Comments on: Olson: SCOTUS confirms gays as a class

By: Jason D

Jason D — Wed, 30 Jun 2010 21:57:36 +0000

Rick, because they think we’re confused straight people. Or sick straight people.

I use this comparison.

I am not a straight house covered in gay paint. I am a gay house. If you removed my homosexuality, I would have NO sexuality at all.

I don’t see how letting gay people get married is ANY different than braille added to signs, elevator floor numbers, or wheelchair accessible stalls.

By: Timothy Kincaid

Timothy Kincaid — Wed, 30 Jun 2010 21:44:20 +0000

Thanks, Laura. Corrected.

By: Laura Kanter

Laura Kanter — Wed, 30 Jun 2010 21:00:04 +0000

The very fine and hopefully promising letter was written to Judge Walker by Theodore J. Boutrous Jr., one of the other attorneys for the plaintiffs in the Prop 8 Fed. trial, not by Olson.

By: Rick

Rick — Wed, 30 Jun 2010 19:04:48 +0000

What is mind-boggling to me is the fact that so many straight people still CANNOT see the double standard they typically apply. They know beyond doubt that they themselves as straight people are not what they do. They are not the equivalent of their conduct. How is it they fail time and again to apply this to us gay people? My conduct does not make me who I am. It is simply an out-flowing, an expression of what is on the inside. It is what is on the inside that places me into another class or constituency.

By: customartist

customartist — Wed, 30 Jun 2010 15:00:55 +0000

This is some of the best news lately.

And thanks Timothy for the reminder.

Althought the court has reversed previous decisions of previous Supreme Courts in other unrelated matters, it might be more difficult to reverse themselves in more recent matters where they seem to have been inclined to deem Gays as a class.

Of course we are all understandably impatient, but I just want to live to see it.

By: Timothy Kincaid

Timothy Kincaid — Tue, 29 Jun 2010 23:54:34 +0000

Lucrece,

I’m not even sure that those four will go all go for ProtectMarriage’s argument. We cannot assume that they will always take the anti-gay position just because it is anti-gay.

Recall that only Thomas dissented in Roe v. Reed.

By: Paul in Canada

Paul in Canada — Tue, 29 Jun 2010 22:26:12 +0000

Defining GLBTQ as a ‘class’ was the basis for recognizing same-sex rights in Canada.

http://www.egale.ca

By: Lindoro Almaviva

Lindoro Almaviva — Tue, 29 Jun 2010 21:11:25 +0000

I can imagine the line of bricks that lines their office spaces, parking lots and conference rooms…

By: Ben in Oakland

Ben in Oakland — Tue, 29 Jun 2010 21:01:59 +0000

yahoo!

By: Lucrece

Lucrece — Tue, 29 Jun 2010 20:51:00 +0000

And yet I doubt all the gaping holes in their case will sway Scalia, Alito, Thomas, or Roberts. They’ll just concoct a more nuanced pile of BS to replace the garbage offered by Protect Marriage.

Keep your fingers crossed that neither Kennedy or Kagan screws us over for generations.