Tag Archives: legal

1975 - California decriminalizes same-sex acts between consenting adults. Assembly member Willie Brown  and state Senator George Moscone (who will later in his career be assassinated along with LGBT civil rights great Harvey Milk in San Francisco)  co-sponsor AB 489, the “Consenting Adults Bill,” which decriminalizes sexual activity between consenting adults.

Gay History – May 12, 1975: California Legalizes Same-Sex Acts Between Consenting Adults, But Not Sodomy.

May 12, 1975 – California decriminalizes same-sex acts between consenting adults. Assembly member Willie Brown  and state Senator George Moscone (who will later in his be assassinated along with gay civil rights leaders Harvey Milk in San Francisco)  co-sponsor AB 489, the “Consenting Adults Bill,” which decriminalizes sexual activity between consenting adults. But not between persons of the same sex.

Governor Jerry Brown signs the bill into law on May 12, 1975, and it goes into effect January 1, 1976.

Prior to 2003, sodomy was not legal in California. And could not be made so while it was illegal on the Federal level. The monumental Supreme Court case, Lawrence v Texas, ruled that systematically criminalizing sodomy is unconstitutional. The case serves as a precedent, and most U.S. states responded by decriminalizing gay sex.

In 2014, California became the first state in the U.S. to officially ban the use of gay panic and transgender panic defenses in murder trials.[ Public schools are also required to teach about the history of the LGBT community and transgender students are allowed to choose the appropriate restroom or sports team that match their gender identity.

California is seen as one of the most liberal states in the U.S. in regard to lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender (LGBT) rights, which have received nationwide recognition since the 1970’s

976 – EVIL: Republicans John McCain and Marco Rubio Speak Out Against LGBT Equality


Despite the fact that the current version of the Employment Non-Discrimination Act (ENDA) is virtually worthless because it would not only allow but write into law that all religious organizations, businesses, schools, and even hospitals could discriminate against LGBT Americans legally. Republicans Marco Rubio and John McCain this week both issued histrionic statements this week against the beleaguered bill stating that it would lead to “reverse discrimination” and hurt small businesses.

Said McCain:

“Whether it imposes quotas, whether it has reverse discrimination, whether it has the kinds of provisions that really preserve equal rights for all citizens or, like for example, busing. Busing was done in the name of equality. Busing was a failure. Quotas were a failure. A lot of people thought they were solutions. They weren’t. They bred problems.

I think the young people know we do not need reverse discrimination, they don’t believe in quotas and they don’t believe in some of the programs we saw in the name of racial equality implemented in the past which turned out to be counterproductive,” he said. “Ask people in Boston if busing turned out to be a good idea.”

Marco Rubio on the other hand went the “small business” route claiming that ENDA could lead to “frivilous lawsuits”

Via spokeswoman:

“[Senator Rubio] believes people’s qualifications, performance and honesty are the most important qualities by which they should be judged in the workplace. If you’re a good worker, that’s all that should matter,” spokeswoman Brooke Sammon said. “This legislation goes far beyond protecting workers from discrimination based on sexual orientation, and he is currently studying what kinds of burdens it could impose on small businesses, frivolous lawsuits that could result, and ensuring that religious freedoms under the First Amendment are protected.”

So in a nutshell here’s what we have.  We have a bill that will prohibit LGBT discrimination but will give a free pass to those who do it the most and the GOP still won’t vote for it and probably won;t pass the House anyway and HRC and other LGBT organizations are wasting millions of dollars to try to get it passed.

Does this make sense to anyone?



Horrific Final Message From Father To His Son: “Get Straight”

In what this is messed up news, a man leaves a sadistic message final message to his son. Frank Mandelbaum, founder of  Intellicheck, an ID verification company, died in 2007 and left a message to his son, Robert, that in order to receive his inheritence he had to marry and have a child with a woman.

Robert married Jonathan O’Donnell shortly after their son, Cooper, was born via gestational carrier. It’s detailed in Frank’s will that any grandchildren born would receive a stake in the trust of $180000 which his other three grandchildren are already a part of. But there’s a sadistic catch to that.

An edict stipulates that the grandchild is unable to receive the trust if Robert is “not be married to the child’s mother within six months of the child’s birth.” So basically Robert would have to live a lie in order his children to receive. This makes Cooper ineligible to have the trust as Jonathan is the other parent and the egg donor is not involved in the child’s life.

Anne Bederka, a law guardian looking out for Cooper’s best interest stated

“Requiring a gay man to marry a woman . . . to ensure his child’s bequest is tantamount to expecting him either to live in celibacy, or to engage in extramarital activity with another man, and is therefore contrary to public policy. There is no doubt that what [Frank Mandelbaum] has sought to do is induce Robert to marry a woman.”

