Constitutional Law, Criminal law, Free Speech, Lawyering, Media

California Attorney Facing Bar Complaint Over Proposed Measure To Allow For The Execution Of Gays And Lesbians

California flagAttorney Matt McLaughlin, an attorney in Huntington Beach, California, is facing a call for disbarment after he filed for a statewide resolution that would legalize the execution of gay people and make it a crime to support gay rights in the state. Anyone can file such papers and, for just $200, force the attorney general to prepare a title and a summary for the proposed new law. The question is whether this despicable act can or should be used for a bar action as conduct that shows that he is not of “good moral character.”

The 2016 initiative, named the “Sodomite Suppression Act”, is awaiting further review by the office of the state attorney general, Kamala Harris, and would mandate “any person who willingly touches another person of the same gender for purposes of sexual gratification be put to death by bullets to the head, or by any other convenient method.” It would also make it a crime to support gay rights, punishable by a $1 million fine and up to 10 years in prison (as well as expulsion from the state). It would also make it illegal to distribute “sodomistic propaganda” to “any person under the age of majority”. Furthermore, being a “sodomite” or distributing “sodomistic propaganda” would disqualify a resident from serving in public office or public employment and from enjoying any public benefit. McLaughlin stated in his proposal that it is “better that offenders should die rather than that all of us should be killed by God’s just wrath”. Suffice it to say, McLaughlin has some serious issues as well as a serious need for psychoanalysis.

However, what he did was the exercise of a legal action with the political system. There is an ironic twist to the notion of his claims of morality being used to establish that he is not of “good moral character.” We have faced this type of issue before. If an attorney does not engage in discriminatory or hateful treatment of clients or witnesses, should he be punished for his political or moral views? I tend to be leery of speech being the basis for criminal or bar sanctions because it is difficult to see where to draw the line. There are many attorneys who engage in political speech as individuals that is deemed insulting to different races or genders.

RicardoLaraState senator Ricardo Lara and others have filed a formal complaint with the state bar. It is not clear if any proceeding would bring up past controversies with McLaughlin, including his 2004 proposed initiative to add the King James Bible as a textbook in California public schools. Once again, such efforts are taken in his capacity as a citizen within the political system.

What do you think?

364 thoughts on “California Attorney Facing Bar Complaint Over Proposed Measure To Allow For The Execution Of Gays And Lesbians”

  1. Mike Pence all but admitted that he is for special protections for religions to discriminate while refusing to provide protections for those being discriminated against. There is no case standing against a religion or business owner pending in Indiana for whom this new law is designed to protect… Yet, there are a lot of cases in Indiana where LGBT or, as I noted above via Mr. Bauchmann, where people are being discriminated against because they are or may be thought of as LGBT.

  3. @ Max-1

    “Marcus Bachmann Refused Service in Indiana, Store Owner Assumed He Was Gay
    http://nationalreport.net/marcus-bachmann-refused-service-indiana-store-owner-assumed-gay/

    “INDIANAPOLIS – Marcus Bachmann, husband of former Minnesota Congresswoman Michele Bachmann, unwittingly became the first public face of Indiana’s newly-enacted Religious Freedom Restoration Act, after being refused service at a dress boutique because the store owner assumed he was gay.”

    I can’t believe that no one has commented on the incredibly rich irony and the beautiful and immediate pay-back involved in this incident.

    “Marcus reacted with shock when he realized he had fallen victim to the very measure he had come to Indiana to support. ‘I was gobsmacked! I never realized a law meant to protect individuals’ religious freedoms would be twisted in such a way as to discriminate! Clearly, people are mis-applying this well-intentioned law.’ [He was just gobsmacked, I tell you, and was probably tempted to throw a foot-stamping hissy-fit right there in the boutique.]

    “Shop owner Holtz said she was well within her rights and does not discriminate. ‘He was getting very persnickety and didn’t seem to like anything we had to offer. He said ‘my wife wouldn’t like this one bit’ and ‘my wife wouldn’t look good in that’ so many times I began to wonder if he had a wife at all! He had on a wedding ring but anybody can buy a gold band. He said my eyeshadow was too heavy. I decided whatever his lifestyle, I didn’t want to support it, so I asked him to leave which he did.’

