Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Posts Tagged ‘proposition 8’

The day before elections, Judge Walker, who is presiding over the federal challenge to Prop 8, held a hearing over a dispute concerning the proponents of Prop 8 and their unwillingness to hand over certain ordered internal campaign communications regarding messaging to the plaintiffs.

These documents are vital to the plaintiffs in their effort to prove that those responsible for Prop 8 are not concerned about the welfare of the state, traditional marriage or the weak argument of protecting procreation, but that they acted out of animus toward the LGBT population.

On November 11, Judge Walker ordered they hand over the documents, stating that they were not protected from disclosure.

Well, it gets better. They still haven’t handed over the documents. According to California attorney Rick Xiao at blog Proposition 8 and the Right to Marry:
Today Judge Walker dropped the hammer on Prop. 8 proponents and ordered immediate production of internal communications concerning their campaign strategies and messages to voters. Among other things, Judge Walker admonished Prop. 8 proponents that his previous discovery orders, while being appealed to the Ninth Circuit, remain in effect because the appellate court has not issued a stay. Thus, Prop. 8 proponents risk contempt of the court if they continue to withhold production. According to today’s order, Prop. 8 proponents are ordered to produce additional responsive documents on a rolling basis to conclude not later than the close of fact discovery on November 30, 2009.
Here is the copy of the order, an order he’s had to issue THREE TIMES:

Walker’s Order Compelling Production in Perry v. Schwarzenegger Filed 11-19-09

It really makes you wonder what’s in those documents and what it is they’re trying to hide at the risk of being thrown in jail for contempt.

This January trial is going to be good.

Read Full Post »

Anti-Prop 8 protestors targeted the Lakewood, CA franchise of El Pollo Loco on November 22nd 2008, after linking the restaurant to a Yes on 8 contribution made by a Long Beach businessman. More than a dozen protestors carried signs reading “Bigot,” “Stop the H8,” and “Franchise Owner Against Civil Rights.” Despite the fact that El Pollo Loco made no contributions to either side in the Prop 8 campaign, the protest is another in a series of demonstrations targeting businesses employing individuals or owned by individuals who supported Prop 8.

Roland Spongberg, president of WKS Restaurant Corporation which operates the El Pollo Loco franchise, told the Long Beach Report: “I am surprised by the personal attacks, surprised that some, it seems, want to affect your livelihood, your ability to make a living. I’ve never seen anything like this before.” Customers so far appear undeterred by the protests, with customer Ken Baker of Long Beach telling a reporter: “I don’t like chicken, but I saw the [anti-Prop 8] signs…[The demonstrators’ signs] were like a big billboard telling me where I should have lunch today.”

El Pollo Loco franchises operated by WKS Restaurant Corporation (by area code):

(818)
El Pollo Loco #3525 16940 Nordhoff St. Northridge, CA 91343-3526 (818) 895-1680
El Pollo Loco #3532 10651 Balboa Blvd. Granada Hills, CA 91344 (818) 831-4044
El Pollo Loco #3467 4544 Saugus Ave. Sherman Oaks, CA 91403 (818) 990-7655

(323)
El Pollo Loco #3526 3925 Sunset Blvd. Los Angeles, CA 90029 (323) 665-1333
El Pollo Loco #3504 5151 State University Dr. CSULA Golden Eagle Bldg. Los Angeles, CA 90032 (323) 343-6728
El Pollo Loco #3507 1360 W. Imperial Hwy. Los Angeles, CA 90029 (323) 757-8229
El Pollo Loco #3528 6929 Eastern Av. Bell Gardens, CA 90201 (323) 771-5544‎

(310)
El Pollo Loco #3531 3008 Sepulveda Blvd. W. Los Angeles, CA 90034 (310) 444-0010
El Pollo Loco #3461 7639 Garvey Ave. Rosemead, CA 91770 (626) 307-4394

