Hello,We will see if I get any responses...
I am a life coach and spiritual teacher, not a legal scholar in any sense of the word, but I have been wondering about this legal question ever since I heard about the ballot initiative that became Prop. 8 after the California Supreme Court overturned Prop. 22.
If there is any validity to the questions, I would appreciate if this could be forwarded to someone who could put it to good use.
As you know, in 2000 California voters passed Proposition 22 which placed the following text into the California Family Code as Section 308.5:Only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California.This single line of text was overturned by the California Supreme Court as a violation of the Equal Protection Clause of the California Constitution.
Proposition 8 placed the exact same text, literally, into the State Constitution as Article I, Section 7.5. Now the questions are as follows...I have heard several cases are being brought into the court, but they seem to the same old cases that never seem to go very far very fast. This would seem to be the most direct and expedient path if it is valid.
- Since this line of code has been determined to be in violation, does it cease to be in violation now?
- Does it make a difference that this exact code was found to be invalid before it was even qualified as a ballot initiative? I think this may be the first time that a law has been added after being declared unconstitutional.
- In what ways would this invalidate Proposition 8 and if nothing else, does this create any kind of Constitutional Crisis since it introduces an ambiguity into the Constitution?
- If the above is correct, how does one go about bringing this to the attention of of the Supreme Court, or whatever process this has to go through to have it ruled upon?
Once again, if this is of any validity, would you please send it on to anyone who can make use of it.
Thank you,
Robert A. Burgener
November 14, 2008
An Open Letter
I don't know what insanity took over me to actually send this, but I just mailed the following letter to 365Gay.com's submission department, the Human Rights Campaign and the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force.
November 7, 2008
End of A Season
Tuesday is finally over and we have a new President of the United States.
Congrats to President-elect Obama on a substantive victory. I may not be your biggest fan, but I did vote for you over Senator McCain.
Here in California, there were several initiatives, there are ALWAYS several, to look at and while most were bond measures, and there were a couple that caught my interest.
Proposition 8:
If Proposition 8 should pass, there is a question that I have about the constitutionality of it as follows. Last May I wrote a blog entry titled “Same-sex Marriage & the Conservative Right” where I mentioned the lack of difference between previous Proposition 22 which put the exact same text into the California Family Code as Proposition 8 puts into the California Constitution.
The California Supreme Court threw the Family Code law out since they determined that it violated the “Equal Protection” clause of the State Constitution. So my question becomes this, does inserting it into the Constitution make it constitutional since it still violates the “Equal Protection” clause? Some would say yes, but I wonder about what challenges could be made since this text was already determined to be unconstitutional. It’s one of those legal questions that make some lawyers go hmmmm……
The other aspect of Proposition 8 was the campaign that was used to get voters to go along with it. I would have expected the usual “restore traditional marriage” ads of the past, but I did not see one pro-8 ad that dealt with anything other than same-sex marriage being taught in schools. If you did not read anything else about the proposition, one might have thought that Proposition 8 was about educational curriculum.
The initial ad discussed that in Massachusetts a teacher used a book, showing one called “King & King”, and when some parents balked they were told that they had no right to protest the curriculum or to pull there child out of class.
The case itself, Parker v. Hurley, the premise was that they were not notified of materials they found offensive; from the brief:
This is not how the case was presented in the advertising for the pro-8 position. Sadly, this is hardly the exception but has started to become the rule as of late. Another good example of this is the so-called Texas Sodomy case where you here the far-right saying that sodomy is now legal in the State of Texas.
If one actually looks into the case, you find that sodomy has always been legal in the State of Texas if you are a heterosexual couple and the law that was challenged and eventually dismissed was only making it criminal for same-sex couples.
I sometimes wonder when we will start requiring political campaigns to actually be direct and honest to the subject. I mean sure there will be some mention of same-sex marriage in schools when it becomes legal, but the proposition has nothing to do with education.
