Full Version: Modern Family Life
Pages: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40
there is no "even"
Daydreaming in Damascus: The Syrian Masturbation Epidemic
Masturbation ... epidemic? Seems rather a benign "epidemic."
QUOTE
It started with a post in Arabic last month by 23-year-old blogger Fadal Atamaz Al-Sibai, who complained that masturbation in Syria has "spread among the youths like wildfire," and announced a campaign to end the "secret habit."
His comments prompted a snarky response from Abufares, one of Syria's leading bloggers, who called for a countercampaign culminating in an "unprecedented Syrian Orgasm against absurdity, hypocrisy, and sanctimony."
Then things really picked up.
Yazan Badran, who blogs from Latakia in northern Syria, suggested observing a week of moral decay, to include drugs, porn, and eating publicly on Ramadan. Two other bloggers proposed campaigns against tribalism and fossilized thinking.
"While unsuspecting parents are watching Bab El Hara [a popular television show in the Arab world], the boys are spanking their monkeys and the girls are beating their beavers," Abufares wrote, in a posting so chalk with lewd detail that even a jaded reader might blush.
Has the Syrian ether suddenly become a bastion of free expression? Hardly. Just last month, the regime sentenced a 31-year-old political blogger, Karim Antoine Arbaji, to three years in prison for undermining President Bashar al-Assad's rule.
But bloggers and analysts say the secular regime in Damascus has proven to be far more tolerant of sex and sexual discussion on the Web than other countries in the region. "You're only in danger when discussing sensitive political issues. The presidency, for example," Badran from Latakia said in an e-mail exchange. "There is very little concern when it comes to social, cultural, or religious debates, especially over a medium like blogs."
Andrew Tabler, a Syria expert at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy, says he's not surprised the masturbation debate exploded. "Whenever you have a high degree of authoritarianism, the things that are tolerated will rise to the surface quite forcefully," he says.
Tabler said the proliferation of Internet porn in Syria has alarmed clerics and might have been the impetus for Sibai's original posting. His blog is peppered with religious references explaining the supposed harmful effects of masturbation.
His comments prompted a snarky response from Abufares, one of Syria's leading bloggers, who called for a countercampaign culminating in an "unprecedented Syrian Orgasm against absurdity, hypocrisy, and sanctimony."
Then things really picked up.
Yazan Badran, who blogs from Latakia in northern Syria, suggested observing a week of moral decay, to include drugs, porn, and eating publicly on Ramadan. Two other bloggers proposed campaigns against tribalism and fossilized thinking.
"While unsuspecting parents are watching Bab El Hara [a popular television show in the Arab world], the boys are spanking their monkeys and the girls are beating their beavers," Abufares wrote, in a posting so chalk with lewd detail that even a jaded reader might blush.
Has the Syrian ether suddenly become a bastion of free expression? Hardly. Just last month, the regime sentenced a 31-year-old political blogger, Karim Antoine Arbaji, to three years in prison for undermining President Bashar al-Assad's rule.
But bloggers and analysts say the secular regime in Damascus has proven to be far more tolerant of sex and sexual discussion on the Web than other countries in the region. "You're only in danger when discussing sensitive political issues. The presidency, for example," Badran from Latakia said in an e-mail exchange. "There is very little concern when it comes to social, cultural, or religious debates, especially over a medium like blogs."
Andrew Tabler, a Syria expert at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy, says he's not surprised the masturbation debate exploded. "Whenever you have a high degree of authoritarianism, the things that are tolerated will rise to the surface quite forcefully," he says.
Tabler said the proliferation of Internet porn in Syria has alarmed clerics and might have been the impetus for Sibai's original posting. His blog is peppered with religious references explaining the supposed harmful effects of masturbation.
Masturbation ... epidemic? Seems rather a benign "epidemic."
Beating beats shelling.
QUOTE (beasty @ Oct 2 2009, 08:00 PM) 
Beating beats shelling.
It may be just the thing needed.
Prop 8 Campaign Attitudes to be Revealed
What a fascinating approach. There is likely a high probability that the internal emails will reveal a ferociously vindictive prejudice completely unrelated to the publically stated objectives, in the same fashion as one would expect to find had email existed when those who campaigned against interracial marriage were trying to advance that prejudice. Even if that animus isn't helpful to the court case, it's likely that exposure to the real objectives behind these groups will really turn off voters the next time it comes up to a vote. I can just imagine the commercials now.
QUOTE
One of the arguments of the Olson/Boies legal team that is suing to overturn California’s Proposition 8, is that the motivation and intent behind the anti-gay marriage amendment was one of animus directed towards gay people as a group. This might prove to be an effective strategy; in Romer v. Evans, the Supreme Court of the United States threw out Colorado’s anti-gay Amendment 2 partly because it established a class of people in order to enact discrimination upon them.
To advance this argument, they subpoenaed the correspondence of the Yes on 8 campaign. Naturally, the campaign resisted, but Judge Vaughn Walker agreed with the Olson/Boies argument.
The judge agreed with lawyers for two unmarried same-sex couples who have sued to strike down the ban, known as Proposition 8, that confidential communications between the campaign’s leaders and professional consultants could reveal a rationale for denying gays the right to wed that is relevant to the case.
The most relevant information will be in relation to what messages the campaign decided not to present to voters as this will put those they did use in perspective.
But I’m sure that the virulent homophobia and blind hate expressed in the communications will also go far to illuminate the attitudes of the campaign against marriage. Unless, of course, the Yes on 8 Campaign always spoke in loving terms about gay people and couples (hey, is that a pig I saw fly past my window?).
