Tuesday, August 30, 2011

Another GOP Signs Anti Gay Marriage Bill... WTF?!

Rick Perry GOP Candidate for 2012 Presidential nomination has signed a pledge banning gay marriage. This is contrary to what he told Colorado in reference to New York, "That's New York, and that's their business, that's fine with me." He already has claimed he would leave gay marriage up to the states, but when confronted by the National Organization for Marriage to sign the pledge, to gain votes he signed it. Already turning into a politician, says one thing than signs another. Obviously NONE OF HIS CAMPAIGN PROMISES are true. Rick you might as well just shit on our economy, foreign policy, health care, etc. You disgust me to a maximum degree. Yet as you can see by the picture (truly an appropriate one) he can handle a phallic symbol like a champion. Sorry Perry, but I could have been nice about the graphics, but you left me no choice. Take a bite of it you dick, don't deep throat.

GOP candidates to also to sign Anti-Gay pledges include the likes of Minnesota Congress Woman Michele Bachmann, Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney, and former Pennsylvania Senator Rick Santorum. While former Utah Governor Jon Huntsman Jr. and my personal favorite Ron Paul has not and is not signing any pledges.

I recently posted a video from a debate in which Ron Paul said "to create and amendment against gay marriage is absolutely unnecessary, and if you believe in federalism you will leave it up to the states." He's absolutely right, these anti-gay "pro-family" groups complain they don't want our gay marriages shoved down their throat, much unlike Perry hoping that corn dog was actually Michele Bachmann's husband's penis. Well we don't want to shove our marriages down your throat, but our state might not agree with your state. If our state says let them be married, then we should be allowed to be married. Otherwise, you might as well just kiss the jobs of all Governors and Attorney Generals appointed to each state. They are here to serve as our voices, you are taking away the constitutional responsibilities delegated to them by vote of the people.

I learned about this anti-gay pledge from a tweet I saw leading me to the article at http://www.boston.com/Boston/politicalintelligence/2011/08/perry-signs-anti-gay-marriage-pledge/sGqX6Ir6FL4HZwyOQSzvKN/index.html">Boston.com. This is what the pledge includes...
The pledge commits a candidate to support a federal constitutional amendment defining marriage as between one man and one woman, defend the Defense of Marriage Act in court, appoint judicial nominees and an attorney general who would reject a constitutional right to gay marriage, establish a commission to investigate harassment of anti-gay marriage donors or organizers, and let the people of Washington, D.C., vote on gay marriage.
Don't let these hateful candidates run our country, next they will be revoking the rights of Non-Whites and Women. Soon if you are not Evangelical Christian you will be breaking the law. This will also appoint Judges that are Partial and will not serve up Justice, instead they will serve up the Personal Vendetta's of these fundamentalists.

Also found in this article Brian Brown, president of NOM, said by signing this pledge, "Perry makes crystal clear that, contrary to the conventional wisdom, Gay Marriage is going to be a bigger issue in 2012 than it was in 2008, because the difference between the GOP nominee and President Obama is going to be large and clear."

So to you Rick Perry I have one thing to say, go fuck yourself (with that corn dog).

Monday, August 29, 2011


I want to show you a reenactment of the Prop8 original trial showing the interview of Kristin Matthews Perry. Marisa Tomei and Josh Lucas did a great job on this reenactment. From inside the court today, if you followed AFER online, you saw the live updates from moment to moment inside that courtroom today. This was for the release of the original Prop8 Trial Video tapes being released. Judge James Ware presided over this case today as he did over the trial for Proponents of Prop8 requesting to vacate the decision made my Judge Vaughn Walker because he was gay and in a long term relationship. (Keep in mind unsatisfied with Judge James Ware's decision to not vacate Walker's decision, Proponents of Prop8 then seeked to Vacate Judge James Ware's decision. Once again proving they will stop at nothing to spread hate through our Golden State).

Now before I continue I want to say thank you very much to AFER (American Foundation for Equal Rights), Courage Campaign, the Legal Team (opposing and fighting prop 8), and most of all Kristin Perry and Sandy Steir for fighting not only for themselves but for all of the LGBT community. If it weren't for you two amazing women, we wouldn't be as close as we are to ending PropH8.

