Ken Starr joins Prop. 8’s defense team.
By on Dec 20th, 2008 at 8:30 am
Ken Starr joins Prop. 8’s defense team.
Ken Starr, the lawyer who crusaded for years against President Clinton and led the impeachment effort, is now signing up to defend Proposition 8, California’s voter-approved same-sex marriage ban. State Attorney General Jerry Brown is asking the state Supreme Court to overturn the measure, “saying the voter-approved ban on same-sex marriage violates basic rights guaranteed in the state Constitution.” A revision — rather than an amendment — to the state Constitution would require a two-thirds vote of the Legislature. The Prop. 8 Legal Defense Fund announced that “Starr will argue the case before the California Supreme Court on behalf of Proposition 8’s official proponents.”
View Most Popular
Advertisement
What We're About
What We're Fighting For
What We're Fighting Against
Featured
Subscribe to the Progress Report
Topic CloudView topics sorted by popularity
Afghanistan
Bachmann
Beck
Boehner
Business
Cheney
Civil Rights
Congress
Corporate Ethics
Dobbs
Economy
Education
Election
Energy
Environment
Ethics
Fox News
Gingrich
Glenn Beck
Global Warming
Health Care
Immigration
International Relations
Justice
LGBT
Lieberman
Limbaugh
Media
Military
O'Reilly
Obama
Palin
Pelosi
Politics
Race
Radical Right
Religion
Sports
Steele
Stimulus
Tea Parties
Tea Party
Terrorism
Veterans
Women's Rights
Visit Our Affiliated Sites
Reports
In-depth studies on select topics
Got a hot tip?
Have a hot news tip? We'd love to hear from you. Use the form below to send us the latest.
ArchivesBlog Roll
makes sense that a slimy, anti-ethical, immoral proposition would be defended by same.
December 20th, 2008 at 8:31 amYet another bridge to nowhere for Kenny. I’m looking forward to the 0-3 — a good sign that the lynch mob will be overturned.
December 20th, 2008 at 8:36 amI wish these wingers would stop thinking about sex all the time.
December 20th, 2008 at 8:40 amTalk about “the usual suspects”! What a farce.
California AG Jerry Brown has had a change of tactic and is now going to fight Prop 8 — I think he’s on the right track.
The Constant Weader at http://www.RealityChex.com
December 20th, 2008 at 9:02 amFrank Rich, in an outstanding op-ed about the witch hunt to get Clinton, referred to Ken Starr and his little band of henchmen as “epicene men”. Look up the meaning of epicene if you aren’t familiar with the term. It’s a great description.
December 20th, 2008 at 9:47 amI say have at it…let these hate groups blow their wads on legal fees.
December 20th, 2008 at 9:50 amRaptureReady Says:
Guido the Loving OBGYN Says:
——————————————————————————–
Our forefathers were businessmen and lawyers, intellectuals and inventors.
December 20th, 2008 at 10:06 am Recommend (0) | Report Abuse
——————————————————————————–
Who were christians.
*
with a small “c”.
:)
December 20th, 2008 at 10:09 amhey, ruptured rectum;
December 20th, 2008 at 10:10 amin this secular country of ours, marriage is a legal contract. thus you need a marriage certificate in order to be married. get it through your thick skull.
RaptureReady is proof positive that there is NO GOD.
December 20th, 2008 at 10:15 am“Our forefathers were businessmen and lawyers, intellectuals and inventors. Who were christians.”
ruptured rectum, did the snake tell that to you when you were speaking in tongues to it at your three day tent revival, ya freak?
December 20th, 2008 at 10:15 amHi Darryl:
December 20th, 2008 at 10:22 amDon’t you understand that I don’t give a flying f uck what your great big book of everything says about anything. Of course you and any others are free to believe as you wish but why do you assume your library dictates what the rest of us do and do not do
Since the hypocrites are the people so alarmed with gays, take the fight back to them by asking them to substaniate their beliefs. What does the Bible say about gays? Once they cannot substantiate it with scripture, ask them what the Bible says about adultery and divorce? Then ask why they permit divorce as if it is nothing? Their opposition to gay marriage is nothing less than fear based hate. They are hateful people and that is not what Christians (capital C) are supposed to be. The Bible does not support their actions. Ask them what Jesus would do.
December 20th, 2008 at 10:28 amkasinca,
December 20th, 2008 at 10:31 amhonestly, these bible bangers don’t care about what jesus would do. in fact, they’re not too concerned with the living jesus, his words and works. instead they fixate on the one dangling from the cross-eternal suffering and damnation all the way for these clowns.