    Ms. Holtz would apparently have everyone understand that she is very undiscriminating when she discriminates against people, regardless of their lifestyle, but especially if they knock her eyeshadow and are persnickety in an effeminate way, her implication pretty clearly being, “What straight man would knock a woman’s eyeshadow?”

    Now, to be fair to Ms. Holtz and her principled undiscriminating discrimination, it is a fact that “Gay rumors have dogged Bachmann for years, exacerbated by charges that his Christian therapy clinic administered gay conversion therapy as a matter of course, rumors the Bachmanns have fiercely denied.”

    “ ‘Marcus is the most rugged individual I’ve ever met,’ said the former Congresswoman.”

    Methinks the lady doth protest too much, and who will soon lose his gratitude to Mrs. Bachmann for her follow-up classic, over-the-top Freudian double entendre, “ ‘There’s never been a gay bone in his body,’ she added.”

    Perhaps not that you know of, Mrs Bachmann, perhaps not that you know of. 🙂

    Thanks for calling attention to this, Max. You have definitely made my week plus next month.

  4. http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slatest/2015/03/26/ncaa_final_four_indiana_lgbt_discrimination_bill_concerning.html

    “The NCAA national office and our members are deeply committed to providing an inclusive environment for all our events. We are especially concerned about how this legislation could affect our student-athletes and employees. We will work diligently to assure student-athletes competing in, and visitors attending, next week’s Men’s Final Four in Indianapolis are not impacted negatively by this bill. Moving forward, we intend to closely examine the implications of this bill and how it might affect future events as well as our workforce.”
    **********************

    People are talking about boycotting Indiana for The Final Four.

  6. Meanwhile…
    Rand Paul courts the dominionists… Libertarians, say hello to the ditch.

  7. Question:
    Is it Constitutionally sound to elevate religious belief above individual Liberty?
    I thought the 1st Amendment treated them both as equals, not one with dominance over the other. Hasn’t the US Supreme Court already ruled on the separation clause?

  8. First San Francisco’s mayor…
    … Now Seattle’s Mayor.

    Mayor Murray to ban City Hall travel to Indiana, citing law he calls ‘discriminatory’
    http://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/politics/mayor-murray-to-ban-city-hall-travel-to-indiana/

    Seattle Mayor Ed Murray announced Saturday that he’ll ban city employees from work-related and city-funded travel to Indiana.

    His decision was prompted by Indiana’s passage of a law that some see as potentially legalizing discrimination against gays and others, based on religious beliefs.

    “I am ordering that none of our taxpayer dollars should go toward supporting this discriminatory law,” Murray said in a statement, adding that the law “doesn’t reflect the values of our city.”
    (continued)

    1. Max-1 – Indiana is going to be sooooo hurt that people from SF are not coming. Some threats are just not worth not making. 😉

    1. Good Night Max-1

      I don’t think I can get any better than that answer and anyway eunuchs can have sexual relations. They did it all the time in China I understand. 😉

    1. Max-1 – My wife would never consider herself a feminist, but she is very bright and damn good at her job. We work as a team.

  12. Davidm
    He that is able to receive it… Jesus asks that we let ha that can do so. So again David, why the gnashing of the teeth to prevent your brother from receiving Gods grace?

  13. davidm
    Jesus turned toward the woman saying, go and sin no more.

    Male authors regularly see it as Jesus scolding the woman.
    Male authors regularly ignore that it was the MEN before Jesus who admitted they are sinners who seek to punish another for what these men call sin.

    When jesus turned toward the woman he defended… he turned away from the men, dismissing their concerns and addressing their sins by saying, GO AND SIN NO MORE! i.e. if you’re that big of a man to assume you’re free from the Lord’s judgement, then you should be able to go and sin no more. Christ, knowing we are all human, are sinners by nature. These men weren’t seeking a sin free life when they were willing to break the Lord’s commandment of killing another human being… ergo, go, and sin no more.

  14. Ladies, as long as you are subservient to your husband, davidm is cool with that. Because anything outside that relationship is feminism run amuck… NO?

    1. Max-1 – it would be a cold day in hell before my wife would be subservient to me. 😉

    1. Max-1 wrote: “still waiting for davidm to quote Jesus discussing gays…”

      Here you go, Max. The latter part of his teaching includes gays.

