Interracial Marriage

Five Republicans Now Endorse Gay Marriage: Slow Movement On Human Rights Issue!

Ronald 11 Comments

With the announcement of Alaska Republican Senator Lisa Murkowski this week that she supports gay marriage, it now make for five leading Republicans who have endorsed the idea.

Murkowski joins Ohio Senator Rob Portman and Illinois Senator Mark Kirk in backing an idea that nearly every one of the Democrats in the Senate have already endorsed.

Former Utah Governor, Ambassador to China, and GOP Presidential contender Jon Huntsman has also backed gay marriage, as has Florida Congresswoman Ileana Ros Lehtinen.

Young Republican groups are much more in support of gay marriage, and it will take many years for most elected Republicans to accept it, but gay marriage is becoming reality, and the GOP is behind on this issue, and that will affect elections into the long term future!

When one looks back in history 50 years from now, one will wonder why it took the GOP so long to endorse a basic human right that most Americans will see as ordinary, just as much as interracial marriage is now seen after nearly 50 years of its being upheld by the Supreme Court!

46th Anniversary Of Loving V. Virginia Supreme Court Case, And Still Racism Is Alive!

Ronald 24 Comments

In 1967, on this date, the Supreme Court declared interracial marriage constitutional, and yet even today, there are still 14 percent of the American people, in a poll, who deplore that people of different races may marry.

The answer is that we now have one of seven marriages as interracial, and if bigots do not like it, so be it, but the world is not going to bow to their hate and prejudice!

And the same thing needs to apply to gay marriage, which faces a Supreme Court test in the next two weeks!

Whatever the Supreme Court does by the end of June, gay marriage is here to stay, and if the bigots do not like it, who cares? It is none of their business whether two men or two women marry, any more than whether a man and woman of different races marry!

And since many of these bigots claim to be “good Christians” on both issues, they need to look in the mirror as to their religious beliefs, why in the name of Jesus Christ, a Jew, they feel a need to hate people because of their race or sexual orientation!

Momentous Supreme Court Month Coming Up: Gay Marriage, Affirmative Action, Voting Rights Act Cases To Be Decided

Ronald 1 Comment

The United States Supreme Court is entering its last month of the present session, and as usual, is leaving its most blockbuster decisions to the last weeks of its term.

Every June is momentous on the Supreme Court, as for instance, the upholding of the Obama Health Care Plan last June.

But this June is possibly more crucial when looking at history, as well as the issue of civil rights and civil liberties!

The most important cases are on Gay Marriage, Affirmative Action, and the Voting Rights Act of 1965.

With so much at stake, with 13 states having legalized gay marriage, and more to come in the next year, it would be wonderful if the Supreme Court went the whole distance, as it did in Loving V. Virginia on interracial marriage in 1967. It would be a major victory for civil rights and civil liberties, and stop the right wing attempt to fight gay marriage dead in its tracks! The hate mongering would go on, but if the Court ruled that two men or two women can be married, it could not be overcome by religious extremists by law!

Affirmative Action has been in effect since 1972, and remains highly controversial, but is now in danger or being ended as a method to promote the advancement of minority groups and women.

The Voting Rights Act, first passed in 1965, and renewed in 1982 and 2006, is now in danger of being curbed or ended, on the false basis that the record of Southern and other states on voting rights in the past no longer applies, but that leaves open the possibility of new voting rights violations in the future.

It is assumed that there are four votes on the Court to uphold all three cases–those of Ruth Bader Ginsberg, Stephen Breyer, Sonia Sotomayor, and Elana Kagan.

It is also assumed that three votes to prevent gay marriage and end affirmative action and the Voting Rights Act are certain–those of Antonin Scalia, Clarence Thomas, and Samuel Alito.

It would be a major surprise if any of these seven votes ended up differently.

The two “swing” votes are those of Chief Justice John Roberts, who has become somewhat unpredictable after, surprisingly, backing ObamaCare last June; and Associate Justice Anthony Kennedy, the true “swing” vote alone, since Sandra Day O’Connor left the Court seven years ago.

