Saturday, July 19, 2008

We Support: Freedom To Marry

Marriage is not a monolithic, unchanging institution, even though many people define it that way (or believe that God has defined it that way). Civil marriage and religious marriage are different institutions, but are often confused with each other because states allow the religious ceremony to double as the state ceremony.


There are different marriage laws in all the states and different definitions of marriage in every religious tradition. In addition to this diversity, civil marriage rights in the U.S. have been significantly broadened during the last fifty years.


Civil vs. Religious Marriage

Unlike some religious definitions, civil definitions of marriage do not usually mention childbearing, sexual relations, living arrangements, or religious beliefs or observance.


When clergy or congregations marry couples it is a religious rite, not a civil ceremony, although the government may recognize it. Clergy and congregations choose whom they marry. They aren't compelled to accept the state's marriage definition, and indeed, many religious institutions don't accept it. Many religious institutions are more restrictive than the state, rejecting interfaith marriages or remarriages after divorce. And some have a broader definition, blessing the unions of same-gender couples.


Religious Diversity


There are a variety of views of the purpose of marriage in the religious community; some think gender is irrelevant. Many religious organizations and people of faith have definitions that are probably different from yours.


Some faiths consider marriage an aid to religious instruction. Some call it an expression of committed love. Others say it is mainly for raising children. In some Christian faiths marriage is a sacrament, in others it is not. But whether one agrees with someone else's definition of marriage (or baptism, or sacrament, or communion) one must respect everyone's Constitutional rights of free speech and free exercise of religion.


The Universal Fellowship of Metropolitan Community Churches, Ecumenical Catholic Church, Church of God Anonymous, ALEPH: Alliance for Jewish Renewal, Reconstructionist Judaism,
Reform Judaism, and Unitarian Universalist Association bless same-gender relationships as a matter of policy.


The United Church of Christ, and various Quaker groups leave the decision to clergy, congregations or local governing bodies.


The Presbyterian Church (USA) allows the blessings of same-gender unions with terminology restrictions.


Entanglement and Discrimination

The federal government and 49 state governments refuse (on what appear to be purely religious grounds) to grant the same legal recognition to same-gender couples that is available to mixed-gender couples who meet the same qualifications. State governments generally let religious ceremonies double as state ceremonies (in some states it is illegal to call a religious blessing a marriage without benefit of a marriage license from the state); the civil definition of marriage covers almost all religious definitions. (Some are more restrictive than the government.) Same-gender relationships are blessed in houses of worship by clergy and congregations from a wide range of religious traditions. The Constitution guarantees religious liberty. but same-gender marriages are still not recognized by almost all U.S. governments.


Civil marriage law has historically been used to legally encode segregation and majority privilege; it was forbidden to members of certain ethnic groups; and forbidden between people who were not members of the same ethnic group (blacks and whites still could not marry each other in some states until the Supreme Court overturned those laws in 1967). Denying legal marriage recognition on the basis of a single characteristic makes it easy to discriminate against everyone who shares that characteristic.


Without civil marriage, families are not legally recognized. In situations involving child custody, medical decisions, burial, and inheritance, preference is given to legally-recognized family members. There are thousands of local, state, and federal laws in which legal marital status determines government treatment of two consenting adults in a relationship. Without legal marriage recognition it is difficult or impossible to legally establish and maintain families(especially when facing opposition from relatives), contrary to the Constitutional right of free association.


Today, many see marriage as the last line of defense for encoding the supposed supremacy of heterosexuality. Only same-gender couples are legally discriminated against in civil marriage in the U.S. States have different requirements for marriage (such as residency and waiting periods, age of consent, kinship restrictions, and blood tests), and different procedures for obtaining a license, but all states and the federal government automatically recognize all marriages and divorces from all states, except those of same-gender couples. Within the last few years "Defense of Marriage" acts have been passed by Congress and more than half the state legislatures. But civil marriage isn't jeopardized by opening it up to more people. There aren't a limited number of licenses; people who support civil marriage for same-gender couples are not asking the state to stop recognizing mixed-gender marriages.