Robert feels that settling this legally because such a mandate to marry a woman knowing that he’s gay violates state law. Ann Freeman, wife of the deceased Frank stated in court papers that her husband’s estate would not allow Cooper to inherit from his grandfather’s estate:

“alleged that he had a son from a homosexual relationship which he believed should be a beneficiary . . . My husband’s will specifically prohibited such a child from becoming a beneficiary.”

Robert has said that his late father knew about his sexuality and about his husband, even noting that Jonathan was included in family vacations and dinners. Some sat that unless it has to do with employment that a last will can be discriminatory. How sad and honestly sadistic to leave that kind of hateful message to their family.

Music Icon Madonna Sued For Supporting Pussy Riot & Gay Rights In Recent Concert

It is reported that singer, actress, icon, and legend Madonna is being sued for $10.5 million (£6.6 million) by the Russian Anti-Gay groups because of her support of the band group Pussy Riot during her MDNA concert on August 9th.During the concert, Madonna reaffirmed her support for gay rights:

 “here to say that the gay community and gay people here and all around the world have the same rights to be treated with dignity, with respect, with tolerance, with compassion, with love,”

During the concert Madonna handed out anti-homophobia wristbands and during a performance of “Express Yourself” exposed her back with the band’s name in support. Madonna also held up rainbow colored signs in show that said “NO FEAR”.

The oppressors are claiming that Madonna’s recent performace supporting punk rock group Pussy Riot after their arrest protesting the Russian Government’s anti-gay rights stance siting her performance was “moral damage suffered by St. Petersburg residents”. A legal represnetative for the anti-gay groups suing said the performance was “psychological stress and emotional shock” as well as a“promotion of homosexuality.” Madonna is also being accused of disfiguring an Orthodox Cross.

Pussy Riot were arrested in March after their charged performance of “punk party”, a song that opposed Russian leader Vladimir Putin and the government’s extreme conservative views on gay rights.The three bandmembers were sentenced yesterday to two years in prison labeled as “hooliganism” Both Pussy Riot and Madonna have been staunch supporters of LGBT rights and equality.

Earler today. Madonna released a statement encouraging activist and advocates alike that the conviction of the band Pusssy Riot is unjust and encourages others to speak out:

“I protest the conviction and sentencing of Pussy Riot to a penal colony for two years for a 40 second performance extolling their political opinions. Even if one disagrees with the location or how they chose to express themselves, the sentence is too harsh and in fact is inhumane. I call on all those who love freedom to condemn this unjust punishment. I urge artists around the world to speak up in protest against this travesty. They’ve spent enough time in jail. I call on ALL of Russia to let Pussy Riot go free.”

As of the time of this article, there’s been no official comment from Madonna or her representatives on this ridiculous lawsuit.

Freedom vs Hate: Words Are Actions

Let’s put some things in perspective. There’s a difference between free speech and hate speech. Yes, our First Amendment right in this country gives us the right to speak freely on our differing opinions without the fear of  persecution. But let’s be honest, in some cases there are consequences to the words we use to express how we feel. If someone threatens another citizen of this country with physical harm, they can be criminally charged with that perceived threat. But what if the motivation of the threat comes from hate because of circumstances or something innate like gender, race, or sexuality?

There are laws that protect against race and gender but it’s not always the case with sexuality. What happens when someone is bullied to the point in harming themselves or others? Or when it potentially provokes others that support that particular sentiment and leads their actions? These actions  directed towards someone because of race, sexuality, gender, and even ability. There’s a difference between free speech and hate speech.

While most  states in the US have hate crime laws but they vary. Barely 1/3 of the states in our country have laws that protect from discrimation and harassment at the workplace of LGBTQ people. So I can not only be fired from a job because I’m gay but also be harassed and bullied because of my sexuality as well. Am I supposed to just endure this type of hate speech at work?  These words of actions can affect every aspect of my life but words are just words? Not in this context.

Despite what some conservative zealots would have you believe, saying of words never hurting is a lie. Words do hurt. Tired of denouncers of homosexuality failing to realize how much bullying can affect gay’s likelihood of committing suicide How is it Christian or Godlike to not care about another human being whose sexuality does not affect their life? Words are powerful enough to build civilization or destroy it. And this is not about taking rights away from anyone or amending those rights in anyway. But there is a a great need for the laws that govern us to protect all of the citizens in this country.

The point is that yes you can say whatever you wish and even though they may not have legal ramifications you damn well better believe that they’re just as powerful and do cause harm. This shouldn’t be a debate about free speech. This is not about taking rights away but ensuring everyone  is protected by laws that affect us. Laws, that while protecting one citizen have the potential to be unjust for others. And all should have the moral compass to be mindful of how our words affects others.

Maybe it’s the love everyone hippy mindset of mine, but I don’t want to see anyone hurting. The pain inflicted on the gay community; the threats, the bullying, the “Appreciation Day” are nothing more then expressions of  hate. Words are actions too,and our laws should protect everyone.