Will Kennedy side with the liberals on the Court on all three cases? It seems highly unlikely at this point, but a good bet on gay marriage at the least, but the Court could choose to decide that case in a very limited manner, not an all encompassing decision.

We shall see on all three cases very soon!

Top Three American Cities Now Have Jewish Mayors, A First, But Will New York City Elect Anthony Weiner To Succeed Michael Bloomberg In November?

Ronald Leave a comment

For the first time in American history, the top three cities in America will have Jewish Mayors.

We already had Mayor Michael Bloomberg of New York City, and Mayor Rahm Emanuel of Chicago, and now we have Mayor Elect Eric Garcetti of Los Angeles, who has a Jewish mother, and a fafher of Spanish, Italian, and Indigenous heritage, which is why his name does not sound Jewish! Garcetti will also be the youngest Mayor of Los Angeles, at age 42, in the past century.

However, Bloomberg is finishing up his third and last term, and the only Jewish candidate who could succeed him in the Mayoralty is former Congressman Anthony Weiner, who was forced to resign over his exposure of x rated pictures on the internet two years ago.

Weiner is attempting a comeback, and has $5 million in his bank account, plus name recognition, although a lot of it might be seen as negative, because of the sex scandal which brought him to resignation.

Is there redemption for Weiner, as there was for former South Carolina Governor Mark Sanford, who won back the former Congressional seat he held before he was Governor, and in the wake of his pursuit of a lover in Argentina, while married and having three sons?

It is hard to know at this point, as New York City can be a forgiving place, and has already as an announced candidate the Speaker of the City Council, Christine Quinn, a woman who is a declared lesbian and is married to her partner: and Bill De Blasio, the NYC Public Advocate, whose wife is African American, while De Blasio is white.

Certainly, there are some who would not like someone involved in a sex scandal; or a married lesbian; or a white guy married to a black woman! So there is plenty of room for outrage by people of different stripes, who do not like any or all of these situations.

But this is modern America, and NYC represents a microcosm of that America, and the issues of sex, sexual preference, and race will play out and, likely, elect one of these three individuals as the next Mayor of NYC, and if Weiner wins, again, we will have the top three cities in America with Jewish Mayors!

Gay Marriage Acceptable To Majority In New Washington Post-ABC News Poll

Ronald 22 Comments

It is now clear that the American people recognize that homosexuality is not a choice, but is the way some people are born,

58 percent of those polled thought gay marriage should be legalized, as compared to 36 percent who disagreed with the concept.. The numbers have almost exactly switched in the past ten years.

Among young people, support is at an all time high of 81 percent, with 50 percent of the elderly against it. And a small majority of Republicans and Independents under the age of 50 support gay marriage, although 70 percent of Republicans over the age of 65 oppose it, down from 80 percent.

Overall, 72 percent of Democrats, 62 percent of Independents, and 59 percent of Republicans support gay marriage.

Overall, 62 percent of all polled feel that the Supreme Court should decide the issue of gay marriage on a national level and based on the US Constitution, not allowing state by state, much like the Loving V. Virginia case on interracial marriage decided the issue nationally in 1967.

This week, what could be the most dynamic case of the Court in many years will be argued on the constitutionality of the Defense Of Marriage Act of 1996, and Proposition 8 of the state of California. The decision could transform American society in a dramatic way!

Hillary Clinton’s Endorsement Of Gay Marriage: What It Portends

Ronald 3 Comments

Former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton has finally endorsed gay marriage in a strong public statement, mirroring her husband’s statement that the Defense of Marriage Act, passed during his Presidency in 1996, was a mistake, and that it was time for it to be repealed.

Hillary Clinton has always been a strong supporter of gay rights, but avoided gay marriage until now.

The question is why, and there are three answers:

The Supreme Court is about to hear a case that could transform this nation on the subject of marriage, unlike anything since Loving V Virginia in 1967, which finally declared interracial marriage to be constitutional. Extra pressure on the Court at a time like this cannot help but possibly influence Justice Anthony Kennedy and Chief Justice John Roberts, either or both who could be the decisive votes on the case.

