Expert in Prop 8 trial says Obama not a reliable ally of gay marriage movement
Leroy N. Soetoro
SAN FRANCISCO � The Proposition 8 trial had a bit of everything Wednesday,
from an expert doubting President Barack Obama's support for gay rights to
new revelations about the depth of Mormon church involvement in the
political campaign to enact California's same-sex marriage ban.
The trial day also included testimony from a gay man who described being
forced by his outraged parents to undergo "conversion therapy" at a
Southern California research center in hopes he would abandon
homosexuality as a teenager. The testimony was targeted at an argument
from foes of gay marriage who maintain homosexuality is a choice, not an
inherent biological characteristic.
"I knew I was gay, just like I knew I was short and half Hispanic," said
Ryan Kendall, a Denver man who told the courtroom the therapy left him
suicidal.
The testimony came in the seventh day of the Proposition 8 trial unfolding
here before Chief U.S. District Judge Vaughn Walker, who is considering a
legal challenge to the 2008 voter-approved ban on the right of gay and
lesbian couples to wed. Same-sex couples have sued to overturn the law,
saying it violates the equal protection clause of the U.S. Constitution.
The focus of Wednesday's proceedings was the expert testimony of Stanford
University political science Professor Gary Segura.
Segura was called to testify on what he considers the political
vulnerabilities of gays and lesbians, meant to buttress the plaintiff's
argument that they need greater legal protections under the constitution.
Proposition 8 supporters insist gays and lesbians have gained major
political traction, but the Stanford professor argued strongly that they
have "no meaningful political power."
Segura took aim at Obama, saying he was "not a reliable ally" for gays and
lesbians, citing his refusal to back gay marriage or end the military's
"don't ask, don't tell" policy. When Proposition 8's lawyer showed a video
of a speech last fall in which the president vowed to fight for gay
rights, Segura was unyielding.
"I think President Obama is perhaps the best illustration of an ally who
can't be counted on, an ally whose rhetoric far exceeds his actions," he
said.
As Segura testified, lawyers for same-sex couples also triggered sparks by
introducing documents revealing the active involvement of churches in the
Prop. 8 campaign. Among other things, one e-mail from a Roman Catholic
official praised the collaboration with the Mormon Church in getting
Proposition 8 passed. Other documents discussed the Mormon Church's
substantial role in the campaign.
Segura called such direct church involvement against one group
"unprecedented."
Kate Kendell, an attorney with the National Center for Lesbian Rights,
said the campaign against Proposition 8 knew of Mormon church involvement,
but added that the evidence was an extraordinary glimpse into its "formal"
role.
Proposition 8 lawyers were clearly dismayed that Walker allowed the church
material into the trial. The initiative's counsel Andrew Pugno argued that
the evidence should be excluded as internal campaign communications, and
that the judge was flouting a recent federal appeals court ruling that
found many of them privileged as private political speech.
--
Nancy Pelosi, Democrat criminal, accessory before and after the fact, to
House Ways and Means Committee Chairman Charles B. Rangel of New York's
million dollar tax evasion. Charles B. Rangel is still under
"investigation" by a "closed door" House Ethics Committee.
--- news://freenews.netfront.net/ - complaints: ne...@netfront.net ---
Anlatt the Builder
he has openly opposed gay marriage.
Dänk 1010011010
> "Not a reliable ally of the gay marriage movement" in the sense that
> he has openly opposed gay marriage.
During the campaign, Obama rarely took a position on anything, but did
say he opposed same-sex marriage in an interview with MTV. This did
not hurt his support among gays, though, who were so drunk on purple
Kool-Aid on election night that they didn't even notice that Prop. 8
had won, because they were all bleating Obama's name like retarded
sheep on crack.
Barack Obama is pure image, and can be anything you want him to be.
Obama is a mass-market political consumer product -- like a brand of
soda pop, gum, or cigarettes -- and comes is as many flavors as the
political market demands.
