Tony Perkins is REALLY not happy...

Everyone's  favorite oddly effeminate white supremacist   has not been having a good month.   Perkins is  head of the  "Family Research Council".  An organization that the Southern Poverty Law Center  has certified  as an extremist  hate group .

First  there was his recent  disastrous appearance on MSNBC's  Hardball with  Chris Mathews.  Where after numerous past guest spots where he was faced with nothing more than softball questions.   Mathews apparently  noticed  he had been giving  free network airtime to hate mongering  nutjob, and decided  to do an actual interview based on real facts.   Perkins, came on the Mathews' show to vent his standard faux-Christian  outrage over  President Obama's statements  in support of  Marriage Equality.  Instead, he got his anti gay talking points served back to him with a big side order  reality.  The result was not pretty.

Then today, a double whammy.   First  the U.S. Government  released a new  international television ad to  encourage  tourism to the United States.  The Ad shows  a diverse range of people and sights from all over the  USA.

What  could  Perkins possibly find offensive about that ad?   Well if you look carefully at the  0:34 mark,  for less than a fraction of second,  the  ad shows  (gasp!)  a  GAY COUPLE!!!  Aiiiiirrgghhh!   The horror!  The Gays are going to come to America and spend their filthy pink money!   The website  Right Wing Watch  has Perkins'  hyperventilating in all its wing nut glory.

In 236 years, America's never had an international tourism ad. So when Congress passed the Travel Promotion Act, people thought it'd be a great chance to highlight American attractions. What they didn't know is that it would highlight same-sex attractions. That's right. The commercial invites people to America-not to see the Grand Canyon, but to celebrate homosexuality. In one scene, a gay man is sleeping on his partner's shoulder in a trolley. 

Really??

Then if that wasn't enough,   the United States First Circuit Court of Appeals upheld a lower court ruling that declared Section 3 of the Defense of Marriage Act -- the federal definition of "marriage" and "spouse" -- as unconstitutional. (Hat tip to Metro Weekly)

Writing that "Supreme Court review of DOMA is highly likely," the appeals court has stayed, or put on hold, the implementation of its decision pending any appeal.

Judge Michael Boudin, appointed to the bench by President George H.W. Bush, wrote for the court: "[M]any Americans believe that marriage is the union of a man and a woman, and most Americans live in states where that is the law today. One virtue of federalism is that it permits this diversity of governance based on local choice, but this applies as well to the states that have chosen to legalize same-sex marriage. Under current Supreme Court authority, Congress' denial of federal benefits to same-sex couples lawfully married in Massachusetts has not been adequately supported by any permissible federal interest."

I have blogged regularly and extensively about Tony Perkins and his hate group the FRC. So there really isn't much more I can add to everything I have already said. I know I should not be surprised by Perkins' hysterical rantings in light of today's events. But I find his whining about a split second image of a gay couple in a thirty second television ad , to be over the top, even for him. Yet it's in that I find a refreshing honesty for a change.

Perkins' whole shtick is to go on television and pretend to be this reasonable guy who doesn't "hate" gay people, he just doesn't want them to have any rights.... at all. Now we see that it's not just rights for Gays and Lesbians that sticks in Tony's craw, it's the idea that Gays and Lesbians are visible in anyway that bothers him. He doesn't just think LGBT Americans don't deserve equal rights, he honestly believes Gays and Lesbians don't deserve existence. The idea that Gays and Lesbians should be visible like any other group of Americans really bothers him.

Whether by chance, or by design, the issues of LGBT Rights has been put center stage in the 2012 Presidential race. With Mitt Romney desperate to show the American Talibangelicals like Perkins, just how much he hates the gays. 

All the while desperately hoping people won't remember things like, then Gubernatorial candidate Mitt Romney promising the people of Massachusetts that he'd be more pro-Gay Rights than the late, great Senator Edward Kennedy.

So once again we will see the idea that all Americans should be treated equally under the law portrayed by Tony Perkins and his assorted ilk, as the greatest threat to the country, and to American Families. Desperate to find something they can get scared, angry racists teabaggers to vote against, the GOP will jump on the "Be afraid! The Gays are gonna get you! Aiiiiighh!" bandwagon and try to ride it to a 50.1 % electoral victory this November. 

The bad news for Tony, Mitt, and all the other bigots is the arc of history is clearly bending in the other direction. The trend in  Gallup polling on the issue is not going to make Tony Perkins feel any better .

The ridiculously mis-named  "Defense of Marriage Act", is going to end up in front of the United States Supreme Court.  Maybe not this year,  But certainly  next year.  As the  legal issues  are not different from those in the case of  Lawrence v. Texas,  it would be unusual for the  court to violate its own precedent.   Combine that  with  the likelihood that  President Obama will  more than probably  win  re-election  and  2012 is shaping to be Tony Perkins' own annus horribilis.