(562)
El Pollo Loco #3457 2727 Carson St. Lakewood, CA 90712 (562) 496-1664
El Pollo Loco #3455 1212 S. Bellflower Blvd. CSULB-Student Union Bldg. Long Beach, CA 90804 (562) 985-2361
El Pollo Loco #3448 16707 Pioneer Blvd. Artesia, CA 90701 (562) 924-6918
El Pollo Loco #3392 2200 Clark Ave. Long Beach, CA 90815 (562) 494-9691
El Pollo Loco #3322 3502 Cerritos Ave. Los Alamitos, CA 90720 (562) 626-8388
El Pollo Loco #3545 3425 E. Anaheim St. Long Beach, CA 90804 (562) 494-1343
El Pollo Loco #3488 11601 Carson St. Lakewood, CA 90712 (562) 924-2250

(951)
El Pollo Loco #3494 40468 Murrieta Hot Springs Rd. Murrieta, CA 92562 (951) 304-7082
El Pollo Loco #3521 32451 State Hwy 79. Temecula, CA 92592 (951)302-2611
El Pollo Loco #3495 117 W. Nuevo Road. Perris, CA 92571 (951) 943-4626
El Pollo Loco #3477 31550 Grape St. Lake Elsinore, CA 92532 (951) 245-1542

(949)
El Pollo Loco #3458 2232 S. Bristol St. Newport Beach, CA 92660 (949) 474-2120
El Pollo Loco #3490 21212 Bake Pkwy. Lake Forest, CA 92630 (949) 454-8312

(714)
El Pollo Loco #3453 120 No. Euclid. Fullerton, CA 92832 (714) 871-5852

(661)
El Pollo Loco #3371 8200 Stockdale Hwy. Bakersfield, CA 93311 (661) 831-9443
El Pollo Loco #3476 2000 White Lane. Bakersfield, CA 93304 (661) 396-7639
El Pollo Loco #3475 3701 California Ave. Bakersfield, CA 93309 (661) 322-4887

(909)
El Pollo Loco #3506 1090 S. Mt. Vernon. Colton, CA 92324 (909) 777-0045

(858)
El Pollo Loco #3565 4330 Genessee Ave. San Diego, CA 92117 (858) 278-0355
El Pollo Loco #3564 8349 Mira Mesa Blvd. San Diego, CA 92126 (858) 578-7553

(619)
El Pollo Loco #3563 3444 Midway Dr. San Diego, CA 92110 (619) 523-9904
El Pollo Loco #3562 494 Broadway. El Cajon, CA 92021 (619) 588-6034

Read Full Post »

The below was posted at PamsHouseblend, and I thought I should post it here too!

This looks like an amazing documentary chronicling the first time a civil right was put on the ballot, to be decided by mob rule — Proposition 8 — and the millions pumped into the fight by the Mormons in the name of faith. Here’s the first trailer for 8-The Mormon Proposition

Producer Steven Greenstreet, who sent me the trailer link (it just went live) says it has just been submitted to Sundance other festivals. He was a journalist in 2008, and did a lot of coverage of Prop 8. When he left his news agency, he began working with the crew that made this documentary.

Read Full Post »

Maggie Gallagher and the National Organization Of Marriage must be PISSED!

SAN FRANCISCO — A federal judge challenged the backers of California’s voter-enacted ban on same-sex marriage Wednesday to explain how allowing gay couples to wed threatens conventional unions, a demand that prompted their lawyer to acknowledge he did not know.

The unusual exchange between U.S. District Chief Judge Vaughn Walker and Charles Cooper, a lawyer for the group that sponsored Proposition 8, came during a hearing on a lawsuit challenging the measure as discriminatory under the U.S. Constitution.

Cooper had asked Walker to throw out the suit or make it more difficult for those civil rights claims to prevail.

The judge not only refused but signaled that when the case goes to trial in January, he expects Cooper and his legal team to present evidence showing that male-female marriages would be undermined if same-sex marriages were legal.

The question is relevant to the assertion by gay marriage opponents that Proposition 8 is constitutionally valid because it furthers the state’s goal of fostering “naturally procreative relationships,” Walker explained.

“What is the harm to the procreation purpose you outlined of allowing same-sex couples to get married?” Walker asked.