To stoners, Obama is a stoner and they swear they heard them promise
to legalize weed. To gays, Obama is gay, or at least they swear they
heard him promise to legalize gay marriage. Everyone seems to think
Obama supports their respective causes though he never promised
anything but Hope™ and Change™.
Obama has as much substance as a packet of Kool-Aid -- a combination
of artificial flavors and colors, fructose, and some sodium benzoate
as a preservative. Obama can be whatever color or flavor you want,
including fruit punch, menthol, and purple.
American gays have been obamtized and truly believe he supports gay
rights, and will continue to support him because he is Dear Leader,
and they will continue to support his Democrap People's Party, because
the Party owns the gay community just like it owns every other special
interest minority group. Since Chairman Obama and the DPP can take
the support of gays for granted, they don't need to worry about
pleasing them.
Who else are gays going to vote for, Sarah Palin?
Wayne
"Anlatt the Builder" <tir...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:9a0405de-e7e1-4b22...@p24g2000yqm.googlegroups.com...
> "Not a reliable ally of the gay marriage movement" in the sense that
> he has openly opposed gay marriage.
And you still voted for him?
Bert Hyman
<leroys...@usurper.org> wrote:
> Segura took aim at Obama, saying he was "not a reliable ally" for gays
> and lesbians,
No American politician is a reliable ally of anyone.
--
Bert Hyman St. Paul, MN be...@iphouse.com
RamRod Sword of Baal
"D�nk 1010011010" <dan...@rocketmail.com> wrote in message
news:49c96e78-394b-4f82...@q6g2000vbi.googlegroups.com...
> On Jan 21, 3:16 pm, Anlatt the Builder <tirh...@aol.com> wrote:
>> "Not a reliable ally of the gay marriage movement" in the sense that
>> he has openly opposed gay marriage.
>
> During the campaign, Obama rarely took a position on anything, but did
> say he opposed same-sex marriage in an interview with MTV. This did
> not hurt his support among gays, though, who were so drunk on purple
> Kool-Aid on election night that they didn't even notice that Prop. 8
> had won, because they were all bleating Obama's name like retarded
> sheep on crack.
So you would prefer Bush, or another like him. Bush who dragged your country
into an illegal war that has caused thousand of young people to be killed,
many more maimed and has cause the US to be brought to the brink of
financial ruin, and was instrumental in bring on a world wide recession
??????????????????????
Dänk 1010011010
wrote:
> "Dänk 1010011010" <dank...@rocketmail.com> wrote in message
N
Dänk 1010011010
I never said I preferred Bush, though at he least he was an authentic
jerk. There are more than two sides, and as an anarchist I don't take
sides. But Obama is different, with a cult of personality that
strongly resembles the Cult of Chairman Mao -- which is why I like to
refer to him as 'Chairman Obama.' No good ever comes of cults
centered around charismatic leaders - religious or political.
Chairman Obama goes beyond mass-market consumer product and is more of
a logo, a brand name for an idea about a brand name for a product that
doesn't exist and comes in any color or flavor you want. And he has a
Cult. And his finger is on the nuclear button.
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
"I wasn't born with enough middle fingers, I don't need to choose a
side."
-- Marilyn Manson
Anlatt the Builder
> On Jan 21, 3:16 pm, Anlatt the Builder <tirh...@aol.com> wrote:
>
> > "Not a reliable ally of the gay marriage movement" in the sense that
> > he has openly opposed gay marriage.
>
> During the campaign, Obama rarely took a position on anything, but did
> say he opposed same-sex marriage in an interview with MTV. This did
> not hurt his support among gays, though, who were so drunk on purple
> Kool-Aid on election night that they didn't even notice that Prop. 8
> had won, because they were all bleating Obama's name like retarded
> sheep on crack.
>
This is a lie. I was with a number of gay people in California on
election night. They were please Obama had won, but absolutely
heartborken Prop. 8 had won.
