| |
|
The jaw-dropping details.
quote:Last Friday, the state Supreme Court handed down an opinion in the case of a lesbian mother seeking to win custody of her three teen-age children from their father. The father, she charged, was both verbally and physically abusive. A state appellate court had agreed with her, but by a 9-0 landslide, the state justices said no.
In a 35-page concurring opinion, Chief Justice Roy Moore unleashed a torrent of what the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force called "abhorrent rhetoric" that described homosexual conduct: "immoral, detestable, a crime against nature, and a violation of nature's God, upon which this nation and our laws are predicated."
The idea that American jurisprudence is based on "nature's God" led Task Force Executive Director Lorri Jean to call for Moore's recall from the bench. "It is appalling," wrote Jean, "to see that blatant bigotry and unrepentant ignorance reign supreme in Alabama's highest court. Chief Justice Moore has decreed that his personal religious beliefs will now be the law of the land in Alabama. This violates the constitutional mandate of separation of church and state and it renders him unfit to serve as a judge."
Linking the opinion with Tuesday's rally, Jean wote: "There is a connection between hateful speech and hateful action. On the anniversary of the brutal salying of Billy Jack Gaither, we call for an end to aborrent rhetoric like that of Chief Justice Moore."
Echoing the theme was the state coordinator for the Gay and Lesbian Alliance of Alabama, David White, who told the Associated Press that Moore was an embarrassment to the state.
"It's obvious he cannot judge a gay person fairly, and he should be removed from office," White said.
The case was litigated by attorney Wendy Crew, who was unavailable for comment due to illness.
The National Center for Lesbian Rights' Shannon Minter called Moore's opinion a "travesty," and noted that the same state Supreme Court has authored one of the worst gay family law decisions on record, in the 1998 case of a lesbian mother who lost her kids after she found a life partner to help her raise them.
Minter said the gay legal establishment thought long and hard about appealing that case into the federal courts. "We thought about it very seriously because the court there just blatantly held that there are two different standards of custody rulings -- for a straight couple you look at whether a child is in harm's way, and for a gay couple, you don't. This case," said Minter, "is even more extreme."
Jesus.
FUCKING.
Christ! |
|
|
