Gay Orgs Don't Want Federal Lawsuit , (lawsuit isn't theirs and no way to make money)

Let talk about one reason that they aren't talking about,, this suit wasn't bought by them they didn't have they sticky hands in on it.. If they are not apart of the Lawsuit they can't ask us for money that is the main reason.. Last November Prop8 bought in Millions of dollars for these groups that is what they were hoping for this time again as well..

Former U.S. Solicitor General Theodore B. Olson and David Boies, who represented then-Vice President Al Gore in the contested election, have joined forces to tackle the same-sex marriage issue, which has deeply divided Californians and left 18,000 gay couples married last year in legal isolation. In a project of the American Foundation for Equal Rights, Olson and Boies have united to represent two same-sex couples filing suit after being denied marriage licenses because of Proposition 8. Their suit, to be filed in U.S. District Court in California, calls for an injunction against the proposition, allowing immediate reinstatement of marriage rights for same-sex couples.

See they didn't help with it.. they now have no rights to used this lawsuit as a money making machine for them...That is why they are against a Lawsuit..

These groups wants another prop8 measure to fleece the gay community of millions and millions of dollars for their coffers.

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE:

May 27, 2009, New York, NY
PRESS CONTACT:
Evan Wolfson
Executive Director, Freedom to Marry
Tel: 212-851-8418; Mobile: 646-263-5552
Email: evan@freedomtomarry.org

New York, May 27, 2009 — In response to the California Supreme Court decision allowing Prop 8 to stand, four LGBT legal organizations and five other leading national LGBT groups are reminding the LGBT community that ill-timed lawsuits could set the fight for marriage back. The groups released a new publication, “Why the ballot box and not the courts should be the next step on marriage in California.” This publication discourages people from bringing premature lawsuits based on the federal Constitution because, without more groundwork, the U.S. Supreme Court likely is not yet ready to rule that same-sex couples cannot be barred from marriage. The groups also revised “Make Change, Not Lawsuits,” which was released after the California Supreme Court decision ending the ban on marriage for same-sex couples in California. This publication encourages couples who have legally married to ask friends, neighbors and institutions to honor their marriages, but discourages people from bringing lawsuits.

"Why the ballot box and not the courts should be the next step on marriage in California” is available at http://www.freedomtomarry.org/pdfs/why_the_ballot_box.pdf

"Make Change, Not Lawsuits" is available at http://www.freedomtomarry.org/pdfs/make_change_not_lawsuits-0509_update.pdf

Man Who Infected Ex-Wife With HIV Ordered to Pay $12.5 Million

A six-year legal battle may be coming to an end now that a Los Angeles County superior court judge has ordered a man to pay $12.5 million for infecting his former wife with HIV.

The Los Angeles couple, called "Bridget B." and "John B." in court documents, have been sparring in courtrooms for years over who infected whom first. In 2006 the case reached the California supreme court, which decided Bridget's case against John could go forward, and that a person would be held liable for failing to inform a new partner of previous risky sexual behavior.

In Friday's ruling Judge Rolf Treu said John B. acted with fraud and malice by lying about his past risky sexual behavior, and ordered him to pay his former wife $5 million for future loss of earnings and $7.5 million in general damages, according to the Los Angeles Times .

Two months after the couple's October 2000 honeymoon, Bridget B. tested positive for HIV and was guilt-ridden, believing she may have exposed her husband to the disease. But two years later Bridget B. discovered John. B. had visited sexually explicit gay websites and found e-mails showing he had unprotected sex with men he met online. In her testimony Bridget B. claimed John B. admitted to her he had sex with two men prior to their marriage.

John B. represented himself in the trial and argued that Bridget B. infected him first. (Neal Broverman, The Advocate)

What if he didn't know he was postive, these judge and juries in CA just love to make new law, I wonder how many lawsuit eill now be file against ex-lovers now. Just goes to show how f-up CA really is, no wonder the citizens of CA took Gay marraige back (away)

233,000 Americans May Unknowingly Have HIV

I guess that 233,000 lawsuits waiting to happen thanks to CA.....

Why are we protesting in NC for what happen in CA

The passage of Prop. 8 in California is not a "California Issue." It is a setback for equal civil rights for all Americans. And-- it is important that North Carolinians band together en masse this Saturday in Raleigh, in solidarity with millions across our nation.

So here is what YOU CAN DO. Each and every one of you- whether you are attending or not-- can take personal responsibility for contacting 10 of your friends and securing their pledge to attend. Coordinate transportation amongst them; and then ask them to recruit 10 of their friends and family.

I want to see a minimum of 500 people turn out in Raleigh. And if you work hard, that number could exceed 1,000.

Many of you busted your buts get Obama elected. But your job did not end on November 4th. I'm here to tell you: there's much work to be done. CHANGE is about action on your part and my part. CHANGE manifests itself when people come together for a purpose.

Attend, recruit, organize, canvas online-- you know the drill.

If the rights guaranteed all Americans under the 1st and 14th Amendments to our Constitution are denied to a single person, then the rights of any American are threatened. Think about it.

This is a nationwide event guys. Do you want NC to record only 100 or so people present? I'll be there. I'd be there for anyone whose civil rights were under assault. This has nothing to do with my being gay.

Standing up for each other is as fundamental as is voting as a means of protecting our democracy.

I would greatly appreciate your support.

Why are we doing this? Please tell me what we are going to gain by protesting here?

SNT: "shocking" Governor Schwarzenegger Vetoes Harvey Milk Day,

This week, California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger vetoed a bill which would have made Milk's birthday a state-wide "day of significance."

Milk was the United States first openly gay man to hold a public office and was murdered, along with San Francisco mayor George Mascone, in 1978. Conservative groups pressured the governor to employ his veto power.

Schwarzenegger said he respected the intent of the bill, but "contributions should continue to be recognized at the local level."

This shock you how? Please everyone knew that sorry SOB wasn't going to sign it in to law. I remember the rumors about Arnold being gay and having a sugar daddy in the USA when he first came to the States. I'm just so glad that he isn't a natural born citizen, and because of this he can never be President of the USA. Then again there is this: Schwarzenegger is shown smoking a marijuana joint after winning Mr. Olympia in the 1975 documentary film Pumping Iron. In October 2007, Schwarzenegger defended his actions with the claim that, "[Cannabis] is not a drug. It's a leaf." Yet if there was a bill to legalize Cannabis, i bet he would veto it too.