RaptureReady Says:
Don’t you liberals understand that homosexuals do not have any right to marry. It is not biblically right. Our Forefathers were christians. Why do you think that they did not specifically include an admendment allowing homosexuals to marry in the Constitution?
The constitution was not written to be “biblically correct,” you warped fundie dipshit. Basic lesson: ever heard of separation of church and state?
December 20th, 2008 at 10:36 amBozo The Neoclown Says:
kasinca,
honestly, these bible bangers don’t care about what jesus would do. in fact, they’re not too concerned with the living jesus, his words and works. instead they fixate on the one dangling from the cross-eternal suffering and damnation all the way for these clowns.
They accuse liberals of reinventing the constitution as a diversion of their reinventing Jesus’ legacy at every turn.
December 20th, 2008 at 10:39 amwell, good ol’ ted haggard is making his way back into the news…
i found this article about a new documentary:
“The Trials of Ted Haggard,” directed by Alexandra Pelosi, daughter of U.S. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, is set to air next month on HBO. Haggard has agreed to take part in publicity for the project, HBO said. [...]
VERY sorry for this fox link, but it’s the only online one i could find to this story that was in my local daily’s friday ‘religion’ page…
http://www.foxnews.com/wires/2008Dec17/0,4670,RELHaggardDocumentary,00.html
December 20th, 2008 at 10:42 amkaty Says:
well, good ol’ ted haggard is making his way back into the news…
i found this article about a new documentary:
“The Trials of Ted Haggard,” directed by Alexandra Pelosi, daughter of U.S. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, is set to air next month on HBO. Haggard has agreed to take part in publicity for the project, HBO said. […]
VERY sorry for this fox link, but it’s the only online one i could find to this story that was in my local daily’s friday ‘religion’ page…
http://www.foxnews.com/ wires/ 2008Dec17/ 0,4670,RELHaggardDocumentary,00.html
*
thanks for the tip katy.
i always get ted nugent and
ted haggard confused.
*
anyway the religious one
(ted haggard?) is our favorite
troll, rapture ready.
^
thank you.
*
December 20th, 2008 at 11:13 amWashed up has been closeted queen.
December 20th, 2008 at 12:13 pmOur Forefathers were christians??
Here’s Jefferson…
Millions of innocent men, women and children, since the introduction of Christianity, have been burnt, tortured, fined and imprisoned; yet we have not advanced one inch towards uniformity.
-Thomas Jefferson, Notes on Virginia, 1782
But it does me no injury for my neighbor to say there are twenty gods or no God. It neither picks my pocket nor breaks my leg.
December 20th, 2008 at 12:14 pm-Thomas Jefferson, Notes on Virginia, 1782
Why is that every time there’s a blowjob that’s garnered the outrage of the Fundies, Ken Starr is right there, right in the middle of the action?
Hmmmm… leaves one to wonder…
PEACE
December 20th, 2008 at 12:18 pm“Thomas Jefferson was a man of deep religious conviction – his conviction was that religion was a very personal matter, one which the government had no business getting involved in.”
“I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof, thus building a wall of separation between church and state.”
Thomas Jefferson Jan.1.1802
http://www.usconstitution.net/jeffwall.html
December 20th, 2008 at 12:26 pmThis is so obvious an illegal conflict between church and state. I have no problem in what others want to believe in as long as they keep it to their self or do not hurt others. But creating/enforcing laws under the name of one’s God is ridiculous and let’s hope this backfires and Churches are forced to pay taxes on profits as they seem to be using funds for political gain.
December 20th, 2008 at 12:33 pmThis seems like a strange position for Starr to take because he always sounded gay to me.
¶ AIO
December 20th, 2008 at 12:35 pmThe New York Times piece on Starr calls him “prominent”. If I were asked to provide an adjective beginning with P for him, it would be “prissy”.
December 20th, 2008 at 12:39 pmHa, you right wing religious fanatics couldn’t even get roe vs wade overturned and you owned the government for 6 years. Presidency, senate and house. What makes you think your agenda is important?
You just get to be used by the right to further their agenda and it don’t include the things you guys want. Americans as a whole don’t support the lunacy that you propose.
Keep on voting for the republicans though, they will promise you the moon…….heh.
December 20th, 2008 at 12:42 pmKen Starr showed what he’s been hiding all these years while being interviewed by Barbara Walters. Like Senator Larry Craig, Starr has lived to hide who he is. Like so many others of that time being married/with children was the cover. After reading Starr’s life and his Mothers comment’s this is a case where Ken Starr is fighting who he is. He enjoyed the tales of Bill Clinton’s scandal so much he wanted to hear the dirty/sexual parts over and over again just to picture it in his mine. He crossed his legs so tight blood might have stopped. Now he like others who campaign against gay rights are really gay but hiding it.