Generally, I take no delight from the misfortunes of others, but in Tony Perkins' case, I am more than happy to make an exception.

Today's 9th Circuit Court Decision on CA Prop 8.

Here is the full court decision upholding the original decision that ruled  California's  Proposition 8, (the ban of same sex marriage) to be unconstitutional

Ninth Circuit Prop. 8 decision

So what does this mean exactly?  Is same sex marriage now legal (again...) in  California?   Well, no.  Or more accurately , not yet.   There is still a Stay of the ruling in place  pending an appeal by  the proponents of Prop 8.  That means same sex marriages  cannot yet  resume in California.   This decision also, only applies to  Proposition 8 in California, and has no effect on laws in any other state or on any federal laws  (i.e. the Defense of Marriage Act).

So yes,  today's court ruling is  good news. But  nothing has actually changed  yet as a result of it.

There is a lot to take in when you read the actual text of the  2-1 court ruling but  here is  a passage that stands out:

"Although the Constitution permits communities to enact most laws they believe to be desirable, it requires that there be at least a legitimate reason for the passage of a law that treats different classes of people differently. There was no such reason that Proposition 8 could have been enacted."

So just  to be clear,   the 9th Circuit Appeals Court today ruled that Prop 8 served no other purpose than to discriminate against Gays and Lesbians. This is significant,  in so much that it highlights the weakness of the one dissenting opinion in the 2-1 ruling.   The voice of dissent belongs to Judge N. Randy Smith.  Smith is a former head of the Idaho Republican Party, and was the lone vote in favor to uphold Prop 8.

Smith,  in his dissenting opinion could only raise the completely unrelated issue of parenting. Suggesting that if Gays and Lesbians can get married,  it somehow would mean fewer children would have Parents.. uh... huh?   How does that work exactly? (Smith didn't offer any explanation.)   It is also interesting to note that  Smith is also a Mormon.

Why is that relevant?  The opponents of Marriage Equality claimed that  the original 2009 ruling by   Judge Vaughn R. Walker  was invalid because Walker was Gay.   It is interesting to note  the plaintiffs in this case made no such similar  accusations against Smith, even though  The  Mormon Church was the single largest backer of Proposition 8.

So what happens next? That's a good question. The proponents of Prop 8 will undoubtedly appeal, so  they could go one of two ways. They could make a motion for rehearing in front of the broader Ninth Circuit (11 judges). If a majority of the circuit judges agree to rehear the case, the case would stay at this appellate level and go through  same process all over again in front of a larger panel. Or the Proponents could skip that step and decide to appeal directly to the U.S. Supreme Court.

In the meantime we can all enjoy the reaction on the  WingNut Bigoted Right as the American Taliban has pretty much lost their minds over today's ruling.  Shrieking hysterically about  "Activist Judges".  Everyone's favorite white supremacist nutcase,  Tony Perkins.  Head of the ridiculously  mis-named hate group  the "Family Research Council" pretty much soiled his adult diaper riding the  Waaaa-mbulance with rage after today's decision.

"This ruling substitutes judicial tyranny for the will of the people, who in the majority of states have amended their constitutions, as California did, to preserve marriage as the union of one man and one woman. However, we remain confident that in the end, the Supreme Court will reject the absurd argument that the authors of our Constitution created or even implied a 'right' to homosexual 'marriage,' and will instead uphold the right of the people to govern themselves.   


Yeah, because we have always allowed people to vote on the civil rights of other Americans.... right?




If the United States Supreme Court were to uphold the original Walker ruling, then like in the case of  Lawrence v. Texas,  suddenly ALL bans on same sex marriage across the United States would be unconstitutional.   This would also overturn the Defence of Marriage Act. (DOMA).  The  federal law banning recognition of same sex marriages.

That my friends,  is the endgame.    So while today's ruling is nice,  it is still only one more step on a very long road.  Albeit, a step in the right direction.

Why Prop 8 Was Completely Anti-American

The celebrations  here in San Francisco  are  still going on at this hour.   The rally which began in  the Castro District soon turned in to a  celebratory march that  shut down half  of  Market Street  as it made its way to Civic Center Plaza in front of   SF City Hall.

There  were  speeches,  (lots of speeches), music, flags, banners and lots of  joy. Even though  the decision  in  Perry v. Schwarzenegger,  won't go into effect  today.  (There is a two day  time frame for the court to consider  a motion by opponents of  Marriage Equality to stay the the resumption  of  same sex marriages  in California  while  they appeal this case  to the  U.S. Supreme Court.)  Yet the sense of vindication and  victory in  the California  LGBT community  is  clear  for everyone to see.