Gays were, of course, disappointed that Obama could not make the leap
to supporitng gay marriage (although most did believe that anyone who
supported gay marriage could probably not be elected president at this
time). However, he was so far ahead of the anti-gay Republicans - he
opposed DADT and DOMA, and supported civil unions - that it was
natural to support him over them.
>
> To stoners, Obama is a stoner and they swear they heard them promise
> to legalize weed. To gays, Obama is gay, or at least they swear they
> heard him promise to legalize gay marriage.
Find one gay commentator or pundit or blogger who ever said that. Just
one. Or admit that you are a liar.
>
> Who else are gays going to vote for, Sarah Palin?
Well, that's the point, isn't it? In her book she claims that
equality, or even visibility, for gays causes children to act on their
brief, fleeting gay feelings and drift into Total Gayness, where
otherwise they would just get over it and be straight like they're
'sposed to be. This is, of course, contrary to the life experience of
the vast majority of gays, who turned out to be gay regardless of
whether they ever heard a good thing said about gays. And the natural
conclusion of her erroneous belief is that gays should be suppressed
to "save the children." Most gays find Obama's views - and lack of
convenient ignorance on the subject - preferable for fairly obvious
reasons.
Anlatt the Builder
> "Anlatt the Builder" <tirh...@aol.com> wrote in messagenews:9a0405de-e7e1-4b22...@p24g2000yqm.googlegroups.com...> "Not a reliable ally of the gay marriage movement" in the sense that
> > he has openly opposed gay marriage.
>
> -
> And you still voted for him?
Given how virulently anti-gay the Republicans are, gays would be
cutting off their nose to spite their face if they hadn't supported
Obama.
Dänk 1010011010
> On Jan 21, 3:08 pm, Dänk 1010011010 <dank...@rocketmail.com> wrote:
>
> > On Jan 21, 3:16 pm, Anlatt the Builder <tirh...@aol.com> wrote:
>
> > > "Not a reliable ally of the gay marriage movement" in the sense that
> > > he has openly opposed gay marriage.
>
> > During the campaign, Obama rarely took a position on anything, but did
> > say he opposed same-sex marriage in an interview with MTV. This did
> > not hurt his support among gays, though, who were so drunk on purple
> > Kool-Aid on election night that they didn't even notice that Prop. 8
> > had won, because they were all bleating Obama's name like retarded
> > sheep on crack.
>
> This is a lie. I was with a number of gay people in California on
> election night. They were please Obama had won, but absolutely
> heartborken Prop. 8 had won.
Well, I was standing on Castro Street and there was a big video
monitor showing the election results and the crowd didn't even seem to
notice that Prop. 8 had won - because they were chanting the Prophet's
name like retarded sheep on crack. I can still hear it in my head: o-
BAA-ma! o-BAA-ma! BAA! BAA! Four legs good! Sarah Palin baad! o-BAA-
ma!
Castro Street is interesting because they named the subway station
after Harvey Milk, the famous gay SF city councilman who was
assassinated shortly after the Jonestown massacre. It seems that Milk
was an avid supporter of Jim Jones, and had recommended him for a spot
on the city housing commission several years earlier. Why Milk did
not choose to follow Jim Jones and his cult to Guyana is unknown, but
some people believe he had planned to work for Barack Obama, who was
running for class president of his junior high school at the time.
> > Who else are gays going to vote for, Sarah Palin?
>
> Well, that's the point, isn't it? In her book she claims that
> equality, or even visibility, for gays causes children to act on their
> brief, fleeting gay feelings and drift into Total Gayness, where
> otherwise they would just get over it and be straight like they're
> 'sposed to be. This is, of course, contrary to the life experience of
> the vast majority of gays, who turned out to be gay regardless of
> whether they ever heard a good thing said about gays. And the natural
> conclusion of her erroneous belief is that gays should be suppressed
> to "save the children." Most gays find Obama's views - and lack of
> convenient ignorance on the subject - preferable for fairly obvious
> reasons.
