RECENT  POSTS:  » Riiiiiiight, FRC. And 'Desperate Housewives' is still TV's hot new show, too » After death do us part: Indignity of Idaho's marriage ban threatens lesbian veteran's final wishes » NOM's Chair to Oregon: We have a right to tell courts our personal, conservative Catholic opinions! » Nice try, anti-equality movement, but the lesbian 'throuple' story makes our argument, not yours » Jonah Goldberg can't see the hornets' nest for its hornets » Video: Male on mail » Jodie Foster in 2013: 'I am'; Jodie Foster in 2014: 'I do' » AFA promotes its new app in only way it knows how » Robert Oscar Lopez says I perform 'psychological operations routine' on him when I quote his own words from his own web site » Matt Barber's ever-classy site suggests gay people are literally crushing fellow humans  

« Go back a post || Return to G-A-Y homepage || Haul tail to next post »

05/20/2009

On Wed. we get Kris v. Adam. On Thurs, Equality vs Nasty Bias?

by Jeremy Hooper

A mix of optimism, police barricades that have gone up in the Castro, and a realization that the remaining days are dwindling has led many to assume that tomorrow, 5/21, is going to be the big Prop 8 decision day:

Word on the Street: Thursday May Be Prop 8 Decision Day! [Bay Area Indymedia]

So if true, what's the historical significance of the date? Well, as Tweeter @natthedem notes:

200905200807

Oy. If tomorrow is to be the day, here's hoping that (a) the court will buy into the enraging "marriage protection" defense much less than they bought the enraging "twinkie" one, and (b) both the ruling and the reaction will be far more peaceful than the '79 version. After all, everyone knows you're not supposed to put on White Nights before memorial day.

We'll learn tomorrow's CA Supreme Court schedule around 10AM (pacific time) today.

**UPDATE: Move on, nothing more to see here

space gay-comment gay-G-A-Y-post gay-email gay-writer-jeremy-hooper


Your thoughts

Ominous! In SF, the PD always puts up barricades for street fairs, and pride celebrations, and protests, and everything where there will be people in the streets. It's just to place a physical barrier between the vehicles on the streets and the revelers/rioters (god forbid). So, there isn't anything unusual (or particularly ominous) about the barricades.

Even an increased police presence in the city (which might be the next thing that we hear about) isn't necessarily an indication of how the court will rule. Unless, of course, if we see brigades of riot police suddenly appear in front of edifices of the certain nameless (shameless) religious institutions. But, even then, we might need to pay more attention to the direction in which those riot police are facing, rather than just the fact that they are there.

I think that prudence dictates that we should expect the worst, with the realization that the days of being relegated to second-class citizenship are numbered. But, hope for the best. As of today, very few (if any) outside of the inner circle of the Supreme Court know how they will rule. Whatever happens, we've come a long way, but we still have miles to go..

Posted by: Dick Mills | May 20, 2009 11:30:49 AM

y'all, PLEASE if the courts don't rule in our favor, let's not do anything counterproductive.

I know it's probably useless for me to ask but still . . .

Posted by: a. mcewen | May 20, 2009 11:51:54 AM

A. McEwen, I understand why you'd ask.

I hope, hope, hope that they're preparing for a mass celebration. I mean, we got Iowa, FFS! But I'd prepare for anything. Plus, as an 8-year-old girl I love recently asked her dad and stepdad, "This might be one of those places where people are mean to guys like you, right?"

Posted by: GreenEyedLilo | May 20, 2009 12:35:46 PM

At 10:08 I checked the supreme court website and there's no announcement. Looks like they're waiting till next week...

Posted by: Pomo | May 20, 2009 1:10:51 PM

comments powered by Disqus

G-A-Y Comments Policy


 
Related Posts with Thumbnails