equality blooms with spring

[deep]

That is how I have been approaching this subject for some time now.

He stated it clearly and rationally.

A long that line of thinking I don't see how any credible sitting supreme court judge would rule differently.

If they do, they surely will go down in history as reaching a flawed decision based on religious bias. And just like Dread Scott it will be reversed by better people.

[deep]

Originally Posted by martha

I didn't see the episode, and I never will, but this bothers me. If she doesn't want to cook for weddings, just pass on the gig. People who are getting married still can be happy. Her "discomfort and dismay" with a happy occasion is a little dramatic, isn't it?

I think it is good that he or she took this opportunity to use this platform to make a statement. I am sure there are many good decent folks that are fans of this show that "love jesus and hate the sin". Perhaps they heard these rational statements and will rethink their bias beliefs being imposed on others.

It would have been nice if a 'good portion' of the public had boycotted "all white" baseball in the 1950s. Instead Jackie Robinson had to be spit at for a couple of seasons and use the back doors at hotels.

[martha]

Originally Posted by deep

I think it is good that he or she took this opportunity to use this platform to make a statement. I am sure there are many good decent folks that are fans of this show that "love jesus and hate the sin". Perhaps they heard these rational statements and will rethink their bias beliefs being imposed on others.

It would have been nice if a 'good portion' of the public had boycotted "all white" baseball in the 1950s. Instead Jackie Robinson had to be spit at for a couple of seasons and use the back doors at hotels.

I see your point.

[Irvine511]

Originally Posted by martha

I didn't see the episode, and I never will, but this bothers me. If she doesn't want to cook for weddings, just pass on the gig. People who are getting married still can be happy. Her "discomfort and dismay" with a happy occasion is a little dramatic, isn't it?

it's a competition show, so she had no choice to take the gig or not.

but i do agree -- she was a little dramatic. there is no reason not to be happy for anyone who wishes to commit themselves to someone else.

[deep]

I caught it on Bravo
they have it on their repeat schedule

there are 3 gay contestants, well 3 that are out
two addressed the issue, one did not

The one woman bringing it up, was not over kill for me
but that is just me.

[Irvine511]

i know, another day, another Republican affair-scandal-embarrassment.

but i never get sick of it.

OC Assemblyman In Bed With Lobbyist . . . No, Literally In Bed
By R. Scott Moxley in Breaking News, Crime & Sex, Moxley, Politics
Tuesday, Sep. 8 2009 @ 9:23PM
ViceChairUtil.jpg
Duvall ran from reporters today in the capitol

​SACRAMENTO--Freshmen legislators arriving in Sacramento receive advice from veteran
 politicians about the intricacies of working in California's capital. One of those tips is to remember that microphones broadcasting legislative debates can also capture embarrassing, career-ending personal admissions if a politician isn't careful. Michael D. Duvall, Orange County's 72nd Assembly
District representative, must have forgotten the warning.

In July--two days after Assembly Speaker Karen Bass and Republican leader Sam Blakeslee put Duvall on the Rules Committee that oversees member ethics--the second-term, conservative, Republican assemblyman sat in a public hearing and vividly described lewd details about his trysts with a female lobbyist whose clients had business before another committee on which
 Duvall sits.


Duvall, speaking to a relatively mum Republican colleague seated to his left, apparently had no idea his dais microphone became live beginning about a minute before the start of a cable-televised committee hearing. He was captured in the middle of recounting portions of an affair.


"She wears little eye-patch underwear," said Duvall, who is married with two children. "So, the other day she came here with her underwear, Thursday. And
 so, we had made love Wednesday--a lot! And so she'll, she's all, 'I am going 
up and down the stairs, and you're dripping out of me!' So messy!"

That line may quickly become part of colorful Sacramento political lore. In the meantime, it leads me to a question: Can someone please buy the assemblyman a box of condoms?