Many Democrats have endorse gay marriage, including President Obama, Vice President Joe Biden, and potential Democratic nominees for President, including Governor Andrew Cuomo of New York and Governor Martin O’Malley of Maryland, so if Hillary Clinton is soon to decide to run for President in 2016 she would, obviously, need to get into line on the issue.

Also, Hillary could be taking this step out of pure principle, and belief that the time is right for this significant social advancement.

No matter what the motivation, and it is probably all three, it is proper to salute Hillary Clinton for speaking up, once again, for human rights and human dignity!

Associate Justice Antonin Scalia Compares Gay Marriage To Murder! Totally Reprehensible!

Ronald Leave a comment

Supreme Court Associate Justice Antonin Scalia has never hidden his ideological agenda on the Court, any more than Associate Justice Clarence Thomas.

Both men, the most ideologically right wing of the past century, are clear in their prejudices and biases, and desire to bring America back to the 18th century, the time of the Founding Fathers, and the much promoted concept of both Justices known as “originalism”

The fact that the Founding Fathers included slave owners, treated women as second class citizens, and did not trust the masses of citizens so as to give them the vote for President or the US Senate, and limited the right to vote for white males to those who owned property in that time period, does not have any effect on either Scalia or Thomas.

If it was up to them, nothing would have changed, despite the fact that Italian Americans, such as Scalia, and African Americans, such as Thomas, were not considered human beings by most of the WASPS who dominated American government, and mistreated both ethnic groups well into the 20th century! The fact that Scalia is the first ever Italian American Justice, and that Thomas is the second ever African American Justice, seems not to have made them pause and realize the nature of progress and change!

So we know the narrow mindedness of both men, but to have Justice Scalia, who claims to be a great intellectual, and loves himself publicly, to compare gay marriage and gay rights to the horrors of murder, makes one think he is losing it completely, and needs to announce his retirement from the Court this coming June, after being in the hateful minority with Thomas on discrimination against a group, gay Americans, which has suffered more hate and prejudice than any other group in the history of the world, simply because of their sexuality, when that is none of anyone’s business!

If it is alright to have interracial marriage, or marriage between Catholics and Protestants, or Christians and Jews, all groups which have had to fight for their rights to marry, then it is alright to have two men or two women who love each other and wish to commit their lives to each other, to marry and have the benefits and security of marriage, and no prejudice, bias or hate should be allowed to get in the way of their commitment!

Scalia looked like a fool when answering the question of gay Princeton University freshman Duncan Hosie, who demonstrated great courage and dignity in his approach to Scalia, in front of a large audience.

No one is claiming that any person is free of prejudice and personal opinions, but it is totally inappropriate for a member of the Supreme Court to be so openly hostile and antagonistic as Scalia is on gay rights and gay marriage, and his behavior gives license to religious freaks and other hate mongers to continue to encourage actions and violence against gay Americans, and their and his behavior is therefore, morally reprehensible!

Momentous Day As Supreme Court Chooses To Pass Judgment On Gay Marriage!

Ronald Leave a comment

Today has been a very momentous day, as the United States Supreme Court has chosen to accept two cases on gay marriage, one involving the constitutionality of the Defense Of Marriage Act of 1996, and the other the validity of the passage of Proposition 8 in California, banning gay marriage.

This could be the blockbuster case of the present term, when it is decided in late June of 2013, after oral arguments in March.

This matter brings to mind the Loving V Virginia case of 1967, when the Supreme Court unanimously upheld the right of interracial couples to be able to marry, a very controversial and divisive case in the age of the Civil Rights Movement.

It should be pointed out that many Southerners and Christian religious leaders opposed interracial marriage bitterly, but once it was settled by the Supreme Court, the issue was moot.

The same opposition, heavily Southern and religiously based, is now vehemently against gay marriage, but the tides of history are going against a continuation of discrimination.

If gay marriage is accepted by the Court, after already being legal in nine states, no religious group would be required to marry a gay couple, but they could be married civilly by a judge or county clerk, or hire someone who is legally qualified to marry couples.