Proposition 4:
What made this so tough for me was that where there is a certain validity to the idea that not all families are positive experiences for a young girl and it may be difficult for her to discuss an unwanted pregnancy with her family, I also wonder just how much of a right to information the parents have?
In this country, we tend to hold parents as the responsible parties for the actions of their minor children. If a child vandalizes a neighbors property, the parents are the ones who are obligated to reimburse the damages. In some places, if a student does not go to school, the parent can be fined for the truancy.
If we are going to hold parents accountable for the actions of their children, how can we expect them to do this when we keep denying their right to know what their child is doing under the auspices of "right to privacy" for said minor?
How I voted is between myself and the booth, but this was something that made me think.
In case you don't live in California, Proposition 4 did not pass by a 52% to 47% margin.
Congrats to President-elect Obama on a substantive victory. I may not be your biggest fan, but I did vote for you over Senator McCain.
Here in California, there were several initiatives, there are ALWAYS several, to look at and while most were bond measures, and there were a couple that caught my interest.
Proposition 8:
California Proposition 8, a law that is identical to one that was declared as unconstitutional, was passed by a narrow margin. There is a slim chance that it will not go through when the absentee ballots are counted, in California the absentee ballots tend to be more liberal or progressive than conservative, we will see…ELIMINATES RIGHT OF SAME–SEX COUPLES TO MARRY. INITIATIVE CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT.
If Proposition 8 should pass, there is a question that I have about the constitutionality of it as follows. Last May I wrote a blog entry titled “Same-sex Marriage & the Conservative Right” where I mentioned the lack of difference between previous Proposition 22 which put the exact same text into the California Family Code as Proposition 8 puts into the California Constitution.
The California Supreme Court threw the Family Code law out since they determined that it violated the “Equal Protection” clause of the State Constitution. So my question becomes this, does inserting it into the Constitution make it constitutional since it still violates the “Equal Protection” clause? Some would say yes, but I wonder about what challenges could be made since this text was already determined to be unconstitutional. It’s one of those legal questions that make some lawyers go hmmmm……
The other aspect of Proposition 8 was the campaign that was used to get voters to go along with it. I would have expected the usual “restore traditional marriage” ads of the past, but I did not see one pro-8 ad that dealt with anything other than same-sex marriage being taught in schools. If you did not read anything else about the proposition, one might have thought that Proposition 8 was about educational curriculum.
The initial ad discussed that in Massachusetts a teacher used a book, showing one called “King & King”, and when some parents balked they were told that they had no right to protest the curriculum or to pull there child out of class.
The case itself, Parker v. Hurley, the premise was that they were not notified of materials they found offensive; from the brief:
In January 2005, when Jacob Parker ("Jacob") was in kindergarten, he brought home a "Diversity Book Bag." This included a picture book, Who's in a Family?, which depicted different families, including single-parent families, an extended family, interracial families, animal families, a family without children, and -- to the concern of the Parkers -- a family with two dads and a family with two moms. The book concludes by answering the question, "Who's in a family?": "The people who love you the most!" The book says nothing about marriage.Where this case fell apart legally was that the law they sued under to block this requires notification and an opportunity to exempt their children from "curriculum which primarily involves human sexual education or human sexuality issues." This has been interpreted as sex education and other related classes. The subject of the class was "what makes a family" which the courts determined did not qualify under this law.
This is not how the case was presented in the advertising for the pro-8 position. Sadly, this is hardly the exception but has started to become the rule as of late. Another good example of this is the so-called Texas Sodomy case where you here the far-right saying that sodomy is now legal in the State of Texas.
If one actually looks into the case, you find that sodomy has always been legal in the State of Texas if you are a heterosexual couple and the law that was challenged and eventually dismissed was only making it criminal for same-sex couples.
I sometimes wonder when we will start requiring political campaigns to actually be direct and honest to the subject. I mean sure there will be some mention of same-sex marriage in schools when it becomes legal, but the proposition has nothing to do with education.