To advance this argument, they subpoenaed the correspondence of the Yes on 8 campaign. Naturally, the campaign resisted, but Judge Vaughn Walker agreed with the Olson/Boies argument.
The judge agreed with lawyers for two unmarried same-sex couples who have sued to strike down the ban, known as Proposition 8, that confidential communications between the campaign’s leaders and professional consultants could reveal a rationale for denying gays the right to wed that is relevant to the case.
The most relevant information will be in relation to what messages the campaign decided not to present to voters as this will put those they did use in perspective.
But I’m sure that the virulent homophobia and blind hate expressed in the communications will also go far to illuminate the attitudes of the campaign against marriage. Unless, of course, the Yes on 8 Campaign always spoke in loving terms about gay people and couples (hey, is that a pig I saw fly past my window?).
What a fascinating approach. There is likely a high probability that the internal emails will reveal a ferociously vindictive prejudice completely unrelated to the publically stated objectives, in the same fashion as one would expect to find had email existed when those who campaigned against interracial marriage were trying to advance that prejudice. Even if that animus isn't helpful to the court case, it's likely that exposure to the real objectives behind these groups will really turn off voters the next time it comes up to a vote. I can just imagine the commercials now.
Consultants will always have a more logical view than the true believers. I do wonder what ends up as private communication. Are we also going to see the political considerations on the other side, or is only one party to be allowed no private and personal communication?
QUOTE (Innocent @ Oct 3 2009, 07:35 PM)
Prop 8 Campaign Attitudes to be Revealed
What a fascinating approach. There is likely a high probability that the internal emails will reveal a ferociously vindictive prejudice completely unrelated to the publically stated objectives, in the same fashion as one would expect to find had email existed when those who campaigned against interracial marriage were trying to advance that prejudice. Even if that animus isn't helpful to the court case, it's likely that exposure to the real objectives behind these groups will really turn off voters the next time it comes up to a vote. I can just imagine the commercials now.
What a fascinating approach. There is likely a high probability that the internal emails will reveal a ferociously vindictive prejudice completely unrelated to the publically stated objectives, in the same fashion as one would expect to find had email existed when those who campaigned against interracial marriage were trying to advance that prejudice. Even if that animus isn't helpful to the court case, it's likely that exposure to the real objectives behind these groups will really turn off voters the next time it comes up to a vote. I can just imagine the commercials now.
Even if "ferociously vindictive prejudices" existed at top echelons that would not invalidate the main objectives of joe six-pack...nor the results achieved.
Since the propopsition has now effecitively become part of California's constitution efforts to repeal it might be difficult...unless entities like ACORN get involved.
QUOTE (Repub_Bub @ Oct 4 2009, 07:17 AM)
Even if "ferociously vindictive prejudices" existed at top echelons that would not invalidate the main objectives of joe six-pack...nor the results achieved.
<chuckle> Yeah, I'm sure that "Joe Six-Pack" has a much more sophisticated and eloquent perspective than those that lead the movement.
What we see in the emails will surely be a milder form of animus than you'll find among the mob. Consider, for instance, your own, um, delicate and loving perspective.
QUOTE (Innocent @ Oct 4 2009, 05:49 PM)
<chuckle> Yeah, I'm sure that "Joe Six-Pack" has a much more sophisticated and eloquent perspective than those that lead the movement. What we see in the emails will surely be a milder form of animus than you'll find among the mob. Consider, for instance, your own, um, delicate and loving perspective.
What we see in the emails will surely be a milder form of animus than you'll find among the mob. Consider, for instance, your own, um, delicate and loving perspective. Delicate and loving perspectives aside...Joe seemed to have won the day.
QUOTE (Repub_Bub @ Oct 4 2009, 10:07 PM)
Delicate and loving perspectives aside...Joe seemed to have won the day.
Actually, more and more and time progresses, surveys indicate we're winning Joe over to the side of equality and non-discrimination - not the Joe the Phobes like yourself, but the everyday Joes. It's just a matter of time, and what we are seeing now are the last gasps of prejudice by minorities of people with strong prejudicial and discriminatory animus like yourself. You and your cohorts will be joining the historical scrap heap with racists and misogynists soon enough.
he's a pharisee
QUOTE (Innocent @ Oct 4 2009, 07:42 PM)
Actually, more and more and time progresses, surveys indicate we're winning Joe over to the side of equality and non-discrimination - not the Joe the Phobes like yourself, but the everyday Joes. It's just a matter of time, and what we are seeing now are the last gasps of prejudice by minorities of people with strong prejudicial and discriminatory animus like yourself. You and your cohorts will be joining the historical scrap heap with racists and misogynists soon enough.
I don't doubt that at all...the sad thing is your confusion of my disdain for perversity with minority prejudice.
I don't envy you your future.
post some more of your favorite porn
QUOTE (Lord_Proprietor @ Oct 11 2009, 05:13 AM)
You ain't seen nuthin' yet...
Poll: 51.8% plan to vote no on question 1
QUOTE
According to new poll data, 51.8 percent of people who plan to vote in November say they will vote no or are leaning in that direction on question 1, the people’s veto of Maine’s same-sex marriage law.
The poll shows that 42.9 percent plan to vote yes, or are leaning that way. And 5.2 percent remain undecided.
A “no” vote would allow the same-sex marriage law to stand. A “yes” vote would overturn the law.