Hitler hated jews because he was Jewish, Strom Thurmond fight blacks while loving a black woman who had his child and I noticed how some wrote about Thomas Jefferson. Yes a man who was one of the Forefathers and he loved Sallie so much that their children were given the freedom and education Americans wouldn’t give other blacks, now that’s love.
December 20th, 2008 at 1:16 pmWe’ve been filing complaints against churches who use their church for any kind of political purpose. Click here for info. It’s easy to do and if there are no complaints to investigate then nothing will ever happen….
December 20th, 2008 at 1:31 pmKen Starr is the queen of the RePugniScum Party.
He is Dean of Pepperdine’s Unversity School of Law.
Rememer this. Pepperdine is really just Richard Mellon Scife College
December 20th, 2008 at 1:33 pmSorry… Scife should be Scaife…
December 20th, 2008 at 1:33 pmI wouldn’t trust Ken Starr to take out my trash. This man is lower than dirt. When they bury him, they will have to dig UP!!
December 20th, 2008 at 2:15 pmwho gives a flying fig what teh “bible” says…it was written and re-written over and over by MEN who wrote what they needed to in order to control the masses…
the “bible” is just a book of stories…get a clue!!!!!
and btw, this whole argument “it’s against nature” is bull crap…there are over a hundred species in the animal kingdom that pratice the ” homosexual lifestyle”…whatever that is..
December 20th, 2008 at 2:41 pmand btw, this whole argument “it’s against nature” is bull crap…there are over a hundred species in the animal kingdom that pratice the ” homosexual lifestyle”…whatever that is..
But Warren doesn’t regard man as being like other biological creatures, so the an*logy is inapt to humans.
But of course, he’ll try to play it both ways: against nature, and the bible.
December 20th, 2008 at 3:00 pmAnother classic definition according to Progressives:
Democracy – when the vote goes OUR way.
An Attack on our civil rights – when it doesn’t
Hahahahahahahahahaha
December 20th, 2008 at 3:11 pmAnd another thing. Don’t get sidetracked with the religious implications of marriage.
Irrespective of our dominant culture, which is Judeo-Christian, marriage exists as a SOCIAL INSTITUTION. It is NOT a basic “civil right” as some keep insisting.
Therefore, societies all over the world have always defined it as being between a man and a woman. It is the RIGHT of a society to do so.
I think it’s pretty clear that our society has spoken definitively on this issue.
December 20th, 2008 at 3:16 pmI would very much like to see Jerry Brown take down Kenneth Starr in a court of law. Looking forward to that!
December 20th, 2008 at 3:16 pmGays married and the sky did not fall!
I’d like to note that some 18,000 gay couples have been married for several months, in the city just across the bay from me, and my own marriage (to a person of the opposite gender) has not been affected IN THE LEAST! I applaud all marriages and know from personal experience it takes great courage, daily effort, and patience.
Our world needs MORE loving, committed, relationships (what we have always called “marriages”) not fewer and Americans overwhelming agree when polled on this question.
Any couple lucky enough to develop such a relationship should be supported by all and given the same exact legal rights as all other such relationships. To treat them as “separate but equal” (ie, “civil unions”) is NO different that other prejudices from our nation’s past.
December 20th, 2008 at 3:24 pmEmilyD,
So you don’t have a problem if three, five or even ten people get married then?
You don’t have a problem if people just re-define marriage to whatever they want?
You are part of the problem.
December 20th, 2008 at 3:27 pmAh tapped by a troll how lovely. Very well I’ll engage in pointless word-play with you, note that I said “Any couple lucky enough….” There’s nothing about polygamists in my post. Do you see it? No, it’s not there so your flame attempt is merely a puff of ill wind.
December 20th, 2008 at 3:47 pmTimmy,
December 20th, 2008 at 3:51 pmI believe she wrote “couples,” as in “2.” Now run along, your mommy is calling you-something about homework!
EmilyD,
So who says you have the right to limit marriage to only TWO people? You bigot.
December 20th, 2008 at 4:16 pmHere’s a valid question:
Who gets to define what constitutes marriage? Is it the courts; is it society; who?
What about the “rights” of people who believe marriage should be between two, three, four, five, etc. consenting adults, hmmmmmm?
December 20th, 2008 at 4:19 pmTim, if you are against gay marriage, DON’T GET ONE!
