Good News on the Prop 8 Front/Michelle "Idiot" Bachmann

This news story that came out today is good news on the Prop 8 front. The California Supreme Court is going to hear a few cases regarding Prop 8:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20081120/ap_on_re_us/gay_marriage_lawsuits;_ylt=ArbHuc46jAtVeAdFSOo.W4MXIr0F

I really hope that the decision will be the same, even though the argument has to be tweaked slightly. From my understanding, the cases presented by the plaintiffs will be more on the side of how the proposition was worded and presented to amend the California State Constitution. The presentation will have the principles of discrimination behind it though, and I'm sure the spirit of the current protests around the country. According to the article, CSC has overturned some initiatives because of their wording with respect to an amendment or a constitutional revision. I hope they decide on the side of NO DISCRIMINATION in California and tell all religious institutions they have no business in state affairs.

Also good news for the gays: Connecticut has just begun marrying after following California with their own Supreme Court decision to allow same sex marriage. This is exceptional, because about a third of Connecticut is part of New York City's Metro area, so a lot of people work in New York, but live in Connecticut. I'm not sure where I was going with this, but it's good nonetheless. Hopefully they won't have to deal with the same thing California is dealing with in 2 years. Although, I wouldn't be surprised.

On another note, I'd like to present you with something that mystifies my concept of intelligence and ignorance:

Exhibit A: Rep. Michelle Bachmann (R-MN) on Hardball a couple of weeks before the election:

Now, about 4 weeks and a reelection to the House later, she appeared on Hannity and Colmes (bleh). May I present Exhibit B:

I seriously feel bad for Minnesota's 6th Congressional district. She won a plurality of the vote, but not by much, with a third party candidate garnering 10% of the vote. Although, on the other hand, they did vote for her, so they get what they want. They get a retarded, idiotic, ignorant, idiot of a woman that obviously doesn't understand QUOTING, VIDEO, and TRANSCRIPTS on the wondrous inventions older than her called the TELEVISION. Regardless of what she intended to say, she said what she said, and it's too late to go back and change your meaning, especially we all know what she meant in the first place. To then go back and call what she said "urban legend" when it came from her own MOUTH is utterly ridiculous. What is she now, a part time tall-tale teller? Did she just do what we all dream of doing by crating her own urban legend beyond mythic proportions? Does she believe she's performing Jedi mind tricks on Alan Colmes to change his mind in an instant? Does she believe she can do magic and make it disappear? I can tell it is none of these. She's just a retard in the United States House of Representatives. Even though she represents only a portion of the people of Minnesota, she still votes for the entire country. Please vote present, Michelle! We don't want you to hurt yourself!

One last thing: Since when has the United States Government overtly allowing such "special needs" people into it? 

Prop H8 ... and my shame of being a Californian...

I have to say... Tuesday was great and crap at the same time. I am proud to be an American, but shameful about being a Californian. This is what my shame amounts to at the moment (image above).

Why, you ask, is my shame bringing feelings about the Jim Crow south that I was never apart of? Well, I shall lay it out for you in the simplest terms that I can. OK, so Proposition 8 passed in California on Tuesday which would ban same-sex marriage in the state and cancel the ruling by the Supreme Court that said it was allowed earlier this year. It would be an amendment to the California State Constitution defining marriage between a man and woman ONLY. Now, about 18,000 gay couples got married in California since May. Their marriages are assured to continue to be valid by the State Attorney General, but I have some misgivings. Let me give you a scenario that I thought of the other day. Say Gary married Steve in June 2008. Steve got into a huge auto accident last month. Gary, being Steve's spouse, wants to visit Steve in the hospital. The hospital happens to be a private hospital and not a government-run facility. The hospital denies Gary the right to see Steve in the hospital. Gary sues the hospital. Gary wins on the basis that the Attorney General said their marriage was still valid in the face of Prop 8 and the subsequent amendment to the constitution and the hospital wrongly disallowed Gary to visit Steve. However, the lovely appeals process is taken up by the hospital, claiming that the marriage is unconstitutional. Now, I'm not a constitutional law student, or even a law student, but it seems easy for this case. I could be wrong, so bear with me, or please, tell me I'm wrong. So anyway, the appeals process takes the case all the way back to the California Supreme Court. Since it is their job to determine whether or not a law is constitutional, they refer to the State Constitution. The Amendment states in plain language that marriage is between a man and a woman and side the case with the hospital. Unfortunately, all the 18,000 marriages granted by California are basically found unconstitutional. Even though the attorney general said they would be safe. I believe all it takes is one case to make it so.

But Alex, you haven't equated Jim Crow to the issue at hand yet. I know, I'm getting there: So here's the deal, what do we do with same sex couples that would like to have the same rights as hetero-couples? Well, since we obviously don't want to grant them marriages like everyone else, we say civil unions. Here's where the connection makes sense. I'm sorry, but civil unions are nothing more than "separate but equal". I for one found the Jim Crow laws to be beneath that of decent human nature, and I am ashamed it took so long for them to be abolished. But apparently it is OK for same sex couples to feel the same type of discrimination? In 2008? Separate but equal should not be language I'm using at this stage in US history, and I am ashamed I am using it now. We, as a nation, elected a black man to the highest office in the land, yet we continue to subject different parts of the population to undeserved discrimination? So what if civil unions are exactly like marriages. That's not the point. Many people fight battles based on principle, and in this case, it is the principle. I know marriage is just a word, but Westerners have placed so much meaning behind the word, it leads a country to continue to discriminate and make others feel less welcome or less of a citizen. That is my point, because civil unions just do not cut it. There are many churches or synagogues out there that will perform the religious ceremonies of same sex couples. The only other aspect is to be allowed in one's civic life to get a marriage license and not a civil union license. Why is it so hard for people to let others do what they wish, considering we live in the land of the FREE and the home of the BRAVE? It's not free to hand someone something separate but equal, and it is not brave to allow that to happen when you know it is wrong.

I would like to add that it is also shameful the ads for Prop 8 that were everywhere stating that same sex marriage would be forced upon Californians, churches would lose their tax-exempt status because they would be against it, and that children would have to learn it in school. None are true, but it was all they had because their main argument would violate the line between church and states. Utterly shameful. And another thing: Hey LDS church based in Utah, mind your own business! Was California all up in your shit when you were allowing polygamist marriages because Mormonism said that was OK? I highly doubt it. Since the United States loves the whole thing about states' rights, keep to yourself in Utah, and Californians will continue to keep to themselves. Again, mind your own fucking business! You wouldn't have recognized the gay marriages anyways!

I hope the California State Supreme Court overturns Prop 8, and call it what it is: complete and utter discrimination, allowing all free citizens of this great nation to do whatever they want as long as it is not breaking any laws or hurting anyone else. It's not like their having gay sex in a church.

I'll leave it at that. Please feel free to leave any comments.