Proposition 4:
WAITING PERIOD AND PARENTAL NOTIFICATION BEFORE TERMINATION OF MINOR’S PREGNANCY.This is a situation that required much thought to decide on my vote.
INITIATIVE CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT.
What made this so tough for me was that where there is a certain validity to the idea that not all families are positive experiences for a young girl and it may be difficult for her to discuss an unwanted pregnancy with her family, I also wonder just how much of a right to information the parents have?
In this country, we tend to hold parents as the responsible parties for the actions of their minor children. If a child vandalizes a neighbors property, the parents are the ones who are obligated to reimburse the damages. In some places, if a student does not go to school, the parent can be fined for the truancy.
If we are going to hold parents accountable for the actions of their children, how can we expect them to do this when we keep denying their right to know what their child is doing under the auspices of "right to privacy" for said minor?
How I voted is between myself and the booth, but this was something that made me think.
In case you don't live in California, Proposition 4 did not pass by a 52% to 47% margin.
October 17, 2008
Silver vs Platinum Perspectives
I am always surprised, not sure exactly why, when my patterns change and I am a bit lost and out of sorts for a while... The current case in point is as follows:
In many ways, it is like the old expression, "When life hands you lemons, make lemonade." Some would say it is finding the silver (I prefer platinum) lining. This is one of the basic skills that it takes to change a life.
To change a life, one must start with changing how one relates to and thinks about the things around them. If all you can see is the dark side of things that happen in your life, the goodness's will be all but invisible to you.
There are many times when the goodness of a situation may not be readily apparent immediately but in those situations, you just have to be open to the idea that there is something good that will come out of it.
An example from my life was several years ago when I was served with notification that I had been evicted, never receiving anything after the initial "3-day pay or quit" notice. At the time, I was devastated and started to freak out. A few days before, I had been visiting with a friend and we had ended up in his garage and I new that it was empty. I asked about renting it to store my stuff in and not only did I get the storage space, but he also had a spare room that I could rent from him for less than half what I had been paying for the apartment.
Those were blessings enough, but there were more blessings in the pipeline that I was unaware of at the time. Later that year, I became very ill as a reaction to some medications I was taking and could not work for nearly six months. My friend was a God-send in helping me get through it.
One small side note, the eviction also helped me get some people out of my apartment that I didn't have the heart (or backbone maybe) to do myself. The local sheriff's notice of locking out solved the issue for me.
Now I am not advocating that you stop paying your rent or go out and specifically cause some action on the hope that it will work out for the best. What I will say is to find and listen to that small inner voice of intuition and follow the guidance that it gives you.
Inspiration is the voice of your true self trying to speak (or yelling, kicking and/or screaming when needed) to you.
- My roommate has moved to literally the opposite side of the world, Southern and Eastern Hemispheres.
- I am back to living alone, though I do have two cats to keep me company...
- For the start of these changes, my expected support systems have been unavailable and I have been on my own to deal with things.
I know God will not give me anything I can't handle. I just wish that He didn't trust me so much.As much as many would be very happy to get onto the self-pity pot, once I regain my perspective, I find it is what makes life interesting.
In many ways, it is like the old expression, "When life hands you lemons, make lemonade." Some would say it is finding the silver (I prefer platinum) lining. This is one of the basic skills that it takes to change a life.
To change a life, one must start with changing how one relates to and thinks about the things around them. If all you can see is the dark side of things that happen in your life, the goodness's will be all but invisible to you.
There are many times when the goodness of a situation may not be readily apparent immediately but in those situations, you just have to be open to the idea that there is something good that will come out of it.
An example from my life was several years ago when I was served with notification that I had been evicted, never receiving anything after the initial "3-day pay or quit" notice. At the time, I was devastated and started to freak out. A few days before, I had been visiting with a friend and we had ended up in his garage and I new that it was empty. I asked about renting it to store my stuff in and not only did I get the storage space, but he also had a spare room that I could rent from him for less than half what I had been paying for the apartment.
