The Bilerico Project

The Virginia-based Liberty Counsel, in a petition with the 1st District Court of Appeal in San Francisco, argued that the wording of the California Supreme Court ruling legalizing gay marriages allows the lower court to set the terms and schedule for implementing the decision.

Liberty Counsel argued that the high court's May 15 ruling put dozens of state laws addressing marriage into conflict and that the Legislature needs time to address those issues.

They don't care about putting it off. That's not the end game here.

What they do care about is the long-term in California, and they know that the more same-sex marriages that happen there before November, the more people are going to realize that their "sky is falling" message doesn't hold water. It's what happened, massively, in Massachusetts.

Oh, and when they start complaining about the out-of-state money and volunteers going into California, lets remember that this lawsuit is being argued by a Virginia-based fundie group and that a third of their money so far has come from non-Californians, with a quarter million coming from an international Catholic organization.

This is what being dragged kicking and screaming looks like. But they're still being dragged.

Gay Marriage Ban on California Ballot

California voters will have a chance to overturn the recent state Supreme Court decision to legalize gay marriage just five months from now, as the secretary of state certified a measure to define marriage as "between a man and a woman" for the November ballot.

Proponents of the measure submitted more than 1.1 million signatures to qualify for the general election ballot. A random sampling by the secretary of state's office determined they had collected more than the 694,354 valid signatures needed.

The new measure would insert the sentence, "Only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California," into the state constitution, thereby overruling the court's decision.

Well, we knew that was coming. And at least the language wouldn't go and get rid of the state's DP's.

California has one of the best state apparatuses out there when it comes to LGBT activism. And the state has moved significantly towards accepting the idea that two dudes or two ladies can marry in their state. Take that with Democrats being overall much more enthused about this race than Republicans (months after becoming the presumptive nominee, McCain is still losing a quarter of the primary vote to people who just show up to show how much they hate him) and Obama registering and exciting a whole bunch of young and progressive voters, and we might see the second marriage ban rejected at the polls in the history of the country, with this being the first that focused exclusively on marriage (in Arizona, the strategy focused on the fact that their ballot initiative went beyond just banning marriage).

Also, there will be marriages in the interim, even with ten other states writing a letter to California to have their decision stayed until November:

Students Win Free Expression Case Against School

A federal judge ruled in favor of students in a case at Ponce de Leon High School in Florida, where junior Heather Gillman sued for the right to wear pride gear. The principal argued this week that students couldn't do things like write "gay pride" on their arms and notebooks and wear rainbows and triangles because they "make students unable to study because they'd be picturing gay sex acts in their mind."

Hmmmm... I remember a few things that made me picture gay sex acts in my mind in high school (other boys, rocks shaped kinda like penises, warm weather), but I can't say rainbows were among them.

The argument might seem lame, that kids would start to think about gay sex if they see pride stuff, but, then again, these people think automatically about gay sex whenever they think about anything gay. Maybe, for this principal, that's true.

Or, since schools can't regulate free speech of students unless they can prove that speech disruptive, the principal might have just thought of the only way pride gear can be disruptive isn't.

Wearing a Confederate flag, though, is OK:

Keep reading...Show less

The Future of the Court

As we wonder about whether or not Obama's charisma is running out, or if Clinton can in fact win regardless of how much ground she is making up right now, I want to remind everyone of something bigger than Obama or Clinton.

The Supreme Court.

If McCain wins this election? The Supreme Court will be stacked with Roberts and Alito clones and we will lose the court for the rest of my lifetime.

I plan on living a long life, too.

When I think about that, I'm not sure I need to be right anymore, about Senator Clinton. When I think about that, I get really frightened for my children.

John Paul Stevens is 88 years old. Ruth Ginsburg 75 and already a one time cancer survivor. How much longer can they hang on?

The war in Iraq needs to end. The economy needs to be sent for emergency surgery. Health care, public education, jobs- the list goes on and on. We are in such a mess after 8 years of Bush, it's hard to know where to begin.

I honestly don't care about Reverend Wright and what he said. I think Clinton's gas tax relief is a lame attempt to garner votes.

The bitter campaign has to stop. The Obamatrons and the Clintonistas have to give it a rest, and yes, I am including myself in that.

Because in the not so distant future? The next president of the United States will be appointing at least one, if not several, new justices to the supreme court.

We should all be afraid, very afraid, of McCain's probable appointments.

Pat Buchanan Outed as White Supremacist On-Air By Pundit Pal

Someone finally called Pat Buchanan a white supremacist to his face. Well, I'm sure someone else has before, but when was the last time another pundit did? If it's any amount time over a month ago, it's been too long.

What's even stranger about this video is that you have three white men talking, and the only thing preventing them from starting a circle jerk over the Oppressed White Man is a Bill Press willing to call the whole idea stupid.

I suppose this is the corporate media's idea of "fair and balanced."

Of course, we should be expecting a lot more of this coming soon. Should either Obama or Hillary win the nomination (and one will, Edwards is SOL after losing Iowa), we'll be hearing some of the most racist or sexist bile flung their way. The only reason we're hearing more against Hillary right now is because Obama is the Not Hillary. Should he win and become the Not John McCain, watch out.

And it won't be directed just at them, but at anyone who supports them. The conversation, before Carlson and Buchanan turned into the KKK chuckle corner, was about whether the Congressional Black Caucus endorsed Obama just because he's Black. You know, the same "analysis" that's become all too common - Black people will vote for Obama because he's Black, women will vote for Clinton because she's a woman, Black women don't exist, and white men are the only people who can be trusted to vote based on a candidate's character, experience, and politics.

Catholic Group Sues to Delay California Same Sex Marriages

Gay Marriage Ban on California Ballot

Students Win Free Expression Case Against School

The Future of the Court

Pat Buchanan Outed as White Supremacist On-Air By Pundit Pal

Catholic Group Sues to Delay California Same Sex Marriages