Tag Archives: gay marriage

Center for Arizona Policy ignores the biggest threat to “moms and dads” in denouncing same sex marriage ruling.

Crossposted from DemocraticDiva.com


The Supreme Court voted to legalize marriage equality in the entire United States and the God-botherers at the Center for Arizona Policy reacted with the all the subtlety you would expect.

Historically Tragic: Supreme Court says moms and dads are unnecessary
Friday, June 26, 2015
Statement from Center for Arizona Policy Vice President of Policy and General Counsel, Josh Kredit

PHOENIX – “Today’s U.S. Supreme Court decision is historically tragic. The High Court has disregarded the democratic process by stripping all Americans of their ability to debate and decide marriage policy.

What’s more, by throwing out the time-tested definition of marriage as only the union of one man and one woman, the Court has said that children don’t deserve the best opportunity to be raised by their mom and dad.

This isn’t the first time the Supreme Court has overstepped its role, and just like before, this will not be the final word on this issue. The U.S. Constitution is absolutely silent on the definition of marriage which makes it all the more egregious for five justices to brush aside the votes of tens of millions of voters throughout the country.

The U.S. Supreme Court can never change the fundamental truth that the lifelong union of one man and one woman is at the foundation of a strong state and nation. Center for Arizona Policy is committed to seeing this essential union strengthened and reaffirmed to secure a better future for generations to come.”

Continue reading

Court arguments reveal how misogyny is at the heart of opposition to marriage equality

equality corgis

Arizona and Texas are the latest states to be defending their same sex marriage bans in federal court. Things haven’t gone well for foes of equality lately, as foes of equality lose in state after state, most recently in Virginia. Attorneys in Arizona and Texas obviously see what’s coming and are resorting to desperately hiding behind children and slut-shaming.

Here are anti-equality attorneys in AZ arguing why same sex partners shouldn’t be allowed to marry:

Papers filed in federal court defending the ban say voters, in approving the constitutional amendment in 2008, are entitled to “define marriage for their community.’’ But the lawyers also are arguing to U.S. District Court Judge John Sedwick there’s a public purpose in the state getting into the business of regulating private relationships: Ensuring that children are, whenever possible, raised by a biological mother and biological father. Continue reading

Must see: Couples talk about what marriage means to them

Connolly v Roche is one of the lawsuits before the US District Court in Phoenix seeking to overturn Arizona’s ban on gay marriage. The plaintiffs are asking for a summary judgement and sent these videos of the plaintiff’s to the judge to convey how the ban makes life difficult and scary for committed couples who don’t have the rights to visitation, health care arrangements, child custody and care, etc., that straight couples simply take for granted. Attorneys for the plaintiffs have made the videos (which my honey Mark participated in the creation of) available to the public. Please share widely.

Here are Robin and Renee:

See the others here.

Gay retaliation: Will gay men marry straight women? (video)

by Pamela Powers Hannley

Gay marriage is now legal in a handful of US states, but many voters are opposed to marriage equality.

We know who those people are; they're the straight, white men who voted for another straight, white man in last week's election– rather than join President Obama's rainbow coalition. 

In retaliation for their resistance to marriage equality, gay men are laying down the gauntlet and challenging straight men: Support marriage equality or we'll start marrying your girlfriends.

Watch the compelling video after the jump.


McSally forces use SEO to hide from questions in Blog for Arizona story

Everything is on the Internet– including stories “they” don’t want you to find.

I researched my Martha McSally story over a few days before I posted this– Martha McSally: Warrior woman hides from questions, constituents, inconsistencies — on Sunday.

Consequently, I know what search results you get when you Google her name different ways, since I used the following search strings multiple times: “martha mcsally,” “martha mcsally gay,” “martha mcsally husband,”  “martha mcsally washington post” and “donald f henry.”

Before I posted the story debunking her feminist claims, debunking her denial of being a “cookie cutter” Republican candidate, revealing that she was afraid to meet with constitutents and answer questions, and calling for transparency related to accusations about a sham marriage while she was in the Air Force, one would get pages of Google results for any of the searches above. (Of course, in Google’s own quirky way, not all of the stories were relevant but many were. For the record, it looked as if Henry– her ex– had already been scrubbed from the Internet, except for a reference in an old Air Force magazine.)

Yesterday and today, when I Googled “martha mcsally,” it looked as if someone was trying to push my BfAZ story off of the first page of Google results. Now what you get — instead of news– is her campaign website (which always comes up first), but now it is followed by generic background like her Wikipedia entry, a link to her background, and a non-story based upon old comments related to burkas and the War on Women in the Middle East. Real news has been pushed down.

Yesterday, when I Googled “martha mcsally gay,” I got three entries– all old and referring to her anti-gay statements but not including the BfAZ story, which had been at the top of a string of links on Sunday and Monday.

Hmmm… Today– thanks to a new comment on that story– it’s on page one again.

McSally needs to stop playing games– like a  “cookie cutter” Republican would do– and answer the questions raised in that story. Why did she get married in Pima County in 1997 and then travel to Santa Cruz County at the end of 1999 to have the marriage annulled? Her lawyer’s office is two miles from the Pima County court. Why drive 90 miles? Did it have something to do with that promotion she got to Senator Jon Kyl’s office in 1999?

What is she hiding? (For images of the court documents and more background, go here.) We need to put pressure on McSally for a statement on these issues. It’s a matter of truthfulness, transparency, and integrity– values she says she stands for as a “warrior.”

Martha McSally: Warrior woman hides from questions, constituents, inconsistencies

If there were a race between Senator Jon Kyl and former Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords, who would you vote for?

The CD2 race is just that. Former Kyl employee Martha McSally is running against former Giffords employee Ron Barber.

Whose legacy would better serve Southern Arizona? That of a right-wing, anti-woman, every-man-for-himself, war-monger who never ventured south of his Tucson Foothills office or that of a reasoned, pro-choice, pro-public health Blue Dog who wasn’t afraid to meet constituents?

As a long-time resident of Giffords’ district, my experiences yesterday made up my mind. Yesterday, I thought I was going to meet the Warrior Woman who hopes to take the CD2 seat– you know, the one who says she “resemble[s] Gabby Giffords more than the man who worked for her”– but she was a no show.

McSally is no Gabby Giffords

Giffords was not afraid to face constituents and answer tough questions. McSally apparently doesn’t have the nerve to answer questions that are not softballs from right-wing commentators. (Sounds like something Jon Kyl would do, huh?)

I had a scheduled interview with McSally to discuss women’s issues (since she now claims to fight for women’s rights, while being anti-choice); the multiple inconsistencies in her platform (believing in the “sanctity of life”, while flying 325+ hours as a bomber) pilot; and rumors circulating about her two-year marriage to Donald Henry in 1997 (what’s up with that annulment in Santa Cruz County, when you were married and lived in Pima County).

When I showed up at her office, video gear in tow, I was given mush-mouth excuses from her press secretary and campaign manager. “Gosh, she’s so busy.” (My guess is they Googled me and said, Yikes– we’re not talking with her!)

Not surprised that McSally bailed on a video interview with a feminist who wanted to ask about women’s issues, I went to her constituent event at Nimbus, down the street. I waited with about 30 old white folks on the Nimbus patio for 45 minutes. Eventually, McSally staffers said, “Gosh… she’s so busy. She doesn’t have time to come and talk with you all today. Scheduling conflicts, you know… blah, blah, blah.” Since when does a politician in a tight race not have time for a meeting with rich, old white folks?   (Was it something I tweeted?)

More unanswered questions about Martha McSally after the jump.

Continue reading