I was being sarcastic. If you didn't notice, there were more than two
candidates for president. I voted for Cynthia McKinney, the black
woman who called for Bush's impeachment while Sen. Obama was voting to
legalize Bush's crimes retroactively. Then there was the Libertarian
candidate who also supported his party's platform of gay rights.
There were two national political parties which openly advocated gay
rights, and yet you chose to vote for a party that took no such firm
position.
I'm not sure why gays are so loyal to the Democrat party, other than
that the Party claims ownership of the gay community as it does with
every other minority group. Obama ran on a platform of opposing same-
sex marriage, you voted for him anyway, and so far he has done as much
to advance gay rights as George W. Bush, and yet you believe this is
progress. Drink some more Kool-Aid - it's delicious Tangerine Obama
flavor, with overtones of menthol and and just a hint of almond. Yum!
- - - - - - - - - - -
Castro Street on election night:
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3662/3370691595_99ff8e4a9d.jpg
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3292/3008677815_a1e687dbf4.jpg
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3221/3008677821_00869d7a76.jpg
Lining up for free Kool-Aid:
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3435/3370691607_a00276f094.jpg
Hope that the Kool-Aid isn't poisoned:
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3634/3370691611_e36cd10c88.jpg
Heil Obama!
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3284/3022774232_9c1ed381bd.jpg
Obama campaign volunteers:
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3023/3008677811_cc3e7809ef.jpg
Dänk 1010011010
And it was Democrats, including President Clinton, who gave us the
"Don't Ask, Don't Tell" policy which bans gays from serving openly in
the military, as well as the Defense of Marriage Act which the Obama
administration has been defending in court. The Supreme Court
decision that struck down sodomy laws happened during the Bush
administration.
I wonder which is morally superior: to openly express opposition to
gay rights as the Republicans do, or to lie about supporting them as
the Democrats do. But I suppose if you Hope enough, the lie becomes
Progress.
Scotius
<leroys...@usurper.org> wrote:
>http://www.mercurynews.com/top-stories/ci_14233026
>
>SAN FRANCISCO � The Proposition 8 trial had a bit of everything Wednesday,
>from an expert doubting President Barack Obama's support for gay rights
Obama's not against equal rights, just special rights, and in
that much he's absolutely correct. He knows it's just a tactic by the
radical leadership of the gay rights movement to later be able to sue
churches and ministers who refuse to marry them - a means to
criminalize views they don't like.
>to
>new revelations about the depth of Mormon church involvement in the
>political campaign to enact California's same-sex marriage ban.
The PEOPLE of California voted on that issue; case closed.
>
>The trial day also included testimony from a gay man who described being
>forced by his outraged parents to undergo "conversion therapy" at a
>Southern California research center in hopes he would abandon
>homosexuality as a teenager.
...which has NOTHING to do with the gay marriage issue. This
is part of the problem in America - the rise of the victim class.
Something wrong is done to someone so then they have unlimited
opportunity to change laws as they see fit until they feel they are no
longer aggreived? NO. That's wrong.
What about equal rights, even for non-victims? What ever
happened to that idea?
>The testimony was targeted at an argument
>from foes of gay marriage who maintain homosexuality is a choice, not an
>inherent biological characteristic.
>
>"I knew I was gay, just like I knew I was short and half Hispanic," said
>Ryan Kendall, a Denver man who told the courtroom the therapy left him
>suicidal.
>
>The testimony came in the seventh day of the Proposition 8 trial unfolding
>here before Chief U.S. District Judge Vaughn Walker, who is considering a
>legal challenge to the 2008 voter-approved ban on the right of gay and
>lesbian couples to wed. Same-sex couples have sued to overturn the law,
>saying it violates the equal protection clause of the U.S. Constitution.
>
>The focus of Wednesday's proceedings was the expert testimony of Stanford
>University political science Professor Gary Segura.
>
>Segura was called to testify on what he considers the political
>vulnerabilities of gays and lesbians, meant to buttress the plaintiff's
>
>argument that they need greater legal protections under the constitution.
