Posted by
Playful Walrus on Wednesday, June 11, 2008 6:34:54 PM
Remember how vitally important it was - according to homosexuality activist groups - for same-sex couples to get marriage licenses in a state that already treats domestic partnerships like marriages? Remember how it was also extremely important that the California Supreme Court’s decision to neuter marriage licenses be implemented as soon as possible – so urgent that it could not wait for the outcome of a popular vote in November? Remember how it was a matter of basic human rights that same-sex couples have their relationships recognized by the state as marriage?
Remember all of that?
Well, strangely, the activist organizations are telling gay people in other states that their relationships don’t matter yet – that they should not exercise their “fundamental right to marry” - yet.
Why? Well, I know you’ll find this as shocking as I did, but it turns out it isn’t about rights at all – it is all about advancing an agenda by judicial fiat, and the activists want all of those desperately unmarried out-of-state same-sex couples to hold off on getting their “marriage rights” for the sake of the larger game plan. It isn't really about individuals or couples who have been together for thirty years. It is about the power of the activists groups and their ability to impose their will on the majority.
Maura Dolan, Los Angeles Times staff writer, reports.
With only a few days left before gays can marry in California,
Again with the imprecise language. Gays have always been able to marry, the same way straights marry.
nine major gay rights groups asked couples Tuesday not to sue the federal government or other states to have their California nuptials recognized, saying that legal action could harm the marriage equality movement.
Well how could that be? And why should they not get their “rights” ASAP? This is a matter of life and death!
In an unusual six-page memorandum, written for same-sex couples,
What, like marching orders?
groups ranging from the American Civil Liberties Union to Lambda Legal warned that lawsuits would invite "bad" court rulings that could take years to overturn.
The memo cautioned that the U.S. Supreme Court has traditionally refused to embrace major social change until many states have already acted and that the battle for marriage must be orchestrated strategically, state by state, court by court.
But they can’t wait! What if someone ends up in the hospital??? Isn’t this like asking African-Americans to wait for emancipation from slavery - according to you own talking points?
Twenty-seven states have passed constitutional amendments banning gay marriage, and only the high courts of California and Massachusetts have approved it. A ballot measure to reinstate California's marriage ban is headed for the November ballot.
That is what is really going on here. They are afraid that when we see other states and the federal government having to deal with lawsuits, we’re going to vote for the amendment.
If the U.S. Supreme Court considered the federal Defense of Marriage Act, which permits states to refuse to recognize same-sex marriage in other states, the current court would likely split 5 to 4, with Justice Anthony M. Kennedy being an unpredictable swing vote, some scholars believe.
Which makes it very important who the next President of the United States will be.
Jon W. Davidson, legal director of Lambda Legal, called the joint statement "unprecedented," particularly since it came from so many groups.
Not that they conspire – uh – I mean coordinate or anything.
The memorandum says marriage rights should be tackled first in state courts, and only in states with courts "that may be ready to do the right thing." Marriage cases are pending before the high courts in Iowa and Connecticut, and gay rights groups are hoping the legislatures of New York and New Jersey will eventually remove [gender from] marriage [licenses].
Brainwash enough people.
Unlike Massachusetts, California has no residency requirements for couples wishing to wed, and tens of thousands of same-sex couples are expected to travel to the state to marry. Experts believe that at least some will return home and bring legal actions.
Which is all part of the plan. Vote accordingly.
Asked whether the memo was likely to prevent lawsuits, Davidson said: "I guess we'll just have to see whether it is successful or not."
Well, don’t groups like yours represent each and every single gay person? At least that’s the way you present yourself. Why wouldn’t gay person stay on the plantation and follow your orders?
The statement said that "early and unnecessary" court losses over marriage rights in Arizona and Indiana "hurt our other cases." Courts in New York, Washington state and Maryland narrowly rejected same-sex marriage and adopted some of the "contorted reasoning" from those decisions, the memo said.
Contorted reasoning – you know, like recognizing that marriage unites the sexes.
Instead of suing, same-sex couples should work against the California anti-gay marriage ballot measure and promote marriage rights in conversations with friends, co-workers, neighbors and employers, the statement said.
Wait – you’re not suggesting – gasp – out-of-state involvement in California politics, are you? Because I remember the activists criticizing the involvement of out-of-state groups, like the Alliance Defense Fund.
The paper has gotten around to setting up a Neutering Marriage Promotion Page – Uh, I mean they’ve gathered most of their coverage here.