December 20th, 2008 at 4:25 pmSociety has a vested interest in marriage because it produces the next generation of citizens. Families are a stabilizing factor in society as well.
Everyone should be concerned with doing all they can to protect the institution of marriage.
THAT is my interest in the issue.
December 20th, 2008 at 4:28 pmWell then, shouldn’t you be more concerned with divorces?
December 20th, 2008 at 5:28 pmRaptureReady Says:
Don’t you liberals understand that homosexuals do not have any right to marry. It is not biblically right. Our Forefathers were christians. Why do you think that they did not specifically include an admendment allowing homosexuals to marry in the Constitution?
Gee, why didn’t they include a Prop 8-type amendment in the Constitution? Works both ways…
Personally, I would rather have the LGBT community get married and ban divorce, but you would be howling and gnashing your teeth in rage…
December 20th, 2008 at 5:29 pmTim, I hope you’re up for Prop 12…banning divorce. I’m sure Protectmarriage.com will start up a petition drive. We’ll see how enthusiastic y’all are for protecting marriage…
December 20th, 2008 at 5:30 pmI like how you guys are redefining marriage to make it a privilege, because then you can turn around and say that the gays do not DESERVE to get married. Just love the logic here…There is a thing called the pursuit of happiness in the Constitution and I would think that marriage would fall under there…
One thing I hate about those who discriminate, you give civil rights to one of their victims and make it socially unacceptable, and then they turn around and look for someone else to victimize, while proclaiming that their victims are the ones victimizing them. How does gay marriage victimize you, Tim and RaptureReady? How does allowing two gay people to finally realize their goal of getting married affect you? Does TEH GAY infect you and your spouses, making you promiscuous and horny? Does TEH GAY make you impotent? I really want to know how you are victimized, because I sure can’t think of any reason why Gay marriage DESTROYS marriage…
December 20th, 2008 at 5:34 pmIn that case if marriage is not a privilege, then perhaps we should allow marriage only after the couples undergo 2-3 years of counseling and a “trial period” to see whether they are fit to marry or not…let’s see where your privilege talk is now…
December 20th, 2008 at 5:38 pmTim Vaculik Says:
THAT is my interest in the issue.
___________
Even if you can’t get near a living, breathing woman to save your life, huh???
Pssst… Timmeh… that she-troll over there is giving you the eye.
Heh… just make sure it really is a she, instead of a T, -troll, Timmeh…
We don’t need a repeat of last week’s embarrassing little kerfluffle, do we?
December 20th, 2008 at 6:56 pmKen Starr was the Gov’s lawyer in my own case, chapman v us
we were of the opinion LSD is not sold by the weight of the blotter paper
Ken Starr convinced Rehnquist that indeed, the weight of the blotter paper had some huge impact on the price per dose of LSD
wancker
December 20th, 2008 at 7:47 pmProfessor Starr certainly spends a lot of time worrying about what other people do in bed. That’s usually a sign that someone has serious, unresolved issues.
December 21st, 2008 at 1:06 amTimmeh,
you and your ilk need to get past this whole “man dog marriage” thing, it’s sooo 2006, and we all know how well it worked for ricky sanscrotum (did his unemployment bennies run out yet?)
a) things like polygamy, incest and bestiality are illegal.
b) homosexuality is not
c) no one here is suggesting any existing laws be broken by allowing you to marry your dog (lucky you, you can still have sex with Rex and not buy him a ring)
thus, your false comparison holds no water.
next
December 21st, 2008 at 10:18 amWe all know Prop. 8 is a religious issue and some homophobism. Now, if we look at Matthew 25 (this is for Warren and Huckabee) does God put gays to the left category. NO! God makes it pretty simple. If you were loving and caring to your brethren you are welcomed into heaven. That would include all religions and people. I’m sure if Warren and Huckabee could have traveled back in time they would have asked Jesus to condemn all gays and women who had abortions to hell for all eternity. That sure would have made thei job a hell of alot easier.
December 21st, 2008 at 10:22 amBut of course Jesus would have not listen to the likes of Huckabee or Warren.
December 21st, 2008 at 10:27 amKen Starr…defending Prop 8?!? Well, there’s some relatively good news. Just think about it — in his last high profile case, he spent an awful lot of his clients’ time and money (unfortunately, that time, his clients were the American taxpayers), raised a giant kerfuffle, and flopped B-I-G time. Despite Starr’s best efforts, Pres. Clinton and his popularity weathered the Kenny’s manufactured storm and came out on top. And Starr came off looking like something of a pervert (among other things). Let’s hope consistency if one of Starr’s better qualities.
December 21st, 2008 at 3:28 pm