Take your own sweet time Mayor Franklin. And then respond: "You give a little, & maybe I'll give a little." -- Court challenge to const. amd't # 1.
As with my series about Rep. Chuck Sims*, I recognize that I am close to beating to death the topic discussed in my 11-15-04 post entitled "I'm with Speaker-elect Glenn Richardson on this one. -- Plaintiffs in court challenge to Constitutional Amendment # 1 suffer dementia if they think suit is best for Georgia."
That post stated:
"My 11-11-04 post titled in part "Is the GOP hoping for Supreme Court defeat?" The answer "yes" as discussed in the series of posts linked in this 11-11-04 post is so obvious that the question asked is no more than a rheorical one.
"The GOP can hardly contain itself at the very prospect of being able to have another referendum on the ballot in Nov. 2006 if amendment # 1 is declared unconstitional because it violated the Georgia constitution's single-subject rule."
But as Mick Jagger says, "I can't get no satisfaction." And satisfaction for me isn't just being my way or the highway. I might be mistaken; have overlooked or not considered something. But we'll never know. Those bringing and responsible for bringing the court challenge desire no dialogue to ferret out of the issues.
The reasons for the second part of this title to this post are reflected in the above-noted posts and the links contained therein.
The "Take your own sweet time Mayor Franklin. Respond: You give a little, and maybe I'll give a little" has reference to the following article in the 11-26-04 ajc. (And as stated several times in my posts, in politics, to get along, sometimes you have to go along, and we sure need those filing the lawsuit to go along on this one.)
And short of some major development, this is my last post on the topic. For both now and in the future, and the future includes 2006. Those who have brought and are responsible for bringing the lawsuit, along with the gay community's leadership that could exert leadership, have at it.
You are in the process of making your bed, and it will be yours to lie in.
______________
Gay group wants mayor to act now
The state's largest gay rights organization is pressing Atlanta Mayor Shirley Franklin to either enforce the city's Human Rights Ordinance as it is or come up with a plan to strengthen it so it can survive a court challenge.
Last week, the mayor said the law, which was passed in 2000 ostensibly to end discrimination against gay people, was poorly drafted and may not survive a lawsuit. Franklin told a group of gay business people she was "stuck" about enforcing the ordinance and risking a lawsuit. When running for office, Franklin had said she would enforce it. Later, her administration revised the legislation to strengthen the wording.
This year, however, the ordinance faced its first test when a city commission found that the Druid Hills Golf Club was discriminating against gays. In January, the Human Relations Commission found the club was discriminating by not granting partners of gay members the same benefits as spouses of married members. The ordinance gives the mayor authority to take punitive action — including revocation of liquor licenses or business licenses — against a public accommodation found to be discriminating.
The mayor, however, has taken no action against Druid Hills. The 1,100-member club has threatened a lawsuit if Franklin takes action.
Chuck Bowen, executive director of Georgia Equality, which claims about 15,000 members statewide, said the mayor did not say how she planned to revamp the ordinance to bolster gay rights in the city.
"She is riding the proverbial political fence and she is going to have to fall one way or the other," Bowen said.
Franklin's office did not respond to repeated inquiries. Cathy Woolard, the former City Council president who sponsored the ordinance, would not comment.
The Druid Hills case was brought by two gay members of the club, Randy New and Lee Kyser. New is a former head of Georgia Equality. Kyser's partner, Lawrie Demorest, has been a high-ranking member of several of Woolard's campaigns.
Georgia Equality, which strongly supported Franklin's election in 2001, has been pressing the mayor to take action for months. The club, meanwhile, has argued that the ordinance is unenforceable and unconstitutional.
Reached this week, club president T. Kent Smith had no comment on Franklin's remarks or Georgia Equality's response.
Bowen said of Franklin's remarks that "We don't need to be lectured, we don't need to hear blame being assigned to a previous administration. We just need the mayor to do her job."
Georgia Equality's public call for Franklin to act comes at a low ebb in its political influence, particularly on the issues of marriage and spousal benefits. Gay activists suffered a drubbing at the Georgia polls Nov. 2, when a proposal to amend the Georgia Constitution to ban gay marriage passed by almost 80 percent statewide. The proposal, strongly supported by the Republican Party, even passed in urban, mostly Democratic, areas such as Fulton and DeKalb counties.
_______________
* I might have beat the Rep. Chuck Sims topic to death, but Chuck himself remains alive and well, and any party switcher will always remain fair game.
That post stated:
"My 11-11-04 post titled in part "Is the GOP hoping for Supreme Court defeat?" The answer "yes" as discussed in the series of posts linked in this 11-11-04 post is so obvious that the question asked is no more than a rheorical one.
