Unconventional Sources

In New York State, legislation has been proposed that would establish with certainty the legal ability of same-sex couples to have equal access to marriage rights. That’s something that’s guaranteed by the Constitution of the United States of America, which guarantees equal protection under the law. Still, even though New York State is a progressive state, it’s not certain that the marriage equality legislation will pass. Some backwards Democrats are joining Republicans in trying to deny equal rights.

The web site Marriage NY is working to organize citizens to mount a grassroots campaign to ensure marriage rights are respected, and all couples in New York, heterosexual and homosexual alike, have equal marriage rights.

It’s a project of the New York Civil Liberties Union. Thanks to them for their work on this subject.

In a decision that’s a victory for heterosexual couples as much as for homosexual couples, the House and Senate of Vermont have overturned the veto by Governor Jim Douglas of legislation legalizing marriage for same sex couples. People who have been family in deed can now be family in name as well, and have legal status as such.

Congratulations to Vermont Freedom to Marry, a group that has been working on this issue for a long time now.

For the rest of us, in states where inequality persists, let us remember that unless we are have equality, none of us have equality.

The issues are many, but the freedom that lets us know about them is the same: Free speech and free press are essential to a functioning democracy. In the world at large, these freedoms are also essential ingredients to a sane foreign policy.

Index On Censorship covers suppression of dissenting viewpoints, intimidation and violence against writers, misinformation campaigns and other forms of censorship.

Thanks to them for speaking out on behalf of those who are not allowed to speak themselves.

The blog Godless Liberal Homo gets my vote for the best byline of any blog I have ever seen: “I am a homo. That is a good thing. I am a liberal. That is a good thing. Everyone is godless. I belong to the minority that has figured this out.”

They also get my kudos for reporting on the story of journalist Parwez Kambakhsh’s conviction in Afghanistan on charges of blasphemy for making the suggestion that women have legal rights.

It’s a story that American newspapers are refusing to print. Why?

Running up to the 2008 presidential election, right wingers tried one last burst of hate to try to recapture the American imagination. People weren’t really afraid of terrorists any more, so Republicans aimed larger, trying to get Americans to fear anyone who didn’t speak English. They invented an immigration crisis out of nowhere, and started complaining that they had to do the simple task of pressing the “1″ button on the telephone to select English customer service.

Around this time, bumper stickers started to appear, reading Welcome to America. Now Speak English! The message was clear: Conform, or get lost.

That’s a terrible message to send about how things are here in the United States. After all, we’re supposed to be the home of freedom of speech, and freedom of speech means nothing if you can’t even choose the language you want to speak in. So, I was tickled to find this tshirt that mocks that English-only concept: Welcome to America. Now Speak Ojibwe. – If we’re going to get pushy about people speaking the language that’s native to America, why not actually choose a native American language?

Seriously, there’s a huge universe of language that’s native to the Americas. These languages are every bit as valid as English. You can begin to explore these native American languages at Native American Language Net.

There’s a simple, positive protest going on in Hawaii at the
Hawaii Gay Marriage Bureau

No, same-sex marriage is not yet legal in Hawaii, but it ought to be, and it may well soon be. There’s a case in the courts right now challenging the constitutionality of the heterosexual exclusivity of marriage rights in Hawaii. Marriage is a legal status conferred by the government, and so it ought to be provided equally to all couples. That’s what the Constitution of the United States of America requires. Look it up.

So, while the Hawaii Gay Marriage Bureau cannot yet officiate over legally recognized marriages, it can help people perform protest marriages. Also, the mere existence of the bureau gives us a looking glass view into the world as it ought to be.

A quick thanks to Privacy International for the rather grim picture of privacy around the world. We here in the United States are marked black, which translates into: Endemic surveillance societies.

