Tag Archives: Harassment

Jennifer Roback Morse explains the California lawsuit against Prop 8

Great post by the admirable Dr. Jennifer Roback Morse on MercatorNet. (H/T RuthBlog)

Excerpt:

California’s high-profile federal lawsuit against Proposition 8, which begins in court on January 11, appears to be about creating a federal case for same sex marriage. But in fact, much more is at stake. Lurking in the shadows of this case is a breathtaking expansion of judicial interference with perfectly valid elections. Whatever your views about Proposition 8, we surely should be able to agree that special interest groups can’t go into court to overturn elections they don’t like.

Ted Olsen and David Boies want to convince the court that the alleged anti-gay bias of Proposition 8 supporters should invalidate the election. But first, they have to find some such bias. This is why Olsen and Boies sought the trial court’s permission to demand confidential campaign documents. They want free reign to rummage around through the Prop 8 campaign’s computers and filing cabinets, looking for evidence of this supposed meanness. The trial judge had ruled that Prop 8 proponents had no First Amendment privilege, and therefore had to hand over all communications among members of the campaign and their contractors.

[…]The motives of the seven million Californians who voted Yes on 8 are irrelevant. The election was about adding 14 words to the California Constitution. The entire state of California knew perfectly well what those words were. The point of the campaign was to discuss the likely impact of those words. Olsen and Boies don’t like what the voters decided. Sorry. Self-government is about abiding by the results of lawful elections, whether you like the outcome or not.

And here is an op-ed by former Attorney General Ed Meese III in the New York Times. (H/T The Corner)

Excerpt:

Most troubling, Judge Walker has also ruled that the trial will investigate the Proposition 8 sponsors’ personal beliefs regarding marriage and sexuality. No doubt, the plaintiffs will aggressively exploit this opportunity to assert that the sponsors exhibited bigotry toward homosexuals, or that religious views motivated the adoption of Proposition 8. They’ll argue that prohibiting gay marriage is akin to racial discrimination.

To top it all off, Judge Walker has determined that this case will be the first in the Ninth Circuit to allow cameras in the courtroom, with the proceedings posted on YouTube. This will expose supporters of Proposition 8 who appear in the courtroom to the type of vandalism, harassment and bullying attacks already used by some of those who oppose the proposition.

The tolerance of the secular left. I hope some of my readers who believe in marriage are going to law school – and I want straight As on your transcripts, but keep a low profile! I recommend writing under a pseudonym, because the other side will go after anything you write to discredit you. Think about it.

My previous post about the threats and violence against Prop 8 supporters. And another post explains why prop 8 supporters favor traditional marriage.

By the way, comments on this post will be strictly moderated in order to respect Obama’s hate crimes law.

MUST-READ: Study documents harassment and threats against Prop 8 supporters

The research publication is here, from the Heritage Foundation. (H/T ECM)

Abstract:

Supporters of Proposition 8 in California have been subjected to harassment, intimidation, vandalism, racial scapegoating, blacklisting, loss of employment, economic hardships, angry protests, violence, at least one death threat, and gross expressions of anti-religious bigotry. Arguments for same-sex marriage are based fundamentally on the idea that limiting marriage to the union of husband and wife is a form of bigotry, irrational prejudice, and even hatred against homosexual persons. As this ideology seeps into the culture more generally, individuals and institutions that support marriage as the union of husband and wife risk paying a price for that belief in many legal, social, economic, and cultural contexts.

The executive summary is here.

The PDF version is here.

You may also want to refresh yourself on how this works out in practice by watching a debate on marriage between Dennis Prager and Perez Hilton.

My previous post on this topic is here.

Are women held to a different standard than men under the law?

I came across these 3 news stories that illustrate 3 concerns I have about how the law favors women over men in many areas.

Woman released without charges after shooting husband dead

Story here.

Excerpt:

A justice of the peace has ordered the release of a woman arrested in connection with the shooting death of her husband because no charges have been filed.

Las Vegas police arrested Ericka McElroy on Oct. 7 outside her southwest Las Vegas home. Her 37-year-old husband, Shane McElroy, died after being shot in the chest. Police said the two had allegedly been in a domestic dispute.

Woman gets 20 days of jail after making false rape accusation

Story here.

Excerpt:

A 20-year-old Valparaiso woman has pleaded guilty to falsely reporting that a Valparaiso man raped her, county police said Thursday.

Erica Donohue was sentenced to 180 days in jail, although most were suspended. She is to serve 20 days in jail and 10 days of community service.

Donohue said that on July 15, an acquaintance raped her in a rural area.

Porter County Detective Gene Hopkins investigated the case, and the evidence he gathered — including a video of the consensual act — convinced prosecutors to issue a warrant for Donohue, who was arrested Sept. 29.

She eventually admitted to making up the story about the rape, to hide where she had been from a person with whom she was in a relationship.

Woman wants $1.5 dollars in per year in child support

Story here.

Excerpt:

Sitting on a makeshift stand before the court, Nantz grew teary as he testified, blaming the marriage’s demise on his wife’s lavish spending habits, as well as what he claimed was a lack of support for his career, the paper reported.

Nantz’s wife, who is seeking alimony as well as more than $1.5 million-per-year in child support for the couple’s 15-year-old daughter, Caroline, has stated that she wants to keep the family’s six bedroom home in Westport, Conn. The family also owns a condominium at a ski resort in Utah, according to the Connecticut Post. Lorrie Nantz said that she wants to care for the child’s daughter even though she has a full-time nanny.

While court papers merely say that the marriage broke down irretrievably, Nantz told Superior Court Judge Howard Owens that while he was traveling around the country for work, his wife stayed home and went on excessive shopping sprees, the paper reported.

In nine years, Lorrie Nantz spent close to $1 million at a high-end clothing and jewelry store in Westport, Conn., the Post reported.

Last month she bought a $12,000 necklace at the posh store, but when pressed on its description, she could not remember details.

These stories are actually not uncommon. They are all from the last few days, and there are more stories like them every day. The lesson I am taking away from this is that the law is very hostile to men. It’s something that men don’t really talk about in public, and I wonder why that is the case.

Here’s my previous post on the parity of male and female rates of domestic violence, my previous post on the recent surge of domestic violence committed by women in Australia, as well as a new story on the surge in child abuse by intoxicated single mothers in Finland.