Connect With Us

FacebookTwitterRSSYoutube

Kamala Harris Tells The Truth, Brian Brown Goes Bananas

brian_brown_copy pretty boyLet me start out by wondering why Brian Brown continues to use the idiotic phrase “conjugal view of marriage” or “conjugal marriage” or any form like that. I am not normally a grammar nazi or the like. I can’t kvetch because of all of my problems with grammar and spelling, but for crying out loud- conjugal means “Rights and responsibilities in marriage”.

Now, Brown could mean copulatory marriage. That would translate as “The coming together of male and female in the act of generation” marriage, or, if you will, marriage intended to have children. “Conjugal marriage” is a nonsense phrase meant to imply “copulatory marriage”, but it isn’t.

But, I digress. Brian Brown is starting to get desperate. In a recent missive begging for donations, Brown attacked Attorney General of California Kamala Harris. Brown whines that “Harris said of those of us who support true marriage, ‘The United States Supreme Court in essence declared today: they are bystanders; they are sitting in [sic] the sidelines.’ She also declared happily, ‘The United States Supreme Court today made clear that Proposition 8 is unconstitutional.’”

Um…Brownie, I hate to break it to you, but that is exactly what the US Supreme Court did in this case- declared that those who brought the suit were bystanders not participants and that Prop 8 is unconstitutional. Of course, you are still upset over not winning, but it seems like, if you have to whine about the reality, you really are just, well, not in a good position overall.

After that, brown begs for donations saying “Please help us stop manipulative politicians like Kamala Harris who would silence our voice in the public square and treat us like pariahs simply for believing in the age-old, God-ordained conjugal view of marriage.”

Brown then tries to explain why Harris is wrong saying “Of course, the US Supreme Court said nothing close to what Harris claimed, and issued no such ruling that Proposition 8 was unconstitutional. In fact, the Court specifically decided nothing about Proposition 8 other than the proponents of the initiative did not have the legal standing to bring an appeal to the Court. Only state officials responsible for defending the laws could bring an appeal, the Court’s majority said. That’s Harris, as Attorney General, and Governor Jerry Brown, and both refused to defend the votes of the 7 million people who passed Proposition 8. . .Marriage in California has now died for lack of a defense.”

This is one of those splitting hairs deals. By upholding the ruling of Judge Vaughn Walker and declaring that those who defended it in court did not have standing to appeal, the US Supreme Court did declare Prop 8 unconstitutional.

Brown, of course, goes on to whine about how “the more than 7 million Californians who exercised their sovereign right to amend their state constitution — an act that the California Supreme Court ruled overwhelmingly was a proper and legal use of the constitutional amendment process — don’t matter because she, Kamala Harris, has determined that it was the wrong thing to do and she was not going to let them get away with this “notion.” In the world of Kamala Harris, we are banished to the sidelines, not even fit to participate in civil discourse.”

Always note that Brown goes back to the day five years ago when California passed Proposition 8. Why? Well, that’s easy. He wants to hold in his hand that perfect little moment when his group was victorious because he knows that pointing out that, if that vote happened today, the National Organization for Marriage would be trounced.

He continues on complaining that “Harris ignored her oath of office and lied about what the Supreme Court has said about Proposition 8. Worse, her hubris and arrogance is revealed with the statement that, ‘I know that all Californians — as evidenced by the most recent polling that was done, 61% — support same-sex marriage and the right of these couples to marry, as equals under the law.’”

First of all, Harris was not the Attorney General when the Perry case began. That would be current Governor Jerry Brown. Add to that, Attorney Generals and state and federal Administrations have the right to choose if they are going to argue a particular case in court. Just because Brown and Schwarzenegger chose not to defend Prop 8 does not mean that they violated anything.

Brown laughingly dismisses the polls by claiming that “even if it were true that 61% of Californians now support same-sex marriage (which is undoubtedly not true), since when does that equate to “all Californians?” And since when does some biased poll entitle the Attorney General of California to ignore duly enacted laws adopted by the voters of California (twice)?”

I’m trying to figure out the ‘twice’ part. That is still a majority, and just by clicking your ruby-slippered feet together does not make the polls biased, Brown. Just because you don’t like the polling does not mean that the polling is wrong.

Brown then sounds the charge and says:

We’ve got to stop politicians like Kamala Harris who are determined to force us to the sidelines, ignoring our votes and subjecting our views to second-class status. Please make a contribution today to help us fight back against Harris and her ilk.

Why does any of this matter to you? Because Kamala Harris is on the political fast-track and some Washington insiders speculate that she could be the next US Attorney General, or even a member of the US Supreme Court!

Now, I could see raising funds to try and stop her from, say, running for Senate or the Presidency, but honestly, if she gets nominated to the courts, there isn’t anything you can do, Brownie.

Of course, that’s the whole point. You’re looking around at your marriage scam and wondering ‘just how the heck to I keep getting money from these people as the nation turns its back on my bigotry.’

Comments

comments

Share This Post

5 Responses to Kamala Harris Tells The Truth, Brian Brown Goes Bananas

  1. Darren

    July 2, 2013 at 12:23 pm

    Saw this recently and seems very appropriate.

    “Marriage is not about religion.
    Atheists marry.
    Marriage is not about procreation.
    The infertile marry.
    Marriage is not about finance.
    It can weave poverty.
    Marriage is about love.
    That’s it.
    And that’s beautiful.”

  2. David Cox

    July 2, 2013 at 3:33 am

    Brown conveniently omits the fact that two federal courts found Prop8 unconstitutional. As the US Supreme Court did not invalidate their rulings, Prop8′s unconstitutionality stands. Brown and friends got an addition kick in the… shins when the US Supreme ruled that the proponents of Prop8 had no standing to bring the case to the court, ergo they should have given up after the 9th District Federal validated Judge Walker’s ruling.

  3. IrishmanLA

    July 1, 2013 at 8:55 pm

    Just to clarify, as a CA resident. When “Brownie” mentioned “twice” regarding the vote of the people of CA, he is referring not just to prop 8 in 2008, but also to a referendum in 2000 that became state law where marriage was defined as solely one man with one woman. This law was challenged in CA courts and it was the defeat of this law that led to marriage equality being won in CA. Because this law was challenged, the organizations that supported Prop 8 decided they needed an amendment to the state constitution to solidify their bigotry in law. So the people of CA voted on this issue twice – once to become law in 2000 and again to become a constitutional amendment to the state’s Constitution in 2008.

    Just because people vote for something doesn’t mean the law is good, right or just.

    • Bridgette P. LaVictoire

      July 1, 2013 at 11:09 pm

      Thank you for the clarification. Sometimes I end up not being able to find certain bits of information or don’t know something right off the bat.

  4. Scott Rose

    July 1, 2013 at 8:48 pm

    Part of determining standing can be — and in the Proposition 8 case at the Supreme Court, was — determining whether the party claiming an injury in fact is suffering any legally valid injury.

    Generalized grievances are not a legally valid injury.

    What the Supreme Court found was that Proposition 8 proponents are not suffering any legally actionable harm from the fact of same-sex couples having the right to marry in California.

    At the same time, the underlying Prop 8 decision says that the Plaintiffs *were* suffering a legally valid personal harm because of Prop 8, and it provides them with legal remedy.

    The bottom line is that the Supreme Court said that there is no constitutional right to discriminate against gays. *That* is why Brown is in such a panic.