Duvall--who was twice a president of the Yorba Linda Chamber of Commerce, served two terms as mayor of Yorba Linda before entering the assembly in
 2006, and is the owner of an insurance agency--continues his tale: "So, I am getting into spanking her. Yeah, I like it. I like spanking her. She goes, 'I know you like spanking me.' I said, 'Yeah! Because you're such a bad girl!'"

He then laughed.


The assemblyman representing Anaheim, Fullerton, Placentia, Orange, Brea, La
 Habra and Yorba Linda then offered clues to the identity of his sex partner.


"And so her birthday was Monday," he said at the Wednesday, July 8 committee hearing. "I was 54 on June 14, so for a month, she was 19 years younger than 
me. I said, 'Now, you're getting old. I am going to have to trade you in.' And she goes, '[I'm] 36.' She is 18 years younger than me. And so I keep
 teasing her, and she goes, 'I know you French men. You divide your age by 
two and add seven, and if you're older than that, you dump us.'"

According to voter-registration records reviewed by the Weekly, veteran Sacramento-based lobbyist Heidi DeJong Barsuglia turned 36 years old on Monday, July 6.

Legislative sources say they have witnessed Duvall, who is vice chairman of 
the Assembly's powerful Committee on Utilities & Commerce, socializing after-hours with Barsuglia. Sources--who asked for anonymity because of 
Duvall's power in the capital--say Susan Duvall usually stays in Orange
 County during the week, when her husband flies to Sacramento. They also say 
they have seen Duvall with Barsuglia in restaurants, "arm-in-arm" at political fund-raising events and even shopping together for groceries just blocks from the capitol building.


"Their relationship is the worst-kept secret in Sacramento," a capitol staffer recently told me. "He's old and fat. She's hot, blonde and about 20
 years younger. He could have never gotten a woman like that before he got
 this job.'"

In April--two months after Duvall became vice chairman of the Utilities & 
Commerce committee--privately owned California utility giant Sempra Energy hired Barsuglia as one of its top lobbyists, according to Secretary of State
 records.
 Barsuglia, who has a law degree and once worked as a speechwriter for
 Governor Pete Wilson, had previously worked at the California Retailers 
Association (CRA). During 25 months of work at CRA, she reported that she incurred no reportable lobbying expenses. She joined Sempra after the 
departure of another lobbyist: David Hayes, who was named deputy director of the Interior Department by President Barack Obama.
 The San Diego-based utility conglomerate (created in 1998 by Southern California Edison and San Diego Gas & Electric) isn't shy about lobbying
 lawmakers for favorable treatment. This session, they gave Duvall $1,500 in campaign contributions. In May, the assemblyman officially adopted the company's negative view on Assembly Bill 64, which proposes increasing the percentage of electricity the utilities must procure from environmentally
 sensitive sources.


Repeatedly asked to explain his recorded sexual boasting, a red-faced Duvall fled me and another reporter, Dave Lopez of KCBS in Los Angeles, three times this afternoon in capitol hallways. He also ignored three handwritten interview requests that were delivered to him on the floor of the assembly. Said one assembly employee who witnessed the scene, "It definitely looks like he is afraid of you guys."

Barsuglia did not responded to a request for an interview made at Sempra's offices located across the street from the capitol building.

Sempra's 2008-2009 "Code of Business Conduct" states, "We've built [the company's] rich tradition because of the emphasis we place on ethical business conduct and compliance with the laws and regulations that govern
our business. We don't compromise on either for the sake of success"

But Duvall wasn't content to just share one adulterous tale at the July 8 committee hearing. He referenced a second, simultaneous affair with another woman. He seemed amused that he was cheating on both his wife and a mistress.

"Oh, yeah, Sher, Shar, Shar," Duvall said. "Oh, she is hot! I talked to her yesterday. She goes, 'So are we finished?' I go, 'No, we're not finished.' I go, 'You know about the other one [Barsuglia], but she doesn't know about you!'"

The assemblyman punctuated his observation with laughter.


