Gay Marriage | News | Oregon

Federal Appeals Court: U.S. and Oregon Bans on Same-Sex Marriage Unconstitutional

A federal appeals court judge has issued yet another ruling against bans on same-sex marriage. This one applies to both federal bans and a ban in the state of Oregon, The Oregonian reports:

OregonHarry Pregerson, a judge with the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, made the declarations in deciding that the federal government had discriminated against Portland lawyer Alison "Tex" Clark based on her sexual orientation.

Clark, an assistant federal public defender, married photographer Anna Campbell last June 23 in British Columbia, where same-sex marriage is legal. On July 12, she applied for federal health care benefits for Campbell, but was denied and subsequently appealed.

"Getting the opinion was a salve for the pain of getting a letter from the government last year saying our marriage was not recognized by the federal government," Clark said Thursday.

Feed This post's comment feed

Comments

  1. The short-haired one is cute :x
    Both are cute.

    Posted by: Au | Apr 26, 2013 2:12:33 PM


  2. It's not a court ruling.

    Posted by: Glenn | Apr 26, 2013 2:13:45 PM


  3. Brian Brown's week just keeps getting tougher.

    Posted by: Clayton | Apr 26, 2013 2:14:11 PM


  4. Harry Pregerson gets it. Clearly & concisely.

    Oregon's Measure 36 to define marriage as between one man one woman ... "This objective amounts to a desire to harm a minority group and is therefore impermissible under (case law)."

    A desire to harm a minority group.

    Stated here just as Justice Kagan did with DOMA testimony. It's an attempt to enshrine discrimination.

    Posted by: JONES | Apr 26, 2013 2:19:52 PM


  5. "The short-haired one is cute"

    Yeah, as a guy. (LOL) Tell me honestly--could anyone look at that photo without zooming in and not think the individual on the right is a male?

    I certainly did.

    Why do so many lesbians, most of whom are feminists and many of whom are radical feminists, try so desperately hard to look exactly like the men they regard as their "oppressors"?

    Posted by: Rick | Apr 26, 2013 2:29:48 PM


  6. Why do so many cowardly gay men work hard (and nine times out of ten FAIL) to look straight? ;)

    Why do you want to look like your oppressors?

    I jest. Sorta but not really

    Long live lgbt people who don't live fear of What Bigots Think!

    Posted by: Little Kiwi | Apr 26, 2013 2:35:17 PM


  7. Hint - gender, unlike sex, is a social construct.

    This is why closeted guys oft say they're "masc" - because they equate masculinity with a certain aesthetic. Which is funny, because I can think of fewer things less-manly than being and ault thats afraid of what Others May Think. That's the domain of the boys whose balls haven't dropped yet.

    Posted by: Little Kiwi | Apr 26, 2013 2:39:02 PM


  8. No, gender is very real and is driven by biological and physiological difference between men and women--hormonal differences (testosterone vs. estrogen), differences in brain structure and function, differences in body structure and function, etc.....all of which have behavioral manifestations, which define the differences between men and women.

    What is unnatural--and a social construct--is attempts by certain very deeply psychologically-damaged people to mimic the behavior of the opposite sex, which invariably makes them look and sound absurd, since such behavior does not come naturally--

    Men who walk with a "swish", for example, can only do so by conscious improvisation and contradiction of their natural gait....because the kind of body structure that causes women to walk that way does not exist

    All of which is why "gender-non-conformity" has never been, is not, and never will be accepted as normal behavior by any human society and why those who engage in it will forever be social outcasts......

    Posted by: Rick | Apr 26, 2013 2:49:20 PM


  9. They look something like k.d. lang and Loreena McKennitt, wonderful role models, and both of them are beautiful for being themselves and loving each other.

    Posted by: trees | Apr 26, 2013 2:50:34 PM


  10. Yay! Let them eat (wedding) cake!!!

    Posted by: Mitch | Apr 26, 2013 3:01:59 PM


  11. Prove your example by proving a link to who you are a. A amateur ally masculine gay man Rick. What's that? You can't?

    Exactly. And your kind never can. Your anonymity proves me right. Every day. So thanks!

    Posted by: Little Kiwi | Apr 26, 2013 3:02:46 PM


  12. Hahaha. Typo fails. Rick - link us to your page. Video. Pics. Anything that shows YOU. Cuz you're so manly. Prove it. You can't. You won't. And that proves you wrong.

    Posted by: Little Kiwi | Apr 26, 2013 3:03:49 PM


  13. How come I'm not a social outcast? Loudly and outspokenly Queer. And my fam and straight buds march with me every year at Pride.

