Pro-SSM activists in New York are threatening TimeWarner Cable -- which is airing ads on both sides of the marriage debate -- because they are, well, airing both sides of the debate.
Time Warner Cable, which operates in 28 states, last month ran ads in New York State from the National Organization for Marriage advocating against same-sex marriage .... Many were outraged to see this bigotry invade their homes. One man has decided to do something about it. Today, Jeffrey Marx has deemed to be Time Warner Cable Cancel Day, and he invites all Time Warner subscribers to cancel their Time Warner service.
Marx adds, “TWC has given me two form letter responses now, both defending themselves by saying they are presenting ads for both sides of the issue. TWC would never accept funds for an ad discriminating against black people, asian people, brunettes, people with blue eyes, or women. Presenting both sides continues the debate. There is no debate regarding Equality. Keeping the LGBT community as second class citizens is no longer a debatable issue. It is just plain wrong. Neither response from TWC mentioned legal issues regarding freedom of speech. I continue my Facebook project in confidence…
Fox News covered a class full of kindergartners in California being taught that you can feel like a girl, feel like a boy, feel like both, or feel like neither.
Watch it and tell us what you think:
The group brought in to teach children these lessons (allegedly to prevent bullying) is called Gender Spectrum.
"People can be girls, feel like girls, they can feel like boys, they can feel like both, and they can even feel, like I said, kinda like neither."
Gary Gross at the Minneapolis Conservative Examiner writes:
What [pro-SSM activists] did after the marriage amendment [passed] is described in this email:
What became unnerving was that last night as we moved closer to the vote they got louder and faster. There was one woman who screeched every time the main doors opened. Made me long for a pair of socks. It was an experience I will remember a long time. Especially seeing the backs of the state troopers--as they lined up shoulder to shoulder to keep the crowd from touching us. And the screaming, "Shame! Shame!" at us. Doesn't really go with earlier in the evening when they were singing Amazing Grace, and shouting "No Hate". Of course, they seemed to think it was perfectly loving to scream "Bigot" 10 inches from my face and spit on one of the other reps. (By the way, he has MS, walks with a cane and is a little slower. No hate, right?)
... Because of the [pro-SSM] activists' noisemaking, the doors were shut to allow debate. I've learned from several other GOP legislators that DFL legislators made a habit of leaving the House Chamber by way of the closed doors. When those doors opened, which is mandated when a legislator leaves the Chamber, the DFL legislators would take their sweet time walking through the door.
I'm told that the reason why DFL legislators did that was to give the [pro-SSM] activists plenty of time to hurl invectives at GOP legislators. I'm told that this went on throughout the debate.
... The [pro-SSM] media apologists should be ashamed for not reporting the [pro-SSM] despicable behavior.
A bill reintroduced into the U.S. House of Representatives this month proposes federal-level punishment for states that ban homosexual couples and non-married individuals from adopting children. Effectively, the bill would ban all Catholic and Christian adoption agencies or forbid them from acting on faith beliefs.
Touted as the means for fixing a “flawed” system, the “Every Child Deserves a Family Act” would “prohibit discrimination in adoption or foster care placements” based on the “sexual orientation, gender identification, or marital status” of prospective adoptive and foster parents.
First introduced in October 2009 by Democratic California Rep. Pete Stark, the bill was re-introduced on May 3 with 52 co-sponsors in the House. Democratic Senator Kristin Gillibrand of New York is expected to introduce companion legislation in the Senate in the coming weeks.
With a push on by supporters of same-sex “marriage” to legalize it in New York state, supporters of traditional marriage — including New York’s archbishop — are mounting their own campaigns to keep marriage as a union between one man and one woman.
... On May 24, more than 350 people attended a morning rally outside the state Capitol in Albany, and hundreds more met with lawmakers in their offices later that day, according to organizers of the event.
Other recent efforts to fight any such measure included a rally in the Bronx that drew several thousand people, a pledge by the advocacy group National Organization for Marriage that it will spend $1.5million in advertising and campaign contributions to head off same-sex “marriage,” and a blog posting by Archbishop Timothy Dolan saying that the definition of marriage is “hard-wired into our human reason.”
[Sen. Diaz' effort to protect marriage] has also drawn the Pentecostal minister into venomous, online clashes and spawned death threats called into his office. Now a Brooklyn gay bar will host a "F--- Ruben Diaz Festival."
"I have never preached hate," Diaz told the Daily News. "They're showing that they're the ones that are doing the hateful things."
Diaz said he and his family have received death threats due to his vocal stance on keeping gay marriage unlawful in New York State. They were reported to the FBI and Albany police, he said. "
We are in America; we are supposed to agree to disagree and respect each other's positions," the senator said.
On May 10, tweets by opponents of Diaz's May 15 rally included one in which the sender expressed the desire to sexually assault Diaz's daughter.
Chile’s President Sebastian Pinera has announced that he will forward to parliament a bill that would grant both heterosexual and homosexual couples the ability to form civil unions, granting them many of the same rights as marriage.
Pinera announced his intentions in an interview published Saturday by daily El Mercurio. --LGBTQ Nation
As it happens, some of Kennedy’s principles were on display in the California prisons case. The facts were simple: California’s prisons are at roughly 200 percent of capacity. Physically and mentally ill inmates sued for adequate services. Two courts over the last decade ordered improvements. When nothing happened, a special three-judge federal district court ordered that the facilities be reduced to 137.5 percent of capacity.
In reviewing the lower court’s finding, Kennedy started with what is undoubtedly his favorite constitutional concept: dignity. Prisoners, he said, have lost their liberty, yet they maintain their dignity as human beings. In fact, Kennedy asserted, the whole point of the Eighth Amendment’s ban on cruel and unusual punishment is to preserve human dignity.
Once dignity was in play, Kennedy was essentially guaranteed to hold in favor of the inmates. He has invoked the principle in a bewildering array of contexts, always with decisive force. Dignity was at the heart of Kennedy’s vote to preserve the basic abortion right in the famous Planned Parenthood v. Casey decision, where he wrote of the need to respect “choices central to personal dignity and autonomy.”