The poll shows that 42.9 percent plan to vote yes, or are leaning that way. And 5.2 percent remain undecided.
A “no” vote would allow the same-sex marriage law to stand. A “yes” vote would overturn the law.
QUOTE (Repub_Bub @ Oct 5 2009, 05:10 AM)
I don't doubt that at all...the sad thing is your confusion of my disdain for perversity with minority prejudice.
Minority prejudice IS perversity. Your current animus is merely a continuation of that long long tradition. Right wing religious organizations through out history have taken great pains to oppose the advancement of every human rights issue they have ever encountered. Only the object of their animus varies. It fails every time, of course. It appears the Gods are looking out for us minorities.
QUOTE
I don't envy you your future.
Crocodile tears Evita? Really? Try Glenn Beck.
Judge refuses to dismiss gay marriage ban suit
He asks lawyers to show how gay unions pose threat to traditional ones
He asks lawyers to show how gay unions pose threat to traditional ones
QUOTE
SAN FRANCISCO - A federal judge challenged the backers of California's voter-enacted ban on same-sex marriage Wednesday to explain how allowing gay couples to wed threatens conventional unions, a demand that prompted their lawyer to acknowledge he did not know.
The unusual exchange between U.S. District Chief Judge Vaughn Walker and Charles Cooper, a lawyer for the group that sponsored Proposition 8, came during a hearing on a lawsuit challenging the measure as discriminatory under the U.S. Constitution.
Cooper had asked Walker to throw out the suit or make it more difficult for those civil rights claims to prevail.
The judge not only refused but signaled that when the case goes to trial in January, he expects Cooper and his legal team to present evidence showing that male-female marriages would be undermined if same-sex marriages were legal.
The question is relevant to the assertion that Proposition 8 is constitutionally valid because it furthers the states goal of fostering "naturally procreative relationships," Walker explained.
"What is the harm to the procreation purpose you outlined of allowing same-sex couples to get married?" Walker asked.
"My answer is, I don't know. I don't know," Cooper answered.
"There are things we can't know, that's my point," Cooper said. "The people of California are entitled to step back and let the experiment unfold in Massachusetts and other places, to see whether our concerns about the health of marital unions have either been confirmed or perhaps they have been completely assuaged."
"But it is not self-evident that there is no chance of any harm, and the people of California are entitled not to take the risk," he said.
"Since when do Constitutional rights rest on the proof of no harm?" Walker parried, adding the First Amendment right to free speech protects activities that many find offensive, "but we tolerate those in a free society."
In allowing the case to move forward, Walker said significant questions remain about whether the California measure, which was approved by 52 percent of voters in November, unlawfully violates the rights of gays and lesbians to equality and due process guaranteed under the U.S. Constitution. The measure overturned a state Supreme Court ruling earlier in the year that legalized same-sex marriages.
The unusual exchange between U.S. District Chief Judge Vaughn Walker and Charles Cooper, a lawyer for the group that sponsored Proposition 8, came during a hearing on a lawsuit challenging the measure as discriminatory under the U.S. Constitution.
Cooper had asked Walker to throw out the suit or make it more difficult for those civil rights claims to prevail.
The judge not only refused but signaled that when the case goes to trial in January, he expects Cooper and his legal team to present evidence showing that male-female marriages would be undermined if same-sex marriages were legal.
The question is relevant to the assertion that Proposition 8 is constitutionally valid because it furthers the states goal of fostering "naturally procreative relationships," Walker explained.
"What is the harm to the procreation purpose you outlined of allowing same-sex couples to get married?" Walker asked.
"My answer is, I don't know. I don't know," Cooper answered.
"There are things we can't know, that's my point," Cooper said. "The people of California are entitled to step back and let the experiment unfold in Massachusetts and other places, to see whether our concerns about the health of marital unions have either been confirmed or perhaps they have been completely assuaged."
"But it is not self-evident that there is no chance of any harm, and the people of California are entitled not to take the risk," he said.
"Since when do Constitutional rights rest on the proof of no harm?" Walker parried, adding the First Amendment right to free speech protects activities that many find offensive, "but we tolerate those in a free society."
In allowing the case to move forward, Walker said significant questions remain about whether the California measure, which was approved by 52 percent of voters in November, unlawfully violates the rights of gays and lesbians to equality and due process guaranteed under the U.S. Constitution. The measure overturned a state Supreme Court ruling earlier in the year that legalized same-sex marriages.
QUOTE (Innocent @ Oct 15 2009, 06:18 PM)
He asks lawyers to show how gay unions pose threat to traditional ones
No big deal, Uncle Zack is a NAMBLA member...the lawyer can't say what's wrong with him takin' the kids to the woods for the weekend.
QUOTE (Repub_Bub @ Oct 11 2009, 06:09 AM)
You ain't seen nuthin' yet...
QUOTE (Repub_Bub @ Oct 15 2009, 09:41 PM)
No big deal, Uncle Zack is a NAMBLA member...the lawyer can't say what's wrong with him takin' the kids to the woods for the weekend.
What creepy things make a home in your mind. Since you appear to be unable to see a difference between the relationships between mutually consenting adults and pedophilia, if one takes your claims on their face, one gets the strong impression that for you were it not for your version of your belief system you'd have no reason not to be "Uncle Zack."