    My truth proves your lies wrong.

    Posted by: Little Kiwi | Apr 26, 2013 3:05:11 PM


  14. Actually, it's a non-binding opinion. Not a ruling. This case is basically identical to the Golinski case in CA and only applies to these plaintiffs because it used the court's internal system to resolve employment disputes.

    Posted by: Steve | Apr 26, 2013 3:24:44 PM


  15. Internalized homophobia is so sad. And to paraphrase Halperin, gayness is wasted on some people.

    Posted by: KevinVt | Apr 26, 2013 3:24:57 PM


  16. Rick, again: every person has the right to act however the hell they want, and you do NOT have the right to tell them any different. Male or female or anything in between, gay or straight or anything in between, masculine or feminine or anything in between, they are OWED THE SAME RESPECT NO MATTER WHAT. If you can't grasp that, then that's your problem and not anyone else's.

    Posted by: Craig S | Apr 26, 2013 3:30:04 PM


  17. Isn't it obvious to everyone that it's time to move on from "Rick"...let's talk about cute lesbians some more...that's fun. Let the garbage pass us by.

    Posted by: PAUL B. | Apr 26, 2013 3:52:48 PM


  18. @Rick wrote: "All of which is why "gender-non-conformity" has never been, is not, and never will be accepted as normal behavior by any human society and why those who engage in it will forever be social outcasts......"

    This is simply not correct. There are many many examples of societies in which gender con-conformity has been accepted and even empowered. Read up on "third sex" in native American and ancient cultures from around the world.

    Posted by: DC20009 | Apr 26, 2013 4:53:04 PM


  19. "Internalized homophobia is so sad"

    It sure is. Nothing is sadder than seeing men try to alter their natural behavior to try to behave like women instead....because they have internalized the idea that society has drilled the into their heads, namely that attraction to men is not compatible with normal masculinity.....

    Very sad spectacle, indeed.

    "they are OWED THE SAME RESPECT NO MATTER WHAT."

    No, men who are physical cowards, as almost all effeminate "gender-non-conforming" men are, will not have their cowardice respected--by me or by anybody else, ever.....and that is just the way it is always going to be.

    Posted by: Rick | Apr 26, 2013 5:20:49 PM


  20. "No, men who are physical cowards, as almost all effeminate "gender-non-conforming" men are, will not have their cowardice respected--by me or by anybody else, ever..."

    Rick,

    when 4 Gay-bashers attack 1 Gay guy, and beat him and kick him--who are the actual cowards?

    And as far as "the swish" in a feminine guys walk: a FEMININE male learns to walk the same way a feminine girl learns to walk. He admires the walk of glamourous women and so he imitates them--same as a female child. Gay men who see themselves as masculine don't do this. It aint no mystery.

    I used to be proud of my Joan Crawford swish or sashay. But I messed up my hip joints with all those years of guzzling down booze. Now, I walk like Red Foxx in "Sandford and Son". (well, not that bad)

    Posted by: Derrick from Philly | Apr 26, 2013 5:49:16 PM


  21. Derrick...I love Red Foxx. I'm guessing you still walk sexy enough for your own good...bad hips and all!

    Posted by: PAUL B. | Apr 26, 2013 6:18:14 PM


  22. Rick, if you think "gender non-conformity" equals "physical cowardice", then that says far more about you than it does about the gender nonconforming.

    As I've noted before, most of the most cowardly guys I've ever met have been straight guys who put on a front of machismo but turned into little girls at the first sign of a fight -- and most of the toughest mofos I've ever met have been drag queens. And nobody who knows anything about the real world will tell you any different.

    Posted by: Craig S | Apr 26, 2013 6:57:40 PM


  23. Rick- you are exhausting! I see nelly straight guys all the time, expecially the younger emo types. And the only reason women dress in heels is to look good for other women and to thrill men who want to treat them like whores.
    it's the nineties, wake up and smell the frappucino (even coffee wears high heels these days)

    Posted by: ty | Apr 26, 2013 9:47:07 PM


  24. Who cares what they look like? Did the rejection letter from the government say, "We're not going to cover you because you are wearing a shirt that buttons on the wrong side for your sex."?

    Posted by: David Hearne | Apr 26, 2013 10:20:08 PM


  25. Dear Rick -

    Take this personally, you're a moron.

    Love, Pirate

    Posted by: PirateWench | Apr 26, 2013 11:49:34 PM


Post a comment







Trending


« «Ellen Hires Males Strippers for the Most Beautiful Woman in the World, Gwyneth Paltrow: VIDEO« «