seven days and counting...
in one week, on march 5th, the california supreme court will hear arguments regarding the legal challenges to the recently-passed prop 8 which eliminated rights for same sex couples in california to be legally married.
less than one year ago, on may 16, 2008, this same supreme court struck down the california ban on same sex marriages:
The California Supreme Court struck down the state's ban on same-sex marriage Thursday in a broadly worded decision that would invalidate virtually any law that discriminates on the basis of sexual orientation.
The 4-3 ruling declared that the state Constitution protects a fundamental "right to marry" that extends equally to same-sex couples.
on monday of this week, the naacp -- in a press statement -- called for prop 8 to be invalidated and/or overturned.
more after the fold -- and even a video!
h/t to lollydee and Clarknt67 for their diaries earlier this week on the naacp statement/position.
seven days and counting...
in one week, on march 5th, the california supreme court will hear arguments regarding the legal challenges to the recently-passed prop 8 which eliminated rights for same sex couples in california to be legally married.
less than one year ago, on may 16, 2008, this same supreme court struck down the california ban on same sex marriages:
The California Supreme Court struck down the state's ban on same-sex marriage Thursday in a broadly worded decision that would invalidate virtually any law that discriminates on the basis of sexual orientation.
The 4-3 ruling declared that the state Constitution protects a fundamental "right to marry" that extends equally to same-sex couples.
on monday of this week, the naacp -- in a press statement -- called for prop 8 to be invalidated and/or overturned.
in seven days the california supreme court will hear arguments and will issue a decision within probably ninety days. regardless how they rule, the work ahead for all of us for LGBT equality is daunting and in need of attention.
it's my hope that once and for all, the scapegoating of the black community in california for the passage of prop 8 will end not only because it is factually untrue but also because we need get on with the struggle to guarantee equal rights and equal access and equal protection to all americans -- and the more divided we allow ourselves to become, the less likely we are to achieve this.
the naacp statement from monday
The National Association for the Advancement of Colored People today announced support of measures before the California legislature challenging Proposition 8, which altered the California Constitution to deny same-sex couples the freedom to marry and equal protection under the law.
In a letter to legislative leaders, NAACP national board chair Julian Bond and President and CEO Benjamin Todd Jealous urged passage of House Resolution 5 and Senate Resolution 7 to put the legislature on record calling for invalidation of Prop. 8 as an improper and dangerous alteration of the California Constitution.
"The NAACP's mission is to help create a society where all Americans have equal protection and opportunity under the law," said President Jealous. "Our Mission Statement calls for the 'equality of rights of all persons.' Prop. 8 strips same-sex couples of a fundamental freedom, as defined by the California State Supreme Court. In so doing, it poses a serious threat to all Americans. Prop. 8 is a discriminatory, unprecedented change to the California Constitution that, if allowed to stand, would undermine the very purpose of a constitution and courts - assuring equal protection and opportunity for all and safeguarding minorities from the tyranny of the majority."
SR 7, sponsored by Equality California (EQCA), will be heard in the Senate Judiciary Committee on Feb. 24th and will proceed to the full Senate for a vote shortly thereafter. Its companion bill, HR 5, also sponsored by EQCA, passed the Assembly Judiciary Committee on Feb. 17th and is eligible for a vote before the full Assembly as early as today.
The California State Conference of the NAACP filed briefs with the California Supreme Court in the legal challenge against Prop. 8, arguing that the measure 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. Several other civil rights organizations, faith leaders, unions and leading corporations also filed briefs urging the invalidation of Prop. 8.
"The NAACP has long opposed any proposal that would alter the federal or state constitutions for the purpose of excluding any groups or individuals from guarantees of equal protection," said Chairman Bond. "We urge the legislature to declare that Proposition 8 did not follow the proper protective process and should be overturned as an invalid alteration that vitiated crucial constitutional safeguards and fundamental American values, threatening civil rights and all vulnerable minorities."
h/t to pam spaulding for the press release
that the naacp had to release such a statement in order to make clear that its long-standing policy of opposing the denial of equal protection for any groups or individuals includes those who had their constitutionally-guaranteed right to enter into a state-sanctioned (california to be exact) marriage contract with their same sex partner says a lot about the state of affairs of the entire civil/equal rights movement, both within and amongst themselves as well as in the general population/public.
this is from january 2009:
Earlier this week the NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund(LDF) filed a friend of the court brief challenging California's Proposition 8 on the grounds that the basic rights of a minority group cannot be taken away by a simple majority. LDF joined other civil rights groups, the Asian American Pacific Legal Center, the Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund, Equal Justice Society, and the California NAACP in calling for the invalidation of Prop 8.
if the right to enter into a state-sanctioned, state-constitutionally-guaranteed contract for same sex couples can be taken away by a simple majority vote, as was what happened in california, what prevents the same type of state-sanctioned contract now constitutionally-guaranteed being taken away in the future by a simple majority?
bond's point:
"We urge the legislature to declare that Proposition 8 did not follow the proper protective process and should be overturned as an invalid alteration that vitiated crucial constitutional safeguards and fundamental American values, threatening civil rights and all vulnerable minorities."