Those were blessings enough, but there were more blessings in the pipeline that I was unaware of at the time. Later that year, I became very ill as a reaction to some medications I was taking and could not work for nearly six months. My friend was a God-send in helping me get through it.
One small side note, the eviction also helped me get some people out of my apartment that I didn't have the heart (or backbone maybe) to do myself. The local sheriff's notice of locking out solved the issue for me.
Now I am not advocating that you stop paying your rent or go out and specifically cause some action on the hope that it will work out for the best. What I will say is to find and listen to that small inner voice of intuition and follow the guidance that it gives you.
Inspiration is the voice of your true self trying to speak (or yelling, kicking and/or screaming when needed) to you.
September 22, 2008
Politics, Religion and I – pt 1.5
I have been kind of procrastinating on doing this second part... I am really not that interested in it.
I also realized that even though I have my issues with both parties and their apparent merger into variations of a single theme, the problem really is not the politicians, the special interests or the corporations. The simple fact is that even though they may pay lots of cash to a candidate, they cannot vote. So in the final analysis, the blame for the current state of affairs in this country truly is the population for their complete lack of involvement.
Those who do not understand, or do not want to understand, the relationship of man and the universe enjoy being victims of the world, you can only be a victim if you choose to be, it cannot be thrust upon you. It can be very comforting to pretend to be innocent victim, but we truly are neither.
The simple truth is that countries get the governments they deserve, not by being good or bad, but by what they allow to be carried out in their names.
As much as many, if not most, people want to blame those in "charge" the simple facts are that the American populace has dropped the ball and may soon find themselves without any voice in the government that originally was of, by and for the people.
If the disenfranchised majority in this country were to get off its backside and would work together as a unit, there could be a complete revolution in this country without a single drop of blood being shed. All the fighting would be in the voting booth and within six years, everything could be different.
Sadly, in this country, we are more interested in voting for our favorite American Idol candidate than political figure.
I am reminded of the story of a young student and teacher talking about the difficulties in finding God when they come to a river.
As they are crossing, the teacher grabs the head of the student and plunges it under the surface. The student starts to struggle for air and after a few moments the teacher releases his student's head.
When the student catches his breath, he looks up at the teacher with astonishment in his eyes, not understanding why his teacher would do such a thing.
The teacher looks at his student and tells him, "When you want God half as much as you wanted air, then you will find Him."
When the American people want change more than they want mind numbing excuses for entertainment, then they will get it. It takes work, but not nearly as much as many feel, first we wake up and then we start to awaken those around us.
So go out and make some noise and start waking your friends and neighbors. Become involved for if you do not, freedom and rights can be taken away from you and many might be surprised just how close we are getting to loosing it already.
I also realized that even though I have my issues with both parties and their apparent merger into variations of a single theme, the problem really is not the politicians, the special interests or the corporations. The simple fact is that even though they may pay lots of cash to a candidate, they cannot vote. So in the final analysis, the blame for the current state of affairs in this country truly is the population for their complete lack of involvement.
Those who do not understand, or do not want to understand, the relationship of man and the universe enjoy being victims of the world, you can only be a victim if you choose to be, it cannot be thrust upon you. It can be very comforting to pretend to be innocent victim, but we truly are neither.
The simple truth is that countries get the governments they deserve, not by being good or bad, but by what they allow to be carried out in their names.
As much as many, if not most, people want to blame those in "charge" the simple facts are that the American populace has dropped the ball and may soon find themselves without any voice in the government that originally was of, by and for the people.
If the disenfranchised majority in this country were to get off its backside and would work together as a unit, there could be a complete revolution in this country without a single drop of blood being shed. All the fighting would be in the voting booth and within six years, everything could be different.
Sadly, in this country, we are more interested in voting for our favorite American Idol candidate than political figure.
I am reminded of the story of a young student and teacher talking about the difficulties in finding God when they come to a river.
As they are crossing, the teacher grabs the head of the student and plunges it under the surface. The student starts to struggle for air and after a few moments the teacher releases his student's head.