The request by Proponents of Prop H8 to seal the video tapes from the original Prop 8 trial Perry vs. Schwarzenegger (now Perry vs. Brown) was to protect the identities of their key "witnesses" in the original trial, fearing that they would be harassed for their support. These two men are Kenneth P. Miller an academic who is used to public speaking, and David Blankenhorn the founder and President of the Institute for American Values (a nonprofit organization dedicated to promoting traditional family values).

Obviously this request is that of a lame attempt not to look stupid to the public, if the public were to be granted the right to see the trial that found Prop 8 as unconstitutional. These two guys are strong Proponents for Prop 8, and Blankenhorn I have to say is a complete ass for naming his organization "American Values" first of all, I am an American, and my values and his values are different. I believe every family should be a home. I believe a family's foundation should be strictly based on love and care. I believe every child deserves a strong set of parents no matter what their sex is, as long as the parents provide them with everything that they need from food in their bellies, to close on their back, to a roof over their head. To me that is what Family is.

Before the Prop 8 trial was originally heard the U.S. Supreme Court accepted these arguments and prohibited the LIVE BROADCASTING of the trial. They would not allow it to be broadcast on TV or online. Only to ensure that the witnesses mentioned before would not feel so intimidated that they would not appear before the courts in the future. Judge Vaughn Walker however did record digital copies of the case which was not technically prohibited by the U.S. Supreme Court. Judge Vaughn Walkers reason for recording this case was that of a good one, to ensure the faith of the public in the Judicial system. I agree, as a gay man, fighting for marriage, I feel that the case that directly relates to my rights or future rights I should have full access to, so my "rights" aren't left in the dark.

This following quote is from LA Times also posted on the AFER website.
Still, the U.S. District Court should now allow the videos to be broadcast. There has never been any real evidence of potential danger to the witnesses. With the trial over, any procedural issues about last-minute changes are moot. California’s ban on same-sex marriage is a matter of extraordinary public interest, and the discussion that took place during the trial would strengthen public understanding. People would see Blankenhorn, though an opponent of same-sex marriage, testify that the United States would be more American on the day such marriages became legal. They would see Miller, hired by supporters of Proposition 8, say that prejudice played a role in its passage. And whatever viewers chose as the take-home message from the trial, they would be more deeply informed about the debate.
The importance of these videos being released is for all of us to know and be reassured that our Judicial system is providing exactly what it is meant to, Justice! We all have a right to know what is going on behind the scenes in the court room. Thank the Lord for twitter as I was able to follow step by step the trial that took place at 9am today. If you would like to be able to see these behind the scene tweets for this and future cases related to Prop 8 trial, be sure to follow @ AFER on twitter.

Also stay tuned, if you do have the California Channel through your cable provider, you will be able to watch the U.S. Supreme Court hearing on whether or not the Proponents for Prop 8 have any standing in the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals. Or if your service provider does not offer that channel you will be able to watch the live webcast via TheCaliforniaChannel.com .

If you are not gay, ask yourself. If these extremist can go as far as attempting at taking rights away from Gays, who is next? Non-Christians? Teachers? Healthcare Providers? Women? Children? Elderly? No one is safe if we don't fight these people off.

Wednesday, August 10, 2011

Concerning the previous post...

I know all of you are shocked that I didn't send my support for Republican Candidate Fred Karger, seeing how he is openly gay. I do support what he is doing, yet the chances of him actually obtaining presidency are very very low. About slim to none, actually. He is constantly fighting for gay rights which of course I appreciate a lot. Yet, the fact of the matter is, he has not been and is not being invited to any Republican debate, I'm guessing its primarily because he is gay. I signed the petition to allow him to participate in these debates and I believe he only needs a few more votes. Please get involved with all of the organizations on your top right, sign up with them and you will get daily emails (they are not an annoying abundance) for petitions you can electronically sign to help make a change in this world, by starting with this country.

Again, my support is going for Ron Paul. I was hoping he would take the Republican nom back in 2008, the country wasn't ready for him then. This country has progressed significantly in the last 4 years so we will hopefully see him with a fighting chance. Please everyone visit RonPaul2012.com and show your support. Be sure to check out what his views are so you know if hes the right candidate for you.

