The California Supreme Court finds itself center stage this Thursday when it will hear oral arguments on whether it should uphold Proposition 8's ban on same-sex marriage.The case touches the heart of our democracy and poses a profound question: can a bare majority of voters strip away an inalienable right through the initiative process? If so, what possible meaning does the word inalienable have?
The state faced a dilemma like this before. In 1964, 65 percent of California voters approved Proposition 14, which would have legalized racial discrimination in the selling or renting of housing. Both the California and U.S. Supreme Courts struck down this proposition, concluding that it amounted to an unconstitutional denial of rights.
As California's Attorney General, I believe the Court should strike down Proposition 8 for remarkably similar reasons -- because it unconstitutionally discriminates against same-sex couples and deprives them of the fundamental right to marry.
Some vigorously disagree. That's the position of Ken Starr and those who argue that a simple majority can eliminate the right to marry. But such a claim completely ignores California's history and the nature of our constitution.If you're in the Los Angeles area tomorrow, the L.A. Gay & Lesbian Center, Lambda Legal, the American Civil Liberties Union, the National Center for Lesbian Rights and the City of West Hollywood will host a viewing of oral arguments at West Hollywood Auditorium, followed by a press conference.Fundamental rights in California are recognized and protected by our constitution, which declares in Article I, Section 1 that "all people are by nature free and independent and have inalienable rights" and "among these are enjoying and defending life and liberty, acquiring, possessing, and protecting property, and pursuing and obtaining safety, happiness, and privacy."
These fundamental premises of a free people were declared when the constitution was first adopted. The initiative process came much later in 1911, when the immediate concern was to give the people power over the railroads, which were seen as having a stranglehold over the legislature. In creating this initiative process, there was no discussion or any evidence of intent to permit a simple majority of voters to take away the pre-existing rights deemed inalienable by Article I.
In 2008, the California Supreme Court was faced with the question of how the values enshrined in Article I apply to same sex marriages. It concluded that the concept of "liberty" includes the right to form the enduring relationship called marriage and that no compelling interest justified denying this right to same sex couples. Just like the right to be free from discrimination in housing, citizens have the right to be free from discrimination in state-granted marriage licenses.
With this Supreme Court decision, same sex marriage has the protection of Article 1 and, like other inalienable rights, cannot be taken away by a popular vote -- whether it be 52% (as was the case in Proposition 8) or 65% (as it was for Proposition 14).
I believe, therefore, the Court must conclude as I have that Proposition 8 is unconstitutional and should be stricken.
Jerry Brown is California's Attorney General.
At the L.A. Gay & Lesbian Center viewing, Lambda Legal Staff Attorney Stefan Johnson will take questions from the audience about the proceedings.For those of us in other environs, you can tune in at the State of California Channel: http://www.calchannel.com/WHEN: Thursday, March 5, 2009, 9 a.m.-1 p.m.
WHERE: West Hollywood Auditorium647 N. San Vicente Boulevard
L.A. Gay & Lesbian Center
The Village at Ed Gould Plaza
1125 N. McCadden Place
Los Angeles, CA 90038(One block east of Highland, just north of Santa Monica Blvd.)
Limited street parking is available; use of public transit is encouraged.
COST: FREE
Cross-posted at http://www.tips-q.com/content/crackpot-les-kinsolving-goes-bonkers-over-sean-penn
Kinsolving, writing for WorldNetDaily, doesn't like gays. Nor is he fond of Sean Penn. Kinsolving may be best known for having accepted $2,500 worth of stock from a lobbyist to report favorably on South Africa which was under apartheid at the time. That lapse in ethics cost him his State Department and Congressional press credentials which he has since won back. Here is a selective sample of some of Kinsolving's recent and highly offensive comments. My email to Kinsolving follows the excerpts:
(Mr Kinsolving can be contacted at les@leskinsolving.com)
Under this Sean Penn morality, how can anyone fail to support the "rights" of sexual orientations which, unlike the Penn-saluted buggery, have none of homosexuality's death rates of AIDS and syphilis?
"We've got to have equal rights for everyone," declared Oscar-winner Penn. This, no doubt, thrilled and relieved all members of NAM/BLA (the North American Man/Boy Love Association - for pedophiles).
