In an obvious attempt at placating the GLBT community, Wisconsin Rep. Tammy Baldwin has been named as one of fifteen co-chairs for the inauguration.
Baldwin is an openly lesbian congresswoman from Wisconsin who I would, under any other circumstances, applaud for being appointed to anything within the Obama political sphere. She has distinguished herself in her service as a United States Congresswoman and is greatly admired for the example she has set.
Unfortunately, her appointment as an inaugural co-chair is virtually meaningless. It is a ceremonial position with no actual power or influence over any aspect of the inauguration. I think it's a shame that she's being used as a mere figurehead to try and offset the building frustrations within the GLBT community over having had NONE of the GLBT candidates for cabinet positions actually appointed. And, in addition to that, having the double whammy of the slap-in-the-face announcement of virulently anti-gay pastor Rick Warren to offer the inaugural invocation and anti-gay marriage reverend Joseph Lowery to give the closing benediction.
In our current frustration, let's not forget about the appointment of lesbian Nancy Sutley as head of the White House Council on Environmental Quality. Although she is, so far, the only prominent member of the LGBT community to earn a senior role in the new administration, her appointment and the still possible appointment of openly gay William White as Secretary of the Navy, does give me hope that the GLBT rights initiatives that have been floundering around Washington for years under Bush will finally see the light of day and be passed by the new congress and signed into laws by the new President.
That being said however, I join with Box Turtle Bulletin in calling on Rep. Baldwin to resign this meaningless appointment as a show of unity with Rep. Barney Frank and a show of solidarity with the GLBT community's growing frustrations.
It's a very rare occurrence when a sitting state attorney general reverses his own position and argues against his state's legislature and a voter approved initiative. But that's what just happened.
When the successfully passed Proposition 8 was challenged and sent to the State Supreme Court, California Attorney General Jerry Brown vowed that he would defend the ballot measure on behalf of the state.
Well, according to a story published last Friday in the Sacramento Bee, Brown filed a legal brief with the court stating that the California constitutional amendment measure to limit marriage to a man and a woman is itself unconstitutional because it deprives a minority group of a fundamental right.
Brown said he reached a different conclusion "upon further reflection and a deeper probing into all the aspects of our Constitution."
"It became evident that the Article 1 provision guaranteeing basic liberty, which includes the right to marry, took precedence over the initiative," he said in an interview Friday night. "Based on my duty to defend the law and the entire Constitution, I concluded the court should protect the right to marry even in the face of the 52 percent vote."
The litigation over Proposition 8 is shaping up, Brown said, as a high-stakes conflict between the electorate's right to direct democracy and rights of minorities to equal treatment.
Posts
All Comments