So what does this all mean?    Does this mean  Same Sex  Marriage  will soon be  sweeping the nation?  Well,  not so much.    The ruling  simply says the State of California  can't  ban  gay marriage  here in  CA.   Which is  largely symbolic.   There still is no Federal  recognition of  same sex marriages.  Same sex  spouses  still can't  file joint  Federal  Income Tax forms,   pass on  Social Security Survivor  benefits  or  sponsor their  husband or wife  for  immigration to the  U.S.

All of those  key benefits  associated with marriage  are  regulated on  Federal level  by the  ridiculously   mis-named  "Defense of Marriage Act".  (DOMA) and  at least for now,  that law  is unchanged.    Should  the Perry case  make it to the  U.S. Supreme Court,(which it is pretty safe to say it  most likely will),   that  law could  very well change.   Should the  nine SCOTUS  Justices  uphold  the  ruling made today,  it would  in effect  nullify  all  laws  banning Marriage  Equality  in the  United States.

So why did the  pro- Prop 8 forces  lose?   I will  talk about  the  legal  issues  in  a minute.  but  what  was  amazing about this  court  case  was  how  the  supporters of  Prop 8  were  completely  unable to  provide any real  evidence  backing up  their  positions.    I could  go on  and on about  how hollow and   empty  the  Yes On 8 arguments  were, but  Rachel Maddow does it so much better than  I could:



We''ll set the spectacle  of  the  Prop 8 trial,  and  the inherent silliness of  the attempt to use "Gay is Bad  because God Says So" as a legal  argument,  aside for the moment.   the biggest reason why the plaintiffs in this case won,  and  why Prop 8 is completely unconstitutional  is very simple.    So  allow me to  lay it out for you .

1)  Same Sex Marriage doesn't threaten or impact ANYONE ELSE'S  marriage  or family  in any way.
2) You cannot  put  the civil rights of  a minority  up  to  popular vote. Rights  are not subject to the whims of  the electorate  that is why they are  RIGHTS.
3)  Just because you don't like a particular minority,  doesn't mean you get to make them 2nd Class Citizens

Judge Walker,  puts it  even more clearly on page  116 of  his ruling where he writes that;

 "fundamental rights may not be submitted to a vote, they depend on the outcome of no elections"

This  is why Proposition 8 is fundamentally un-American, and  un-constitutional.

Prop 8 took  the whole idea  of   fundamental rights laid out  in  the Declaration of  Independence and  the U.S. Constitution and said  that  they were not inalienable.  But rather subject to the mood  of  at least 51% of  whoever shows up to vote in a given election.  That is not democracy, that is electorally sanctioned discrimination,   and it was an affront to everything  our country stands for, and  everything our nation's  founding fathers stood for.

Proposition 8,  denied  basic, fundamental  civil rights  to  an entire group of  Californians,  based  solely on a desire by  groups like the Mormon Church and  Conservative Evangelicals, to put into civil law their belief that  God hates Gay people.  So therefore  the law should treat them as less than everybody else.

If the  U.S.  Supreme Court fails to uphold  today's ruling,  they will have said that  the United States of America is no better than the Taliban.

Dear Republicans ...

Shut the hell up.

You no longer have any credibility or right to argue about who can and cannot get married. You are hypocritical sleazeballs. Your protestations on the "sanctity of marriage" is a sad pathetic joke, and stands in stark contrast with your own personal lives.

Let's look at the GOP record for a moment, shall we?

First we have Newt Gingrich, architect of the 1994 GOP Revolution, and ardent proponent of "Family Values".



More recently, in 2008 year we had the case of Conservative Republican Senators Larry Craig of Idaho and David Vitter of Louisiana. Last year we saw both these men show off their family values. Sen. Craig by soliciting an undercover cop for gay sex in an airport men's room.



Senator Vitter, endeared himself to social conservatives with his impassioned speech on the Senate floor in 1996 on the need to amend the U.S. Constitution to preserve the sanctity of marriage. More recently in 2008, Vitter really didn't want to talk about the sanctity of his own marriage.



Then just last week we had Nevada's "Family Values" Republican Senator John Ensign. Ensign, is the Chairman of the National Republican Senatorial Committee. In 1998, while running for Nevada’s Senate seat against Harry Reid, Ensign called on President Clinton to resign in light of his admitted affair with former White House intern Monica Lewinsky:

Ensign has also been an ardent opponent of gay marriage. In Feb. 2004, Ensign announced his support for an amendment to the Constitution that would have defined marriage as a union between a man and a woman. Ensign said the amendment, which ultimately failed, was necessary to protect “the institution of marriage“:

“Sadly, the effort to redefine marriage against the wishes of a majority of the people is, with help from activist judges, succeeding,” Ensign said. “In order to defend the institution of marriage, uphold the rights of individual states, and maintain the will of the people, I believe we are compelled to amend our country’s constitution.”