In view of his admonition to America: "We've got to have equal rights for everyone," will we have an opportunity to see the award-winning Sean Penn in one future movie casting as a veterinarian who fornicates with his patients? Or as an undertaken who has relations with corpses?
And while the majority of California voters strongly oppose this glorification of the deadly disease-spreading alternative sexual orientation, other alternatives (including NAM/BLA, Ren? Guyon, necrophiliacs, Eulenspiegel and LAL were not even mentioned by the sodomy acceptance advocates at the Academy Awards.To: les@leskinsolving.com
Subject: Gratuitous Ignorance and Bigotry
Date: Tue, 3 Mar 2009 17:49:40 -0500
X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.7.0; i386-redhat-linux-gnu)
Regarding your recent little polemic in (presumably the only publication that will suffer your presence) World Net Daily:
1. Conflating gays with NAMBLA is not only deceptive but ignorant. The FBI and numerous published and peer reviewed studies have concluded that gays are LESS likely to be pedophiles than heterosexuals.
2. You confuse correlation and causation with respect to AIDS. AIDS is not a gay disease. Worldwide, the vast majority of AIDS patients are heterosexuals.
3. "Buggery?" Common decency or, more pragmatically, self-censorship should preclude such expressions of hatred. "Fag" would be no more offensive.
4. Comparing gays to bestiality and necrophilia isn't even very original. Yes, I know that Penn said "all" people. Pretending not to understand what he meant in context is intellectually dishonest.
The Human Rights Campaign, the nation's largest lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender civil rights organization, today learned that the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints has sent a private e-mail to its members in Illinois urging them to contact state legislators and voice opposition to civil unions legislation currently under consideration. Mormons have notably utilized private networks to torpedo pro-LGBT policies in the past, most recently in their home state of Utah, where a package of fair-minded legislation called the Common Ground Initiative was systematically killed in the state legislature. Most notoriously, Mormons funneled millions of dollars into California last year to pass Proposition 8, a ballot initiative that stripped lesbian and gay couples of the right to marry in the state.More below the fold."It is irrefutably clear that the LDS Church is fighting an anti-gay crusade throughout the nation, targeting any form of equality for the lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender community," said Bruce Bastian, Board of Director for the Human Rights Campaign and former member of the LDS Church. "Church leaders want nothing more than to do their hateful work in secrecy, but the time has come to shine a light on their insidious efforts. If the LDS Church won't tell the truth, we will."
The e-mail, sent to at least one LDS ward in Illinois, was authorized by Bishop Chris Church, of the Nauvoo, Illinois 3rd Ward, and was sent out by that website's ward administrator. The messaging in the e-mail carries many of the same bigoted lies that were hallmarks of the LDS Church's campaign in support of Proposition 8 in California and Proposition 102 in Arizona. The e-mail misleads citizens in Illinois by blatantly misstating that the civil unions legislation would "empower the public schools to begin teaching this lifestyle to our young children regardless of parental requests otherwise." It goes on to issue this incendiary and inaccurate warning - "it will also create grounds for rewriting all social mores." The e-mail was uncovered by BoxTurtleBulletin.com, a website that tracks and monitors anti-gay rhetoric. The contents of the e-mail are posted online at www.boxturtlebulletin.com/2009/03/03/9359.
In the aftermath of the passage of Proposition 8, the ballot measure that ended marriage equality in California, Elder L. Whitney Clayton responded to public backlash against their massive, coordinated efforts in support of the measure by saying the LDS Church is not opposed to civil unions and other non-marriage legal recognitions of same-sex relationships. State LGBT group Equality Utah then drafted five pieces of state legislation that extended basic legal protections for LGBT Utahns called the Common Ground Initiative. HRC sent Church President Thomas Monson a letter urging him to support the Common Ground Initiative and also launched an action alert asking members and supporters to contact the LDS Church to encourage it to publicly support civil unions and other pro-equality legislation in the Church's home state. When the Church blocked e-mails from HRC members and supporters, local members hand-delivered the nearly 30,000 communications.Related:
But in a matter of weeks, all five pieces of legislation had been killed."Despite the Mormon Church's attempt to not appear publicly bigoted against the social justice issue of our time, it is perfectly clear that the church has in its cross-hairs any measure that recognizes the humanity and dignity of LGBT Americans," continued Bastian.
* Calling Illinois: The Mormons Are At It Again
No comments:
Post a Comment