For the vast majority of the rest of the planet the distinction between the relationships between mutually consenting adults and pedophilia is not problematic and consequently we don't have to worry that a crisis of faith leads to molesting little kids. Except, apparently, for you. But that's only if we take you statements at face value. If you don't believe that a crisis of faith would lead you to begin molesting little kids, then you do recognize the difference. I'm guessing it's just simple false witness – you know what you are saying is crap, but you don’t have anything else.
serving his god
he'd last 10 minutes on Survivor
he'd last 10 minutes on Survivor
Interracial couple denied marriage license in Tangipahoa Parish
"I'm not a racist. I just don't believe in mixing the races that way." We hear a version of this argument now with gay marriage too. Obviously the person making the statement is racist.
QUOTE
A Louisiana justice of the peace said he refused to issue a marriage license to an interracial couple out of concern for any children the couple might have.
"I'm not a racist. I just don't believe in mixing the races that way," Bardwell told the Associated Press on Thursday. "I have piles and piles of black friends. They come to my home, I marry them, they use my bathroom. I treat them just like everyone else."
Bardwell said he asks everyone who calls about marriage if they are a mixed race couple. If they are, he does not marry them, he said.
Bardwell said he has discussed the topic with black people and white people, along with witnessing some interracial marriages. He came to the conclusion that most of black society does not readily accept offspring of such relationships, and neither does white society, he said.
Beth Humphrey, 30, and 32-year-old Terence McKay, both of Hammond, say they will consult the U.S. Justice Department about filing a discrimination complaint.
Humphrey, an account manager for a marketing firm, said she and McKay, a welder, just returned to Louisiana. She plans to enroll in the University of New Orleans to pursue a masters degree in minority politics.
"That was one thing that made this so unbelievable," she said. "It's not something you expect in this day and age."
"It is really astonishing and disappointing to see this come up in 2009," said American Civil Liberties Union of Louisiana attorney Katie Schwartzmann. "The Supreme Court ruled as far back as 1963 that the government cannot tell people who they can and cannot marry."
The ACLU sent a letter to the Louisiana Judiciary Committee, which oversees the state justices of the peace, asking them to investigate Bardwell and recommending "the most severe sanctions available, because such blatant bigotry poses a substantial threat of serious harm to the administration of justice."
"He knew he was breaking the law, but continued to do it," Schwartzmann said.
"I'm not a racist. I just don't believe in mixing the races that way," Bardwell told the Associated Press on Thursday. "I have piles and piles of black friends. They come to my home, I marry them, they use my bathroom. I treat them just like everyone else."
Bardwell said he asks everyone who calls about marriage if they are a mixed race couple. If they are, he does not marry them, he said.
Bardwell said he has discussed the topic with black people and white people, along with witnessing some interracial marriages. He came to the conclusion that most of black society does not readily accept offspring of such relationships, and neither does white society, he said.
Beth Humphrey, 30, and 32-year-old Terence McKay, both of Hammond, say they will consult the U.S. Justice Department about filing a discrimination complaint.
Humphrey, an account manager for a marketing firm, said she and McKay, a welder, just returned to Louisiana. She plans to enroll in the University of New Orleans to pursue a masters degree in minority politics.
"That was one thing that made this so unbelievable," she said. "It's not something you expect in this day and age."
"It is really astonishing and disappointing to see this come up in 2009," said American Civil Liberties Union of Louisiana attorney Katie Schwartzmann. "The Supreme Court ruled as far back as 1963 that the government cannot tell people who they can and cannot marry."
The ACLU sent a letter to the Louisiana Judiciary Committee, which oversees the state justices of the peace, asking them to investigate Bardwell and recommending "the most severe sanctions available, because such blatant bigotry poses a substantial threat of serious harm to the administration of justice."
"He knew he was breaking the law, but continued to do it," Schwartzmann said.
"I'm not a racist. I just don't believe in mixing the races that way." We hear a version of this argument now with gay marriage too. Obviously the person making the statement is racist.
Harry Potter Alliance Asks Maine Muggles to Oppose Gay Marriage Repeal
Too cute for words.
QUOTE
The wizard lobby is wading into Maine’s fight over gay marriage.
The Harry Potter Alliance, a Massachusetts-based nonprofit that is “dedicated to bringing the themes of Harry Potter into the real world” announced today a grassroots effort to help defeat a Nov. 3 ballot initiative in Maine that seeks to repeal a recent state law legalizing same sex marriage.
The alliance announced an Oct. 24 concert series in Portland featuring Harry and the Potters and Draco and the Malfoys—two indie rock bands that sing songs from the perspective of Harry Potter characters.
The bands and concert attendees will then spend the day canvassing voters to vote against Proposition 1 in conjunction with Maine Equality, a gay rights group. Then, the bands will play a second concert, which will be live-streamed to fans who are also being asked to take part in a phone bank that day.
The lobbying day is being constructed as a House Cup Competition from the books—including the creation of a feature in the phone bank system that allows participants to register and earn points based on which House at Hogwarts they identify with. Headlining the effort is Evanna Lynch, who plays Luna Lovegood in the Harry Potter films.
“The parallels in Harry Potter around equal rights, including marriage equality, abound,” said Andrew Slack, the Alliance’s executive director, in a statement promising a “magical day of activism.”
What Would Dumbledore Do?
The Harry Potter Alliance, a Massachusetts-based nonprofit that is “dedicated to bringing the themes of Harry Potter into the real world” announced today a grassroots effort to help defeat a Nov. 3 ballot initiative in Maine that seeks to repeal a recent state law legalizing same sex marriage.
