EDITION: U.S.
 
CONNECT    

GET UPDATES FROM Robin Tyler
 

Notes From the First Plaintiff in Tyler v. The State of CA

Posted: 1/11/10

The author is a petitioner in the CA Supreme Court case to overturn Prop 8. (Tyler v. State of California), the first plaintiff in the case which brought marriage equality to California, if only for a brief time.

I was at the Pasadena Federal Courthouse early this morning when the press told me that the Olson/Boies Federal trial to overturn Proposition 8 in California would not be broadcast today.
The Federal Supreme Court ordered a two-day postponement of any broadcast of this trial outside of the San Francisco Courthouse. The 'Yes on 8' people maintain that it might affect their ability to be open in the courthouse, backed up by the excuse that they are afraid that our community might commit violence against them.

Excuse me?

This is akin to someone stepping on our head and then telling us their foot hurts and it's our fault.

In the past few years, The 'Yes on 8' people have appeared all over television, including but not limited to news shows, talk shows, CNN, and so forth. We know who they are. So, why don't they want to be filmed in the courtroom? Because they don't want the cameras on them when they are 'under oath,' because under oath, and cross-examined by great attorneys, they may have to tell the truth. These bigots don't want the cameras on them when they are questioned about the lies and misinformation they put out about same-sex marriage. The 'Yes on 8' campaign was one of the most viscous, vitriolic, untruthful campaigns in US history. Their ads were false, and misleading. They lied and smeared our community in their advertisements, and in every interview they did. And 52% of the California voters believed them. For the first time in US history, a minority was taken out of a constitution. The six CA Supreme Court justices who ruled against us and to uphold Prop 8 ruled on one word only: Reelection. And now, two of the greatest attorneys in the United States, a conservative and a liberal, neither of whom is gay, have filed in Federal Court to overturn that unconstitutional decision.

The bigots and liars who led the 'Yes on 8' campaign want to hide behind their religious beliefs in order to justify discrimination against our community, just as they did in 1948 when they unsuccessfully tried to prevent interracial marriage. "It will ruin marriage." "It is against God's plan," and so forth.

So, now these 'Yes on 8' people are painting our community as the villains, and themselves as the victims.

They say we marched to the huge, gated, Mormon Church in Los Angeles and left a paint stain on their fence. Yes, tens of thousands of us marched all summer in a number of places. A paint stain on a fence? Well, the 'Yes on 8' people left a stain on the Constitution of California. They say we boycotted business who supported Prop 8. Yes, we did. Why would we support a business who does not support equal rights for us?

No, the Prop 8 people don't want their testimony to be broadcast. After all, they may not be able to lie under oath, or justify the total immoral, unethical smear campaign that they ran for Yes on 8.

We've seen this before in civil rights movements. That's why the Ku Klux Klan wore hoods.
They were cowards who hid behind their disgusting, bigoted philosophy, and caused so much physical and mental harm, all the while feeling safe because in anonymity.

The LGBT community did not hurt anyone in our demonstrations. We were rightfully angry beyond belief. And now, the perpetrators are hiding behind their hoods.

Hopefully, in two days the Federal Supreme Court will do the right thing and reverse its decision and let the public see and know what happened in the Yes on 8 campaign.

It is a disservice to the entire national community, gay and straight, to not be able to see the footage -- and therefore, the truth of these proceedings. For without truth, there can be no justice, and justice should not mean 'just us.'

 
The author is a petitioner in the CA Supreme Court case to overturn Prop 8. (Tyler v. State of California), the first plaintiff in the case which brought marriage equality to California, if only for a...
The author is a petitioner in the CA Supreme Court case to overturn Prop 8. (Tyler v. State of California), the first plaintiff in the case which brought marriage equality to California, if only for a...
 
  • Comments
  • 9
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Recency  | 
Popularity
02:25 AM on 01/14/2010
This is a brilliant piece! Thank you.

