Finally!

Hey folks, I'll be here tomorrow @10 as 9 people in odd robes a thousand miles away tell my husband and I whether or not we can finally take that head of household tax deduction. Anything short of a sweeping ruling one way or the other is going to produce a lot of conflicts. Some are sure to be happy, others sure to be pissed.

I'd serve cake and cocktails but for this primitive internet.

Al Cardenas' Wife Said Something About Gays on Facebook!

Facebook isn't just a place where Sarah Palin can free associate deep thoughts about 'Merica and you can see what your old high school girlfriend's kids look like, it's also a place where Al Cardenas' wife can share her thoughts about gays with the world.

As broken by Steve Rothaus, here are some exclamation-filled excerpts:

"Well, there is no reason not to like them or love them, the same way you would love one who has a disability, or an illness, etc.," Diana Cardenas wrote. She added: "You know I always wondered why homosexuals are referred to as 'gay', kind of an oxymoron? Nothing really 'gay' about them or their movement."

The timing turned out to be somewhat awkward, as Big Al was about to meet with GOProud about why the American Conservative Union banned their group from having a closet booth at CPAC:

Cardenas said of the previously scheduled meeting with GOProud: "It was not easy." He added: "I love my wife more than life and I think we agree on the issue of traditional marriage, but I disagree with some of the things that she said."

SAVE Dade, meanwhile, released their own statement and called on Mrs. Cardenas to retract her comments:

"For the sake of moving forward with bridging the divide in our community, and bringing together all minorities, be it ethnic, racial or religious, Mrs. Cardenas should temper her offensive and disgusting remarks. We sincerely hope she will retract her public comments that aim to hurt so many, and pauses to reflect on the pain she has caused her community;"

I don't get organizations like GOProud.

It'd be like a Jewish support group in the 1970s for the Riviera Country Club, where you support everything about the club except for the fact that the members want nothing to do with you and would rather you go away.

Unfortunately, that issue is out there and you'll just have to agree to disagree.

But on the color of the table napkins you and the club share the exact same vision!

GT to Be Honored for Overturning Gay Adoption Ban.

It's an old legal truism that every person and issue deserves an attorney, but not everyone deserves you.

With that in mind I see that Save Dade is honoring GT for their pro bono and historic work overturning Florida's ban on gay adoption:

For the past 33 years, the state of Florida banned gays and lesbians from adopting.  In September of 2010, the ACLU of Florida victoriously struck down this ban. The ACLU of Florida has fought for the rights of children to have a "forever home," and this victory continues to prove their commitment to the fight for LGBT equality and rightfully earns them the 2011 Champions of Equality Award., stated CJ Ortuno, Executive Director of SAVE Dade.

The ACLU of Florida’s victory, however, was not its alone.  Greenberg Traurig LLP, a for-profit law firm, stepped up to defend , pro bono, the rights of the two children who have now been legally adopted by Martin Gill.

Greenberg Traurig has publicly stated that this case was the “most meaningful” for its team. Its willingness to go above and beyond to­ protect the interests of these children earns it the 2011 Champions of Equality Award.

As Glenn Garvin noted in his review of last night's excellent American Experience, dealing with the heroic efforts by visionary, forward-thinking activists to strike down Jim Crow in the South:

The immediate and profound reaction to each — even among viewers who lived through the 1960s: “That was America? It’s a testament to how stunningly and totally the civil-rights movement eventually triumphed that these images seem so utterly alien, as if they were drawn from a world long ago and far away. Could we really have lived in a country in which water fountains were marked white and colored? Where a public park could have a sign out front reading, whites only? Where a young white woman could smile sunnily into a TV camera and explain that three kids shot to death for registering black voters were asking for it? Where federal troops could be seen lining the streets of a state capital, grimly mounting bayonets onto their rifles in preparation for the day’s work?

It's always good to be on the right side of history, at least once in your life, on at least one issue of consequence.

The reception will be on 5/20 at the Ice Palace in downtown Miami.

Shorter Glenn Garvin: Civil Rights Laws Were A "Tactical Mistake."

I'm going to do my level best to fairly summarize Glenn Garvin's column today on Judge Walker's landmark decision on Proposition 8:

1.  Eric Deggins is black and recently got a racist voicemail.


2.  This proves some whites still hate blacks despite the civil rights laws and all the judicial rulings on black/white relations.


3.  The Prop 8 lawsuit was not about allowing gays to marry because they have lots of other rights except specifically the right to marry.  

4.  Rather, the suit seeks to force non-gays to "socially accept and emotionally affirm" gays.


4.  This won't work because some whites still hate blacks.


5.  Thus, the "blunt force of government edicts" is a tactical mistake with respect to gays, just like it was with respect to blacks.


6.  Barry Goldwater was right.

There's so much wrong here I'm not sure where to begin.

Let's start with the civil rights laws.