The alliance announced an Oct. 24 concert series in Portland featuring Harry and the Potters and Draco and the Malfoys—two indie rock bands that sing songs from the perspective of Harry Potter characters.
The bands and concert attendees will then spend the day canvassing voters to vote against Proposition 1 in conjunction with Maine Equality, a gay rights group. Then, the bands will play a second concert, which will be live-streamed to fans who are also being asked to take part in a phone bank that day.
The lobbying day is being constructed as a House Cup Competition from the books—including the creation of a feature in the phone bank system that allows participants to register and earn points based on which House at Hogwarts they identify with. Headlining the effort is Evanna Lynch, who plays Luna Lovegood in the Harry Potter films.
“The parallels in Harry Potter around equal rights, including marriage equality, abound,” said Andrew Slack, the Alliance’s executive director, in a statement promising a “magical day of activism.”
What Would Dumbledore Do?
Too cute for words.
QUOTE (Innocent @ Oct 15 2009, 07:25 PM)
What creepy things make a home in your mind. Since you appear to be unable to see a difference between the relationships between mutually consenting adults and pedophilia, if one takes your claims on their face, one gets the strong impression that for you were it not for your version of your belief system you'd have no reason not to be "Uncle Zack."
For the vast majority of the rest of the planet the distinction between the relationships between mutually consenting adults and pedophilia is not problematic and consequently we don't have to worry that a crisis of faith leads to molesting little kids. Except, apparently, for you. But that's only if we take you statements at face value. If you don't believe that a crisis of faith would lead you to begin molesting little kids, then you do recognize the difference. I'm guessing it's just simple false witness – you know what you are saying is crap, but you don’t have anything else.
For the vast majority of the rest of the planet the distinction between the relationships between mutually consenting adults and pedophilia is not problematic and consequently we don't have to worry that a crisis of faith leads to molesting little kids. Except, apparently, for you. But that's only if we take you statements at face value. If you don't believe that a crisis of faith would lead you to begin molesting little kids, then you do recognize the difference. I'm guessing it's just simple false witness – you know what you are saying is crap, but you don’t have anything else.
I see that the age of consent is quite variable by location and that some groups are attempting to lower it still. What's creepy is your continued insistance that this flexibilty demands some instant demarcation with each whimsical mark in the sand... allowing any unsavory and perverted activity the instant status of normalcy.
Interesting that you would see my failure to appreciate homosexual lifestyles as a crisis of faith...I guess, for you, there is no notion that cannot be rationalized to accomodate your perversity.
QUOTE (inyerface @ Oct 15 2009, 07:28 PM)
serving his god
he'd last 10 minutes on Survivor
he'd last 10 minutes on Survivor
Ain't no coattail you can't swing on...huh, bud?
QUOTE (Innocent @ Oct 15 2009, 08:46 PM)
Yeah, especially when Harry brings his grandpa...
QUOTE (Repub_Bub @ Oct 16 2009, 04:20 AM)
Ain't no coattail you can't swing on...huh, bud?
Jesus Christ is Lord
http://www.philly.com/philly/news/homepage...moms__kids.html
Pa.: 6 stole 375G from food program for low-income moms, kids
By JULIE SHAW
Philadelphia Daily News
shawj@phillynews.com 215-854-2592
The taxpayers' money was to be used by low-income moms to feed their babies.
Instead, the federal funds were used by six scammers to feed their own greed, according to findings by a state grand jury.
Pa.: 6 stole 375G from food program for low-income moms, kids
By JULIE SHAW
Philadelphia Daily News
shawj@phillynews.com 215-854-2592
The taxpayers' money was to be used by low-income moms to feed their babies.
Instead, the federal funds were used by six scammers to feed their own greed, according to findings by a state grand jury.
Why does he need to accommodate or rationalize anything?
What is it that he forgoes by virtue of your (and others') finding of his sexual tastes and practices 'perverse'?
What is it that he forgoes by virtue of your (and others') finding of his sexual tastes and practices 'perverse'?
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/2...0-15_inter.html
Interracial couple is refused marriage license by justice of peace over concern for future children
By Patty Lee
DAILY NEWS WRITER
Updated Friday, October 16th 2009, 1:10 PM
A Louisiana justice of peace refused to issue a marriage license because the couple trying to wed was interracial.
Keith Bardwell, a justice of peace in Tangipahoa Parish, cited concern for children that the couple might have as one of his reasons.
Bardwell, who claims most interracial marriages do not last long, came to the conclusion that offspring from those relationships are discriminated against.
"There is a problem with both groups accepting a child from such a marriage," Bardwell told the Associated Press. "I think those children suffer and I won't help put them through it."
He supports his decision by saying he treats all interracial couples the same way.
"I try to treat everyone equally," Bardwell said.
The justice of peace estimates that he has denied marriage to four couples during his two and a half year career.
The latest couple to be denied, Beth Humphrey, 30, and Terence McKay, 32, will look into filing a discrimination complaint with the U.S. Justice Department.
"That was one thing that made this so unbelievable," Humphrey said. "It's not something you expect in this day and age."
Humphrey, who is white and an account manager for a marketing firm, and McKay, a welder who is black, recently returned to Louisiana.
Humphrey called Bardwell on Oct. 6 to ask about getting a marriage license and learned through Bardwell’s wife that he would not sign for interracial couples.
"We are looking forward to having children," Humphrey said. "And all our friends and co-workers have been very supportive. Except for this, we're typical happy newlyweds."
The American Civil Liberties Union of Louisiana has already sent a letter to the state’s judiciary committee asking it to investigate Bardwell.