One little piece of advice, if you find that one of ten views do not match your own, it doesn't mean they are not the choice for you. They still may be the best of the best for your own needs. He doesn't comment on same-sex marriage on his website because he feels attacking it is not a priority and that their are other priorities to be dealt with first. He does touch on Pro-Life, and I am too to an extent, I don't believe in outlawing abortions but I do believe on limiting them as to not make them a form of birth control (it costs the government a lot of money). It should be prescribed.

Okay ladies and germs, I'm off to work for the day. Its time to go cut/color/style some hair, try to help this world a more beautiful place to the eye, if only it worked to make this world a better place as a whole... peace out boy/girl scouts.

Tuesday, August 9, 2011


Have you heard Christian fundamentalists believe that the First Amendment is reserved for them only?

Did you hear 2012 Presidential Candidate Rick Perry organized a Prayer Rally for fundamentalist Christians that exceeded 30,000 attendees? Far more than any event staged by the announced Republican presidential contenders?

Rick Perry has followed in the footsteps of those like Michele Bachmann, Mitt Romney, and Tim Pawlenty, and Mitch Daniels. Just another one of the Republican presidential candidates for the 2012 election to make RELIGION their number one drive and force behind their campaign to gain favor and votes.

These four have all promised and made it a top priority to ban gay marriage nationally. Even in the states that have voted it legal. Some even signed a vow stating that gay is a choice and the legal rights of gays will be revoked or further hindered.

So you four, further putting off full equality of civil liberty and human rights is your biggest goal, aside from all Tea Party candidates jumping on board and holding USA hostage so that OBAMA will agree to your terms on our debt ceiling issue we have been facing? Foreign Policy, Repairing the Economy, Social Security, Health, etc... are not your top priorities. "Protecting Families" however is a top priority, pardon my language but "WHAT THE FUCK ARE YOU PROTECTING THEM FROM, HUH?" With this war parents (heterosexual parents) are losing their children in a war that is not our own, families are ending up on the streets and starving because this economy has tanked so much, social security is becoming obsolete to the point these already starving families now have to take on their extended family (the grandparents) financially, and the health is ridiculous considering more than 50% of this country is obese and overweight. Your idea of protecting families will pull perfectly healthy ones apart.

The Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) has recently ended up in bankruptcy court. DOMA was enacted back in 1993 by President Bill Clinton. It has been 18 years that DOMA has been around and according to both President Bill Clinton and the architect of DOMA former Georgia Rep. Bob Barr, DOMA has done no good. In fact many of the ANTI SAME-SEX MARRIAGE supporters claim they "don't want their taxes paying for the perversions of others." Okay, so they would rather "their taxes" go to an Act that does nothing, 18 years of their taxes, and eventually go into bankruptcy? Obviously these people that support ANTI SAME-SEX MARRIAGE are not very smart with their finances, and these are the people that the Republican Presidential Candidates are trying to appeal to. So with our country being in debt to a point of almost having to claim bankruptcy itself we are going to choose someone who supports an act that has been wasting tax payers dollars for 18 years. In fact, an act that has been taking taxes from the hard working American LGBT community and funneling it into DOMA which withholds our own rights???

Recently during the Repeal of DOMA to be replaced by RFMA (respect for marriage act) which was shot down by no other than these same Republicans that have been wasting our money on it.... anyway sidetracked sorry. Recently during the repeal of DOMA former Georgia Rep. Bob Barr wrote an editorial in Los Angeles Times calling to repeal DOMA.

I've wrestled with this issue for the last several years and come to the conclusion that DOMA is not working out as planned. In testifying before Congress against a federal marriage amendment, and more recently while making my case to skeptical Libertarians as to why I was worthy of their support as their party's presidential nominee, I have concluded that DOMA is neither meeting the principles of federalism it was supposed to, nor is its impact limited to federal law.

In effect, DOMA's language reflects one-way federalism: It protects only those states that don't want to accept a same-sex marriage granted by another state. Moreover, the heterosexual definition of marriage for purposes of federal laws -- including, immigration, Social Security survivor rights and veteran's benefits -- has become a de facto club used to limit, if not thwart, the ability of a state to choose to recognize same-sex unions.