When the student catches his breath, he looks up at the teacher with astonishment in his eyes, not understanding why his teacher would do such a thing.
The teacher looks at his student and tells him, "When you want God half as much as you wanted air, then you will find Him."
When the American people want change more than they want mind numbing excuses for entertainment, then they will get it. It takes work, but not nearly as much as many feel, first we wake up and then we start to awaken those around us.
So go out and make some noise and start waking your friends and neighbors. Become involved for if you do not, freedom and rights can be taken away from you and many might be surprised just how close we are getting to loosing it already.
August 13, 2008
Politics, Religion and I – pt 1
This blog is not really about politics, but in today's world, with religion and politics becoming more and more intertwined; I spend a lot of time discussing politics with clients, students and practitioners. I am always reminded of the following line:
First of all, I am neither a Republican or a Democrat, I am what George Carlin used to refer to as a free thinker. I find out as much as I can about the issues and/or the candidates and then make my own decisions.
I will listen to the corporate media in this country for their perspective, but I am quite aware of the fact that they tend to slant their presentations and their coverage based upon their own needs, read financial. I have no doubts that the media in America has a vested interest in politics for both access and financial reasons.
The access can be many things, but one that I became aware of in 2001 was from several friends at Disney who said that the ABC News division had been made aware that if they presented stories that were not in the interest or perspective of the Bush administration, they would find access restricted. What does that mean? Two quick examples...
This form of conservatism involved the concepts of self-responsibility and government staying outside of the privacy and sanctity of the home. Funny, the neo-conservatives of today would classify Goldwater as a left-leaning liberal by their current stances.
For me, the Republican Party started to fall out of favor during the Reagan/Bush administration. I became quite aware that many of my friends were getting ill with GRID, as AIDS was called at the time, and the administration did not care. The people getting this strange illness were homosexuals, drug addicts and immigrants; people the Ronald Reagan didn't count as part of his America.
I always found it a touch ironic that he later cut the funding for Alzheimer's disease and the same disease would be a substantial player in his own later life and death. There was a joke (?) that went around for a while that went something like: He forgot 100,000 Americans during his presidency and later forgot everyone else as well. A touch crass, but many people still hold strong feelings about the lack of care by the "Compassionate Conservatives" of the time.
During the Clinton Presidency, the Republican Party continued to show its true colors by spending years and millions trying to remove Clinton from office. The looked into and screamed about every appearance of impropriety. Basically they came across, to me at least, as a bunch of spoiled children that were unhappy they did not get their way.
Later, as a nation, we were told that when President Clinton wanted to do something about Osama bin Laden, that there was nothing to it and all he was trying to do was divert attention from the Monica Lewinsky scandal that was going full force at the time, August 1998. Three years later we would find that the target had been valid.
By the time the current administration came into power, sic, I had pretty much lost all respect for the party as a whole, but I also realized that the party has been co opted by two differing factions with completely different goals, one though was more than willing to manipulate the other. These two opposing forces that seem to have united are the Religious Right and the Corporate Elite, for lack of a better name.
The Religious Right has a morality that is based upon its belief structure and the only aspect of it that gets to me is their attempts to encode these beliefs into the law of the land. I support the privilege to live as one chooses, but forcing others to abide by it is just wrong. Sadly, these people tend to believe that morality is about rules and regulations; if this is the case, then lawyers are the most moral individuals out there.
The other group that has seized power in today's Republican Party is the Corporations and "Special Interests." Now I have no problem with business making its voice heard, but it has been a serious mistake to allow Corporate culture all the rights and privileges of the citizenry with none of the responsibilities or moral ethics required of individuals. Corporations only do the right thing when it is profitable to them; this has been mandated by the Supreme Court in some of their decisions.
I think that the Religious Right is in for a rude awakening when they awaken to the fact that they have been used as a voting block and the "Business" side does not share their morality and will dump them as soon as they become a burden or less than profitable.
To be continued...