"It is really astonishing and disappointing to see this come up in 2009," ACLU attorney Katie Schwartzmann said. "The Supreme Court ruled as far back as 1963 that the government cannot tell people who they can and cannot marry."
But Bardwell insists that he did nothing wrong.
"I've been a justice of the peace for 34 years and I don't think I've mistreated anybody," Bardwell said. "I've made some mistakes, but you have too. I didn't tell this couple they couldn't get married. I just told them I wouldn't do it."
Read more: http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/2...l#ixzz0U9k3EkVU
Interracial couple is refused marriage license by justice of peace over concern for future children
By Patty Lee
DAILY NEWS WRITER
Updated Friday, October 16th 2009, 1:10 PM
A Louisiana justice of peace refused to issue a marriage license because the couple trying to wed was interracial.
Keith Bardwell, a justice of peace in Tangipahoa Parish, cited concern for children that the couple might have as one of his reasons.
Bardwell, who claims most interracial marriages do not last long, came to the conclusion that offspring from those relationships are discriminated against.
"There is a problem with both groups accepting a child from such a marriage," Bardwell told the Associated Press. "I think those children suffer and I won't help put them through it."
He supports his decision by saying he treats all interracial couples the same way.
"I try to treat everyone equally," Bardwell said.
The justice of peace estimates that he has denied marriage to four couples during his two and a half year career.
The latest couple to be denied, Beth Humphrey, 30, and Terence McKay, 32, will look into filing a discrimination complaint with the U.S. Justice Department.
"That was one thing that made this so unbelievable," Humphrey said. "It's not something you expect in this day and age."
Humphrey, who is white and an account manager for a marketing firm, and McKay, a welder who is black, recently returned to Louisiana.
Humphrey called Bardwell on Oct. 6 to ask about getting a marriage license and learned through Bardwell’s wife that he would not sign for interracial couples.
"We are looking forward to having children," Humphrey said. "And all our friends and co-workers have been very supportive. Except for this, we're typical happy newlyweds."
The American Civil Liberties Union of Louisiana has already sent a letter to the state’s judiciary committee asking it to investigate Bardwell.
"It is really astonishing and disappointing to see this come up in 2009," ACLU attorney Katie Schwartzmann said. "The Supreme Court ruled as far back as 1963 that the government cannot tell people who they can and cannot marry."
But Bardwell insists that he did nothing wrong.
"I've been a justice of the peace for 34 years and I don't think I've mistreated anybody," Bardwell said. "I've made some mistakes, but you have too. I didn't tell this couple they couldn't get married. I just told them I wouldn't do it."
Read more: http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/2...l#ixzz0U9k3EkVU
QUOTE (Repub_Bub @ Oct 16 2009, 07:25 AM)
Yeah, especially when Harry brings his grandpa...
Is that you? It certainly fits my mental image of you.
QUOTE (Innocent @ Oct 16 2009, 09:32 PM)
Is that you? It certainly fits my mental image of you.
He sure cuts a fine figure in a tablecloth.
QUOTE (Repub_Bub @ Oct 16 2009, 07:19 AM)
I see that the age of consent is quite variable by location and that some groups are attempting to lower it still.
Historically it keeps going up, since we need longer and longer educational and developmental periods as society becomes more complex. This process started during the industrial revolution when childhood was invented. Give it a generation or two and people in their 30s will still be considered children. You already see some of that now. But I certainly don't anticipate this country moving back the biblical age values when people married at 12 or so, unless there is some major disaster.
QUOTE (Repub_Bub @ Oct 16 2009, 07:19 AM)
What's creepy is your continued insistance that this flexibilty demands some instant demarcation with each whimsical mark in the sand... allowing any unsavory and perverted activity the instant status of normalcy.
Never said anything remotely like that.
QUOTE (Repub_Bub @ Oct 16 2009, 07:19 AM)
Interesting that you would see my failure to appreciate homosexual lifestyles as a crisis of faith...I guess, for you, there is no notion that cannot be rationalized to accomodate your perversity.
You appear to have misunderstood this too.
Have a good day creepy internet guy.
cgi
creepy guy on the internet
creepy guy on the internet
QUOTE (Innocent @ Oct 16 2009, 07:42 PM)
Historically it keeps going up, since we need longer and longer educational and developmental periods as society becomes more complex. This process started during the industrial revolution when childhood was invented. Give it a generation or two and people in their 30s will still be considered children. You already see some of that now. But I certainly don't anticipate this country moving back the biblical age values when people married at 12 or so, unless there is some major disaster.
Not true. It is going up with some groups but down with others. Pedophile advocacy groups, alternative life-stylists, and general fagdom all promote your version of normalcy with efforts such as "Homosexual Activists Ask Canada to Lower Age of Consent for Anal Sex, National Post Agrees"
QUOTE (Innocent @ Oct 16 2009, 07:42 PM)
Never said anything remotely like that.
Yeah, ya did...
QUOTE (Innocent @ Oct 16 2009, 07:42 PM)
You appear to have misunderstood this too.
Have a good day creepy internet guy.
Have a good day creepy internet guy.
Nope...
QUOTE (Innocent @ Oct 16 2009, 07:32 PM)
Is that you? It certainly fits my mental image of you.
You probably remember him from some wall posters you had as a child...
"fagdom" is juvenile. It is junior hs and high-school masculinity lingo.
You're stuck in 9th grade, Bub.
You're stuck in 9th grade, Bub.
