Over a decade ago in a somewhat jarring state legislative race in our area between a long time incumbent and a right wingnut challenger we observed the aftermath of large campaign sign vandalism. An acquaintance, he of a mathematics and computer science background, who also noticed the sign vandalism mentioned the spray painted message on the challenger’s sign by asking me, “What does big zero plus mean?” The typography of the spray painted tag wasn’t exactly evenly spaced. I replied that I thought the spray painting spelled out “bigot”. “Oh.”

We were both correct.

The Springfield, Missouri LGBT inclusive anti-discrimination ordinance was overturned by the voters in yesterday’s election by a very narrow margin:

SUMMARY REPORT                                    Greene County, Missouri

                                                 Municipal Election

                                                 April 7, 2015

RUN DATE:04/07/2015 08:40 PM

                                                                                             VOTES PERCENT

PRECINCTS COUNTED (OF 78) .  .  .  .  .        78  100.00              

REGISTERED VOTERS – TOTAL .  .  .  .  .   172,016                      

BALLOTS CAST – TOTAL.  .  .  .  .  .  .    40,681                      

VOTER TURNOUT – TOTAL  .  .  .  .  .  .             23.65

[….]

City of Springfield Question 1

YES  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .    15,347   51.43

NO.  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .    14,493   48.57

[emphasis added]

A “yes” vote was for repeal of the city ordinance.

Turnout was just under 24%. That, and the margin, ain’t exactly an overwhelming mandate for denying civil rights. Times are changing. That tiny margin will soon disappear.

This morning, at the Missouri Ethics Commission:

A151124 04/08/2015 YES ON QUESTION 1 National Black Robe Regiment PO Box 397 Aledo TX 76008 3/31/2015 $14,978.64

A151124 04/08/2015 YES ON QUESTION 1 National Black Robe Regiment PO Box 397 Aledo TX 76008 4/7/2015 $19,700.00

[emphasis added]

Who?

A151124: Yes On Question 1

G10-A East Battlefield Pmb 109 Committee Type: Campaign

Spring Field Mo 65807

[….] Established Date: 04/06/2015

  Termination Date:

Treasurer

Mike Tull

610-A East Battlefield Pmb 109

Springfield Mo 65807

  [….]

Ballot Measure History

Ballot Measures Election Date Subject Support/Oppose

Question 1 04/07/2015 Shall The City Of Springfield Repeal General Ordinance No 6141 Adopted By City Council 10/13/14 That Amended Chapter 2 On Human Rights & Community Relations/City Of Springfield Support

[emphasis added]

What? The day before the election?

National Black Robe Regiment? That sounds like a group name from the past appropriated for other purposes by a modern day lunatic.

What we know about Beck’s Black Robe Regiment

August 30, 2010 5:29 PM EDT

FAE JENCKS

This weekend, Glenn Beck announced the re-creation of a revolutionary force called the Black Robe Regiment. At his Restoring Honor rally on Saturday, Beck claimed that “our churches have fallen asleep” and that the “thousands of clergy” in the Regiment who subscribe to his particular views on the role of religion in American life, will “start the heart of this nation again and put it where it belongs: our heart with God….”

Yep.

Big zero plus.

 

Yesterday, via Twitter:

Jim White ‏@JW_for_Congress

Elections matter, see Brownback’s attack on civil rights. My rights are only as secure as yours. # Mo. don’t be a me too state. 5:04 PM – 11 Feb 2015

Somehow we don’t think Vicky Hartzler (r) agrees.

Same planet, different epochs.

Pennsylvania’s law banning same sex marriage and recognition of same sex marriages from other states was declared unconstitutional today.

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

DEB WHITEWOOD, et al.,Plaintiffs,

v.

MICHAEL WOLF, in his official

capacity as Secretary, Pennsylvania

Department of Health, et al., Defendants.

1:13-cv-1861

Hon. John E. Jones III

….we hold that Pennsylvania’s Marriage Laws violate both the Due Process and Equal Protection Clauses of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution. Because these laws are unconstitutional, we shall enter an order permanently enjoining their enforcement. By virtue of this ruling, same-sex couples who seek to marry in Pennsylvania may do so, and already married same-sex couples will be recognized as such in the Commonwealth.

