Update: YouTube has yanked this ad as it appears SMM violated National Public Radio’s copyright. Woohoo!

Stand For Marriage Maine has started running this ad.

This despite the fact that Maine’s own Attorney General published a Legal Opinion stating:

“Whatever the benefits and burdens of the civil institution of marriage, the state’s definition of marriage has no bearing on the curricula in our public schools, either under current law or under LD 1020. Neither the Parker decision nor passage of LD 1020 “requires” or “allows” the teaching of any particular subject in our schools, in answer to the citizen question attached to your letter.”

I suppose when you can’t make logical arguments to support your case, you have to resort to FUD (Fear, Uncertainty, and Doubt). I just hope the independent minded citizen of Maine take the time to read the Maine AG’s legal opinion and see this ad for the FUD that it is.

Sources for Bilerico and Pam’s House Blend have learned that the hate crimes bill currently working its way through the Senate will most likely be attached to a defense authorization package, since there are not enough votes to pass it as a standalone bill. Hate crimes legislation was shelved back in 2007 when this same tactic was used. From Bil Browing at Bilreco:

Remember how well that worked out for us last time?

Congressmembers can use our lives to bargain for bombs and defense spending instead of simply affirming our dignity as human beings worthy of safety from persecution and violence if hate crimes are added to the defense authorization.

You need to call your Senator NOW and ask them to save the hate crimes bill from certain death! If it’s added to the defense authorization bill it will be the death of hate crimes this year.

You can look up your Senator’s direct phone number here or call (202) 224-3121 and tell them to SAVE THE HATE CRIMES BILL.

And at a hearing on hate crimes this morning Attorney General Eric Holder voiced support for the bill even as some Democrats displayed an abundance of ignorance, repeating the same tired meme that hate crimes would curb the free speech of churches and people of faith. From AP:

… Democratic lawmaker, Sen. Richard Durbin of Illinois, both voiced concerns that the bill could be used to prosecute a church leader who speaks out against homosexuality, if a member of their congregation then assaults a gay person.

“This is a bill to hold people accountable for conduct, not for speech,” Holder insisted.

Update: Myself and other blogs have unfortunately mischaracterized Durbin’s comments based on the AP article. After watching the hearings it was clear that Durbin was characterizing questions posed by his constituents and not necessarily his personal views.

Judy and Dennis Shepard, parents of Matthew Shepard for whom the act is named, appeared on CNN defending the hate crimes bill. Watch:

Please contact your senator and urge them to support S. 909, the Matthew Shepard Hate Crimes Prevention Act of 2009.

California Attorney General Jerry Brown and Andrew Pugno, attorney for Protect Marriage appeared on CNN discussing the latest challenge to Proposition 8 recently filed in federal court. Brown filed a brief in support of overturning ban yesterday. Watch:

UPDATE: Earlier today, Attorney General Jerry Brown issues this release recommending the court to review Prop 8 and that an “immediate stay” should not be granted.

Attorney General Brown Urges California Supreme Court to Review Constitutionality of Proposition 8

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
November 17, 2008
Attorney General Brown Urges California Supreme Court to Review Constitutionality of Proposition 8

SACRAMENTO—California Attorney General Edmund G. Brown Jr. today urged the California Supreme Court to accept review of the legal challenges to Proposition 8 and for this matter of widespread concern to be “promptly resolved.”

“The profound importance of the issues raised by Proposition 8 warrants that this matter be reviewed and promptly resolved by the California Supreme Court.” Attorney General Brown said.

In a set of briefs filed with the Court today, Attorney General Brown wrote that: “review by this Court is necessary to ensure uniformity of decision, finality and certainty for the citizens of California. The constitutionality of the change created by Proposition 8 impacts whether same-sex marriages may issue in California and whether same-sex marriages from other states will be recognized here. There is significant public interest in prompt resolution of the legality of Proposition 8. The Court can provide certainty and finality in this matter.”

Typically, matters are brought before lower courts before the Supreme Court hears the case. However, petitioners have asked the Supreme Court to accept the review directly to bring an early resolution to the matter.

Attorney General Brown opposes a stay on Proposition 8, arguing that it would increase uncertainty related to marriages performed in California. The Attorney General’s brief states that “the public interest would be best served not by issuing a temporary stay, but by an expedited resolution of the important issues raised by the petitions.”

Attorney General Brown continues to believe that same-sex marriages performed between June 17 and November 4, 2008 remain valid and will be upheld by the Court.