Prop 8 Watch. Grab your popcorn, kids!

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loving_v._Virginia

This:

   My generation was bitterly divided over something that should have been so clear and right. The majority believed that what the judge said, that it was God's plan to keep people apart, and that government should discriminate against people in love. But I have lived long enough now to see big changes. The older generation's fears and prejudices have given way, and today's young people realize that if someone loves someone, they have a right to marry.

   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.

   I am still not a political person, but I am proud that Richard's and my name is on a court case that can help reinforce the love, the commitment, the fairness, and the family that so many people, black or white, young or old, gay or straight, seek in life. I support the freedom to marry for all. That's what Loving, and loving, are all about.

made me cry.

[Thurnez Isa]

An Elder?
Why the hell did you quit?

Space Jesus is probably pretty pissed at you right now

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

A gay Republican is still a Republican.

"He might have tanked the economy with supply side economics and tax cuts, and he might have gotten us into three more useless wars, but at least he sucks cock!"

Depends on what KIND of Republican. A Nixon Republican wouldn't do any of that shit.

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

It's already split, CB. There never was an "LGBT community", rather, the fags and lesbos hate on the bisexuals and queers, and everyone hates on the trannies. It's the southern white sharecropper's racism, taken to a different issue. Really fucking sad.

Thanks for saying it before I did.

Also, I hate the idea that I'm supposed to be "unified" in opinion with a bunch of other assholes just because mainstream society has conveniently categorized us as all the same kind of freak.

That said, I've never noticed, since becoming part of "the community" (LOL) at 18, any evidence that lesbians and fags don't get along. They intermingle pretty freely around here. But then, it's Portland, where even bisexuals (former niggers of the queer community) are accepted.

Oh, and around here, it's REALLY un-PC to say anything negative or even questioning about trannies.

[Nephew Twiddleton]

A gay Republican is still a Republican.

"He might have tanked the economy with supply side economics and tax cuts, and he might have gotten us into three more useless wars, but at least he sucks cock!"

Depends on what KIND of Republican. A Nixon Republican wouldn't do any of that shit.

I agree. Republicans are a different monster now though.
All the more reason to gay them up. Their divorce from the warmongering/Christian Right is long overdue.

[Nephew Twiddleton]

It's already split, CB. There never was an "LGBT community", rather, the fags and lesbos hate on the bisexuals and queers, and everyone hates on the trannies. It's the southern white sharecropper's racism, taken to a different issue. Really fucking sad.

Thanks for saying it before I did.

Also, I hate the idea that I'm supposed to be "unified" in opinion with a bunch of other assholes just because mainstream society has conveniently categorized us as all the same kind of freak.

That said, I've never noticed, since becoming part of "the community" (LOL) at 18, any evidence that lesbians and fags don't get along. They intermingle pretty freely around here. But then, it's Portland, where even bisexuals (former niggers of the queer community) are accepted.

Oh, and around here, it's REALLY un-PC to say anything negative or even questioning about trannies.

Likewise here.

[BabylonHoruv]

An Elder?
Why the hell did you quit?

Space Jesus is probably pretty pissed at you right now

In Mormon elder means well dressed teenager.  It's not exactly prestigious.

[Requia ☣]

or you could really drive them nuts and tell them that now that you married a dude you now wanna marry a dog and a tree

Remember i used to was a Mormon Elder for 13 years.

I KNOW WHERE THE BUTTONS IZ.

Wait, you were an elder and you quit?  Is the stuff about magic underwear true?

[Adios]

An Elder?
Why the hell did you quit?

Space Jesus is probably pretty pissed at you right now

In Mormon elder means well dressed teenager.  It's not exactly prestigious.

Those are just the ones on missions. lol, I was in the bishopric of my ward.

[Adios]

or you could really drive them nuts and tell them that now that you married a dude you now wanna marry a dog and a tree

Remember i used to was a Mormon Elder for 13 years.

I KNOW WHERE THE BUTTONS IZ.

Wait, you were an elder and you quit?  Is the stuff about magic underwear true?

Not magic, sacred. And the only ones who can wear them are the ones who are worthy to enter the temple.

[LMNO]

Back on topic, apparently the "expert" witnesses for the pro-8 side didn't meet the standards the judge required to have their opinions considered.