Even more so now than in 1996, I believe we need to reduce federal power over the lives of the citizenry and over the prerogatives of the states. It truly is time to get the federal government out of the marriage business. In law and policy, such decisions should be left to the people themselves.

In 2006, when then-Sen. Obama voted against the Federal Marriage Amendment, he said, "Decisions about marriage should be left to the states." He was right then; and as I have come to realize, he is right now in concluding that DOMA has to go. If one truly believes in federalism and the primacy of state government over the federal, DOMA is simply incompatible with those notions.

Moving on....

If you are going to vote for any Republican, which contrary to what this article has lead you to believe so far... I would like to. Actually, a fiscally conservative socially progressive Republican would be a breath of fresh air. Anyhow, you are going to vote for any Republican this 2012 the nom's should be either Jon Huntsman Jr. or Ron Paul.

Jon Huntsman Jr. first off has more experience with Foreign Policy than any other Republican presidential candidate, not to mention with us being financially owned by China, him working for the White House as the Ambassador to China isn't a bad attribute for his campaign to exude or his presidency if he is to gain it. China trusts him and they'll trust us. Same-sex marriage is the least of his concerns, and he endorses Civil Unions for same-sex couples, which is a start. He actually leans more towards the typical Republican voter on that subject than say someone like Mitt Romney, Mitch Daniels, Michele Bachmann, Tim Pawlenty, and Rick Perry. Jon Huntsman Jr.'s has three big hurdles to overcome to get the Presidential nomination. His work with the Obama administration being one of them, the fact that he's Mormon being another, and his acceptance of gay rights (though limited acceptance).

A BETTER CHOICE, would have to be RON PAUL, I've been wanting RON PAUL in office FOREVER!!!! You guys have no idea, his views are real, he's to the point, he's a realist not a selfish asshole. Here is a clips on his beliefs of gay marriage, if you would like to know more about RON PAUL visit his website www.RonPaul2012.com

All I am saying that if a presidential candidate wants to run this country maybe they should try by not totally distorting what the country prides itself on like liberty and justice. Nothing about discrimination is justice, nothing about Tyranny is justice. We are progressive we set the bar.

You want to save our asses in debt, here is an idea... pull all troops out of any "war" we are having. Bring our troops home. The cost of them being over seas is killing our national wallet. We have yet to have any type of major attack and have had maybe one small attempt at that on our own shores. Let us fight from our shores. I understand it is our duties to help others that can not help themselves, but what happens when we can't help ourselves who is going to save us? No one, we will not be saved... we will be owned. This will not and can not happen. Bring our troops home and watch it fix our problems....

Look its like this a friend comes to you and says, "I'm in a lot of trouble I need you to loan me $20,000," you look to your friend and say, "I'm sorry buddy, I can't help you. I don't have $20,000, if I did have it I would definitely help you, but seeing that I don't it is absolutely IMPOSSIBLE for me to help you."
These other countries we are fighting wars in are our friends asking us for something we don't have, some of them aren't even asking for us, and half the time those we are helping do not want us there nor do they want our help. Lets pull our troops out and bring them home. We'll save money, get back to our financial success in NO TIME and the world will be a better place.

Anyway guys, thank you all for reading this, I love you all.


Saturday, August 6, 2011

PROP 8 UPDATE! oh and some other news...

Mark your calendars, ladies and gentleman, history is in the making. Tuesday, September 06th, 2011 @ 10:00am The US Supreme Court in San Francisco will be hearing the proposed question on the prop 8 case. The question is (if you haven't been following) Do the proponents for Prop 8, or as I like to call it Prop H8, have the right to defend it when State Officials have declined to do so? Well, lets discuss exactly what that means...

When a specific party funds and creates an initiative to be placed on a ballot there are some steps they have to go through. They must write up the proposition, gain signatures (basically petition) to have the proposition recognized otherwise anyone would just put random ass laws on the bill. They also have to go through some officials themselves, once they have passed the bill on after completing all requirements including funding, the bill is then out of their hands. It moves on to the state officials, its placed on the ballot and left up to the people.

