The Power of Hatred, and What it Brings

Tiassa

Let us not launch the boat ...
Valued Senior Member
This is what bigots won with Proposition 8. This is what they are fighting for. This is what they wanted:

Clay Greene and his partner of 20 years, Harold Scull, lived in Sebastopol, California. As long-time partners, they had named each other beneficiaries of their respective estates and agents for medical decisions. As 2008 began, Scull was 88 years old and in deteriorating health. Greene, 11 years younger, was physically strong, but beginning to show signs of cognitive impairment. As Scull’s health declined, it became apparent that they would need assistance, but the men resisted outside help.

In April of 2008, Scull fell down the front steps of their home. Greene immediately called an ambulance and Scull was taken to the hospital. There, the men’s nightmare began. While Scull was hospitalized, Deputy Public Guardians went to the men’s home, took photographs, and commented on the desirability and quality of the furnishings, artwork, and collectibles that the men had collected over their lifetimes.

Ignoring Greene entirely, the County petitioned the Court for conservatorship of Scull’s estate. Outrageously referring to Greene only as a “roommate” and failing to disclose their true relationship, the County continued to treat Scull as if he had no family. The County sought immediate temporary authority to revoke Scull’s powers of attorney, to act without further notice, and to liquidate an investment account to pay for Scull’s care. Then, despite being granted only limited powers, and with undue haste, the County arranged for the sale of the men’s personal property, cleaned out their home, terminated their lease, confiscated their truck, and eventually disposed of all of the men’s worldly possessions, including family heirlooms, at a fraction of their value and without any proper inventory or determination of whose property was being sold.

Adding further insult to grave injury, the county removed Greene from their home and confined him to a nursing home against his will—a different placement from his partner. Greene was kept from seeing Scull during this time, and his telephone calls were limited. Three months after Scull was hospitalized, he died, without being able to see Greene again.

“Because of the county’s actions, Clay missed the final months he should have had with his partner of 20 years,” said Greene’s trial attorney Anne Dennis of Santa Rosa. “Compounding this horrific tragedy, Clay has literally nothing left of the home he had shared with Harold or the life he was living up until the day that Harold fell, because he has been unable to recover any of his property or his beloved cats—who are feared dead. The only memento Clay has is a photo album that Harold painstakingly put together for Clay during the last three months of his life.”


(NCLR)

Nothing. I feel nothing. Because the alternative is to admit that I suddenly remember what hatred feels like, and if that's the case, I will never forgive the people or ideas that woke such a beast.

Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn.

Congratulations, homophobes. I hope you're proud of yourselves.
____________________

Notes:

National Center for Lesbian Rights. "NCLR Launches Visibility Campaign to Expose Tragic Case Where Sonoma County Separated Elderly Gay Couple, Sold Off All Belongings". April 19, 2010. http://nclrights.wordpress.com/2010...d-elderly-gay-couple-sold-off-all-belongings/

See Also:

Greene v. Sonoma. Sonoma County Superior Court. March 21, 2010. NCLR.org. April 20, 2010. http://www.nclrights.org/site/DocServer/Greene_v_Sonoma_County.pdf?docID=7461
 
its stories like these that really get me pissed.. this is the exact reason that there should be marrige with no boundries of sex
 
such a touching story ... i've been crying from laughter for the past four minutes.

by the way, tiassa, how could you - and i quote - "feel nothing" from reading this story? you're a monster, no emotions at all over such a heartbreaking injustice?!

for shame.
 
Is it really so complicated?

Dream Eater said:

how could you - and i quote - "feel nothing" from reading this story?

What part confuses you?
 
What part confuses you?

the part where you admitted to feeling "nothing" over a story which apparently features ugly hatred and injustice? look, whatever, it wasn't a totally serious comment, just a side thought to detract from the awkwardness the first sentence in my post may have caused in those who were actually invested emotionally in this issue or particular story.

this whole ugly mess (the story in question) could have been avoided if gay relationships were outlawed outright. betcha didn't look at it that way, did you? now don't tell me outlawing gay relationships couldn't have prevented this ...

i don't think homophobes like breaking people's hearts or watching their property distributed unfairly, i think to say homophobes enjoy these things is a terribly bombastic assertion on your part. they simply have a code of ethics which they think you should follow even if you don't believe in them, simply because they do ... it's not all that bad.

err ...
 
