Mombian
Feed Subscribe to Feed       Facebook Become a Facebook Fan       Facebook Follow on Twitter       E-mail Daily Digest - Enter your e-mail address:

Wednesday August 4, 2010

BREAKING: Equality Wins in California; Prop 8 Unconstitutional

RingsCalifornia’s ban on the marriage of same-sex couples is unconstitutional, ruled U.S. District Judge Vaughn Walker. He then quickly issued a temporary stay of the ruling until Friday, by which time both sides must file papers in response to the stay—meaning same-sex couples can’t marry quite yet.  More thoughts and analysis to come . . . here is the key part of the ruling (my emphasis):

The evidence does not support a finding that California has an interest in preferring opposite-sex parents over same-sex parents. Indeed, the evidence shows beyond any doubt that parents’ genders are irrelevant to children’s developmental outcomes. Moreover, Proposition 8 has nothing to do with children, as Proposition 8 simply prevents same-sex couples from marrying. Same-sex couples can have (or adopt) and raise children. When they do, they are treated identically to opposite-sex parents under California law. Even if California had an interest in preferring opposite-sex parents to same-sex parents—and the evidence plainly shows that California does not—Proposition 8 is not rationally related to that interest, because Proposition 8 does not affect who can or should become a parent under California law. . . .

Proposition 8 fails to advance any rational basis in singling out gay men and lesbians for denial of a marriage license. Indeed, the evidence shows Proposition 8 does nothing more than enshrine in the California Constitution the notion that opposite-sex couples are superior to same-sex couples. Because California has no interest in discriminating against gay men and lesbians, and because Proposition 8 prevents California from fulfilling its constitutional obligation to provide marriages on an equal basis, the court concludes that Proposition 8 is unconstitutional.

Plaintiffs have demonstrated by overwhelming evidence that Proposition 8 violates their due process and equal protection rights and that they will continue to suffer these constitutional violations until state officials cease enforcement of Proposition 8. California is able to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples, as it has already issued 18,000 marriage licenses to same-sex couples and has not suffered any demonstrated harm as a result,see FF 64-66; moreover, California officials have chosen not to defend Proposition 8 in these proceedings.

Because Proposition 8 is unconstitutional under both the Due Process and Equal Protection Clauses, the court orders entry of judgment permanently enjoining its enforcement; prohibiting the official defendants from applying or enforcing Proposition 8 and directing the official defendants that all persons under their control or supervision shall not apply or enforce Proposition 8. The clerk is DIRECTED to enter judgment without bond in favor of plaintiffs and plaintiff-intervenors and against defendants and defendant-intervenors pursuant to FRCP 58.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

All Right Kid Thinks The Kids Are All Right Is All Right

Yes, we’re all waiting for the Prop 8 decision to come out later today. In the meantime, let’s go back to the ongoing discussion about The Kids Are All Right. Over at Moms and Bombs, Kellen Kaiser asserts, “I’m ‘all right’, I don’t know about the rest of them,” and offers her opinion as the daughter of lesbian moms. We cannot expect her to represent the opinion of all children of lesbians—but I think she raises some good points about the use of what some feel is an overused cliché about lesbians sleeping with men:

After watching this movie it becomes clear that Mark Ruffalo’s character has lost the battle. . . . Seducing lesbians isn’t a great idea, this movie says, it won’t end well for you. This is because Julianne Moore’s character doesn’t actually turn straight, as she stresses to her long term partner, Ms Bening, once the affair is exposed. She reiterates this fact, that she is gay, to the donor when he proposes actually making a go at being together romantically. Yes, she slept with a man but this doesn’t change who she is. . . .

As to why she sleeps with a dude in the first place and of all dudes, that guy? Well, her sleeping with a a woman wouldn’t have worked as a plot device. If she had an affair with another woman it would have been a much more significant threat to her relationship, she might have actually left her partner for another woman. Whole different movie, way more depressing (see real life). The dissatisfaction Ms. Moore’s character is experiencing in her relationship is what leads her to cheat. It being with a man makes the whole thing less heartbreaking really. Read the rest of this post »

Tuesday August 3, 2010

The Mama Grizzlies vs. the Mama Lezzies

(A new report came out yesterday that reevaluated the reasons California’s Prop 8 passed in November 2008. Among the findings (my emphasis):

The most effective decision made by either campaign—the one with the biggest impact on the outcome—was Yes on 8’s decision to appeal to appeal to anti-gay prejudice by dishonestly alleging danger to kids. Its most broadcasted ad, “Princes,” and most of its other ads charged that schools would expose kids to inappropriate information about gay people. The Yes on 8 ads changed votes on Prop 8 even though they only peripherally concerned marriage. . . .