During his political career, Duvall has unabashedly espoused conservative
 principles and is known as a partisan Republican with a knack for theatrics:
 He has noisily driven his Harley-Davidson motorcycle to functions. In 2008, 
Duvall blasted efforts to condone gay marriage. Legislatively, he has 
proposed bills to aid the insurance industry and government contractors 
feeding off the state's massive transportation kitty.
 He has offered a law to alter the First Amendment rights of Americans by
 banning anti-war activists from putting the names of fallen soldiers on 
T-shirts with messages such as "Bush lied" on the front and "They died" on the back; he observed that the dead soldiers fought to protect freedom, and "opportunists" should not be allowed to "exploit" the sacrifices with political messages opposing war.


Such thinking impressed certain constituencies. Earlier this year, the man who never graduated from high school received "100 percent" approval scores 
by the California Republican Assembly, the state's leading conservative outfit, and the Capitol Resource Institute (CRI), a fierce guardian of traditional family values.


"Assemblyman Duvall has been a consistent trooper for the conservative causes," CRI president Karen England announced in March. "For the last two years, he has voted time and time again to protect and preserve family values in California. We are grateful for his support of California
 families.'"

Acknowledging the CRI award, Duvall observed in a press release that as long as he is in office, he would work to protect "California families" from "constant assault in Sacramento."

OC Assemblyman In Bed With Lobbyist . . . No, Literally In Bed - Orange County News - Navel Gazing

[financeguy]

So it turns out not all opponents of gay marriage are closet gays? Is that the message here?

[BVS]

No, they all just secretly hate the sanctity of marriage, just not as much as they hate the gays.

[Irvine511]

Originally Posted by financeguy

So it turns out not all opponents of gay marriage are closet gays? Is that the message here?

most opponents of gay marriage are not closeted. they're just hypocritical assholes.

[martha]

Hey, those of us in the OC know how to party!

[MrsSpringsteen]

Congressman: Gay Marriage Is "Socialism"

The push for marriage equality is part of a radical socialist agenda, according to Congressman Steven King, a Republican from Iowa.
By Julie Bolcer | Advocate.com

In an extreme formulation of a tired antigay argument, Rep. Steve King of Iowa said that same-sex marriage is a “purely socialist concept” during an interview with a conservative radio network on Wednesday.

King, a Republican who represents the 5th congressional district, spoke with Greg Corumbus of Radio America for World Net Daily about his concern that congressional Democrats and the Obama administration are “pushing closer and closer” to repeal of the Defense of Marriage Act.

Unsatisfied with comparing the prospect of same-sex marriage to the legalization of incest, as opponents such as former Senator Rick Santorum have done, King said he wanted to “take this along the rationale even further.”

“If relationships between individuals cannot be prohibited by the state legislature, then there’s no ban that can actually be constitutional that would ban group marriage and it wouldn’t have to be for reasons of, let me say, love or lust, it could be reasons of profitability or avoiding taxes or accessing benefits,” King said.

“So in the end, this is something that has to come with a, if there’s a push for a socialist society, a society where the foundations of individual rights and liberties are undermined and everybody is thrown together living collectively off one pot of resources earned by everyone, this is one of the goals they have to go through is same-sex marriage because it has to plow through marriage in order to get to their goal,” he said.

“Not only is it a radical social idea, it is a purely socialist concept in the final analysis,” King said.

[BVS]

When history looks back upon this era of American politics we're going to cringe at the social conservatives like we do now at McCarthy or those that supported segregation. We're going to look back at the tea party signs, quotes like this, audio soundbytes of the AM blowhards and know what we did wrong.

[Vincent Vega]

Is there anything that socialism is not?

[martha]

Originally Posted by MrsSpringsteen

“Not only is it a radical social idea, it is a purely socialist concept in the final analysis,” King said.

What a fucking MORON.

[anitram]

Is regular marriage socialism too?

I'm confused.

[Irvine511]

Jesus is Socialism.

[BVS]

Conservatives Fight "Homosexual Extremist Movement" - Political Hotsheet - CBS News

[MrsSpringsteen]

I'm just glad that in CA a Laker can marry one of the Kardashian sisters after dating for one month-possibly for purposes of promoting her TV show and his clothing line or name or whatever. But gay people in loving, committed long term relationships can't get married there. Straight marriage can be capitalism I guess, and that's ok.