“My answer is, I don’t know. I don’t know,” Cooper answered.

Moments later, after assuring the judge his response did not mean Proposition 8 was doomed to be struck down, Cooper tried to clarify his position. The relevant question was not whether there is proof that same-sex unions jeopardize marriages between men and women, but whether “the state is entitled, when dealing with radical proposals to make changes to bedrock institutions such as this … to take a wait and see attitude,” he said.

“There are things we can’t know, that’s my point,” Cooper said. “The people of California are entitled to step back and let the experiment unfold in Massachusetts and other places, to see whether our concerns about the health of marital unions have either been confirmed or perhaps they have been completely assuaged.”

Walker pressed on, asking again for specific “adverse consequences” that could follow expanding marriage to include same-sex couples. Cooper cited a study from the Netherlands, where gay marriage is legal, showing that straight couples were increasingly opting to become domestic partners instead of getting married.

“Has that been harmful to children in the Netherlands? What is the adverse effect?” Walker asked.

Cooper said he did not have the facts at hand.

“But it is not self-evident that there is no chance of any harm, and the people of California are entitled not to take the risk,” he said.

“Since when do Constitutional rights rest on the proof of no harm?” Walker parried, adding the First Amendment right to free speech protects activities that many find offensive, “but we tolerate those in a free society.”

Walker made clear that he wants to examine other issues that are part of the political rhetoric surrounding same-sex marriage but rarely surface in courtrooms. Among the questions he plans to entertain at the trial are whether sexual orientation is a fixed or immutable characteristic, whether gays are a politically powerful group, and if same-sex marriage bans such as Proposition 8 were motivated by anti-gay bias.

The lawsuit over which Walker is presiding was brought by two unmarried same-sex couples. They have since been joined by lawyers for the city of San Francisco.

Attorney General Jerry Brown, who was named as a defendant, has taken the rare step of agreeing with the plaintiffs instead of arguing to uphold the voter-approved law.

In allowing the case to move forward, Walker said significant questions remain about whether the California measure, which was approved by 52 percent of voters in November, unlawfully violates the rights of gays and lesbians to equality and due process guaranteed under the U.S. Constitution. The measure overturned a state Supreme Court ruling earlier in the year that legalized same-sex marriages.

An estimated 18,000 gay couples wed before the law took effect. In May, the Supreme Court declined to invalidate Proposition 8 but upheld the existing same-sex marriages.

Chad Griffin, a Los Angeles political consultant who spearheaded the lawsuit, said after Wednesday’s hearing that he was thrilled by Walker’s ruling, “which brings us one step closer to the beginning of a federal trial where we will be able to prove the unconstitutionality of Prop. 8.”

Cooper said he, too, would be ready to address the issues Walker outlined, though he declined to comment on the grilling by the judge.

“We all heard it, and we haven’t had the benefit of reviewing it,” he said.

Andy Pugno, general counsel to the coalition of religious and social conservative groups behind Proposition 8, said that after losing the election, supporters of same-sex marriage were trying to persuade the judge to substitute their views for those expressed by voters.

“What really is happening is the voters who passed Proposition 8 are essentially on trial in this case, and they continue to be accused of being irrational and bigoted for restoring the traditional definition of marriage,” he said.

Read Full Post »

All I can say is WOW.

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, the country’s most powerful Mormon politician, criticized his own church during a meeting with gay-rights activists, reportedly scolding Mormon leaders for supporting the ban on same-sex marriage in California.

The Salt Lake Tribune reported that Reid brought up the topic last week during a meeting in his office with organizers of the National Equality March, held over the weekend in Washington, D.C.

One participant told the newspaper that Reid said the decision by The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints to support the successful Proposition 8 ballot measure in California last year was a “waste of church resources and good will.” Another said Reid made clear that he “felt it was harmful for the church to focus on such a divisive issue.”

Though the church fought to support Proposition 8, with money and volunteers, just as it has fought other moves to legalize same-sex marriage, it is rare for the Nevada Democrat to comment on his own church’s political activity. Reid supported the gay rights march over the weekend.