Almost three-quarters of the net movement toward the ban was among parents with kids under 18 living at home. Approximately 500,000 of them moved away from us. The lesson of the Yes on 8 campaign: when parents hear that their kids are in danger, even if it’s a lie some of them believe it—particularly when the lie largely goes unanswered.

This isn’t exactly new news. I wrote about Yes On 8′s preponderance of parents with minor children, and the scare tactics they used, back in November 2008. Still, this is a fresh analysis (well worth a full read) that emphasizes just how critical it is to address issues of parenting in any similar ballot battle. In fact, one of the report’s top recommendations is:

Cultivate Allies: Knowing that we lost ground particularly among parents, white Democrats, Independents, and voters in the Greater Bay Area, let’s make one of our highest priorities building more and stronger alliances with leaders and groups that organize those constituencies. Likewise, let’s reach out to voter subgroups such as African-Americans that we lost by larger margins. The work outside of our base is more speculative; some of it will bear fruit, and some won’t. But the LGBT community has to do this work well in advance of the next ballot measure, or we will never measurably improve our standing with some of these voters.

That puts us LGBT parents on the front lines of those who can best reach out to create allies in the fight for LGBT rights. In that light, the piece I wrote for my Mombian newspaper column, July 20, 2010, takes on enhanced meaning. Who will win the battle for the hearts and minds of the “movable middle”? Sarah Palin and her “Mama Grizzlies” (and social conservatives broadly speaking) or we Mama Lezzies and other LGBT parents?)

The Mama Grizzlies vs. the Mama Lezzies

Sarah Palin has a new ad out, proclaiming that conservative women will rise up like “mama grizzlies” this year to put a stop to the “fundamental transformation” of our country that threatens their children. Moms “just kind of know when something is going wrong,” she says, and will fight back when someone threatens “to do something adverse toward their cubs.” The target date for her stampede of conservative “pink elephants,” she adds, mixing her metaphors, will be November 2—Election Day. But what will happen when her Mama Grizzlies meet the Mama Lezzies?

Palin is unspecific in the video as to exactly what “transformations” she is against—except to show people in the background holding signs against “Obamacare.” Even if we assume she is referring to issues she has raised before, such as health care reform, financial reform, and defense spending, I wonder where the direct threat is that is causing her to rear up on her hind legs and show her fashionably polished claws.

Since Palin is fond of animal analogies, here’s one for her. Once upon a time, a fox was chasing a rabbit. The fox, fierce and muscular predator though it was, could not catch the rabbit, who escaped. When a bird asked the fox why, he replied, “I was just running for my dinner. The rabbit was running for its life.”

Palin may be looking for a little more food for her cubs. That’s not a bad thing in itself; most parents would do the same. But let’s take a look at the situation for the Mama Lezzies and our families. Read the rest of this post »

Monday August 2, 2010

Water Songs from Erin Lee and Marci

Erin Lee and MarciChildren’s musicians Erin Lee and Marci bring us the next of their regular posts with thematic recommendations for kid-friendly music, plus activities to make the songs an interactive experience for the whole family.

Look for Erin Lee and Marci here on the first Monday of each month, or visit their homepage, www.gottaplay.org.

I’ve created links to Amazon for the full albums (click the album name), plus links to Amazon MP3 downloads, when available, for those who want only the singles. (Click the song name.) I also have a widget after the jump that will let you preview most of the songs without leaving Mombian.

We’re having a heat wave—at least we are here in New York City. Whenever August rolls around, so does the heat—and the best way to beat the heat is with water! Here are some of our favorite tunes that celebrate sprinklers, swimming, and all-around general splashing. Warning and heat advisory: these are all dance tunes—guaranteed to get you all ready for a run through the sprinkler or a dunk in the water! Read the rest of this post »

© 2005-2012 by Dana Rudolph and Dana B. Rudolph, LLC
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.

This blog is powered by Wordpress. Theme modified from bryanhelmig.com.