The issue we resolve today is a divisive one. Some of our citizens are made deeply uncomfortable by the notion of same-sex marriage. However, that same-sex marriage causes discomfort in some does not make its prohibition constitutional. Nor can past tradition trump the bedrock constitutional guarantees of due process and equal protection….

….Similarly, in future generations the label same-sex marriage will be abandoned, to be replaced simply by marriage.

We are a better people than what these laws represent, and it is time to discard them into the ash heap of history….

[emphasis in original]

Missouri’s ban is not long for this world.

It’s bending.

A passerby reading the concert poster prior to last night’s performance

of Andrew Lippa’s “I am Marvey Milk” at the Folly Theater in downtown Kansas City.

A petition at the White House site:

We petition the Obama Administration to:

Revoke The Tennessee Religious Viewpoints Anti-discrimination Act

Tennessee governor Bill Haslam has just received a bill that allows and encourages anti-gay bullying in the name of “religious freedom.”

The ACLU warns that the bill, SB 1793/HB 1547, “crosses the line from protecting religious freedom into creating systematic imposition of some students’ personal religious viewpoints on other students.”

“Should this pass, students with a range of religious beliefs, as well as non-believers, would routinely be required to listen to religious messages or participate in religious exercises that conflict with their own beliefs,” the ACLU adds.

Article: http://www.thegailygrind.com/2…

Created: Mar 27, 2014

Issues: Civil Rights and Liberties, Education, Human Rights

Signatures needed by April 26, 2014 to reach goal of 100,000 72,065

Total signatures on this petition 27,935

[emphasis added]

There are still desperate vestiges of the past, but it’s bending.

Previously: HJR 85: the bend toward justice (March 28, 2014)

A bill, introduced yesterday by Senator Wayne Wallingford (r):

SECOND REGULAR SESSION

SENATE BILL NO. 916 [pdf]

97TH GENERAL ASSEMBLY

INTRODUCED BY SENATOR WALLINGFORD.

Read 1st time February 24, 2014, and ordered printed.

TERRY L. SPIELER, Secretary. 6183S.01I

AN ACT

To repeal sections 1.302 and 1.307, RSMo, and to enact in lieu thereof one new section relating to the exercise of religion.

Be it enacted by the General Assembly of the State of Missouri, as follows:

Section A. Sections 1.302 and 1.307, RSMo, are repealed and one new 2 section enacted in lieu thereof, to be known as section 1.302, to read as follows:

1.302. 1. [….] As used in this section, the following shall mean:

(1) “Demonstrates”, meets the burden of going forward with the evidence and of persuasion;

(2) “Exercise of religion”, an act or refusal to act that is substantially motivated by sincere religious belief, whether or not the religious exercise is compulsory or central to a larger system of religious belief;

(3) “Relevant circumstances”, includes legitimate penological interests needed to protect the safety and security of incarcerated persons and correctional facilities, but shall not include reasonable requests by incarcerated individuals for the opportunity to pray, reasonable access to clergy, use of religious materials that are not violent or profane, and reasonable dietary requests.

2. A governmental authority shall not substantially burden a person’s free exercise of religion, even if the burden results from a rule of general applicability, unless the governmental authority demonstrates that the burden on the person is essential to further a compelling governmental interest, and the burden is the least restrictive means to further that compelling interest, considering the relevant circumstances.

3. This section provides a claim or defense for state and local laws, resolutions and ordinances, and executive orders, and the implementation of such laws, resolutions, ordinances, and executive orders, whether statutory or otherwise, and whether adopted before or after August 28, 2014, which violate the free exercise of religion established pursuant to this section.

4. This section shall apply without regard to whether a state or local governmental authority is a party to the claim, proceeding, or other legal dispute.

5. Nothing in this section shall be construed:

(1) To authorize any governmental authority to burden any religious belief;

(2) To establish a defense to a civil action or criminal prosecution based on a federal, state, or local civil rights law involving discrimination as defined in section 213.010; or

(3) To allow any person to cause physical injury to another person, to possess a weapon otherwise prohibited by law, to fail to provide monetary support for a child or to fail to provide health care for a child suffering from a life-threatening condition.

[….]

[emphasis in original]

It’d be nice if there was an amendment which required businesses to disclose if they subscribed to and applied this if it becomes law. That way I’d know to take my business elsewhere.

In case you were wondering, LGBT individuals, their allies, their friends, and their families do spend money.

