Counter

Atty. Gen. Jerry Brown's Brief Protecting Gay Marriage in California

for full legal brief go to http://ag.ca.gov/cms_attachments/press/pdfs/n1642_prop_8_brief.pdf

from LBReport.com

The Attorney General's office legal brief -- to which LBReport.com provides a link in full below -- states in pertinent part:

"Respondent Attorney General is the chief law officer of the state [citation omitted]. In that capacity, he is duty bound to uphold of the whole of the Constitution, not only the People's reservation of the initiative power, but also the People's expression of their will in the Constitution's Declaration of Rights (Cal. Const., art. I, section 1.) In reconciling these separate constitutional protections, Respondent concludes that the initiative power could never have been intended to give the voters an unfettered prerogative to to amend the Constitution for the for the purpose of depriving a disfavored group of rights determined by the Supreme Court to be part of fundamental human liberty...
...The use of the initiative power to take away a legal right deemed by this Court to be fundamental and from a group defined by a suspect classification is a matter of deep concern. Existing precedents of this Court do not support the invalidation of Proposition 8 either as a revision or as a violation of the separation of powers. However, Proposition 8 should be invalidated as violating the inalienable right of liberty found in article I, sectino 1 of our Constitution."

"In the brief, AG Brown doesn't support an argument made by some challengers to to Prop 8 that existing case-law precedents invalidate Prop 8 either as a revision or as a violation of the separation-of-powers doctrine." LBReport

"Instead, AG Brown argues that Prop 8 should be invalidated because the Supreme Court concluded (4-3) earlier this year that Article I, section 1 of the CA Constitution provides a right to marry that cannot be denied to same-sex couples...and to invalidate such a fundamental right requires the Court to find a compelling justification. Since a majority of the High Court found no such compelling justification, Prop 8 must be stricken, AG Brown argues."LBReport

Kudos to Hillary Rosen For Standing Up for US and Against Obama's choice of Rick Warren, anti Gay Marriage Pastor to Ungrace His Inauguration

I was proud of Hilary Rosen. She was on Anderson Cooper's CNN news commentary show tonight speaking up against Obama's outrageous choice of a controversial pastor to give the introductory invocation at his inauguration. I was so looking forward to Barack Obama's inauguration day thinking change will be coming at last; Instead we LGBT people get slapped in the face. Roland Martin was speaking on the other side saying Obama was trying to bring all kinds of different sides together to show he can work with everyone. A third person on the show supported Hilary. But it was Hilary's aghast looks and frown and very incisive comments that broke through all the traditional speech. Hilary's mouth did not just move, she said something important to herself and to all of us. It was as if she and her words became one. I remember she said this issue was not about Gay Marriage. I think she suggested in a way it was about symbolism, what Obama stands for. And I say who does he want up there with him, everyone good and evil or at least people who stand for something better than old tired superstitious thinking.

I had no idea Hilary Rosen was a Lesbian but for sure I know she is now. I looked it up and saw she spoke up on Gay Marriage on Huffington Post back in 2006 and used the We not the royal "We" but the we that means I am one of us. I have no idea when Hilary Rosen "came out" publicly but more power to her. I knew Obama stated publicly he defined marriage in the traditional way but did he have to go out of his way to pick a pastor who uses Gay Marriage and anti abortion issues as a weapon to hold sway over his converts and congregants. Rick Warren from what I understand is a fire and brimstone type of pastor who puts the fear of Hell and Damnation in his audience. Do we have to elevate that kind of person over thousands of other worthy pastors who receive their ovations and support from congregations that pray for peace and freedom and inclusiveness rather than who get "high" on pontificating about the evils of LGBT folks who want to marry the ones we love. Who else does Rick Warren put down in his sermons? Women who choose abortion as a way out of an unfortunate situation thus saving the world from overpopulation and saving babies from what could end up being a less than desirable life.

Yes, we have room for the Rick Warren's of the world but does the room have to be the outdoor space reserved only once every four years for the President of the United States to take his oath of office. Does the room have to be given to a so called religious person who brings fear and confusion into the hearts of so many people? It is an outrage and I can hope Obama comes to his senses and univites this person who intrudes so rudely into our hearts and minds at the thought of his being in front of a podium next to our future President of the United States. I guess we were well warned in advance that Obama and our interests as LGBT people are not the same but we did think at least if he was not on the same page, Obama had bookmarked our page and would not let us down. But sadly he has let us down. And now the point we must take from this is that during this administration we need to be ever more vigilant not only about our enemies like Rick Warren but also vigilant and ever wary of our once "true friends". Never let your guard down and keep the pressure up. We don't like what is going on Mr. President-Elect. I hope your LGBT insiders and LGBT colleagues speak up and do something as profound and wonderful as what Hilary Rosen did. I assume there will be protests over this strange slap in the face choice of a pastor to ungrace an inauguration.

Sharon Raphael

Day without a Gay (or Lesbian)

Day Without a Gay' (The Chicago Tribune)
Homosexuals urged to skip work

—John Keilman
December 9, 2008
The HR office has probably never encountered this before: People across the country are being urged to skip work Wednesday after calling in "gay."

The loosely organized protest, called "Day Without a Gay," (www.daywithoutagay.org) is intended as a statement against California's ban on same-sex marriage, along with other political developments considered anti-gay.

Some are calling for a boycott of all economic activity to highlight the gay community's financial power. Others want gays and lesbians to spend the day volunteering for worthy causes to demonstrate their compassion, which could win new sympathy to their cause.