And all these two men needed to do was to each write a will leaving everything to the other and letting people know who they wanted as executor over them in case of any problems like this one. Why didn't they do what most everyone does? Were they that foolish that they didn't think that something could happen one day that would require the other person to help them if they needed help? I can't belive they made no provisions during their time together for any emergency that might arise.
 
And all these two men needed to do was to each write a will leaving everything to the other and letting people know who they wanted as executor over them in case of any problems like this one. Why didn't they do what most everyone does? Were they that foolish that they didn't think that something could happen one day that would require the other person to help them if they needed help? I can't belive they made no provisions during their time together for any emergency that might arise.

To be fair, I doubt many heterosexual couples have made such arrangements.

But the moral of the story is clear: if you're gay, keep a good lawyer handy.
 
This and that

Cosmictraveler said:

And all these two men needed to do was to each write a will leaving everything to the other and letting people know who they wanted as executor over them in case of any problems like this one.

I'm pretty sure I corrected Sandy on the same myth, just the other day. I'll look it up later. Gotta run.

• • •​

Dream Eater said:

i don't think homophobes like breaking people's hearts or watching their property distributed unfairly

This is what they wanted. This is what they fought for. If they want to pretend after the fact that they really are nice people and just didn't think it through—that they didn't know this would happen—then they should just shut the hell up and get out of the way. If they're afraid to take responsibility for the outcomes of their actions, they ought not take those actions.
 
Just when you think you start to see progress made...

Idiots do a roundabout and throw us backwards.

That's absolutely tragic.

Worse yet, is knowing this will happen to other people as well.
 
And all these two men needed to do was to each write a will leaving everything to the other and letting people know who they wanted as executor over them in case of any problems like this one. Why didn't they do what most everyone does? Were they that foolish that they didn't think that something could happen one day that would require the other person to help them if they needed help? I can't belive they made no provisions during their time together for any emergency that might arise.

They did take the necessary steps. From the article Tiassa posted:

As long-time partners, they had named each other beneficiaries of their respective estates and agents for medical decisions.

What happened here is that the State sought to revoke that. Again, from Tiassa's article:

While Scull was hospitalized, Deputy Public Guardians went to the men’s home, took photographs, and commented on the desirability and quality of the furnishings, artwork, and collectibles that the men had collected over their lifetimes.

Ignoring Greene entirely, the County petitioned the Court for conservatorship of Scull’s estate. Outrageously referring to Greene only as a “roommate” and failing to disclose their true relationship, the County continued to treat Scull as if he had no family. The County sought immediate temporary authority to revoke Scull’s powers of attorney, to act without further notice, and to liquidate an investment account to pay for Scull’s care. Then, despite being granted only limited powers, and with undue haste, the County arranged for the sale of the men’s personal property, cleaned out their home, terminated their lease, confiscated their truck, and eventually disposed of all of the men’s worldly possessions, including family heirlooms, at a fraction of their value and without any proper inventory or determination of whose property was being sold.

They obviously thought they had done enough, and they had in effect done enough. The State failed to disclose their relationship to the Court and then went on to liquidate all of their joint assets, leaving Greene with nothing at all, even though some of the assets were his or jointly owned.
 
I'm pretty sure I corrected Sandy on the same myth, just the other day. I'll look it up later. Gotta run.

My lawyers say the guys have to have in writing EXACT stipulations prepared by an attorney (not legal zoom.com), have the atty keep a copy, notorized, given out to friends and family members and to leave a video with EXACT instructions. Most people will not do that because their wills change yearly.
 
Burn, baby, burn

Sandy said:

My lawyers say the guys have to have in writing EXACT stipulations prepared by an attorney (not legal zoom.com), have the atty keep a copy, notorized, given out to friends and family members and to leave a video with EXACT instructions. Most people will not do that because their wills change yearly.

To borrow a word, vile.

This is what you support, Sandy. This is what you fight for. And it is loathsome. Repugnant. Disgusting.

Pray to God that you're wrong, else I will see you in Hell.
 