From the executive director of the Missouri Baptist Convention:

Response to the Landmark Supreme Court decisions

Decisions June 26 by the U.S. Supreme Court regarding California’s Proposition 8 and a key provision in the federal Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) do not sound the death knell for the marriage debate, according to John Yeats, executive director of the Missouri Baptist Convention….

“The Court’s decisions do not surprise us, but they disappoint us for at least two reasons,” said Yeats. “First, the branches of our federal government continue to chisel away states’ rights to carry out the will of their people. Second, and more disturbing, they reflect the fact that a growing number of Americans increasingly embrace behaviors that violate natural law and biblical truth. The Supreme Court had the opportunity to uphold marriage and return authority for marriage policy to citizens and their elected officials but chose instead to legislate from the bench.”

Even so, the marriage debate continues, said Yeats. Instead of casting rocks at the Court or bemoaning the advances of the gay agenda, Christians should stand on Scripture and search their own souls. One reason Christians seem to be losing the debate is because our lives don’t show evidence that morality truly makes a difference.

“Our divorce rates, sexual immorality, and other worldly pursuits mirror those of society in general,” he said. “Our words about God’s power to transform lives ring hollow because too often our actions show we don’t really believe it. Our example should always be Jesus. He showed the deepest compassion for the greatest sinners, yet He never compromised on the truth of human sinfulness and the need for God’s forgiveness….”

Previously:

Ding, dong, DOMA’s dead (June 26, 2013)

Last plaintiff without standing (June 26, 2013)

Rep. Vicky Hartzler (r): but, but, the Supreme Court ignored all the children (June 26, 2013)

Rep. Ann Wagner (r): forget the children, it’s all about states’ rights (June 26, 2013)

Rep. Vicky Hartzler (r): “Now that Michele Bachmann is leaving it’s my turn…” (June 26, 2013)

Previously:

Ding, dong, DOMA’s dead (June 26, 2013)

Last plaintiff without standing (June 26, 2013)

Rep. Vicky Hartzler (r): but, but, the Supreme Court ignored all the children (June 26, 2013)

Rep. Ann Wagner (r): forget the children, it’s all about states’ rights (June 26, 2013)

Via Twitter:

Rep. Vicky Hartzler ‏@RepHartzler

VIDEO: Led press conference on #SCOTUS #DOMA decision today. [….] 11:40 AM – 26 Jun 13

And there was one reply:

RJ Equality Ingram ‏@RJEquality

@RepHartzler Your opposition to equality & love will forever be recorded as a mistake in the congressional record, Congresswoman. 11:43 AM – 26 Jun 13

The video:

Representative Vicky Hartzler (r): Good morning, everyone. We’re here today to respond to the Supreme Court’s ruling on the Defense of Marriage Act and Proposition 8. We believe the court got it wrong on these rulings. The court’s activist ruling on the Defense of Marriage Act ignored the votes of a bipartisan majority of Congress. This is a dangerous precedent which strips power away from Congress with respect to defining national marriage policy. We must work to defend the rights of Americans to make marriage policy. Additionally, the Proposition 8 ruling is a loss for the millions of Americans who have gone to the ballot box to voice their support for marriage between one man and one woman. California’s governor and attorney general who refused to defend the people’s wishes abandoned the people of California is a loss for democratic self government [sic]. With the Supreme Court denying them standing they have left the people voiceless. While California silenced the voices of their citizens the Supreme Court has not created a constitutional right to same sex marriage. Thirty-eight states have affirmed the belief of their citizens that marriage exists between a man and a woman and is a necessary building block of stable society. The debate over marriage will continue with the states leading the way. We must work to defend the rights of Americans to make [garbled] policy. We should work to promote the truth of marriage between a man and a woman. It is wise policy to uphold the reality that every child deserves a mom and a dad and society as a whole benefits when they do….

“…Thirty-eight states have affirmed the belief of their citizens that marriage exists between a man and a woman and is a necessary building block of stable society…”

That horse left the barn a long time ago:

Barely Half of U.S. Adults Are Married – A Record Low

….In 1960, 72% of all adults ages 18 and older were married; today just 51% are. If current trends continue, the share of adults who are currently married will drop to below half within a few years. Other adult living arrangements-including cohabitation, single-person households and single parenthood-have all grown more prevalent in recent decades….

….The United States is by no means the only nation where marriage has been losing “market share” for the past half century. The same trend has taken hold in most other advanced post-industrial societies, and these long-term declines appear to be largely unrelated to the business cycle. The declines have persisted through good economic times and bad….

