Civil Rights

Torturing Truth: Why Civil Rights Are Good for Us, by Doni Remba
Including a new op-ed: Cheney, Obama, Jack Bauer & Torture

Two major civil rights stories unfolded recently, seemingly unconnected; yet both testify mightily to why civil and human rights are not only just, but good for us. Dick Cheney accused President Obama of putting Americans at greater risk of a new catastrophic terrorist attack by ordering the closure of the detention camp at Guantanamo and an end to the torture of suspected terrorists. Was Cheney speaking the truth? Or torturing it? But first to another civil rights issue, and then to the questions of terrorism, the Constitution and national security.

This week New York Senator Charles Schumer announced his support for marriage equality legislation in New York state and for the repeal of the “Defense of Marriage Act” (DOMA), which forbids federal government recognition of same-sex marriages. In declaring his support for legalizing same-sex marriage, Schumer joins New York's other Democratic US Senator, Kirsten Gillibrand, New York City's (Republican) Mayor Michael Bloomberg, and other leading area Democrats like New York Governor David Paterson and New Jersey Governor Jon Corzine.

Read more here.

Repeal Proposition 8 and Support Civil Rights for Same-Sex Couples

In May 2008, the California Supreme Court ruled that laws that limit marriage to a relationship between a man and a woman violate the equal protection clause of the California Constitution. It also held that individuals of the same sex have the right to marry under the California Constitution.

Fueled by misinformation, distortions and lies, California voters passed Proposition 8 on November 4th by a margin of 52% to 48%, saying yes to bigotry, yes to discrimination, yes to second-class status for same-sex couples. Voters in Florida and Arizona also passed similar resolutions barring same-sex couples from marrying, and in Arkansas from adopting children. Until 40 years ago, interracial couples like the parents of Barack Obama were legally barred from marrying in 16 states.

Watch this powerful video from Keith Olbermann to learn more about why we support repealing Proposition 8 and respecting the civil rights of gay couples throughout America.

Keith Olbermann Special Comment on Proposition 8

To learn more about the issue, please visit Garden State Equality and http://www.civilunionsdontwork.com/.

To support our campaign to repeal Proposition 8, guarantee civil rights for all Americans and help us fight the special interests who will try to block President-elect Obama's agenda for change, please click here.

To request tickets for Broadway for a New America: Standing Up for Marriage Equality and A Progressive Agenda for Change, our New York City Benefit Concert, please click here.

Why Jews Should Vote for Barack Obama
Letty Cottin Pogrebin, Moment Magazine, September/October 2008

The key issue dividing the candidates is their position on choice. A woman’s right to choose to bear or not have a child, a couple’s freedom to decide when to start or expand a family, and the composition of the Supreme Court for years to come—all hinge on which candidate wins.

Click here to read the full article.

McCain Says He Wouldn't Have Nominated the 2 Jewish Justices to US Supreme Court--Ginsburg and Breyer; Rejects all 4 Centrist and Liberal Judges on the Court
Jewish Telegraphic Agency, August 19, 2008

When Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) was asked Saturday night which member of the U.S. Supreme Court he would not have nominated, the Republican presidential candidate didn't just name his least favorite justice. He picked four -- the group commonly identified as the more liberal wing of the court, including the two Jewish justices, Ruth Ginsburg and Stephen Breyer...The judges McCain said should not have been appointed to the court, including Justices John Paul Stevens and David Souter, really represent centrist viewpoints, not classically liberal positions, said Mark Pelavin, the associate director of the Religious Action Center of Reform Judaism....

“If you take away those votes, by any fair reading, the court would move significantly to the political right,” said Pelavin, whose organization generally stakes out liberal positions on domestic affairs -- in keeping with what polls suggest are the views of an overwhelming majority of American Jews. Issues of government funding for religion also are sure to be impacted, Pelavin said, pointing to cases making their way up the system dealing with the constitutionality of the “faith-based initiative,” or providing government funding for religiously infused social services. In addition, he said, jurisprudence “on abortion, a variety of civil rights, affirmative action, environmental protection and the whole question of federalism“ as well as the limits of executive power could change with new justices.

Click here to read the full article, originally published as “Presidential forum highlights divergent views on Supreme Court”

The Battle for the Country's Soul
Jane Mayer, The New York Review of Books, August 14, 2008

At almost every turn along the way, the Bush administration was warned that whatever the short-term benefits of its extralegal approach to fighting terrorism, it would have tragically destructive long-term consequences both for the rule of law and America's interests in the world. These warnings came not just from political opponents, but also from experienced allies, including the British Intelligence Service, the experts in the traditionally conservative military and the FBI, and, perhaps most surprisingly, from a series of loyal Republican lawyers inside the administration itself.... President Bush, Vice President Cheney, and a small handful of trusted advisers sought and obtained dubious legal opinions enabling them to circumvent American laws and traditions. In the name of protecting national security, the executive branch sanctioned coerced confessions, extrajudicial detention, and other violations of individuals' liberties that had been prohibited since the country's founding.

Click here for a PDF file with extracts or here to read the full article.

A History of Abuse in the War on Terror
Jennifer Schuessler, The New York Times, July 22, 2008

The Dark Side cover “What does that mean? ‘Outrages upon human dignity’?” President Bush said at a press conference in 2006, after the Supreme Court ruled that the Geneva Conventions applied even to “enemy combatants.” In “The Dark Side,” Jane Mayer provides a chilling answer, along with the most vivid and comprehensive account we have had so far of how a government founded on checks and balances and respect for individual rights could have been turned against those ideals.

Click here to read the whole article.