      “The Pharisees also came unto him, tempting him, and saying unto him, Is it lawful for a man to put away his wife for every cause? And he answered and said unto them, Have ye not read, that he which made them at the beginning made them male and female, And said, For this cause shall a man leave father and mother, and shall cleave to his wife: and they twain shall be one flesh? Wherefore they are no more twain, but one flesh. What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder. They say unto him, Why did Moses then command to give a writing of divorcement, and to put her away? He saith unto them, Moses because of the hardness of your hearts suffered you to put away your wives: but from the beginning it was not so. And I say unto you, Whosoever shall put away his wife, except it be for fornication, and shall marry another, committeth adultery: and whoso marrieth her which is put away doth commit adultery. His disciples say unto him, If the case of the man be so with his wife, it is not good to marry. But he said unto them, All men cannot receive this saying, save they to whom it is given. For there are some eunuchs, which were so born from their mother’s womb: and there are some eunuchs, which were made eunuchs of men: and there be eunuchs, which have made themselves eunuchs for the kingdom of heaven’s sake. He that is able to receive it, let him receive it.” (Mat 19:3-12)

  16. Angie’s List Cites Anti-Gay Law In Halting Indiana Expansion
    http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/angies-list-halts-indiana-expansion-anti-gay-law

    Angie’s List, a company that publishes consumer reviews of local businesses, announced Saturday that it decided to stop a planned expansion project at its Indianapolis, Indiana headquarters because of the state’s new religious freedom bill.

    Indiana officials in recent days have scrambled to contain the fallout from the bill, which Gov. Mike Pence (R) signed into law on Thursday. Critics say the bill allows business owners to refuse to serve same-sex couples if they have a religious objection to doing so.

    Angie’s List had been planning to convert an old Ford assembly plant on Indianapolis’ east side into more offices for its company campus, according to Reuters.
    (continued)

  17. Marcus Bachmann Refused Service in Indiana, Store Owner Assumed He Was Gay
    http://nationalreport.net/marcus-bachmann-refused-service-indiana-store-owner-assumed-gay/

    INDIANAPOLIS – Marcus Bachmann, husband of former Minnesota Congresswoman Michele Bachmann, unwittingly became the first public face of Indiana’s newly-enacted Religious Freedom Restoration Act, after being refused service at a dress boutique because the store owner assumed he was gay.
    The Bachmanns were visiting the state capitol on Thursday to lend their support to embattled Gov. Mike Pence when the incident occurred. Dorothy Holtz, owner of Dotty’s Dress Den described what happened.
    “I didn’t think anything was out of the ordinary at first,” said the 59-year old self-described “devout Christian citizen,” although I don’t usually have men come in by themselves. He was very polite but the more he spoke, the more I thought he was different.”
    Holtz began to suspect that Bachmann was “perhaps a homosexual man”, and because it is now within her rights to refuse service based on religious beliefs, informed Bachmann she would be unable to serve him, and asked him to leave.
    “I was aghast!” said Bachmann. I’ve been shopping for Michele for years! I had no idea why the woman in the store turned on me like that. I thought perhaps she had suddenly become ill.”
    (continued)

  19. @ Squeaky From Pom, Scourge of All That’s Gay

    As long as you’re advocating stoning to death gay people, why not advocate capital punishment for attempted suicides?

    And how about the execution of criminal children? Don’t you think that’s the only way they’re ever going to learn?

  20. @Ken Rogers

    I loved your skit, but the point is, and was, that gay sexuality is a dangerous activity and hardly anybody wants to talk about that aspect lest they be labeled homophobic. I know you don’t believe the majoritarian theory about HIV transmission, but I do. That aspect also gets lost in all the people slamming religion. What doesn’t get asked there, is how come gay sex became an “abomination” to the various religions in the first place???

    You and Inga and others are like tobacco company executives. You attack anybody who attacks cigarette smoking, while avoiding any responsibility for promoting an activity which causes a significant amount of lung cancer and other diseases. The sad thing is that you will probably get by with it.

    Squeeky Fromm
    Girl Reporter

Comments are closed.