Comments on: More important than tea parties http://neworleans.metblogs.com/2009/05/11/more-important-than-tea-parties/ Thu, 26 Jan 2012 16:09:23 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1 By: Laureen Lentz http://neworleans.metblogs.com/2009/05/11/more-important-than-tea-parties/comment-page-1/#comment-14864 Laureen Lentz Tue, 12 May 2009 23:24:43 +0000 http://neworleans.metblogs.com/?p=2653#comment-14864 In my Moot Court class this year, we covered a case based on this very topic. It is disturbing, Richard, I agree, that some legislators are using the adoption issue in an attempt to put the skids on the gay-marriage movement. I was really glad we had a such a great case to work on in our class. I had to do my orals on the State's side, and it was hard to create a solid arguement from the State's standpoint. But, I was very relieved that I was assigned the Plaintiff's side for my brief on behalf of the G/L parents. I learned so much about this hot topic. First, there is no documented research that shows children raised in G/L homes have any different outcomes than those raised in heterosexual homes. Second, many of these states with such legislation do permit single gays to adopt but NOT same-sex couples. This contradiction makes absolutely no sense except to show that such efforts are aimed at discriminating against marriage between same-sex gay couples. It's the kids who are the most at risk with this f'd up strategy coming from the far-right wingers' fueled by their fear of same-sex marriage. Good post! I find it embarrassing to live in the states who are attempting to pass this type of short-sighted, anti-family legislation. This particular legislative effort obviously comes as a response to a recent court order which dictated that Louisiana must issue birth certificates updated to reflect the adoptive parents' information, regardless of their sexual orientation. That case is found here: http://www.lambdalegal.org/our-work/in-court/cases/adar-v-smith.html. There is hope that things continue to go in the left direction regarding this issue. Discrimination regarding sexual orientation is the core issue and homosexuals are not a protected class under the Equal Protection Clause of 14th Amendment. However, the significance of the Iowa Supreme Court ruling this past week recognizing same-sex marriage is important because not only did the court rule in favor of same-sex marriage unanimously, but the court's opinion mentions that same-sex legislation deserves "strict scrutiny" regarding its existence as purely discriminatory regarding sexual orientation. This is a big breakthrough. Camille Taylor, lead counsel on the case, Varnum v. Brien, explains it nicely here: http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=103848870 In my Moot Court class this year, we covered a case based on this very topic. It is disturbing, Richard, I agree, that some legislators are using the adoption issue in an attempt to put the skids on the gay-marriage movement. I was really glad we had a such a great case to work on in our class. I had to do my orals on the State’s side, and it was hard to create a solid arguement from the State’s standpoint. But, I was very relieved that I was assigned the Plaintiff’s side for my brief on behalf of the G/L parents. I learned so much about this hot topic.

First, there is no documented research that shows children raised in G/L homes have any different outcomes than those raised in heterosexual homes. Second, many of these states with such legislation do permit single gays to adopt but NOT same-sex couples. This contradiction makes absolutely no sense except to show that such efforts are aimed at discriminating against marriage between same-sex gay couples. It’s the kids who are the most at risk with this f’d up strategy coming from the far-right wingers’ fueled by their fear of same-sex marriage.

Good post! I find it embarrassing to live in the states who are attempting to pass this type of short-sighted, anti-family legislation.

This particular legislative effort obviously comes as a response to a recent court order which dictated that Louisiana must issue birth certificates updated to reflect the adoptive parents’ information, regardless of their sexual orientation. That case is found here:
http://www.lambdalegal.org/our-work/in-court/cases/adar-v-smith.html.

There is hope that things continue to go in the left direction regarding this issue. Discrimination regarding sexual orientation is the core issue and homosexuals are not a protected class under the Equal Protection Clause of 14th Amendment. However, the significance of the Iowa Supreme Court ruling this past week recognizing same-sex marriage is important because not only did the court rule in favor of same-sex marriage unanimously, but the court’s opinion mentions that same-sex legislation deserves "strict scrutiny" regarding its existence as purely discriminatory regarding sexual orientation. This is a big breakthrough.

Camille Taylor, lead counsel on the case, Varnum v. Brien, explains it nicely here:
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=103848870

]]> By: gentillygirl http://neworleans.metblogs.com/2009/05/11/more-important-than-tea-parties/comment-page-1/#comment-14863 gentillygirl Tue, 12 May 2009 07:53:28 +0000 http://neworleans.metblogs.com/?p=2653#comment-14863 Asshat? Darlin' he's a fuckmook, and there are punishments for that. (like tar & feathering and a one-way trip to Tejas. Asshat? Darlin’ he’s a fuckmook, and there are punishments for that. (like tar & feathering and a one-way trip to Tejas.

]]>