Apparently Ensign's efforts to defend marriage entailed having an affair with a married member of his own staff.



And most recently this past week, we had the curious case of the Republican Governor of South Carolina, Mark Sanford. Sanford A self proclaimed "Pro-family" Conservative, is Chairman of the Republican Governor's Association. Gov. Sanford literally disappeared for nearly a week. Neither his office, or his family knew where he was, and said they could not contact him. When pressed, his office said he was hiking the Appalachian Train.

We all have learned today, that apparently "Hiking the Appalachian Train" is a new slang term for flying down to Argentina to hook up with your married mistress.



Now let's be clear about a few things. Whatever Newt, Larry, David , John and Mark do in their personal private lives is NOBODY's business but theirs and their family's. I really don't care what any of these people do behind closed doors, bathroom or otherwise. It's none of my business. Their behavior is not the issue. Their rank hypocrisy is the issue.

You can't run around the country saying how your morals are so much higher than everyone else's. You can't go holding your marriage up as some sort of social ideal that should be the ONLY kind of marriage to be legal in the U.S. THEN turn around behind closed doors and throw those ideals you claim to uphold, out the window or under the hooker's bed.

What IS my business is the efforts all of these people have engaged in to codify their FAKE morality into civil law at the expense of the the basic civil rights of millions of other Americans.

So Republicans, until you clean up your own lives, you don't get to tell ANYBODY else how to live theirs.

Sit down and shut up. You have zero credibility.

Again with the Gays!? What is it with you People?

Dear Anti Gay "Conservatives":

What is it with you people? You all need professional help.

Seriously.

You are obsessed with homosexuality. You think about it night and day. It's all you can talk about. Gay Adoptions, Gay Marriage, books with possible Gay content. (Except for Lynne Cheney's soft-core Lesbian romance novel, apparently that one is okay.) Gay characters on TV or in movies, basically if anything is even remotely connected to Homosexuality you are all over that like AIG on bailout money.

Gay people don't think about Homosexuality as much as you do. Your fetish for all things Gay has come out once again. This time in the form of TV ad courtesy of the conservative evangelical Ooompa Loompas at one of your new groups calling itself, "National Organization for Marriage".

The ad is striking, black storm clouds roll in the background. Bolts of lightning streak across the sky behind a group of distraught looking "average Americans" all talking about the Gay Attack on Marriage". And how granting same sex couples the right to marry would take away THEIR civil rights. But you couldn't find any real people who are as jazzed up about the 'Gay Threat' as you are, so you had to get really bad actors to give you your "gay attack" jollies.



Your latest bit of wing-nuttery crosses the line from dishonest and stupid, to just plain silly. As usual though, your passion for Homosexuality, avoids any connection to facts or reality.


But apparently your deep love for all things gay doesn't stop there. What is interesting, (and really entertaining) this time around, is how your quest for Gay-ness has expanded to economic issues . This past week you wanted millions of Americans to "teabag" President Obama.

So what you are saying is, your new cause is "tea bagging".... Really?

If that wasn't silly enough, you want millions of Americans to join your brand new "2 Million For Marriage" movement. Or, as you want to call it (being the hip, savvy interwebby types you are..) "2M4M"! Clearly somebody needs to teach you all how to use that "Google thing on the interwebs." It might save you a lot of embarrassment.

I really can't figure out WHY you care SO much about anything and everything Gay. The lives of LGBT Americans don't affect your lives. Giving LGBT Americans equal rights doesn't take away any of your rights. There is no logical reason for what you are doing. In trying to figure out why you all have been so Homo-focused lately. I have managed to boil it down to three possible explanations.

1) You are in fact, all closeted self-hating Homosexuals yourselves, who desperately want to get in on all the Gay action, and this the only way that feel you can.



2) You are mentally challenged bigots who really do believe the insane, hateful bile you are spewing, you as a result feel that the LGBT Americans are less than human, and like Hitler with the Jews, hope for their eventual extermination.



Or, the third (and most plausible explanation)

3) You are merely lazy political opportunists, devoid of any real ideas or solutions for America's problems. While desperately searching for an issue you think can scare people in to supporting your party and your causes, decided Gays and Lesbians are the last minority you can get away with trying to demonize for political gain. So anyone who disagrees with you gets painted with the "Gay" label,



So dear Conservatives, I have to ask; which is it? Are you all really just Gay and self-hating? Are you all just crazy and bigoted? Or are you all just intellectually bankrupt and dishonest?

Your non-stop obsession with Gays and Lesbians, their lives, their families, their civil rights (or maintaing the lack thereof...), makes any other answer, nearly impossible to believe.