is the point. specifically, he and the naacp, along with aapla and maldef et al, are not just talking about inter-racial marriage. that's just the tip of that iceberg.
this is not bond's first time advocating for the rights of the LGBT community -- not by a long shot. julian bond has been a long-standing supporter of the right for same sex marriage as well as LGBT rights and has been a very vocal critic of homophobia within the black community. when asked in an interview in september 2006 of where martin luther king jr. would stand on the issue gay rights, bond answered:
I think Martin King would stand as his widow stood -- in favor of them.
here, julian bond, in a brilliant interview, discusses same sex marriage, civil rights, LGBT rights, similarities, connections and challenges (well-worth the 9 minutes of video):
(h/t to towerload for this clip)
the scapegoating despite the facts
the fall-out in california over the passage of prop 8 turned bitterly ugly and bitterly racist and bitterly fact-free and bitterly convenient when black californians were called out as the deciding vote in prop 8's passage. reason and analysis went by the wayside as both racism and in turn (in return) homophobia reared their ugly heads -- all thew while the responsible parties for bankrolling and funding a viscous and untrue campaign against same sex marriages walked away with impunity.
bad exit polling data gave permission for truly unacceptable conclusions to be made about the reason why prop 8 passed. there have been, however, valid analyses of the data from the november election and reasoned explanations and conclusions for the vote and what influenced it. one might want to check out the study funded by the Haas Foundation for a look at the data and the evidence-based conclusions one can draw from them. to wit:
Moreover, the study found that the level of support for Proposition 8 among African Americans was nowhere close to the NEP exit poll 70 percent figure. The study looked at pre- and post-election polls and conducted a sophisticated analysis of precinct-level voting data from five California counties with the highest African-American populations (Alameda (Oakland), Los Angeles, Sacramento, San Diego and San Francisco).* Based on this, it concludes that the level of African-American support for Proposition 8 was in the range of 57-59 percent. Its precinct-level analysis also found that many precincts with few black voters supported Proposition 8 at levels just as high or higher than those with many black voters.
the catholic church, the mormon church had nothing to fear by way of reaction from angry californians when the angry californians were set upon themselves. old tactic, still effective -- blame (insert the name of a non-dominant culture group) for the loss..."
when the data are looked at, the the HAAS Foundation study concluded:
when religious attendance was factored out, however, there was no significant difference between African Americans and other groups.
In other words, people of all races and ethnicities who worship at least once a week overwhelmingly supported Proposition 8, with support among white, Asian and Latino frequent churchgoers actually being greater than among African Americans.
LGBT rights, civil rights
mildred loving was public in her support for the right for same sex couples to be married:
Surrounded as I am now by wonderful children and grandchildren, not a day goes by that I don’t think of Richard and our love, our right to marry, and how much it meant to me to have that freedom to marry the person precious to me, even if others thought he was the "wrong kind of person" for me to marry. I believe all Americans, no matter their race, no matter their sex, no matter their sexual orientation, should have that same freedom to marry. Government has no business imposing some people’s religious beliefs over others. Especially if it denies people’s civil rights.
coretta scott king was a long-standing champion of the interconnectedness between the civil rights movement and LGBT equal rights efforts. long-standing.
in her own words:
For too long, our nation has tolerated the insidious form of discrimination against this group of Americans, who have worked as hard as any other group, paid their taxes like everyone else, and yet have been denied equal protection under the law...I believe that freedom and justice cannot be parceled out in pieces to suit political convenience. My husband, Martin Luther King, Jr. said, "Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere." On another occasion he said, "I have worked too long and hard against segregated public accommodations to end up segregating my moral concern. Justice is indivisible." Like Martin, I don't believe you can stand for freedom for one group of people and deny it to others.
when bush was pushing for a constitutional amendment banning same sex marriages in 2004, coretta scott king was unequivocal in her opposition.
in just seven days...
hopefully the naacp press release will help, once and for all, to clear away the power and the sway brogan about by the whispering and chaos-inducing chatterings of those who continue to capitalize upon racism and homophobia and sexism and classism to maintain a power imbalance that is threatened by equal access, equal protection and equal rights.
while racism (like sexism and homophobia and classism) is alive and well in the u.s. (regardless of community) so too is the capacity to make change also alive and well.
speaking out to have prop 8 overturned and/or invalidated is a positive and significant step towards actualizing the capacity to make positive change happen. now.
it's not that the calls for equality have not been made -- they have. it is time for them to now all be heard and acted upon.
so, i return to where i started --> in seven days the california supreme court will hear arguments and will issue a decision within probably ninety days. regardless how they rule, the work ahead for all of us for LGBT equality is daunting and in need of attention.
it's my hope that once and for all, the scapegoating of the black community in california for the passage of prop 8 will end not only because it is factually untrue but also because we need get on with the struggle to guarantee equal rights and equal access and equal protection to all americans -- and the more divided we allow ourselves to become, the less likely we are to achieve this.
cross-posted over at NION