The Gay Legal Rulings Thread

[Martinus]

I suppose there's the argument that bringing them into the fold will possibly hasten the moderation of their views rather than the opposite.

Of course. The thing is, what if the troglodytes achieve critical mass and they begin to drag Europe back? We should not bite more than we can chew, and the moods even in the old Europe are not peachy either (have you read about the Golden Dawn party in Greece which just issued an ultimatum to Greek muslims to leave the country or be killed?)

[11B4V]

Seriously though. We all know whats going on in the US in regards to the "Gay" question. Slowly advancing forward for you all. What about Europe. What's happening there?

[Ed Anger]

Seriously though. We all know whats going on in the US in regards to the "Gay" question. Slowly advancing forward for you all. What about Europe. What's happening there?

Tamas is checking his beet storage shed.

[garbon]

Looks like Supreme Court isn't announcing decision on gay marriage today.

[garbon]

Apparently that French anti-gay group is at it again.



http://www.theatlanticwire.com/global/2013/07/worlds-most-homoerotic-homphobes-are-storming-french-beaches-tiny-shorts/67077/

Hommen, the French anti-gay group made famous by its members' flat abs, protesting shirtless, and being more "gay" than the gay men were protesting is back. With abs flatter than ever, the anti-gay group has set the bar for homoerotic hijinks higher than ever by taking five, wet, sinewy men in tiny swimsuits and cramming them into a tiny boat off of a beach in Montpellier, France. Yes, we're quite aware that there are parts of that last sentence that could resemble any weekend in Provincetown, but that would all be lost on Hommen:

[Jacob]

 

[garbon]

http://news.yahoo.com/calif-court-declines-stop-gay-125510245.html

Calif. court declines to stop gay marriages

he California Supreme Court refused Monday to order the state to immediately stop issuing marriage licenses to same-sex couples.

However, the court still plans to consider whether the governor and attorney general correctly instructed county clerks that a voter-approved ban on gay marriages had become legally invalid statewide.

Without comment, the court denied a request made Friday by backers of the ban for an emergency order that would have required the state to keep enforcing Proposition 8 while they pursue a last-ditch legal effort to preserve it.

"Although we would have preferred for the California Supreme Court to issue a stay so that the state's marriage amendment would be respected sooner rather than later ... we remain hopeful that the court will recognize that Proposition 8 remains the law of the land in California and that county clerks must continue to enforce it," said Austin Nimocks, a lawyer for the coalition of religious conservative groups that qualified Proposition 8 for the November 2008 ballot.

Human Rights Campaign President Chad Griffin, who spearheaded the lawsuit that resulted in gay marriage returning to the nation's most populous state after 4 1/2 years, cheered the state court's decision allowing the weddings to continue without interruption.

"Our opponents have failed in a desperate attempt to deny happiness and protections to lesbian and gay couples and their children and no amount of legal wrangling is going to undo that joy," Griffin said.

The U.S. Supreme Court cleared the way for gay marriages to resume in the nation's most populous state on June 28 by dismissing the backers' appeal of a lower court ruling that found the ban unconstitutional. The high court decided the backers lacked authority to defend Proposition 8 after the governor and attorney general refused to do so.

The California Supreme Court still plans to separately consider whether the lower court ruling that invalidated the ban and a companion mandate prohibiting the state from enforcing it applied statewide or only in Los Angeles and Alameda counties. The two couples who sued to strike down Proposition 8 live in those counties.

Lawyers for Proposition 8 sponsors also have argued that because the U.S. Supreme Court did not rule directly on Proposition 8's constitutionality, state officials are bound by state law to abide by the measure.

The state high court has asked for additional written arguments on those issues by Aug. 1.

Don't these people have anything better to do?

[garbon]

http://news.yahoo.com/britain-legalizes-gay-marriage-133757426.html

Britain legalizes gay marriage

Britain on Wednesday legalized gay marriage after Queen Elizabeth II gave her royal stamp of approval, clearing the way for the first same-sex weddings next summer.

Lawmakers cheered as House of Commons Speaker John Bercow said royal assent had been given — one day after the bill to legalize same-sex marriage in England and Wales cleared Parliament.

The queen's approval was a formality and is the last step necessary for a bill to become law.

The law enables gay couples to get married in both civil and religious ceremonies in England and Wales, provided that the religious institution consents. The Church of England, the country's official faith, is barred from performing such ceremonies.

It also will allow couples who had previously entered into civil partnerships — which were introduced in 2005 and carry similar rights and responsibilities to marriage — to convert their relationships to marriage.

The British government introduced the bill in January.

Prime Minister David Cameron had backed it, but it divided his Conservative Party and touched off strident debates in the House of Commons and House of Lords.

Numerous attempts to derail the legislation failed as it wound its way through Parliament, with traditionalists arguing it would undermine the sanctity of marriage.

On Tuesday, Conservative lawmaker Gerald Howarth accused the government of having "bulldozed" the legislation through Parliament, "offending large swatches" of his party.

But in the same debate, shadow women and equalities minister Yvette Cooper said it was the "time to celebrate and not discriminate."

Alright so now I need to find a English or Welsh man who wants to marry me next year so I can finally do the whole move to the UK bit.

[Ed Anger]

You can marry josq.

[garbon]

You can marry josq.

My mother said okay, sounds fun. Just don't stay in England too long.

[garbon]

Hmm, apparently Hommen has competition.

http://news.yahoo.com/worlds-most-homoerotic-homophobes-now-mounting-giant-pole-144850531.html

The World's Most Homoerotic Homophobes Are Now Mounting a Giant Pole in Tiny Pink Shorts

In France, there wages a (bizarre and perhaps unintentional) war among the country's anti-gay groups. In this war, there is apparently a race to to be, at once, more homoerotic and more homophobic than the next anti-gay group. Today we meet La Manif Pour Tous, who decided a bunch of very fit shirtless men straddling a giant pole is the best way to flaunt their anti-gay stance.

