Friday August 4, 2006 SGN.org |
 |
Volume 34 Issue 31 |
 |
|
Saturday, Sep 06, 2008
|
 |
||||||||
|
||||||||
|
|
||||||||
 |
 |
Letters |
|
 |
|
| SUPREME COURT: JUSTICES USED BACKWARD THINKING
Dear SGN, The decision and logic used by the Washington State Supreme Court in the Andersen v. King County case on the constitutionality of Washington's 1998 Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) that prohibits same-sex marriage is very offensive to all of the Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual and Transgender (GLBT) and many straight citizens of the State of Washington. The five Justices that voted in the majority cited a number of very illogical and backwards thinking in their opinion! When I read their decision I felt I was in a time warp back to the 1970's and 80's! One of the arguments that the majority referenced was the fundamental issue of whether being Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual or Transgender is a choice. It is very clear to a majority and [...] to [those of] us that are GLBT that we are born the way we are, just like I was born as a Chinese man with black hair and brown eyes! Who we are is not a choice! Would we choose to be discriminated against, treated like second class citizens - being forced to be in the closet because people are ignorant and society is not accepting of whom we are? Society and our laws today do not tolerate that I could be discriminated against or told that I could not marry because I was Chinese. As a Chinese citizen of the State of Washington I am provided with all the rights and protections as ALL citizens are in the State of Washington, so, why - as a Gay citizen of the State of Washington - I am not allowed the same rights as my fellow straight citizens? And, finally, I want to thank and acknowledge the four dissenting Justices for standing up for equality - for all the citizens of the State of Washington! Thank you Justice Mary E. Fairhurst, Justice Bobbe J. Bridge, Justice Tom Chambers and Justice Susan J. Owens!! As Justice Bobbe J. Bridge wrote in a dissenting opinion: "Future generations of justices on this court and future generations of Washingtonians will undoubtedly look back on our holding today with regret and even shame, in the same way our nation now looks with shame upon our past acts of discrimination. I will look forward to the time when state-sanctioned discrimination toward our Gay and Lesbian citizens is erased from our state's law books if not its history. I dissent." Ernie Lou Seattle, WA MARRIAGE: OTHER OPTIONS EXIST Dear SGN, We are starting to get a clear message from the state courts that they will not grant us marriage equality and that it is up to the political process to achieve that goal. We will not be successful with continuing a frontal attack on marriage. What is needed is a return to the strategy we were successfully using prior to the Right's forcing the issues of marriage upon us. That strategy was one of incremental change. We were successful in obtaining domestic partner benefits from corporations and governments. Anti-discrimination efforts have been successful. It is time to realize that civil unions may be what are obtainable today. We should be working to secure - for all couples that choose to enter a civil union - those rights that today are only obtainable by couples that have the foresight to get a lawyer to draw up the necessary documents. For example, we must secure the right to accompany our loved one when they enter the hospital. These things will move us forward and toward the goal of marriage. Remember, many Gay people still are in fear of their safety. We have come a long way from Stonewall. I wonder how many who manned the barricades that night thought that same sex marriage would even be hotly debated 40 years hence. Let us keep up the fight. Very Truly Yours, David Anderson SUPREME COURT: MOTION TO RECONSIDER SHOULD BE FILED Dear SGN, Motion to reconsider Supreme Court Marriage Ruling Denied? It is common knowledge that the couples who sued the state for equal marriage lost. It is not common knowledge that they have the right to file a motion to reconsider. I spoke to one of the plaintiffs in the case and she didn't even know that this was an option. This blew me away. She hadn't even been informed that this was an option! She said she had not ever heard of it. She told me to ask Jamie Pederson, who was one of the lawyers involved in the case. So, I spoke to Jamie Pederson - face to face - and he told me that they (the lawyers involved in the case) were not likely to file a motion to reconsider because they (the lawyers) don't think it will change the outcome. That just doesn't sit right with me. There was no guarantee that they would win when they went into this suit and there's no guarantee that it won't change the outcome. The lawyers still have approximately 20 days left to file. Apparently, the lawyers are not asking the LGBT community what it wants to do and they are not asking the couples if they would like to file for reconsideration with the court. Outrageous! Where is the conviction, the principle? In the Stranger (online) there is an MP3 file where Justice Alexander says at least 4 times that the plaintiffs have 30 days to file for reconsideration of the ruling. If they don't file, I want to know WHY? I told Mr. Pedersen that if they don't file that the lawyers on the case would be remiss in their duties to their clients and to the broader community. If this is the case, I will be writing letters to the editors of every paper in Washington State in order to let the LGBT community know that 2nd best is just fine with Democrats and that 2nd class is just fine with the couples' lawyers. Even if the outcome is the same, they would at least get more exposure and continue to stand on principle. That is, after all, the whole point. The opinion of the Washington State Supreme Court justices who sided with the 'right wingnuts' out of fear sided on the wrong side of the constitution and we have to fight them on their decision with a motion to reconsider! They need to understand that their ruling was not happily received. Regards, Bart and Danny Lovejoy |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
International Readers |
REPORTS & MUSINGS FROM THE VETERAN GAY AND AIDS HUMAN RIGHTS ADVOCATE
|
 It's new! A blog created by the SGN staff, so you can be heard |
 |
  |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
|
working for the freedom to
|
copyright Seattle Gay News - DigitalTeamWorks 2006