Here is another round of relevant articles about Perry v. Schwarzenegger.
» MLK Day: An Opportunity for President Obama to Speak Out in Favor of Equal Rights by The Advocate’s Jon Barrett (Editor in Chief)
This article is not specifically about Proposition 8, but has particular significance this weekend. The Advocate’s Editor in Chief, Jon Barrett, uses this piece to challenge President Obama to do more to speak out for the equal rights of gay and lesbian Americans, particularly on the first Martin Luther King, Jr. day of his presidency. He points out Coretta Scott King’s passionate support of gay rights and emphasizes the importance of The Advocate’s recent provocative story (itself a worthwhile read!) on the Don’t Ask, Don’t Give campaign. Definitely an important critical look at Obama’s opportunity (and responsibility) to support gay rights.
» An Odd Couple Defends Couples That Some (Oddly) Find Odd by The NYT’s Maureen Dowd
In a rather lighthearted piece, Maureen Dowd talks about her recent conversation with Ted Olson and David Boies, co-counsel for the plaintiffs in the Prop 8 Trial. They talk about the challenges gays and lesbians experience with a sincerity and concern that speaks volumes of their commitment to the case. Boies also jumps at the opportunity to hold Obama accountable, and Dowd ends the piece by sharing her own concern:
Obama sees himself as such a huge change that he can be cautious about other societal changes. But what he doesn’t realize is that legalizing gay marriage is like electing a black president. Before you do it, it seems inconceivable. Once it’s done, you can’t remember what all the fuss was about.
» A Small World Getting Smaller: Rats Flee A Sinking Ship by P8TT’s Brian Leubitz
Reflecting on Fox News contributor Margaret Hoover’s decision to support marriage equality, Brian considers the long-term effects of the trial. Like the Scopes Monkey Trial did with evolution, this trial has the potential to shift the paradigm of how society thinks about homosexuality. For Republicans, this could be a “public relations nightmare.”
» Various Outlets Concerned About SCOTUS’s Motives
Two different articles today address concern about how the Supreme Court might be watching and considering the Prop 8 Trial.
The Los Angeles Times looks at the implications of Wednesday’s SCOTUS decision, concluding that the justices are “following this case closely,” “do not trust Walked to set fair rules for proceedings,” and “the majority has a distinct sympathy for the foes of same-sex marriage.” It’s definitely an interesting piece to consider.
Keen News Service: Supreme Court’s second move alarms gay legal activists
Lisa Keen expands on the concern from the LA Times piece by considering what’s at stake by the court’s decision to consider the Referendum 71 signatures case. Will marriage equality opponents convince the Supreme Court that they have valid concerns about harassment for the publicity of their views?
Lambda’s Pizer called the Supreme Court’s involvement in “extra-procedural micro meddling” over courtroom cameras and its decision to hear the Referendum 71 petitions dispute makes it “hard not to draw a bigger, bleaker conclusion” about the high court’s motives. In both cases, she said, anti-gay activists are making “absurd claims” in order to secure “special protection” from the government.
“Their claims would be comical,” said Pizer, “if they weren’t falling on such distressingly receptive high court ears.”
» Another Great Day of Snark from Protect Mawwiage
I wrote yesterday about a new twitter account that is raising some eyebrows. Here are some more fun tweets from the parody account “Protect Mawwiage“:
Warriors for the right bravely fought battle to hide from cameras and WON. Congrats to these patriots for bold courage and strength! #prop8
Waiting for @FoxNews to tell us who and what to be afraid of today!
» Science Education vs. Religion
A lot of Protect Mawwiage’s tweets have been making fun of religion, and I think with good reason. The comparisons to the Scopes Monkey Trial are right on: in this case, science is on trial. The defense is building a case on beliefs, tradition, and illogical thinking (demanding burdens of proof for negatives and accusing science of being “wrong”).
This image, courtesy of Saturday Morning Breakfast Cereal, demonstrates effectively what changes can be expected as our society learns how to better appreciate scientific literacy:
Remember, you can keep up and catch up with the trial at my Perry v. Schwarzenegger archive!