This is what bigots won with Proposition 8. This is what they are fighting for. This is what they wanted:

Is it? Being opposed to gay marriage doesn't necessarily mean you're opposed to couples in civil unions being granted certain rights.

Anyway, I'd like to hear the State's side of things before passing judgement. The statement that Greene was apparently suffering "signs of cognitive impairment" raised an eyebrow. What were these signs of cognitive impairment? How bad was the cognitive impairment? Who measured it? Were they used as justification to nullify his power of attorney?

Furthermore, I've read that there were claims of domestic abuse. As yet, I haven't seen any evidence either way. But I'd like to get more information (from websites other than blogs) before having a knee jerk reaction.
 
They cannot avoid the implications of their choices

Mordea said:

Is it? Being opposed to gay marriage doesn't necessarily mean you're opposed to couples in civil unions being granted certain rights.

If homosexuals could marry one another, this would not have happened. Just because the bigots did not think this through does not excuse them the outcome.

I reiterate:

If they want to pretend after the fact that they really are nice people and just didn't think it through—that they didn't know this would happen—then they should just shut the hell up and get out of the way. If they're afraid to take responsibility for the outcomes of their actions, they ought not take those actions.​
 
Anyway, I'd like to hear the State's side of things before passing judgement. The statement that Greene was apparently suffering "signs of cognitive impairment" raised an eyebrow. What were these signs of cognitive impairment? How bad was the cognitive impairment? Who measured it? Were they used as justification to nullify his power of attorney?
I too would like to hear from the State as to why they failed to disclose to the court that Greene and Scull were a couple and had in effect, stated what they wanted. I would like the State to explain how and why they also sold all of Greene's possessions without his consent and without giving him the funds from said sale. I would also like the State to advise how and why they did not have Greene evaluated before they made such a judgement. I would also like to know why the State did not have Scull evaluated mentally before they took the steps they did.

But do you know what gets me in this whole sorry saga?

Clay and his partner of 20 years, Harold, lived in California. Clay and Harold made diligent efforts to protect their legal rights, and had their legal paperwork in place--wills, powers of attorney, and medical directives, all naming each other. Harold was 88 years old and in frail medical condition, but still living at home with Clay, 77, who was in good health.

One evening, Harold fell down the front steps of their home and was taken to the hospital. Based on their medical directives alone, Clay should have been consulted in Harold's care from the first moment. Tragically, county and health care workers instead refused to allow Clay to see Harold in the hospital. The county then ultimately went one step further by isolating the couple from each other, placing the men in separate nursing homes.

http://www.bilerico.com/2010/04/sonoma_county_ca_separates_elderly_gay_couple_and.php

They had done everything right. And they had their rights completely stripped from them. I guess their belongings were that nice..

Furthermore, I've read that there were claims of domestic abuse. As yet, I haven't seen any evidence either way. But I'd like to get more information (from websites other than blogs) before having a knee jerk reaction.
I haven't seen any claims of domestic abuse in this case. Do you have a link for it?
 
I must confess to some ignorance here...

I was under the vague impression that gay marriage was legal in the state those two men reside in-- California.

I only heard this because of George Takei marrying his boyfriend.
 
I was under the vague impression that gay marriage was legal in the state those two men reside in-- California.

No, not since Prop H8 passed in 2008.

I only heard this because of George Takei marrying his boyfriend.

It was legal for a brief period prior to the passage of Prop H8. The marriage licenses which were granted prior to passage of the referendum remain valid, however.
 
I'm with Tiassa on this one.

Here in New Zealand you can get a Civil Union.

Essentially, if you get a civil union you have all of the rights of a married couple. Legally speaking it's marriage in every sense of the word, except for the name.

It's even available to long term heterosexual couples who want to aknowledge their commitment without the religous palava of getting married.
 
To borrow a word, vile.This is what you support, Sandy. This is what you fight for. And it is loathsome. Repugnant. Disgusting.Pray to God that you're wrong, else I will see you in Hell.

WTF? I don't support anything. I don't even have an opinion on this. I told you what my ($700/hr) lawyer said. I don't fight for squat regarding this issue. Why are you so outraged? I did the exact thing and I am hetero.
Nothing I can say or do will cause you to see me in Hell. I won't be there.
 
Back
Top