When religion and politics ride in the same cart, the whirlwind follows.So lets get into it and see what we can make of things...Rev. Mother Romallo
"Dune" by Frank Herbert
First of all, I am neither a Republican or a Democrat, I am what George Carlin used to refer to as a free thinker. I find out as much as I can about the issues and/or the candidates and then make my own decisions.
I will listen to the corporate media in this country for their perspective, but I am quite aware of the fact that they tend to slant their presentations and their coverage based upon their own needs, read financial. I have no doubts that the media in America has a vested interest in politics for both access and financial reasons.
The access can be many things, but one that I became aware of in 2001 was from several friends at Disney who said that the ABC News division had been made aware that if they presented stories that were not in the interest or perspective of the Bush administration, they would find access restricted. What does that mean? Two quick examples...
- Every media outlet, supposedly, has members in the White House Press Core. While the administration would not evict a reporter from a network or outlet, they may never be called upon to ask questions during a press conference or just very late into it.
- We all see those lovely interviews on Sunday morning and other times with the big players in Washington. What does a network do when they can only get 2nd or 3rd string interview?
The Republican fall from grace
I was raised in a Southern Baptist Republican home. I was taught many things that have stayed with me until this day and in many ways find myself agreeing with many policies of "conservative" politics. Now before you freak out about this, understand that when I speak of "conservative Politics" I am referring to it as it was by Barry Goldwater, the father of conservatism.This form of conservatism involved the concepts of self-responsibility and government staying outside of the privacy and sanctity of the home. Funny, the neo-conservatives of today would classify Goldwater as a left-leaning liberal by their current stances.
For me, the Republican Party started to fall out of favor during the Reagan/Bush administration. I became quite aware that many of my friends were getting ill with GRID, as AIDS was called at the time, and the administration did not care. The people getting this strange illness were homosexuals, drug addicts and immigrants; people the Ronald Reagan didn't count as part of his America.
I always found it a touch ironic that he later cut the funding for Alzheimer's disease and the same disease would be a substantial player in his own later life and death. There was a joke (?) that went around for a while that went something like: He forgot 100,000 Americans during his presidency and later forgot everyone else as well. A touch crass, but many people still hold strong feelings about the lack of care by the "Compassionate Conservatives" of the time.
During the Clinton Presidency, the Republican Party continued to show its true colors by spending years and millions trying to remove Clinton from office. The looked into and screamed about every appearance of impropriety. Basically they came across, to me at least, as a bunch of spoiled children that were unhappy they did not get their way.
Later, as a nation, we were told that when President Clinton wanted to do something about Osama bin Laden, that there was nothing to it and all he was trying to do was divert attention from the Monica Lewinsky scandal that was going full force at the time, August 1998. Three years later we would find that the target had been valid.
By the time the current administration came into power, sic, I had pretty much lost all respect for the party as a whole, but I also realized that the party has been co opted by two differing factions with completely different goals, one though was more than willing to manipulate the other. These two opposing forces that seem to have united are the Religious Right and the Corporate Elite, for lack of a better name.
The Religious Right has a morality that is based upon its belief structure and the only aspect of it that gets to me is their attempts to encode these beliefs into the law of the land. I support the privilege to live as one chooses, but forcing others to abide by it is just wrong. Sadly, these people tend to believe that morality is about rules and regulations; if this is the case, then lawyers are the most moral individuals out there.
The other group that has seized power in today's Republican Party is the Corporations and "Special Interests." Now I have no problem with business making its voice heard, but it has been a serious mistake to allow Corporate culture all the rights and privileges of the citizenry with none of the responsibilities or moral ethics required of individuals. Corporations only do the right thing when it is profitable to them; this has been mandated by the Supreme Court in some of their decisions.
I think that the Religious Right is in for a rude awakening when they awaken to the fact that they have been used as a voting block and the "Business" side does not share their morality and will dump them as soon as they become a burden or less than profitable.
To be continued...
Subscribe to:
Posts
(
Atom
)