In Chicago, the Gay Liberation Network has called for an 11 a.m. rally outside the County Building, 118 N. Clark St., to call for granting marriage licenses to same-sex couples. Network co-founder Andy Thayer said he didn't expect people to actually "call in gay," but added that "many people will find one way or the other to not be in work that day, because we're sick of being treated like second-class citizens."



The motto has stirred a tempest of online debate about the wisdom of skipping work during a recession. Sean Hetherington, a West Hollywood, Calif., comic and personal trainer who helped devise the event, said the slogan wasn't meant to be taken literally. But noting the flood of media attention it has attracted, he was unapologetic.

"I'm happy with the way we did it," he said. "We're keeping gay people in the spotlight."

African Parrot drawing by me

Alex & Me by Irene Pepperberg

I just finished reading a book titled Alex & Me published in 2008 by Harper/Collins. The subheading on the cover says "How a Scientist and a Parrot Uncovered a Hidden World of animal Intelligence--and formed a Deep Bond in the Process." That  subheading was the hook and I purchased the book thinking it would be good reading. I tend to like books, documentaries, programs that focus on what people discover about animal life and also have a curiosity about human-animal communication. I have a therapist friend who wrote a book about her relationship with her cat. I ended up doing an in depth book review about her book. In this book, Irene, starts out as a shy young girl with only a parakeet for a friend and ends up using her knack with caring for birds as a means to establishing a brilliant career questioned though it is by established authorities who tend to poo poo the thought of animals being anywhere near the equals of humans in the brain/thought category. .

Alex is an African Grey, type of parrot which or should I say who tends to project words they learn to speak more clearly than most other parrots. Irene, the main human character, who has a PhD. is a scientist in search of a research project. Although her degree is an advanced very specialized area in chemistry, she decides to spend her life delving into processes and various aspects of bird communication and learning coming from the premise that some species i.e. the African Grey, which by the way have brilliant red tail feathers have the ability to understand what they are saying. In the process Irene and Alex, the first parrot she adopts to be her student, companion, science experiment become extremely bonded with each other. The bottom line is after over 30 years of working with Alex using meticulous methods and creative procedures the scientific community begins to accept both Irene as an equal and Alex as sort of an equal in the realm of having the ability to think. As Irene explained, Alex has the emotional development of a 2 year old and the intellectual development of a 5 year old. This conclusion as a result of the fact that Alex can count up to 7, understands colors and size and shapes, knows what nothing is, can communicate a couple hundred words in the right context and at the right time, can make up words of his own i.e. banberry for apple (cherry plus a banana) and can solve problems in his own unique way usually by making humans do things for him they don't necessarily want to do.

Alex is raised and lived most of his life in various labs that Irene manages to run. At one point Irene attempts to take Alex home with her as much as she can do it,  but that period is ruined because Alex becomes frightened by a small owl he sees outside Irene's window and asks to be taken back to the Lab "Wanna go home" he kept repeating intently. (paraphrasing). Irene closes the drapes so he can't see the owl but that doesn't work, of course, as Alex knows objects still exist even when not seen or heard, a notion that scientists tend to reserve only for human minds. As Irene put it the owl, a feared predator, was in Alex's DNA and she never brought Alex home again. His life at various labs was not too bad given he had the run of the places, even a tree out in an open area with birds up there to look at which is what he preferred to do rather than go in the tree. The downside was the repetitious tests he was given which often became boring for him to do. In that case, he would make up wrong answers and generally be disruptive. As time passed, Alex also had two other parrots as buddies though Alex was always the one in charge and his number one companion and preferred friend was Irene. They used to call that imprinting. Wonder what Irene would say about that.

I enjoyed the book. There are funny parts such as the time Irene takes Alex on a plane trip and the the woman giving out the tickets gives both of them a hard time when she finds out that one of the passengers with Irene is a bird with his own ticket with his own baggage and all. Alex himself is funny, has a sense of humor and is always a step ahead of the humans.

I did come away with a thought though. I disagree with the need to compare animals with humans. When Irene states compared with the average human, Alex is like a 5 year old mentally, turn it around. How would we compare if we were thrown in with a world of birds and no other humans?  How well would we learn to fly, care for our "feathers", communicate with other birds? We know, we wouldn't be able to survive at all though we might learn to sound like birds would we ever know what they are saying to each other. As Irene admits, she could never know Alex's "consciousness" , what the intent of his actions were. One time he tore up a grant she was writing. Why did he do it? She will never know for sure but she can always surmise. It was just fun, Alex liked to eat paper, he was bored and on and on. Was he jealous of the grant? Did he suspect the grant itself would mean boring tests? Well that is a bit far out. (on my part) 

The book is more about Irene than Alex in some ways as it shows how Irene develops into her own person, after experiencing a deprived kind of childhood, a divorce, and the misfortune of being looked down upon within the scientific world because of her research interest in proving that animals can think and in this case that parrots are not just "birdbrains". Some of us always knew not only that animals can think but they can also feel. It was clear that Alex loved Irene in that special ways animals have of communicating their affection for humans. I wonder why scientists have never latched on to that concept that individual animals can feel just as deeply as the individuals within the human species can feel. Thank goodness they are not trying to prove that notion too. Irene Pepperberg's book opens up a world in which the reader can learn how progress was made in the quest for knowledge about how not only birds think and communicate but also how humans change themselves as a result of their conscious connectedness with the animal kingdom which in this case means a human sharing intimate moments with an African Gray named Alex.

pink baby elephant drwn using graffiti program

by sraphael