"Shirtless guys ... on top of one another ... clutching a giant pole ... in pink shorts and those guys are protesting gay marriage? This has to be some kind of joke," your brain is probably telling you. But we kid you not. Those men are holding the logo La Manif Pour Tous, an anti-gay group in France, and are featured on the group's Facebook page. And while those boys look like an ad for a gay adult summer camp, this trend of homoerotic homophobia is actually going on in France.

[garbon]

http://news.yahoo.com/nj-court-agrees-allow-same-sex-marriages-monday-183328605.html

NJ court agrees to allow same-sex marriages Monday

Same-sex marriages will begin within days in New Jersey after the state's highest court ruled unanimously Friday to uphold a lower-court order that gay weddings must start Monday and to deny a delay that was sought by Gov. Chris Christie's administration.

"The state has advanced a number of arguments, but none of them overcome this reality: Same-sex couples who cannot marry are not treated equally under the law today," the court said in an opinion by Chief Justice Stuart Rabner. "The harm to them is real, not abstract or speculative."

A judge on the lower court had ruled last month that New Jersey must recognize same-sex marriage and set Monday as the date to allow gay weddings. Christie, a Republican who is considered a possible 2016 presidential candidate, appealed the decision and asked for the start date to be put on hold while the state appeals.

The state's top court agreed last week to take up the appeal of the lower-court ruling by Judge Mary Jacobson. Oral arguments are expected Jan. 6 or 7.

In Friday's opinion, Rabner wrote that the state has not shown that it is likely to prevail in the case, though it did present some reasons not to marriage to move forward now.

"But when a party presents a clear case of unequal treatment, and asks the court to vindicate constitutionally protected rights, a court may not sidestep its obligation to rule for an indefinite amount of time," he wrote. "Under these circumstances, courts do not have the option to defer."

Rabner also rejected the state's argument that it was in the public interest not to allow marriages until the court has had more time to rule fully on the issue.

"What is the public's interest in a case like this?" he wrote. "Like Judge Jacobson, we can find no public interest in depriving a group of New Jersey residents of their constitutional right to equal protection while the appeals process unfolds."

On Thursday, some communities started accepting applications for marriage licenses from same-sex couples so that they would pass the 72-hour waiting period by 12:01 a.m. Monday.

Several communities, including Asbury Park and Lambertville, are holding ceremonies for multiple couples then.

Meanwhile, the gay rights group Garden State Equality said it was lining up judges who could waive the 72-hour waiting period. Also, the state's marriage law says there is no waiting period for couples already married to reaffirm their vows. Some couples wed in New York or other places that already recognize gay marriages are expected to do that.

Despite the uncertainty before Friday's ruling, couples — some of whom have been together for decades — have been planning to have ceremonies as soon as they would be recognized by the state government. Lambertville Mayor David DelVecchio said he's planning to lead one of the state's first legally recognized same-sex weddings, between Beth Asaro and Joanne Schailey. DelVecchio also performed the ceremony in 2007 when the couple became among New Jersey's first to be granted a civil union.

"The applications should be flowing and the licenses should be granted and people should be allowed to marry freely," said Hayley Gorenberg, a Lambda Legal lawyer who is working on the case. "The court has unanimously said my clients and the people of New Jersey don't need to wait."

The court did not address the question of what would happen to the status of same-sex marriages entered into next week if it later decides that the state does not have to grant the marriages.

Whether gay couples should have the right to marry in New Jersey has been the subject of a battle in the state's courts and Legislature for a decade. There has been a flurry of movements in both venues since June, when the U.S. Supreme Court invalidated key parts of a federal law that prevented the federal government from recognizing same-sex unions.

Since then, gay rights advocates have asked New Jersey judges to force the state to recognize same-sex marriage, arguing that the state's current policy of granting gay couples civil unions but not marriage licenses amounts to denying them federal protections such as Social Security survivor benefits and the right to file tax returns jointly.

Since July, gay rights groups have also engaged in an intense campaign aimed at persuading lawmakers to override Christie's 2012 veto of a bill that would have allowed gay marriage. To get an override, the Legislature must act by Jan. 14. The bill spells out details that likely would not be covered in a court ruling. For instance, civil unions would automatically be converted to marriages unless couples opted out and dissolved their civil unions, and there would be a religious exception that would allow not only clergy but also others such as caterers or florists not to be involved with gay weddings.

Thirteen other states, including most in the Northeast, recognize gay marriage.

Christie says he favors civil unions and says that allowing same-sex marriage is something that should be done only by a public vote, not the state's judges or lawmakers.

He didn't immediately comment on the ruling.

Sheila Oliver, speaker of the state Assembly, issued a statement blaming Christie for not having gay marriage sooner in New Jersey.

"It's a shame it took this long to get to this point and that it took a court fight for same-sex couples to gain equal rights," she said. "New Jersey could have had marriage equality already if it wasn't for Gov. Christie, who has done everything he could to prevent this from happening, including wasting money and time continuing this court battle."

[Grinning_Colossus]

Another one down. How many more blue states are left?

[merithyn]

Illinois.

[DontSayBanana]

http://news.yahoo.com/nj-court-agrees-allow-same-sex-marriages-monday-183328605.html

It's about bloody time.  The whole point of instituting civil unions was that they were supposed to be a 1:1 equivalent of marriage in NJ.  The beef was that since the feds didn't recognize civil unions, there was no way for it to be a 1:1 match.

I just wish I had seen the oral arguments for this.  Rabner and Albin in particular don't exactly suffer fools gladly.