WA State Homophobes: We need to keep our white-hoods on!

In the latest twist in the Evangelical Christian attempt to force their narrow minded version of Biblical Law on the rest of us, the group pushing R-71, the so-called "Protect Washington Families" act, which is an effort to overturn the WA congressional decision to extend full rights under the law to domestic partners (notice NO MENTION of Marriage to be seen), the Religious bigots running this side show have gone to court to get a special exemption to the WA state law that requires names on a state referendum to be public.

http://www.theolympian.com/politicsblog/ story/923882.html

The complaint challenges the Constitutionality of the public disclosure law on the ground that it chills free speech protected under the First Amendment, particularly when it is reasonably probable that those exercising their First Amendment rights will be subjected to threats and harassment.

You know, if there was any irony in these bigots lives, how much more then complaining that they need to be protected from Threats and Harassments.

All these Bible-thumping lunatics spend seem their time on IS threatening and harassing and trying to deprive US citizens of their rights.

Keep in mind, the WA state bill SAID NOTHING about Marriage, it was simply extending equal rights under law to all WA state citizens.

But, with the Christian Right, it's clear, as much as they wail about Marriage, this is an effort to group a class of US citizens into second class status under law.

There is no slippery slope here, these people want to drive every gay American back in the closet, to repeal any law that protects job and legal discrimination based on sexual orientation. That is their true agenda.

This is not about Marriage, this is about Hate.

And, the court challenge to WA state Full Transparency Act is to allow these Religious fanatics to extend anonymity to anyone taking up this bigoted Religious Crusade with them.

Tags: Evangelical christians, homophobia, WA R-71 (all tags)



Public disclosure

If you put your name on a petition, then you have implicited and explicitly announced publicly your support or opposition to an issue or proposed legislation.

Your name should be disclosed.  Public disclosure also give you the opportunity to view petitions you might have signed to review that the petition that you THOUGHT you signed is the petition that you actually signed.

by Khun David 2009-07-29 01:30PM | 0 recs
They got their restraining order!

http://www.seattlepi.com/local/6420ap_wa _domestic_partnerships.html

Don't know much about this judge, he IS a GW Bush appointee, but that might be more about timing then he is a Federalist Society thug...

These bastards don't give a rats-ass about supporting free speech, and if this goes all the way to the WA State Supreme Court, it will go down for the reason the poster cited above.

Still, for today, the forces of darkness won the day in court.

by WashStateBlue 2009-07-29 02:55PM | 0 recs
Re: They got their restraining order!

The TRO said that the Defendants failed to appear or otherwise object to the order, so there you have it.  Can't win if you don't play.

This is just a temporary order that lasts for a couple weeks, until a full hearing can be held.  It's sort of a no-brainer, in a sense, because obviously releasing all the names makes it impossible to put the cat back in the bag, whereas if an injunction is granted for a couple weeks and then lifted there's no major harm.

by Steve M 2009-07-30 12:45PM | 0 recs


Advertise Blogads