An answer from GLAD March 4, 2009Posted by truthspew in Gay rights, marriage equality, politics, religion.
Tags: marriage equality
Since I’ve been peripherally involved with marriage equality in RI (From Same Sex Marriage Now RI to MERI) I’ve always been told that the reason we keep banging our heads against the wall is because GLAD thinks the RI Judiciary is hostile to our cause.
And now we have an answer.
Here’s the comment I posted about it:
I’m happy to see the question finally answered. But I still assert that if we present it under a question of denial of rights granted by Article 1 Section 2 we’ll have no problems whatsoever. Justice Hurst so much as told us so.
I note you mention legal, political and educational. I assert we have the legal rights and they are being denied at the current moment.
I also stipulate that the political is a lost cause. We’ve pursued redress under several different leaders in the legislature to no avail.
As far as the educational, I believe this is the point where we fall down the most. Part of it has to do with people not knowing gay people. That was the interesting part of the Senate hearing when Jabour nodded when someone mentioned that members of the committee probably had gay relatives, friends, etc.
And as an attorney you know that case law rules. We have two states around us, potentially four that have marriage equality through judicial relief. Is GLAD so sure we’d lose in the RI Judiciary?
What I don’t see is citation of relevant cases in RI, because this issue is all about RI. “
Sure they cite the federal Bowers v. Hardwick and Ormiston v. Chambers cases. But what I’m looking for here is citation of other cases having to do with gay rights from the RI courts.
What I think is really going on is that GLAD wants to legitimize marriage equality through the legislature. Even if H5744 gets 77 co-sponsors I think the leadership in the body of one Wlliam Murphy will continue to quash it before t comes to a full vote.
And as I say in the comment I left, we’ve seen several different leaders over the past 13 years, Joe DeAngelis, John Harwood and now William Murphy.
None of them has every supported this bill. But one has to look at how one becomes speaker. It’s a very interesting process, he who can raise the most money wins.
And let us not forget that the Roman Catholic Diocese of Providence still has an enormous amount of influence. This is why I often say, if we really want to protest, we protest in Cathedral Square, or in Bishop Tobin’s office.