I would have to say if they want to get married, fine, as long
as there's no attempt to sue ministers or churches that won't marry
them. Then everyone knows it's not just more political maneuvering and
it should be fine.
>
>Proposition 8 supporters insist gays and lesbians have gained major
>political traction, but the Stanford professor argued strongly that they
>have "no meaningful political power."
>
>Segura took aim at Obama, saying he was "not a reliable ally" for gays and
>lesbians, citing his refusal to back gay marriage or end the military's
>"don't ask, don't tell" policy. When Proposition 8's lawyer showed a video
>of a speech last fall in which the president vowed to fight for gay
>rights, Segura was unyielding.
>
>"I think President Obama is perhaps the best illustration of an ally who
>can't be counted on, an ally whose rhetoric far exceeds his actions," he
>said.
No, it's just that he beleives in equality rather than special
status, and doesn't want to support efforts that are really only
attempts to criminalize views that some gays think people shouldn't be
allowed to hold.
>
>As Segura testified, lawyers for same-sex couples also triggered sparks by
>introducing documents revealing the active involvement of churches in the
>Prop. 8 campaign. Among other things, one e-mail from a Roman Catholic
>official praised the collaboration with the Mormon Church in getting
>Proposition 8 passed. Other documents discussed the Mormon Church's
>substantial role in the campaign.
>
>Segura called such direct church involvement against one group
>"unprecedented."
>
>Kate Kendell, an attorney with the National Center for Lesbian Rights,
>said the campaign against Proposition 8 knew of Mormon church involvement,
>but added that the evidence was an extraordinary glimpse into its "formal"
>role.
>
>Proposition 8 lawyers were clearly dismayed that Walker allowed the church
>material into the trial. The initiative's counsel Andrew Pugno argued that
>the evidence should be excluded as internal campaign communications, and
>that the judge was flouting a recent federal appeals court ruling that
>found many of them privileged as private political speech.
So the gays can back as a united group whatever they want, but
no one else is allowed to? WRONG.
juanjo
well known cowardly anonymous liar shared the following with us:
I do love how you can take various gobbets and twist them around to
make white, black and black, white.
Clinton of course tried to allow gays to serve openly in the
military. His efforts were roundly opposed by the Republicans to a
man as well as more than a few blue dog democrats, including that
jackass, Sam Nunn. I did appreciate former senator Goldwater standing
up to the Republican leadership and calling bull shit on their
arguments. They did not dare touch him either when he called them
moral retards. The DADT policy was a compromise forced upon Clinton.
Of course like most compromises, it satisfied no one and has not
worked well. But it was better than the previous outright ban on
military service where a service member found to be homosexual but who
has not committed any homosexual acts while in service would receive
an undesirable discharge. Those who were found guilty of engaging in
homosexual conduct were dishonorably discharged. DADT says sexual
orientation will not be a bar to service unless manifested by
homosexual conduct. The military will discharge members who engage in
homosexual conduct, which is defined as a homosexual act, a statement
that the member is homosexual or bisexual, or a marriage or attempted
marriage to someone of the same gender. Of course now that policy is
on its last legs and will fall shortly.
The Defense of Marriage Act was authored by Georgia Representative Bob
Barr, then a Republican, and signed into law by President Bill
Clinton, on September 21, 1996, after moving through a legislative
fast track and overwhelming approval in both houses of the Republican-
controlled U.S. Congress. They had a vetos proof majority and they
knew it. Clinton was not an idiot.
While the Bush administration was in office when the Lawrence v Texas
case was pending in the Supreme Court, the case involved a state law
and its constitutionality. Thus the US Attorney General had no
standing in the case to defend the law in question. They could have
filed an amicus brief if they had wished but declined to do so. So
while they did not file any brief supporting it, they filed none
opposing it either.