I saw your speech at the State Capitol with your wife and Gloria Allred after the Prop 8 vote. You were incredible­.

We lost Harvey, but if you'd get out more (no pun intended) and start getting more coverage we may just have found a new leader.

You have been consistent­ly eloquent and passionate and your message resonates. LOUDER PLEASE!

All the best.
08:20 PM on 01/28/2010
Thank you so much for your support. Robin
photo
HUFFPOST PUNDIT
Artemis34
Mommy says the rich men need our food stamps.
02:01 AM on 01/14/2010
http://www­.huffingto­npost.com/­2010/01/13­/supreme-c­ourt-no-ca­meras-_n_4­22481.html
Supreme Court: No Cameras At Gay Marriage Trial

You said it, Cowards!
photo
HUFFPOST PUNDIT
Artemis34
Mommy says the rich men need our food stamps.
09:26 PM on 01/11/2010
From Courage Campaign:

"The bad news: Opponents of marriage equality filed an emergency appeal with the U.S. Supreme Court on Saturday, begging to hide the trial from the American public. And a few hours ago, the Supreme Court delayed their decision until Wednesday.

Prop 8 supporters and anti-equal­ity organizati­ons like the National Organizati­on for Marriage have spent tens of millions of dollars on 30-second ads scaring the American people into thinking that same-sex marriage will destroy our country. And now, when federal judges want to open the courtrooms to America, Prop 8 supporters want to unplug the TV.

What are they hiding? And what are organizati­ons like NOM and Focus on the Family willing to do and say to keep the American people from finding out the truth?

The Prop 8 trial starts today. That's why the Courage Campaign Institute is launching the "Prop 8 Trial Tracker" -- a web site that will hold right-wing organizati­ons accountabl­e for what they say every day of the Prop 8 trial. We need your support immediatel­y. Will you contribute $25, $50, $100 or more right now to help us get the truth out ASAP?"

http://www­.courageca­mpaign.org­/GetTheTru­thOut
photo
StevenKeirstead
Photographer and Biologist who happens to be gay.
09:06 PM on 01/11/2010
Good Luck in the case! Thank you for doing this Robin.
08:23 PM on 01/28/2010
Did you notice the Yes on 8 people only put on a couple of people to testify for their side?
It never was about us threatenin­g them. They did not want their Homophobia put on trial
for every one to see. My friend, John Ireland, is taping (and puting on the web) a reinactmen­t
of this trial. They cannot and will not silence us any more. Robin
photo
HUFFPOST PUNDIT
Artemis34
Mommy says the rich men need our food stamps.
08:26 PM on 01/11/2010
Thank you for writing this and making the case. You are right of course, they are cowards. If they were not cowards and liars, they would not be ashamed.

Now we have to get the names revealed of who signed the petition to take away domestic partnershi­p rights in Washington State. We can't let them continue to do these assaults in secrecy!

I just heard the Supreme Court will not allow it on YouTube. Is that right?

Keep up the fight, Robin.
08:30 PM on 01/28/2010
I am sorry I am so late in getting back to you, but was ill last week. Yes, we should
get names of people who vote against us. I absolutely do not want to support the business
of anyone who will not support our civil rights. We here in LA, after tens of thousands of people
were on the streets for months, never physically attacked anyone who was against us.
I was there in the front lines in Silverlake­, when the mounted police did not want us to march into Hollywood. They asked us to wait so they could resolve it with their command post. 15,000 of us waited, and did not rush the police, and did not threaten them. The police were finally given permission to let us through, as the street closures had to be worked out, which is what caused the delay. Even though we were angry, raging angry, we did not want any one (them or us) to be hurt. So, tell the anti-gay bigots to come out of their closets, whoever they are. We did.
05:58 PM on 01/11/2010
The judge that ruled delaying the broadcast should be ashamed of him/hersel­f.
There are no facts to justify overruling the publics right to know in this case. The judge must know this. Therefore before the case has even started questions about the impartiali­ty of the judge arise.