Source

Read Full Post »

Time published an article titled “What Happens If You’re on the Gay ‘Enemies List.’” It’s relatively accurate.

The last paragraph, however, includes the clichéd response from the Yes on 8 campaign about the boycott-the-bigots movement. And it’s a cliché that is ridiculous, and I’m completely fed up with it being printed in news reports without it being immediately discounted. Here it is:

Meanwhile, lists of donors to Proposition 8, once trumpeted on the Yes on 8 Web site, have been taken down to protect individuals from harassment. “It’s really awful,” says Frank Schubert, campaign manager for Yes on Proposition 8. “No matter what you think of Proposition 8, we ought to respect people’s right to participate in the political process. It strikes me as quite ironic that a group of people who demand tolerance and who claim to be for civil rights are so willing to be intolerant and trample on other people’s civil rights.”

Schubert is a liar and a bigot, and obviously, he’s a hypocrite. Let’s take this apart.

“It’s really awful.”

What is awful? That your supporters have to face ramifications for their political acts? That they spent money on a campaign that demonized and lied about gays and lesbians and now gays and lesbians are angry with them? That majority rule does not mean that the majority can force a minority to shut up? (That the majority rules doesn’t even exist, since we live in a constitutional republic, not a direct democracy?) What did you expect to happen when you stripped a minority group of their rights? That we would crawl back into our closets? Frank Schubert, you’re an idiot.

“No matter what you think of Proposition 8, we ought to respect people’s right to participate in the political process.”

We are respecting their rights. They have every right to give money to a hate group. And we have every right to publicize this fact, to ask people not to patronize their businesses, and to protest their actions in legal and peaceful ways. It is rich that Schubert would bringing up “respect” for “rights,” after his organization stripped the rights of people he clearly has no respect for. Frank Schubert, you’re an idiot.

“It strikes me as quite ironic that a group of people who demand tolerance and who claim to be for civil rights are so willing to be intolerant and trample on other people’s civil rights.”

Intolerant? Tolerance does not mean lying down in the street and being run over by trucks. Tolerance is live and let live. It is respect for the beliefs and private actions of others. I am tolerant of Mormons practicing in their church. I am tolerant of my relatives who believe that the Bible does not support my marriage to another man. But the moment that the group I am tolerant of tries to strip me of my rights, spreads lies about me on TV, the radio, and the Internet, and enters the public sphere and tries to make me a second-class citizen, tolerance is irrelevant…

Because I will not simply lay down in the street and have you walk all over me time and time again, I will stand the fuck up and literally tear apart.

Read Full Post »

BUY PEPSI PEOPLE!

Churchgoers in Florida have launched a campaign to boycott Pepsi for its support of gay rights, including its donations to the fight against Proposition 8.

<!– videos aren't worked out yet this is Phase 2

May be a screen capture JPG that links to the video player, or an embedded video from an external source like YouTube.com
May be a screen capture JPG that links to the video player, or an embedded video from an external source like YouTube.com

–>

Churchgoers in Tampa Bay, Fla., are being urged to boycott Pepsi to protest the corporation’s donations to gay advocacy organizations and “acceptance of the homosexual lifestyle.”

Terry Kemple, president of the Community Issues Council, a right-wing Christian activist organization, wants to send a retaliatory message to Pepsi and its subsidiaries, which include Gatorade, Tropicana, Frito-Lay, and Quaker, according to WTSP-TV .

“[Kemple] said the company donated more than a million dollars to organizations that fought California’s gay marriage–banning Proposition 8,” reported WTSP-TV. “He also says the Pepsi Corporation has sponsored gay pride events and commercials that accept cross-dressing and homosexuality.”

Kemple reportedly also convinced his megachurch, the Bell Shoals Baptist Church, to remove its 10 Pepsi machines and replace them with vending machines from Coke.

Nadine Smith, the executive director of Equality Florida, called the boycott “offensive” and “embarrassing,” noting that Coke, like Pepsi, supports full equality.

Source

Read Full Post »

Older Posts »