Here is a problem with the campaign they set forth before the vote to ban gay marriage in California, they lied. Not only did they use images of children without the consent of the parents (who were outraged), but they made the Proposition so confusing many people voted Yes on Prop 8 thinking it was "protecting marriage" as in keeping all marriage alive. I recently spoke with a co-worker of mine who voted yes and she said she thought she was voting for gay marriage and now that she realizes what she did she's kind of pissed and feels extremely horrible for being a contributing vote to the discrimination that is now and has been law. Misleading was inevitable considering you have these so-called Christian "Extremists" heading these campaigns.

Back to the main topic.

After, now retired, Judge Vaughn Walker declared/ruled Prop 8 as unconstitutional, ProtectMarriage.com appealed the ruling sending it straight to the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals. They plead their case and the 9th Circuit came to the conclusion that further clarification of initiative representation law was needed so they passed the case Perry vs. Brown (then Perry vs. Schwarzenegger) on to the US Supreme Court. In the time waiting between then and what is soon to be now (less than one month, yay) the proponents for Prop 8 appealed Judge Vaughn Walker's ruling claiming that Judge Vaughn Walker should have recused himself or at least announced that he was gay and in an 11 year relationship. The case went to Judge James Ware, Walker's successor, who ruled against the appeal. As a result proponents for Prop 8 appealed his ruling... they also requested that Walker surrenders the video recording of the case Walker presided over ruling Prop 8 as unconstitutional. They did not want these videos seen because it will clearly show how weak their case was that Vaughn Walker ruled on without bias. You can sign an open letter to Judge James Ware here @ AFER to have the video tapes from the case released to the public.

ProtectMarriage.com jumped on the appeal process at first chance, long before then Governor Schwarzenegger or Attorney General now Governor Brown declined to appeal Vaughn Walker's ruling. Later after Gov. Brown was elected into office along with now Attorney General Kamala Harris, they too both declined to appeal Walker's ruling. Being that the Gov and Attorney General of the state are both elected officials, sworn into be the voice of the people, they are to represent the people if they choose to do so against a law that is challenged, when they decline no one else should be allowed to appeal. This needed further clarification to the 3 judge panel of the 9th Circuit, ergo forwarding the case to US Supreme Court.

Prop Haters (as we will refer to Prop 8's proponents from this point on) even went before a 5 party panel in the state to have a bill voted in allowing sponsors of ballot measures to be allowed to represent the initiative once enacted upon appeal. This to me says they too know they are not allowed to and are trying to be sure they are allowed to before it got to the US Supreme Court. They were out-voted 3-2.

So these are all the desperate stops that Prop Haters have pulled:
- Appealed before the State officials even had a chance to, possibly without the right to appeal
- Requested that Judge Vaughn Walker's ruling be thrown out because he is gay
- Requested the video tapes from the November case to be never available to the public
- Requested and lost a vote to allowing anyone proposing a bill to defend it other than state officials and lost
- Appealed Judge James Ware's ruling on not tossing Walker's ruling out

Do you see a pattern here? They are doing everything they can to fight this... I mean you got to give them a little credit, they got a spark. Problem for them is, we are a blazing inferno (a flaming joke could be made, but I don't agree with that kind of humor so if you comment keep it off the comments).

With this case now going into US Supreme Court, Atty Gen. Kamala Harris submitted an Amicus Brief on the case stating in more or less words that the question is do they have a right to appeal/defend this case in the event that the State Officials failed to do so and her answer to the question is "No, they don't. " Allowing them to would, "undermine the constitutional responsibilities delegated to the Governor and Attorney General."

So this is what it all boils down to, if the US Supreme Court rules that proponents of Proposition 8 have no standing then same-sex marriage could very much become legal. First the case will be sent back to the 9th Circuit after The US Supreme Courts ruling has been made, and the 9th Circuit may question the Supreme Court more if they choose to do so. This could have been a process that took up until 2014 to be worked out. It seems now this will all be figured out in a timely manner. We should also be appreciative that US Supreme Court has made sure to hear the case first before any other. Lets hold confidence in our US Supreme Court to make the right decision.

"I don't believe that marriage is between man and woman, but between life and love." - Frank Ocean (you should all by his new album, its amazing).


(you may find another similar article with a little bit more information on this subject here at www.Care2.com