Walker notes that the plaintiffs presented eight lay witnesses and nine expert witnesses, including historians, economists, psychologists, and a political scientist. Walker lays out their testimony in detail. Then he turns to the proponents' tactical decision to withdraw several of their witnesses, claiming "extreme concern about their personal safety" and unwillingness to testify if there were to be "recording of any sort." Even when it was determined that there would be no recording, counsel declined to call them. They were left with two trial witnesses, one of whom, David Blankenhorn, founder and president of the Institute for American Values, the judge found "lacks the qualifications to offer opinion testimony and, in any event, failed to provide cogent testimony in support of proponent's factual assertions." Blankenhorn's credentials, methodology, lack of peer-reviewed studies, and general shiftiness on cross examination didn't impress Walker. And once he was done with Blankenhorn, he turned to the only other witness—Kenneth P. Miller—who testified only to the limited question of the plaintiffs' political power. Walker wasn't much more impressed by Miller, giving his opinions "little weight."

[DiscoUkulele]

Back on topic, apparently the "expert" witnesses for the pro-8 side didn't meet the standards the judge required to have their opinions considered.

Walker notes that the plaintiffs presented eight lay witnesses and nine expert witnesses, including historians, economists, psychologists, and a political scientist. Walker lays out their testimony in detail. Then he turns to the proponents' tactical decision to withdraw several of their witnesses, claiming "extreme concern about their personal safety" and unwillingness to testify if there were to be "recording of any sort." Even when it was determined that there would be no recording, counsel declined to call them. They were left with two trial witnesses, one of whom, David Blankenhorn, founder and president of the Institute for American Values, the judge found "lacks the qualifications to offer opinion testimony and, in any event, failed to provide cogent testimony in support of proponent's factual assertions." Blankenhorn's credentials, methodology, lack of peer-reviewed studies, and general shiftiness on cross examination didn't impress Walker. And once he was done with Blankenhorn, he turned to the only other witness—Kenneth P. Miller—who testified only to the limited question of the plaintiffs' political power. Walker wasn't much more impressed by Miller, giving his opinions "little weight."

On top of that, both Miller and Blankenhorn admitted on the stand that having the right to marry would benefit gays and lesbians, and that there isn't a non-religious, non-moral reason for denying them.

[Freeky]

Back on topic, apparently the "expert" witnesses for the pro-8 side didn't meet the standards the judge required to have their opinions considered.

Walker notes that the plaintiffs presented eight lay witnesses and nine expert witnesses, including historians, economists, psychologists, and a political scientist. Walker lays out their testimony in detail. Then he turns to the proponents' tactical decision to withdraw several of their witnesses, claiming "extreme concern about their personal safety" and unwillingness to testify if there were to be "recording of any sort." Even when it was determined that there would be no recording, counsel declined to call them. They were left with two trial witnesses, one of whom, David Blankenhorn, founder and president of the Institute for American Values, the judge found "lacks the qualifications to offer opinion testimony and, in any event, failed to provide cogent testimony in support of proponent's factual assertions." Blankenhorn's credentials, methodology, lack of peer-reviewed studies, and general shiftiness on cross examination didn't impress Walker. And once he was done with Blankenhorn, he turned to the only other witness—Kenneth P. Miller—who testified only to the limited question of the plaintiffs' political power. Walker wasn't much more impressed by Miller, giving his opinions "little weight."

On top of that, both Miller and Blankenhorn admitted on the stand that having the right to marry would benefit gays and lesbians, and that there isn't a non-religious, non-moral reason for denying them.

Way to play for the other team, heroes.

[Bebek Sincap Ratatosk]

Back on topic, apparently the "expert" witnesses for the pro-8 side didn't meet the standards the judge required to have their opinions considered.

Walker notes that the plaintiffs presented eight lay witnesses and nine expert witnesses, including historians, economists, psychologists, and a political scientist. Walker lays out their testimony in detail. Then he turns to the proponents' tactical decision to withdraw several of their witnesses, claiming "extreme concern about their personal safety" and unwillingness to testify if there were to be "recording of any sort." Even when it was determined that there would be no recording, counsel declined to call them. They were left with two trial witnesses, one of whom, David Blankenhorn, founder and president of the Institute for American Values, the judge found "lacks the qualifications to offer opinion testimony and, in any event, failed to provide cogent testimony in support of proponent's factual assertions." Blankenhorn's credentials, methodology, lack of peer-reviewed studies, and general shiftiness on cross examination didn't impress Walker. And once he was done with Blankenhorn, he turned to the only other witness—Kenneth P. Miller—who testified only to the limited question of the plaintiffs' political power. Walker wasn't much more impressed by Miller, giving his opinions "little weight."

On top of that, both Miller and Blankenhorn admitted on the stand that having the right to marry would benefit gays and lesbians, and that there isn't a non-religious, non-moral reason for denying them.

Well, at least they were honest... shot the whole thing in the foot... but they didn't lie.

[LMNO]

Well, they didn't exactly offer those opinions -- apparently, the cross-examination was brilliant and brutal, and more or less forced them to admit it.