look bad. The Tea Party isn't really a particularly southern phenomenon, either.

Incompetant isn't the word I'd use. They've done a pretty good job of infiltrating state and municipal levels of government, and have brought the federal government to a screeching halt, all while giving birth to a fresh breed of racists that aren't even concerned about hiding it.

True, it isn't strictly a southern phenomenon, but that only makes it worse.

 

[Mechazawa]

Man, I must've been asleep or something, I knew a bunch of states allowed it in the past year, but looking at that map, we're practically already there.

 

[AndyD]

If you call it Oburgerfell more Americans will show interest.

Furiously applauding this from my Rascal scooter.

If you pronounce it a-burger-fell everyone will slow their Rascals and bow down in a moment of sadness.

 

[captive]

Reading all these stories, I am so happy for these people and all the others they represent. There is no reason two adults should not be allowed to get married, or adopt children if they wish. I would hate to be the lawyer that has to argue in favor of banning gay marriage.

I remember back in college I had a teacher who was a lesbian, in the class we covered gay rights and she was quite negative about the prospect of gay marriage ever being legal because gays and lesbians represented such a small portion of the population. Its amazing how much has been done in the last decade, but sad at how entrenched much of America was and some of it still is.

 

[HylianTom]

First, a pretty big weigh-in on the issue from the The New England Journal of Medicine:

The oldest medical journal in the US just backed same-sex marriage
Same-sex marriage in the US just received the backing of one of the world's most well-respected medical journals. The New England Journal of Medicine published an editorial today outlining its position — a position that is, unsurprisingly, tied to the many health obstacles faced by LGBTQ folks, as well as their families.

"Too often physicians have seen the price that their patients have paid for society’s lack of acceptance of homosexuality," the authors write. Long-term, stable relationships encourage health and reduce the risk of certain diseases; same-sex marriage should therefore "be accepted both as a matter of justice and as a measure that promotes health," they write.

The editorial is a message meant for the Supreme Court, which is expected to rule on same-sex marriage in June. "We believe that the Court should resolve this conflict in favor of the full recognition of same-sex marriage throughout the United States," they write.

http://www.theverge.com/2015/4/22/8...l-journal-supports-same-sex-marriage#comments
~~~~~

Next, if anyone's looking for a horse to pick on in the "Which-State-Will-Resist-Most?" Sweepstakes, Texas is looking like a pretty good bet.

Committee Approves Bill Targeting Same-Sex Marriage
A Texas House committee on Wednesday passed a bill that seeks to prohibit same-sex marriages, even though the state already bans such unions.

The measure is one of several proposals at the Texas Capitol targeting same-sex marriage and the first one that has cleared a legislative committee this session, according to the Texas Freedom Network, which describes itself as fighting initiatives backed by the state's religious right.

The State Affairs Committee passed House Bill 4105, which would forbid the use of state or local funds for issuing same-sex marriage licenses. The 7-3 vote was along party lines, with only Republicans supporting the measure. The proposal now heads to a committee that schedules legislation for debate by the full House.

http://www.texastribune.org/2015/04/22/first-bill-against-same-sex-marriage-passes-commit/
~~~~~

6 days..

 

[Escape Goat]

Wasnt Texas ban overturned pending appeal?

 

[kess]

If he rules against (and he probably will), Alito's dissent should be fun to read.

 

[ivysaur12]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/courts_law/poll-gay-marriage-support-at-record-high/2015/04/22/f6548332-e92a-11e4-aae1-d642717d8afa_story.html

A record-high 6 in 10 Americans support same-sex marriage and a similar share say individual states should not be allowed to define marriage as only between a man and a woman, according to a new Washington Post-ABC News poll.

The national debate on same-sex marriage moves to center stage next week, when the Supreme Court hears oral arguments on whether state restrictions on same-sex marriage are unconstitutional.

Courts across the country have agreed with gay-marriage advocates that a Supreme Court ruling in 2013, striking down the federal government’s refusal to recognize legal same-sex unions, means that state restrictions must fall as well.

Next week, the court will be considering whether the Constitution requires that gay couples be allowed to marry and whether states may refuse to recognize same-sex marriages performed outside their borders.

The Post-ABC poll finds 61 percent of Americans support allowing gays to marry and 35 percent are opposed. Support is up only slightly from last year but is a reversal from public sentiment a decade ago, when opponents outnumbered supporters 58 percent to 39 percent.

In the short and long run, support for same-sex marriage has grown significantly across demographic and political groups.

Among those under age 30, support has grown since 2005 from 57 percent to 78 percent. Among those 65 and over, it has increased from 18 percent to 46 percent. Support has also risen by double digits across partisan groups, though Democrats and independents have shifted the most.

Despite that, wide swaths of opposition persist among important voting groups. More than 6 in 10 Republicans oppose allowing gay couples to marry, and that increases to 71 percent of conservative Republicans, who play a critical role in the party’s presidential primaries and caucuses.

Results broken down by group.

 

[Alucrid]

6/10 seems too low

 

[Sectorseven]

6/10 seems too low

There's a lot of closet homophobes out there.

 

[Aaron Strife]

6/10 seems too low

Given where we used to be it's pretty damn good.

Gay marriage has rapidly been gaining support - it won't be a 50/50 permanent wedge issue the way abortion is.

 

[Link]

EDIT - I don't read good.