CHANGE.ORG
Published February 10, 2009 @ 06:44PM PST
Starr, who has been a little media shy since joining the legal team of protectmarriage.com, told those gathered that marriage is regulated in society in many ways, according to the Associated Baptist Press.
"Plural marriage, which is lawful in 28 countries that are members of the United Nations, would not be recognized [in the U.S.]," said Starr. "There are many, many regulations [on marriage] -- age regulations and so forth."
Barf. That's the same, tired talking point that anti-LGBT crusaders have been peddling for years when it comes to the issue of same-sex marriage. Starr also went on to tell the Nashville audience that the original California Supreme Court decision that legalized same-sex marriage was "very cultural," and countered the history and tradition of marriage in the U.S.
Sure enough, the original California Supreme Court decision may have countered Starr's and protectmarriage.com's warped view of what constitutes a marriage, but it certainly did nothing to uproot society's culture. It has long been a part of our culture to combat inequality and violations of civil rights whenever and wherever they are seen. That was the intent of the original decision to legalize same-sex marriage in California. As Chief Justice Ron George wrote for the majority, "An individual's sexual orientation -- like a person's race or gender -- does not constitute a legitimate basis upon which to deny or withhold legal rights."
Starr is arguing the same tired bullshit and using the same tired legal argument that gay marriage is tantamount to plural marriage. Thankfully, as people increasingly realize that same-sex marriage is a civil rights issue, they are buying less and less into Starr's version of the truth.
We're still a few weeks away from the start of arguments before the California Supreme Court on Proposition 8. But from where we stand, Ken Starr's defense of Prop 8 puts him squarely in the company of people who supported the Board of Education in Topeka, Kansas in 1954, or those that supported Virginia's anti-miscegenation laws in 1967.
The California Supreme Court announced today that it will hear oral arguments on Thursday, March 5, 2009 in the Proposition 8 legal challenge. The National Center for Lesbian Rights, Lambda Legal, and the ACLU—with support from civil rights groups, religious organizations, labor unions, and legal scholars—argue that Proposition 8 is invalid because the people of California have established strict safeguards that prohibit the underlying principles of the California Constitution from being changed by a simple majority vote. By taking away a right only from one group, Proposition 8 violates the most basic principle of our government: that all people are entitled to equal treatment under the law.
The California Supreme Court will ultimately have to decide the fate of Proposition 8, but late yesterday, California Attorney General Jerry Brown weighed in with his office's verdict on the matter, and it's a win for supporters of marriage equality. Jerry Brown's thoughts? 