We in the USA are now in the same Big Brother category as Russia and China, thanks to the warrantless wiretapping that began under George W. Bush and now continues under Barack Obama. This map shows the privacy ranking for 2007, but the situation became even more grave in 2008, with the passage of the infamous FISA Amendments Act, which gave amnesty to telecommunications corporations that helped the White House create an immense electronic surveillance network that gathers all electronic communications by foreigners and by Americans, targeting journalists, soldiers, aid workers, government whistleblowers and who knows what other groups. Barack Obama voted in favor of this Big Brother spying system, and has said that he intends to keep on using it.

I know that doesn’t fit with the Obama as savior narrative, but it’s a fact.

An American has to have been determined to be ignorant not to know what’s happened to the Constitution of the United States of America under President George W. Bush. The individual rights that are guaranteed by the Constitution have been thoroughly violated by the Bush White House, which announced that the Constitution’s rules were merely suggestions that would need to give way before the needs of the moment. It was declared that the President is above the law, and above the Constitution itself.

Torture and Big Brother spying programs against peaceful Americans were begun. The power of arbitrary imprisonment without a trial or even habeas corpus was announced. Freedom of speech and assembly were curtailed. Church and state were mixed.

Now, Barack Obama is becoming President of the United States. Will all that change? Will the Constitution’s authority be restored?

Unfortunately, restoring our constitutional rights isn’t as simple as electing a new President. President Obama will have the same powers as President Bush, and it’s up to Obama, and to the Congress, to pull back presidential power so that the Constitution can regain its proper place.

Will Barack Obama act to bring the Presidency back under the law? Will President Obama respect the Constitution?

It looks uncertain. For all his talk of change, the closer that Obama gets to the Oval Office, the more reluctant he sounds about cutting back on the authoritarian powers established under George W. Bush. Obama suggests that secret torture prisons may not be closed, espionage against Americans may not end, and church and state will continue to be mixed.

We cannot simply trust President Barack Obama to obey the Constitution. We need to do our duty as active citizens, and push Obama to bring the White House back under control.

That’s why, on Inauguration Day 2009, there will be a Pro-Constitution Inauguration Demonstration. The parameters of this political demonstration are simple: On the parade route, outside the Department of Justice, at the southwest corner of 9th Street and Pennsylvania Avenue NW, at noontime (plan to get there early to really get there on time), Americans who love the Constitution will assemble in a place reserved with the cooperation of the National Park Service. They will come with small signs, buttons, t-shirts, etc., with messages urging Barack Obama to comply with his Oath of Office, and uphold the Constitution.

More information about the 2009 Inauguration demonstration for constitutional rights.

Earlier this morning I wrote about the lawsuit to remove Rick Warren from the Constitution. Rick Warren’s involvement in performing an official government Christian religious ritual is a clear defiance of the Constitution’s guarantee of freedom from religious tests for public office, as well as a violation of the separation of church and state.

There’s a related resource that I left out of the article, though: A petition by atheists to remove Rick Warren from the Inauguration, not just because Warren’s activities establish government religion, but because Rick Warren has been an opponent of the Constitution’s promise of equality under the law, campaigning for a new theocracy in which only Americans who believe in his God are allowed to become President.

All in all, this Rick Warren seems to be a nasty extremist.

The Freedom from Religion Foundation has sued to remove Christian rituals and theological tests for public office from the 2009 Inauguration of Barack Obama to the position of President of the United States. This lawsuit has many Christian groups infuriated.

Why? Do these Christian groups really believe that their religion will fall apart unless it gains official sanction from the government? Is their God a government dependent?

It’s nonsense for right wing religious groups to claim that a ritual invocation of Christian spirits by a Creationist preacher like Rick Warren and the phrase “so help me God” are an important part of the presidential inauguration process. The truth is that for most of American history, there was no invocation prayer and no use of the phrase “so help me God” in the Inauguration.

Abraham Lincoln didn’t need it. George Washington didn’t need it. So, why are these right wing Christians so upset about a lawsuit that would merely return the Inauguration to its historical roots and constitutional foundation?

It seems to me that they’re really afraid of is the Constitution and American history. They’re trying to change America, not celebrate it.