For Gay Marriage Foes, Transparency Is the Enemy

by Michael Jones · 2010-01-09 13:28:00 UTC
Topics:

DiscriminationThe "will it or won't it be televised" question surrounding Perry v. Schwarzenegger, the federal court trial challenging California's ban on same-sex marriage, has been filled with enough twists and turns over the past 48 hours to make an episode of Lost look like an infomercial.

First there was Judge Vaughn Walker's ruling that the trial could be recorded, but would be tape delayed and only available via avenues like YouTube. Then, in response to that decision, one of the defendants in the case decided to ask if he could back out. On top of that, the National Organization for Marriage sent out an action alert to their membership accusing Judge Walker of being in the pocket of the gay rights movement and that gay marriage foes would probably lose.

And now, to add even more mystery and suspense, gay marriage opponents have decided to appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court with a Hail Mary plea to kick cameras, even if their footage is tape-delayed, out of the courtroom.

What's the lesson in all of this? Well, the first lesson is that litigation is one hell of a roller coaster ride. The second lesson? That foes of gay marriage will go to any length be secretive. Why are they so afraid of transparency? After all, if they're so proud of their opposition to gay marriage, why hide it?

That's the question that Chad Griffin, President of the American Foundation for Equal Rights (AFER), wants to know the answer to. AFER is the organization pushing the federal court case challenging Prop 8.

“Those who want to ban gay marriage spent millions of dollars to reach the public with misleading ads, rallies and news conferences during the campaign to pass Prop. 8. We are curious why they now fear the publicity they once craved,” said Chad Griffin, Board President of the American Foundation for Equal Rights. “Apparently transparency is their enemy, but the people deserve to know exactly what it is they have to hide.”

Transparency is the enemy. Yup, that's the message to take home in all of this.

Meanwhile, the New Yorker has weighed in on the LGBT rights court case to perhaps end all other court cases. Outside of The American Prospect's take on this case, it's probably the best feature article covering the ins and outs of this monumental litigation. The New Yorker recognizes that on its surface, this case seems all-but destined for the U.S. Supreme Court. They ask: Is it too soon?

That's a question so many of us are wondering. Monday marks the beginning of the biggest gay rights trial in history. And if the pre-trial proceedings have been a hell of a ride, just wait until this case starts.

Photo: Albany_Tim

Michael Jones is a Change.org Editor. He has worked in the field of human rights communications for a decade, most recently for Harvard Law School.
PREVIOUS STORY:
In Sickness, Health ... And Silence
NEXT STORY:
Bullied high schooler convinces MPAA to change ‘Bully’ rating to “PG-13”

COMMENTS (8)

    Comment Policy

    · All fields are required to comment.

    [X]

    Comments on Change.org are meant for further exploration and evaluation of the campaign on Change.org. To that end, we welcome constructive comments. However, we reserve the right to delete comments which, as determined solely in our discretion: (1) are offensive, abusive, or off-topic; (2) include content solely intended to personally attack the campaign creator, (3) are designed to subvert or hijack comment threads rather than contribute to them; and/or (4) violate our terms of service and/or privacy policy. Repeat offenders may be permanently removed from the site at our discretion. Please also be advised that: (A) we do not actively curate and/or monitor in any manner whatsoever the comments made on the Change.org platform, and (B) the creator of each campaign on Change.org may remove any comment at her/his/its discretion.