"The GOP can hardly contain itself at the very prospect of being able to have another referendum on the ballot in Nov. 2006 if amendment # 1 is declared unconstitional because it violated the Georgia constitution's single-subject rule."
But as Mick Jagger says, "I can't get no satisfaction." And satisfaction for me isn't just being my way or the highway. I might be mistaken; have overlooked or not considered something. But we'll never know. Those bringing and responsible for bringing the court challenge desire no dialogue to ferret out of the issues.
The reasons for the second part of this title to this post are reflected in the above-noted posts and the links contained therein.
The "Take your own sweet time Mayor Franklin. Respond: You give a little, and maybe I'll give a little" has reference to the following article in the 11-26-04 ajc. (And as stated several times in my posts, in politics, to get along, sometimes you have to go along, and we sure need those filing the lawsuit to go along on this one.)
And short of some major development, this is my last post on the topic. For both now and in the future, and the future includes 2006. Those who have brought and are responsible for bringing the lawsuit, along with the gay community's leadership that could exert leadership, have at it.
You are in the process of making your bed, and it will be yours to lie in.
______________
Gay group wants mayor to act now
The state's largest gay rights organization is pressing Atlanta Mayor Shirley Franklin to either enforce the city's Human Rights Ordinance as it is or come up with a plan to strengthen it so it can survive a court challenge.
Last week, the mayor said the law, which was passed in 2000 ostensibly to end discrimination against gay people, was poorly drafted and may not survive a lawsuit. Franklin told a group of gay business people she was "stuck" about enforcing the ordinance and risking a lawsuit. When running for office, Franklin had said she would enforce it. Later, her administration revised the legislation to strengthen the wording.
This year, however, the ordinance faced its first test when a city commission found that the Druid Hills Golf Club was discriminating against gays. In January, the Human Relations Commission found the club was discriminating by not granting partners of gay members the same benefits as spouses of married members. The ordinance gives the mayor authority to take punitive action — including revocation of liquor licenses or business licenses — against a public accommodation found to be discriminating.
The mayor, however, has taken no action against Druid Hills. The 1,100-member club has threatened a lawsuit if Franklin takes action.
Chuck Bowen, executive director of Georgia Equality, which claims about 15,000 members statewide, said the mayor did not say how she planned to revamp the ordinance to bolster gay rights in the city.
"She is riding the proverbial political fence and she is going to have to fall one way or the other," Bowen said.
Franklin's office did not respond to repeated inquiries. Cathy Woolard, the former City Council president who sponsored the ordinance, would not comment.
The Druid Hills case was brought by two gay members of the club, Randy New and Lee Kyser. New is a former head of Georgia Equality. Kyser's partner, Lawrie Demorest, has been a high-ranking member of several of Woolard's campaigns.
Georgia Equality, which strongly supported Franklin's election in 2001, has been pressing the mayor to take action for months. The club, meanwhile, has argued that the ordinance is unenforceable and unconstitutional.
Reached this week, club president T. Kent Smith had no comment on Franklin's remarks or Georgia Equality's response.
Bowen said of Franklin's remarks that "We don't need to be lectured, we don't need to hear blame being assigned to a previous administration. We just need the mayor to do her job."
Georgia Equality's public call for Franklin to act comes at a low ebb in its political influence, particularly on the issues of marriage and spousal benefits. Gay activists suffered a drubbing at the Georgia polls Nov. 2, when a proposal to amend the Georgia Constitution to ban gay marriage passed by almost 80 percent statewide. The proposal, strongly supported by the Republican Party, even passed in urban, mostly Democratic, areas such as Fulton and DeKalb counties.
_______________
* I might have beat the Rep. Chuck Sims topic to death, but Chuck himself remains alive and well, and any party switcher will always remain fair game.
posted by Sid Cottingham | 6:08 AM
2 Comments:
Personally, it's hard for me to get all that upset about discrimination against gay couples at a country club. It's a private club, so they are entitled to invite whoever they want to be members. I don't really understand the big deal about letting same-sex partners of members have the same benefits as people married to members. Some of it probably goes back to the legal ambiguity of gay relationships. A lot of it is probably just because country club people don't like gays. Whichever it is, this is a dumb issue for anyone to get too worked up over.
As for Atlanta's anti-discrimination law...I think it probably is unconstitutional--even without Amendment 1. The thing seems to me to have been poorly written, and probably should go to court so it can be overturned.
Your insight is invaluable Joseph. Hope you and yours had a great Thanksgiving.
Post a Comment
<< Home