[martha]

Originally Posted by MrsSpringsteen

Straight marriage can be capitalism I guess.

That's what it was for the first 1000 years.

[MrsSpringsteen]

The Texas two-step on gay divorce

By Ellen Goodman | Boston Globe October 9, 2009

I suppose there is something charming about watching conservative politicians in Texas trying so ardently to preserve a same-sex marriage. How else can you explain their passionate opposition to a court ruling last week that would allow a couple legally wed in Massachusetts to be divorced in their state?

This tale of same-sex love and marriage, horse and carriage, and the difficulty of unhitching began in 2006 when two men known as JB and HB were wed with the usual set of hopes and dreams. A year later, one of them was transferred and they moved to Texas. There, the marriage went on the rocks.

Last January, the couple made an amicable agreement to divide their property. But when they went to court to formalize it, Attorney General Greg Abbott, a Republican, leapt in. Since same-sex marriage was banned by a constitutional amendment, he argued, the state couldn’t dissolve a marriage it didn’t recognize.

Judge Tena Callahan saw things differently. Texas, she ruled, could grant divorces to couples legally married in other jurisdictions. Indeed, on this “limited issue’’ of divorce, she said, the state’s four-year-old gay marriage ban violated the federal right to equal protection.

At that point, Abbott swore to appeal the case in order to “defend the traditional definition of marriage.’’ The governor, Rick Perry, and Senator Kay Bailey Hutchison, who is running for the Republican nomination against him, were equally full-throated in their attempt to keep JB and HB together till death do them part.

As Evan Wolfson of Freedom to Marry says, “the irony is that the antigay forces are so opposed to gay relationships they won’t even let us out of them.’’

Let us stipulate that JB and HB did not set out to challenge the ban. Nor did they want to become the poster couple for same-sex divorce. But divorce happens. And one of the strange side effects of the patchwork of gay-straight laws governing marriage is their impact on ending marriage.

Same-sex marriage is now legal in Vermont, Connecticut, Iowa, and Massachusetts. In January, New Hampshire will join the roster. The District of Columbia may well be next if legislation introduced this week passes. And the issue is on the ballot this November in Maine. Meanwhile, 29 states ban it.

Men and women also get married according to state laws, but they are not suddenly single when they cross state borders. Under the principle of comity, their marriage can be recognized - or dissolved - anywhere. This is not necessarily true for gay couples. Indiana and Rhode Island have both denied divorce to gay couples who were married elsewhere, while New Jersey has allowed it. That’s just the beginning.

The refusal of one state to recognize the legal marriage of another state leads to some pretty impractical, unfair, and nutty conclusions. The B’s, for example, would have to move back to Massachusetts for a year just to get divorced.

That’s nothing compared to the scenarios imagined by Northwestern law professor Andrew Koppelman, author of “Same Sex, Different States.’’ On his list? If a man has a husband in Iowa, he might take a wife in Texas without being charged with bigamy. If a married couple from Connecticut has an accident in the Lone Star State, a woman could be barred from her wife’s hospital bedside because she isn’t family.

What we’re seeing are all sorts of potholes on the uneven road to equality. Remember the so-called compromise on gays in the military: “Don’t ask, don’t tell’’? Now, military researchers call it a “costly failure.’’

It’s the law, not gay soldiers, that’s undermining morale. Remember DOMA, the Defense of Marriage Act that created a strange dual citizenship for gay couples - entitled to marriage benefits under some state laws, denied them under federal law? Now, Bob Barr, the former congressman who wrote DOMA, disavows it, and Bill Clinton, the president who signed it, publicly favors gay marriage. There’s a bill to repeal it.

But for sheer perversity, nothing quite beats the current Texas divorce fandango. There, the very people who insist they would like nothing more than to end gay marriage are the ones doing their utmost to keep one gay couple joined in unhappy perpetuity. For better or for worse? That’s an easy call.