Greene v. County of Sonoma et al.
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 placewills, 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 Harolds 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.
Ignoring Clays significant role in Harolds life, the county continued to treat Harold like he had no family and went to court seeking the power to make financial decisions on his behalf. Outrageously, the county represented to the judge that Clay was merely Harolds roommate. The court denied their efforts, but did grant the county limited access to one of Harolds bank accounts to pay for his care.
What happened next is even more chilling: without authority, without determining the value of Clay and Harolds possessions accumulated over the course of their 20 years together or making any effort to determine which items belonged to whom, the county took everything Harold and Clay owned and auctioned off all of their belongings. Adding further insult to grave injury, the county removed Clay from his home and confined him to a nursing home against his will. The county workers then terminated Clay and Harold's lease and surrendered the home they had shared for many years to the landlord.
Three months after he was hospitalized, Harold died in the nursing home. Because of the countys actions, Clay missed the final months he should have had with his partner of 20 years. Compounding this 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. The only memento Clay has is a photo album that Harold painstakingly put together for Clay during the last three months of his life.
With the help of a dedicated and persistent court-appointed attorney, Anne Dennis of Santa Rosa, Clay was finally released from the nursing home. Ms. Dennis, along with Stephen O'Neill and Margaret Flynn of Tarkington, O'Neill, Barrack & Chong, now represent Clay in a lawsuit against the county, the auction company, and the nursing home, with technical assistance from NCLR. A trial date has been set for July 16, 2010 in the Superior Court for the County of Sonoma.
All this bigotry and hate against gays is caused because of the Bible and the Absolute Word of God, or should I say Words of God since nobody reads the Word in the same way or can agree on what they mean which is good because that way everybody gets to be absolutely right with a million conflicting but absolute truths.
http://garlandgrey.com/post/532479961/response-to-greene-v-county-of-sonoma-et-alToday I received a comment on the Greene Vs. County of Sonoma story:
Here is what I know: On November 3, 2009 the Sonoma Board of Supervisors discussed the case of Clay M. Greene, Jannette Biggerstaff, Executor of the Estate of Harold Scull, Deceased v. County of Sonoma, et al.Superior Court of California, County of Sonoma, SPR-81815 in a closed session. It doesnt seem uncommon for a probate dispute to be handled in closed session, but it does point to this being a real story.Its a REALLY infuriating story, but
Im always mystified when I see
Results 1 - 10 of about 93,000 for Greene v. County of Sonoma.
to something like this, and cant find anything on any news site, & all the references end up pointing back to one source.
I just dont like it when theres
1) a VERY infuriating story,
2) no dates on when any of this happened,
3) has things like the county removed Clay from his home and confined him to a nursing home against his will without saying HOW they did that what, just because theyre EVIL?
4), like I said, every reference I can find to the story points back to one source. It just starts to sound too anecdotal.
My first reaction is to be ANGRY, OUTRAGED, but that little voice is saying wait a minute check the facts. and I cant FIND any.
Does ANYONE have any additional info on this story?
The source that I obtained the story from was Andy Towles Towleroad blog, a popular blog focusing on Gay Mens Issues. Towle picked it up from Dan Savage, who blogs for The Stranger in Seattle, and who is usually the first to pick up stories from the NCLR, the National Center for Lesbian Rights. The NCLR is very much like the ACLU, except dealing with Queer Issues instead of speech. There is a lot of cross-pollination between the NCLR, the ACLU, and Lambda Legal - Constance Millers prom challenge was handled by the ACLU, even though Constance is a lesbian, and there were portions of her case dealing with sexual orientation discrimination.
<snip>
The whole gay marriage "problem", I don't have a problem with gay marriage at all, I mean the problem of us fighting over it, is a perfect example of the government stepping to far into our lives. If marriage wasn't regulated, this wouldn't be a problem.
Its not govt making the problem. It's people guided by religious ideas and sentiment, who claim moral superiority, who are raising the issue to problem levels.
The whole gay marriage "problem", I don't have a problem with gay marriage at all, I mean the problem of us fighting over it, is a perfect example of the government stepping to far into our lives. If marriage wasn't regulated, this wouldn't be a problem.
How could you NOT regulate it? Marriage is a binding legal agreement between 2 parties. Ever heard of Divorce settlements? Alimony? How the hell do you think you can make someone else PAY YOU for decades just because you lived in the same house?
The problem is that the religious people being the arrogant fucks many of them are, think that they own marriage, when marriage has existed long before their religion had ever been invented and legal marriage is completely unrelated to the tax authority they call a Church.
No the problem is the government, divorce cases are settled in civil court, you know the same place if you sue ANYONE it's handled in. You don't need government regulation and licensing for divorce settlements and alimony to be decided upon in a civil court.
You're fucking kidding right? The government is solely responsible for this mess. They are the ones who give the people fighting it the power because of their regulation. If it was not regulated anyone could marry and get those rights by presenting proof of union(that's all marriage is.)
Fools. The Word of God in the Bible is absolute and it's definitely against homosexuals.
Fight God if you want, but you shall not win in the end.
Matthew 7
13Enter ye in at the strait gate: for wide is the gate, and broad is the way, that leadeth to destruction, and many there be which go in thereat:
14Because strait is the gate, and narrow is the way, which leadeth unto life, and few there be that find it.
I really try not to use this term often, but it is down right bigotry.
What, God can't change his mind? He changed his mind about keeping slaves right? Wait, did he?
Ahahhahahahhaha.
I wonder where we get our laws from....... I know, teh Courts must make them up as they go!
This is the fallacy of God. How can the all knowing God of Fools ever change his mind?
This is the fallacy of God. How can the all knowing God of Fools ever change his mind?
Fools. The Word of God in the Bible is absolute and it's definitely against homosexuals.
Fight God if you want, but you shall not win in the end.
Matthew 7
13Enter ye in at the strait gate: for wide is the gate, and broad is the way, that leadeth to destruction, and many there be which go in thereat:
14Because strait is the gate, and narrow is the way, which leadeth unto life, and few there be that find it.
god is welcome to damn the gays to hell in the afterlife, but what does that have to do with contracts made between two people on earth?Fools. The Word of God in the Bible is absolute and it's definitely against homosexuals.
Fight God if you want, but you shall not win in the end.
Matthew 7
13Enter ye in at the strait gate: for wide is the gate, and broad is the way, that leadeth to destruction, and many there be which go in thereat:
14Because strait is the gate, and narrow is the way, which leadeth unto life, and few there be that find it.
god is welcome to damn the gays to hell in the afterlife, but what does that have to do with contracts made between two people on earth?
... you don't have to break the law to end up in civil court.