Friday, January 15, 2010

Supreme Idiocy

     The Supreme Court has ruled 5-4 that the Perry vs. Shwarzenegger proceedings will not be viewable to the public or to people in other designated federal court houses.

     The San Francisco Chronicle reports:
     The ruling was issued by Chief Justice John Roberts and Justices Antonin Scalia, Clarence Thomas, Anthony Kennedy and Samuel Alito.
     The dissenters were the court's more liberal members, Justices Stephen Breyer, John Paul Stevens, Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Sonia Sotomayor.
     Breyer, writing for the dissenters, said the public had ample opportunity to comment, there was no evidence that witnesses would be harmed, and those outside the courthouse were losing an opportunity to view a trial of "great public interest."
     Walker had ordered the trial telecast live to the regional appeals court's headquarters at Seventh and Mission streets in San Francisco and courthouses in Pasadena, Seattle, Portland, Ore., and Brooklyn, N.Y.
     Wednesday's ruling means the only place people can watch the case on TV is in a 19th floor conference room at the Golden Gate Avenue courthouse that seats about 150. Thirty-six seats are available to the public for the trial itself in Walker's courtroom on the 17th floor.
     It's no big surprise the way the court split, and not a good sign for when this case is appealed to the Supreme Court.  So, if you are one of the lucky thirty-six, who live in San Francisco with the ability to get into a seat at the courthouse, please let us know what's going on.

     Here is the link to a site where you can follow the latest happenings of the trial: Prop 8 Trial Tracker

     My friend Geoff Farrow posted in-depth on the reasons why the Yes on 8 side doesn't want the trial public.  Simply, they don't want the public to hear that Yes on 8 lied to them in their ads.  The lies that worked were just a recycling on the lies Anita Bryant used: that gays are pedophiles and that tolerance of gays will lead to gays being role models, and then they'll make your children gay.  Farrow responds:
     Homosexuals Are No More Likely to Sexually Abuse Children Than Heterosexuals.
     · In fact, gays and lesbians may be less likely than heterosexuals to sexually abuse children. Two studies that examined the sexual orientation of child molesters found that less than one percent, in one study, and zero percent, in the other, were lesbian or gay.
     · About four of every five cases of child sexual abuse reported to child protection authorities involve a girl who is abused. But because sexual abuse of boys is less likely to be reported, it is estimated that 1/4 to 1/3 of all sexually abused children are boys, while 2/3 to 3/4 are girls.1 Because most child molesters are men, (90 percent2), some have argued that “homosexual” child abuse is widespread and that homosexuals abuse children at a rate higher than their proportion of the general population, which is somewhere around 3 to 8 percent of the population. Such claims are based on the false belief that men who sexually abuse boys are homosexual. In fact, the overwhelming majority of men who sexually abuse children live their lives as heterosexual men.
   Farrow goes on:
     In testimony today and Monday, witnesses for the plaintiffs discussed a number of “Yes on 8” television ads and fliers which underscored the campaign slogan “Protect your children.”
     Even though both the California Teacher’s Association and the State Superintendent of Public Instruction made public statements that made it clear that these allegations by the “yes on Prop 8” forces, were untrue. My own bishop, John Steinbock, in his “pastoral letter” to the people of our dioceses falsely claimed that “children would be brainwashed.” These deliberate perpetuation of grossly untrue myths and stereotypes by the “yes on Prop 8” side were and are a lie. A lie which they, like Bryant before them, successfully used to deceive and cause unfounded fears in voters. Lies and fears which were used to strip countless same sex couples of the right to a civil marriage.
     I find it repugnant that religious leaders, such as Steinbock (who is known for protecting Father Eleuterio Ramos, the most prolific pedophile-priest in Orange County history), speak of gays "brainwashing" children, when that is exactly what he and others like him are doing with the myths they preach to children about their supposedly all-loving god, who is really a vindictive, fear-inspiring, and condemning version of themselves.  They preach lies in the name of truth.  Lies that will be confronted in the current trial.  Lies that they need to protect to keep the people in pews "brainwashed" as they see fit.

*Even if that priest stuck his ontologically changed penis down your eight-year-old's communion-receiving throat.

Not to point out the stereotypically obvious, but doesn't the lisp give him away immediately?