Finally with regard to the DOMA cases currently pending, the
government has the obligation to defend federal laws in court. The
Obama administration filed a brief in these cases which stated the
following:
"With respect to the merits, this Administration does not support DOMA
as a matter of policy, believes that it is discriminatory, and
supports its repeal. Consistent with the rule of law, however, the
Department of Justice has long followed the practice of defending
federal statutes as long as reasonable arguments can be made in
support of their constitutionality, even if the Department disagrees
with a particular statute as a policy matter, as it does here. "
Dank Boy, it is a pity that you are such a pathetic liar.
juanjo
> On Thu, 21 Jan 2010 18:06:13 +0000 (UTC), "Leroy N. Soetoro"
>
> >http://www.mercurynews.com/top-stories/ci_14233026
>
> >SAN FRANCISCO — The Proposition 8 trial had a bit of everything Wednesday,
> >from an expert doubting President Barack Obama's support for gay rights
>
> Obama's not against equal rights, just special rights, and in
> that much he's absolutely correct. He knows it's just a tactic by the
> radical leadership of the gay rights movement to later be able to sue
> churches and ministers who refuse to marry them - a means to
> criminalize views they don't like.
>
This argument has been raised repeatedly and is just so much bull
shit. Churches regularly discriminate when it comes to marriage and
the courts have always refused to interfere. There are a number of
churches which still believe that interracial marriage is morally
wrong and yet I have yet to hear of anyone suing one of those
churches, demanding them to administer the marriage rites of their
church to an interracial couple. The Roman Catholics will refuse to
conduct a marriage for a mix faith couple unless the non-Catholic
party agrees to sign an agreement requiring the children to be raised
as Roman Catholics. Many rabbis will refuse to conduct a marriage
between a non-Jew and Jew. But still we hear this nonsense come from
the far right propaganda machine.
As far as I am concerned it is time we removed the clergy from civil
marriage entirely. That will resolve the issue completely. Make it
as it is in many countries where once you go down and register at the
county clerk, you are married legally. If you want to have a
religious marriage within the religious tradition you subscribe to
then that is all well and good but legally it has no legal effect at
all.
Sam Spade
> On Jan 23, 6:37 pm, D�nk 1010011010 also known as Frito Pendejo and a
I hope you enjoy your Hep C buttfucker.
juanjo
his wit and wisdom with us:
> juanjo wrote:
> > On Jan 23, 6:37 pm, Dänk 1010011010 also known as Frito Pendejo and a
Sorry sweetie but I am monogamous and I have never dated you so I do
not have Hep C.
Frito Pendejo
> On Thu, 21 Jan 2010 18:06:13 +0000 (UTC), "Leroy N. Soetoro"
> <leroys...@usurper.org> wrote:
>
>> http://www.mercurynews.com/top-stories/ci_14233026
>>
>
> Obama's not against equal rights, just special rights, and in
> that much he's absolutely correct. He knows it's just a tactic by the
> radical leadership of the gay rights movement to later be able to sue
> churches and ministers who refuse to marry them - a means to
> criminalize views they don't like.
>
>> to
>> new revelations about the depth of Mormon church involvement in the
>> political campaign to enact California's same-sex marriage ban.
>
> The PEOPLE of California voted on that issue; case closed.
Even though I'm gay, I voted FOR Prop. 8 simply because every goddamn
Obamatard in San Francisco was against it.
What's really weird is how most gays continued to support Obama even
after he went on record as opposing same-sex marriage. It's like they
were brainwashed or something, completely oblivious to the reality
around them, and absolutely convinced that Obama supported gay marriage
even though he said he opposed it.
Some Obamatards believe that Obama lied about his position on same-sex
marriage for political reasons, and that he really supports it. The
reasoning is that if Prophet Obama says the Kool-Aid is poisoned, that
means it is safe to drink.
juanjo
> Scotius wrote:
> > On Thu, 21 Jan 2010 18:06:13 +0000 (UTC), "Leroy N. Soetoro"
> > <leroysoet...@usurper.org> wrote:
>
> >>http://www.mercurynews.com/top-stories/ci_14233026
>