IntenseDebate

9 years ago @ Equality on Trial - Both sides face skepti... · 0 replies · +3 points

!st - thanks Scottie for the reporting.
Well, now we wait a couple months. Rose pointed out chaos if they rule against ME. The more I think about it, the more I agree. I don't think that will escape the Justices, but neither do I think that would sway them (they have security details and a pension). Interesting me most is what The RATS will put down in writing as their legacy. Something along the lines of brown people should sit in the balcony and pee in a different urinal? Kennedy is worried about the "millennia" . I guess he should be, that's how old he and most of these farts are (or act). I am 60 and eschew "social media". I, living in gun-happy exurbia, am as Abe Simpson "out-of-touch- get off my lawn" " as I can get. But an anti-ME ruling will be prima facia argument for a mandatory retirement age.

9 years ago @ Equality on Trial - Both sides face skepti... · 1 reply · +6 points

I agree. I think they just don't get it. One would think these people might have taken the time to have a heart-to-heart talk with a gay, lesbian or transgendered person before today. Perhaps they have, and don't care.
As to chaos - you are right. Upholding the 6th CA decision will unleash the hounds of conservative (and ugly) backlash. It will be like the Hayes/Tilden election compromise which effectively demolished the Reconstruction Act.

9 years ago @ Equality on Trial - READ IT HERE: Same-sex... · 1 reply · +1 points

Und verklempt.

9 years ago @ Equality on Trial - READ IT HERE: Same-sex... · 2 replies · 0 points

The question of the day should be - what do we want to see Alito, Scalia, and Thomas wearing on their heads come April 28. Whichever is white and pointy?

9 years ago @ Equality on Trial - READ IT HERE: Same-sex... · 1 reply · +1 points

I'm kinda old, and knew some rather personal things about the Clintons from back in the 70's. Perhaps it was an intellectual and political match, with ambition as the trump suit. Personally I think she is smarter the he, but more awkward. She may make an excellent, hard bitten and driven President, but don't expect to love her personally. If someone argued she is not naturally pro-LGBT but reads the political winds, I would be hard pressed to argue otherwise for lack of evidence. Clintons do not seem to come out in favor of anything that doesn't poll at least 51%, and keep their personal believes utterly opaque, if they indeed have any. (That's a bit unfair; I think Hillary could have a lot more to say about women's poition in societies if you got her alone and drunk; Rose's "stupid!" comes to mind.) Welcome to politics, take your victories where you can - and stay loud.

9 years ago @ Equality on Trial - Supreme Court to confe... · 1 reply · +4 points

Late to the party, but referring to Scottie's headline post: $5 says SCOTUS figures they are going completely 21st Century overboard with a plus for ME and will pay short shrift to the transgendered and therapy suffering teens as part of a Roberts engineered political compromise. Now that we barely socially acceptable LG people have made some real progress, the prospect of others being left behind is upsetting. Comments, please.
That said, last night I went to my Douglas County Colorado (a rich and about 70+% Romney county) annual Democratic Party Dinner. The Dem. attendees here are 95% white, 99.5% straight, and 80% former Republicans. Yet when you talk to them most say they arrived not via economic or foreign policy issues as much as the bigotry and discrimination tolerated, and encouraged, in the R's since Nixon launched the "Southern Strategy". So I am encouraged that it is not always "it's the cononomy stupid", but that civil rights do matter to many.

9 years ago @ Equality on Trial - Group that put Nevada'... · 8 replies · +2 points

The panel-packing allegation is of deep,deep concern to me, no matter how flimsy. It speaks to the political landscape, and we are all aware of the poltical backlash, mostly "religious freedom" bills, to ME victories furiously underway in almost every state outside the N.E.. and West Coast. Justice Roberts is clearly "politically aware" and the majority of justices were at least raised Catholic, a religion which historically links church and state closely. I wonder if SCOTUS might duck the questions, claiming "federalism"? Improbable, knowing as much about the topic as readers of this site do, but maybe they don't want to know as much?
I want to hear from our politically savvy two Z's on this.

9 years ago @ Equality on Trial - Equality news round-up... · 1 reply · +19 points

RE Florida - jeeze, these people just never give up. I will note that there have been zero reports of adoption problems in states where Catholic agencies have closed up shop because they can no longer discriminate. Sigh - one more blatant sign of animus by those who have probably never taken the time to talk to an LBGT person.

9 years ago @ Equality on Trial - Federal judge blocks n... · 12 replies · +4 points

Question: don't these freedom of bigotry laws allow a business owner to not only refuse customers, but to treat them differently? I just had this aweful thought of the return of movie theaters with a separate entrance leading to the balcony.

9 years ago @ Equality on Trial - Federal judge orders A... · 0 replies · +3 points

There is a similar bill in play in Colorado that had an extensive committee hearing. However, the Republicans reagined control of the state Senate by one vote last November, and they will surely block it. Meanwhile, the D's have killed several "religious bigotry" bills the R's have proposed, though I should note and applaud a few Republicans are now voting pro-LBGT.

IntenseDebate Comment System

Connect with RQO

People I'm following

RQO