QUOTE (Repub_Bub @ Oct 17 2009, 05:36 AM)
Not true. It is going up with some groups but down with others. Pedophile advocacy groups, alternative life-stylists, and general fagdom all promote your version of normalcy with efforts such as "Homosexual Activists Ask Canada to Lower Age of Consent for Anal Sex, National Post Agrees"
Your link doesn't work, but I'd guess it fits the standard profile of equalizing the laws so that they apply to everyone equally, rather than having one set of laws that apply to one group and another to a different group. Currently many places have one set of AOCs for heterosexuals and another for homosexuals.
QUOTE (Repub_Bub @ Oct 17 2009, 05:40 AM)
You probably remember him from some wall posters you had as a child...
Nope, no pictures of you on my wall.
Even 9th graders don't address actual homosexual boys as "fags", so long as they are 'otherwise' one of the guys.
Calling Innocent a 'fag' is akin to calling an upper-class white man of good breeding and good moral character "white trash".
I know it's not politically correct to say but there ARE homosexual who are "fags" and there are homosexuals who are not. And there are heterosexuals who are 'fags'.
Just as there African-Americans who are 'niggers' and African-Americans who are not. Just as there non-African Americans who are 'niggers'.
Calling Innocent a 'fag' is akin to calling an upper-class white man of good breeding and good moral character "white trash".
I know it's not politically correct to say but there ARE homosexual who are "fags" and there are homosexuals who are not. And there are heterosexuals who are 'fags'.
Just as there African-Americans who are 'niggers' and African-Americans who are not. Just as there non-African Americans who are 'niggers'.
QUOTE (Nomarchy @ Oct 19 2009, 02:07 PM)
Even 9th graders don't address actual homosexual boys as "fags", so long as they are 'otherwise' one of the guys.
Calling Innocent a 'fag' is akin to calling an upper-class white man of good breeding and good moral character "white trash".
I know it's not politically correct to say but there ARE homosexual who are "fags" and there are homosexuals who are not. And there are heterosexuals who are 'fags'.
Just as there African-Americans who are 'niggers' and African-Americans who are not. Just as there non-African Americans who are 'niggers'.
Calling Innocent a 'fag' is akin to calling an upper-class white man of good breeding and good moral character "white trash".
I know it's not politically correct to say but there ARE homosexual who are "fags" and there are homosexuals who are not. And there are heterosexuals who are 'fags'.
Just as there African-Americans who are 'niggers' and African-Americans who are not. Just as there non-African Americans who are 'niggers'.
This begs the question...just what is a fag ... and what is Innocent?
I have resisted calling Innocent a fag since it seems to have unusually offended the local folks...I refered to fagdom as a generality. Your typical knee-jerk has made the broadjump association.
Just connectin' the dots...
I think you need to sharpen your crayon
QUOTE (inyerface @ Oct 19 2009, 04:29 PM)
I think you need to sharpen your crayon
I think you need instructions from Waldo...
okay Waldo
go for it
go for it
A Father's Son
86-year old WWII vet asks "What do you think I fought for on Omaha Beach?" in repsonse to being asked "What do you think of equality for gays and lesbians?"
Very touching.
QUOTE
This is why equality will win in the end. In Maine, a World War II vet stood up for his son, and for the America he and so many others fought for:
Youtube: Philip
Youtube: Philip
QUOTE
Testimony given for and against Maine's marriage equality bill on April 22, 2009. Nearly 4,000 people attended the hearing, with marriage equality supporters out-numbering the opposition 4 to 1.
86-year old WWII vet asks "What do you think I fought for on Omaha Beach?" in repsonse to being asked "What do you think of equality for gays and lesbians?"
Very touching.
QUOTE (Nomarchy @ Oct 19 2009, 05:07 PM)
I know it's not politically correct to say but there ARE homosexual who are "fags" and there are homosexuals who are not. And there are heterosexuals who are 'fags'.
Just as there African-Americans who are 'niggers' and African-Americans who are not. Just as there non-African Americans who are 'niggers'.
Just as there African-Americans who are 'niggers' and African-Americans who are not. Just as there non-African Americans who are 'niggers'.
That is true...
The Larry King Effect
Pew Research: The States of Marriage and Divorce
Lots of Ex’s Live in Texas
Pew Research: Interactive Map: Marriage and Divorce: A 50-state tour
Marrying young, being working class, and being overtly religious all lead to higher levels of serial marriage.
Being part of the "creative classes," college educated, a bohemian, or an immigrant reduced levels of serial marriage.
There was no correlation between multiple marriages and the share of the gay population.
QUOTE
Last week, the Pew Research Center recently released its report on marriage in America. Based on data from the U.S. Census American Community Survey for 2008, it provides a wealth of data on marriage and divorce across the 50 states.
The thing that jumped out at me was the "Larry King" statistic - the number of people who have been married three or more times.
About one-in-twenty Americans who ever have been married said they had been married three or more times. That comes to 4 million men and 4.5 million women.
States varied a lot on this. Arkansas had the highest percentage of "serial marrieds," 10 percent. This was five times more than New York, New Jersey, and Massachusetts with just two percent. The study found that multiple marriages were less likely in states with high concentrations of college-educated people, and more likely in states with lower incomes and smaller college-educated populations.
Over the weekend, I enlisted my number-crunching colleague Charlotta Mellander to look at what other factors might be related to such serial marriage. We looked at unemployment, the class composition of the workforce, immigration, gay population, religion, and levels of psychological well-being. Our analysis points to associations and not causal relationships. It shows that a relationship exists, but not that one causes the other.