The belief is strong that the Court will rule at least 5-4, if not 6-3, for gay marriage rights, with the four Democratic appointments to the Court—Ruth Bader Ginsberg, Stephen Breyer, Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan—voting for the majority, along with Justice Anthony Kennedy, and possibly Chief Justice John Roberts.

Kennedy is the key vote, but since he supported the right of gays to privacy in the Lawrence V. Texas case in 2003, and was, indeed, the decisive fifth vote, it is believed he will take a step further in support of this major step forward.

Roberts is an unknown quantity, but after his surprising vote for ObamaCare in June, it is believed he might join the majority on this significant case.

So now, ten years later, it looks likely that the Court will have evolved further, and the right of anyone to marry who they love will be guaranteed as a basic civil right.

This is basic social justice, and a majority in public opinion polls, and particularly the younger generation, support gay marriage.

No one is saying that there cannot be people who oppose gay marriage, but society does not have the right to use their prejudices and religious views to deny basic human rights to others!

Social Advancements: Gay Marriage And Recreational Use Of Marijuana!

Ronald 2 Comments

Amazing social advancements occurred in yesterday’s election, and it will never be reversed, and will, instead spread rapidly nationwide!

Gay Marriage was approved by VOTERS in Maine and Maryland, and probably in Washington State, and Minnesota, while not allowing it , defeated a state constitutional amendment to ban it forever.

Also, Washington State and Colorado approved recreational use of marijuana in small amounts, if used at home, not in public places.

These are trends of the future, whether one likes it or not, as the point is that many people feel it is NONE of the government’s business to interfere with private life decisions!

One does not have to like the concept of gay marriage, but then many whites, particularly older ones, have a problem with racial intermarriage and integration, but the answer is “TOUGH”, as your dislike of change should not govern the lives of others! If you do not like interracial marriage or gay marriage, fine, don’t engage in it, but DO NOT use the argument of religion to interfere with others’ lives! This is a personal decision, not subject to religious viewpoints, and certainly, if churches or synagogues do not wish to engage in gay marriage ceremonies, that is their right!

As far as marijuana use for recreational purposes is concerned, this author has never smoked marijuana, but also has never smoked cigarettes nor has he ever been drunk from alcohol.

That is my personal choice, but since cigarettes and alcohol have been proved dangerous to one’s health a lot more than marijuana but are legal, there is no reason to arrest and imprison people for use of marijuana!

What liberals and progressives want is ECONOMIC regulation, not SOCIAL regulation, so kudos on the issues of gay marriage and recreational use of marijuana, and may it spread far and wide, and make the American people what they wish to be–free and in control of their own happiness!

NAACP Endorsement Of Gay Rights And Gay Marriage As Another Civil Rights Struggle: Major Victory!

Ronald Leave a comment

The leading, and most reputable, Civil Rights organization in America, the National Association For The Advancement Of Colored People (NAACP), has just endorsed gay rights and gay marriage as equivalent of another civil right, as much as the African American struggle for equality in the 1950s and 1960s.

This is a major victory for gay rights and gay marriage, and will help bring over many African Americans, who because of religious beliefs, have opposed such developments in California, North Carolina, and elsewhere, helping to cause defeats of referendums on the issue of gay marriage.

There were already signs of a beginning of a new attitude among blacks on the topic, and this will only help the progression toward something that will become more and more the norm over time, and in 40 years, we will look back with amazement at the opposition, just as was so with interracial marriage in the 1960s.

The “equal protection” clause of the 14th Amendment was utilized by the NAACP to justify their stand for gay marriage as a civil right.

This is the way that could be utilized in the future by the Supreme Court, and if a case came up in the short term, such as the California case pursued by Ted Olson and David Boies, the Court COULD rule in favor by a vote of 5-4,. assuming that Justice Anthony Kennedy, who made the majority in 2003 for gay privacy rights in Lawrence V. Texas, were to vote the same way.

One could say that Anthony Kennedy’s vote in 2003 had a great effect in spurring the rapid development of the gay rights movement in the intervening nine years from then to now!

So a Supreme Court endorsement of gay marriage could be in the offing sooner, rather than later!