Last I checked, they were not about white people "emotionally affirming" black people -- they were about fully enabling black people to vote, buy homes in white neighborhoods, marry white people, go to intergrated schools, drink from a white water fountain, sit anywhere they want on a bus, be able to eat at the Burdines lunch counter -- you know, that kind of thing.

That some whites still hate blacks does nothing to diminish the value or significance of the substantive rights established by judicial rulings and other "governmental edicts" regarding black people.

Moving on to the Prop 8 lawsuit, Glenn is woefully confused.

Judge Walker was not asked and did not make any rulings regarding the "emotional affirmation or social acceptance" of gay marriage.  He did not seek to abolish "irrational prejudice by government decree."  That's not what courts do.

He did make "findings of fact" and ruled, based on real, honest-to-goodness evidence presented at trial, that there is no "rational basis" to deprive Americans from the right to marry based on their sexual preference -- and that to do so violates the 14th Amendment.  (See Ted Olsen explain that to an incredulous Chris Wallace above).

Indeed, Judge Walker expressly refused to make any rulings regarding morality or the "emotional acceptance" of one view of marriage as opposed to another.  What he did evaluate is whether there are any tangible benefits to the State recognizing only heterosexual marriage, and found -- based on credible social science testimony -- that none exists.  That's why it is unconstitutional to deprive gay couples from the institution of marriage, because there are no legitimate empirical or utilitarian justifications to support the deprivation.

The fact that some whites still hate blacks doesn't mean Loving v. Virginia was wrongly decided.  In fact, more people support gay marriage now than supported interracial marriage in 1967 (only four percent(!) of the American public supported that right in 1958).

Get on the right side of history, Glenn -- or just go back to reviewing "Cougar Town."

Love Me Like A Man!

I just spent the last four hours reading confirmed bachelor Felix Unger's -- I mean Chief Judge Vaughn Walker's -- 136-page ruling regarding Proposition 8, and all I can say is I had no idea gay sex could be that boring!

I did find this part of the ruling interesting:

Same-sex couples are identical to opposite-sex couples in the characteristics relevant to the ability to form successful marital unions. Like opposite-sex couples, same-sex couples have happy, satisfying relationships and form deep emotional bonds and strong commitments to their partners. Standardized measures of relationship satisfaction, relationship adjustment and love do not differ depending on whether a couple is same-sex or opposite-sex.

Happy?  Satisfying?  Deep emotional bonds and strong commitments?

You can tell this judge has never been married.

Here, read the whole darn thing yourself.

Judge Cindy Lederman Is a Genius.

Here's why:

"Dr. Rekers' testimony was far from a neutral and unbiased recitation of the relevant scientific evidence. Dr. Rekers' beliefs are motivated by his strong ideological and theological convictions that are not consistent with the science. Based on his testimony and demeanor at trial, the court can not consider his testimony to be credible nor worthy of forming the basis of public policy.''

The Florida Attorney General's Office has appealed Lederman's ruling, and a decision is expected anytime.

Not bad, Judge, but I would have added:

"Further, based on his preposterous mustache and absurd comb-over, this man is either a buffoon or a closeted self-hating homosexual, or possibly both."

Wait a second, who is our dummkopf attorney general again?

Oh yeah, that health-care suing fella who blew -- metaphorically of course -- $87k of taxpayer monies on this tortured hypocrite.

BTW, Bill, scrubbing your wall won't erase the taint.

Judge Jordan's Ruling Leads to Change in Hospital Visitation Rights

We analyzed Judge Jordan's ruling last year in the Langbehn/Jackson Memorial gay visitation dispute here.

While I wasn't exactly thrilled with the outcome, I found his ruling sensitive, rational, and fair given the messed up state of Florida's tort jurisprudence.

Now we see all the advocacy and publicity has paid off (depending on your point of view):

Gay rights advocates said the rules change was inspired by one of those cases involving a same-sex couple, Janice Langbehn and Lisa Pond, who were profiled in The New York Times last year. After Ms. Pond was stricken with a fatal brain aneurysm, Ms. Langbehn was denied visiting rights in 2007 by a Florida hospital. Although Ms. Langbehn had power of attorney and she and Ms. Pond were parents to four children they had adopted, the hospital refused for eight hours to allow her and the children to see Ms. Pond, her partner for 18 years. Ms. Pond died as Ms. Langbehn tried in vain to get to her side.

Ms. Langbehn, represented by Lambda Legal, a legal advocacy organization, brought suit against the hospital, Jackson Memorial in Miami, but lost. On Thursday night, Mr. Obama called her from Air Force One to say that he had been moved by her case.

“I was so humbled that he would know Lisa’s name and know our story,” Ms. Langbehn said in a telephone interview. “He apologized for how we were treated. For the last three years, that’s what I’ve been asking the hospital to do. Even now, three years later, they still refuse to apologize to the children and I for the fact that Lisa died alone.”

Glad to see that hopey-changey thing working out for ya' at least a little bit.