Class: Serial marriage was less likely in states with high creative class concentrations (a correlation coefficient of -.59). Conversely, it was was much more likely in working class states (.63). The effect of class was about the same as for income (-.58) and human capital (-.65). When we controlled for income, the association between class and marriage remained significant (-.33 for the creative class and .39 for the working class). Class appears to have a relationship to multiple marriage which is distinct from income.
Immigrants, Gays, and Bohemians: Multiple marriage was significantly less likely in states with high immigrant concentrations (-.38). Multiple marriage was also less likely in states with high bohemian concentrations (-.49). So much for the libertine bohemian lifestyle - at least when it comes to multiple marriage that is. There was no correlation between multiple marriage and the share of the gay population.
Religion: The Pew study did not find a strong correlation between religion - measured as the percentage of people who said religion was "very important" in their lives - and marriage or divorce patterns. Our analysis suggests at least a moderate one. Religion was positively associated with multiple marriage (.43). Multiple marriage was more likely in more religious states.
Well-Being: Multiple marriage was less likely in states with high levels of psychological well-being (-.37).
The thing that jumped out at me was the "Larry King" statistic - the number of people who have been married three or more times.
About one-in-twenty Americans who ever have been married said they had been married three or more times. That comes to 4 million men and 4.5 million women.
States varied a lot on this. Arkansas had the highest percentage of "serial marrieds," 10 percent. This was five times more than New York, New Jersey, and Massachusetts with just two percent. The study found that multiple marriages were less likely in states with high concentrations of college-educated people, and more likely in states with lower incomes and smaller college-educated populations.
Over the weekend, I enlisted my number-crunching colleague Charlotta Mellander to look at what other factors might be related to such serial marriage. We looked at unemployment, the class composition of the workforce, immigration, gay population, religion, and levels of psychological well-being. Our analysis points to associations and not causal relationships. It shows that a relationship exists, but not that one causes the other.
Class: Serial marriage was less likely in states with high creative class concentrations (a correlation coefficient of -.59). Conversely, it was was much more likely in working class states (.63). The effect of class was about the same as for income (-.58) and human capital (-.65). When we controlled for income, the association between class and marriage remained significant (-.33 for the creative class and .39 for the working class). Class appears to have a relationship to multiple marriage which is distinct from income.
Immigrants, Gays, and Bohemians: Multiple marriage was significantly less likely in states with high immigrant concentrations (-.38). Multiple marriage was also less likely in states with high bohemian concentrations (-.49). So much for the libertine bohemian lifestyle - at least when it comes to multiple marriage that is. There was no correlation between multiple marriage and the share of the gay population.
Religion: The Pew study did not find a strong correlation between religion - measured as the percentage of people who said religion was "very important" in their lives - and marriage or divorce patterns. Our analysis suggests at least a moderate one. Religion was positively associated with multiple marriage (.43). Multiple marriage was more likely in more religious states.
Well-Being: Multiple marriage was less likely in states with high levels of psychological well-being (-.37).
Pew Research: The States of Marriage and Divorce
Lots of Ex’s Live in Texas
QUOTE
In Arkansas and Oklahoma, men and women marry young -- half of first-time brides in these states were age 24 or younger on their wedding day. These states also have above-average shares of women who divorced in 2007-2008.1
It's the opposite state of affairs in Massachusetts and New York. Their residents marry late -- half of ever-married New York men were older than age 30 when they first wed. These states also have below-average shares of men and women who divorced in 2007-2008.
Remember the classic country song: "All My Ex's Live in Texas"? Well, George Strait was on to something. Looking at numbers, Texas is indeed home to more thrice-married adults than any other state, about 428,000 women and 373,000 men.
It's the opposite state of affairs in Massachusetts and New York. Their residents marry late -- half of ever-married New York men were older than age 30 when they first wed. These states also have below-average shares of men and women who divorced in 2007-2008.
Remember the classic country song: "All My Ex's Live in Texas"? Well, George Strait was on to something. Looking at numbers, Texas is indeed home to more thrice-married adults than any other state, about 428,000 women and 373,000 men.
Pew Research: Interactive Map: Marriage and Divorce: A 50-state tour
Marrying young, being working class, and being overtly religious all lead to higher levels of serial marriage.
Being part of the "creative classes," college educated, a bohemian, or an immigrant reduced levels of serial marriage.
There was no correlation between multiple marriages and the share of the gay population.
QUOTE (Repub_Bub @ Oct 19 2009, 04:06 PM)
This begs the question...just what is a fag ... and what is Innocent?
I have resisted calling Innocent a fag since it seems to have unusually offended the local folks...I refered to fagdom as a generality. Your typical knee-jerk has made the broadjump association.
Just connectin' the dots...
I have resisted calling Innocent a fag since it seems to have unusually offended the local folks...I refered to fagdom as a generality. Your typical knee-jerk has made the broadjump association.
Just connectin' the dots...
If you don't know "just what is a fag" then don't use the term and its related terms (fagdom, etc.)
Innocent is most certainly not a "fag". He is fine fellow, a dedicated worker, with many worthwhile side-interests, and a kind and honorable person, conservative and very close to his family. He also happens to prefer (SOME) other men sexually and erotically.
Some very observant (but also very, well, randy) Christian ladies are caught between the rock and the hard place. I have never met a group of people more capable of rationalization and make-believe.
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.