Damn. We’re all going to hell in a handbasket.

“…We should work to promote the truth of marriage between a man and a woman. It is wise policy to uphold the reality that every child deserves a mom and a dad and society as a whole benefits when they do…”

Again:

….We’re looking forward to Representative Hartzler (r) starting the process for constitutional amendments banning divorce and enforcing shotgun weddings….

We’ll be waiting with bated breath.

Previously:

Ding, dong, DOMA’s dead (June 26, 2013)

Last plaintiff without standing (June 26, 2013)

Rep. Vicky Hartzler (r): but, but, the Supreme Court ignored all the children (June 26, 2013)

A statement released today by Representative Ann Wagner (r) in reference to today’s two U.S. Supreme Court decisions on the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) and California’s Proposition 8:

Wagner Statement on Supreme Court’s Ruling on DOMA and Prop 8

Jun 26, 2013

Press Release

Washington, DC – Congresswoman Ann Wagner (R-MO) released the following statement in response to the Supreme Court’s ruling on the Defense of Marriage Act and Proposition 8:

“I believe in the sanctity of traditional marriage and believe that it should be up to states’ to determine the definition of marriage.  The people of Missouri have spoken and over 70% of Missourians’ decided that marriage should be between one man and one woman.  I will always support states’ rights and the people of Missouri have made their decision.”

I wonder if she’ll join Representative Vicky Hartzler (r) in sponsoring those constitutional amendments banning divorce and enforcing shotgun weddings. Nah. States’ rights.  

Previously:

Ding, dong, DOMA’s dead (June 26, 2013)

Last plaintiff without standing (June 26, 2013)

A statement released today by Representative Vicky Hartzler (r) in reference to today’s two U.S. Supreme Court decisions on the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) and California’s Proposition 8:

Hartzler statement on Supreme Court decision on the Defense of Marriage Act and Proposition 8

Jun 26, 2013

Congresswoman Vicky Hartzler (MO-4) has issued the following statement regarding today’s Supreme Court decision on the Defense of Marriage Act and Proposition 8:

“Today the Court got it wrong. The activist ruling on the Defense of Marriage Act ignored the votes of a bipartisan majority of Congress. This alarming precedent disempowers Congress from making national policy with respect to marriage. We must work to defend the rights of Americans to make marriage policy. We should work to promote the truth of marriage between a man and a woman. It is wise public policy upholding the reality that every child needs a mom and a dad, and society benefits when they do.”

“Additionally, the court ignored the voices of millions of Californians who went to the ballot box twice to protect marriage. Their Governor and Attorney General, who refused to defend the people’s wishes, abandoned the people of California. With the Supreme Court denying them standing, they trampled on the people’s rights and left them voiceless. This is a serious loss for democratic self-government and the rights of the people to stand for marriage as the union between one man and one woman. While California has tried to silence the voices of their citizens, the Supreme Court has not created a Constitutional right to same-sex marriage. We will continue to work to protect marriage laws defining marriage as a union between a man and a woman across the country.”

Congresswoman Hartzler serves on the House Agriculture, Budget, and Armed Services Committees.

“…It is wise public policy upholding the reality that every child needs a mom and a dad, and society benefits when they do…”

We’re looking forward to Representative Hartzler (r) starting the process for constitutional amendments banning divorce and enforcing shotgun weddings.

Yeah, keep flogging that icky gay people thing. That’s gonna work really well in 2014 and 2016.

Today the U.S. Supreme Court, 5-4, punted on California’s Proposition 8 which repealed gay marriage in that state:

HOLLINGSWORTH ET AL. v. PERRY ET AL. [pdf]

CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

No. 12-144. Argued March 26, 2013-Decided June 26, 2013

….We have never before upheld the standing of a private party to defend the constitutionality of a state statute when state officials have chosen not to. We decline to do so for the first time here.

Because petitioners have not satisfied their burden to demonstrate standing to appeal the judgment of the District Court, the Ninth Circuit was without jurisdiction to consider the appeal. The judgment of the Ninth Circuit is vacated, and the case is remanded with instructions to dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction.

It is so ordered.

This ruling effectively restores gay marriage in California, the Supreme Court ruling that the people who brought the case to overturn the overturning (think about that for a second) do not have standing to bring the case to the court.