Religious Support for Equal Rights

Many religious organizations, including some that do not recognize religious same-gender marriage, either directly support civil marriage for same-gender couples, support equal rights for same-gender couples, or are opposed to the denial of equal rights for same-gender couples. These include ALEPH: Alliance for Jewish Renewal, American Friends Service Committee, California Council of Churches, Central Conference of American Rabbis, Church of Religious Science, Ecumenical Catholic Church, Hawai'i Council of Churches, Interfaith Working Group, Pacific Congress of Quakers, Presbyterian Church (USA), Reconstructionist Rabbinical Association, Unitarian Universalist Association, and Universal Fellowship of Metropolitan Community Churches.



The reasons religious organizations support equal rights for same-gender couples are varied. But it is fair to say that most see it as a matter of love, justice, basic fairness, and civil rights. Many agree that legal recognition of same-gender marriage would make very positive moral and social points--that we as a people value committed, caring relationships and do not discriminate on the basis of gender, sexual orientation or religion.


Freedom to Marry is the gay and non-gay partnership working to win marriage equality nationwide. Headed by Evan Wolfson, one of America's leading civil rights advocates and lawyers, Freedom to Marry brings new resources and a renewed context of urgency and opportunity to this social justice movement. Freedom to Marry brings the work of its partner organizations and their many approaches — litigation, legislation, direct action, and public education — into a larger whole, a shared civil rights campaign that fosters heightened outreach to non-gay allies.


Freedom to Marry encourages dialogue with Americans thinking through the need to end discrimination in marriage, provides support to targeted state and local efforts, and promotes fairness for all families, including same-sex couples and the children raised by gay parents. By working to secure equal access to marriage, we help reinforce our country's historic commitment to freedom, the pursuit of happiness, and equal justice for all.


As we advance toward full marriage equality, we promote gains along the way for all families, including same-sex couples and the children raised by gay parents. By working to end the exclusion of same-sex couples and their families from marriage, we help reinforce our country's historic commitment to freedom of religion and the separation of church and state. By ending sex discrimination in marriage, much as we ended race discrimination in marriage a generation ago, we are building a better America, protecting and supporting families, children, and the freedom of choice for all.

British man arrested for sex with sheep, charged with bestiality in London, copyright infringement in Scotland



RUN SHEEP! RUUUUUUN!!!!!

A Briton has been arrested on suspicion of carrying out a series of sex attacks on sheep, London police said on Friday.


The 27-year-old man was held at his home in Dulwich, south London, on suspicion of bestiality with sheep. He was also wanted in connection of the possession of drugs with intent to supply.


Detectives said the arrest followed allegations made to them in May and June.


"Two male joggers said they had observed a man molesting the sheep in a field at Botany Bay Lane, Chislehurst," police said in a statement.


"A similar incident was reported to police by a stables employee in the area."

Media reports said the man had been barred from visiting farmland while officers carried out their investigation.


"Ladies and gentlemen, O'Hare airport welcomes Mexicana Airlines 802, now arriving at gate 11 . . . 12 . . . 13 . . . 14 . . . 15 . . ."

CHICAGO -- A Mexicana Airlines flight overshot a runway while landing at Chicago's O'Hare International Airport Friday night and struck a safety barrier, injuring a flight attendant, authorities said.


Flight 802 was arriving from Mexico City just after 7 p.m. when it was stopped by a barrier of lightweight, crushable concrete blocks, authorities said.


The safety barrier, known as an arrestor bed, was specifically installed to stop planes that overshoot runways, said Department of Aviation spokeswoman Karen Pride.


"The good news is the safety enhancements that we had in place worked perfectly and things are OK out there," she said.


One crew member went to the hospital with minor injuries, said Chicago Fire Department spokesman Richard Rosado. Federal Aviation Administration spokesman Tony Molinaro said the injured person was a flight attendant.


Authorities differed on the number of people on board the Airbus A320.


Mexicana Airlines spokesman Adolfo Crespo said there were 145 passengers and crew aboard, but Rosado said 142 people were evacuated using a stair truck raised to the rear of the plane.


The passengers were transported by bus to a nearby terminal.


"Everything went textbook," Rosado said of the evacuation.


Crespo says crosswinds forced the plane's nose gear off the runway, but Molinaro said an investigation will take some time.


The arrestor bed was installed recently, "probably in the past year," Molinaro said.


"It did its job, it stopped the plane," he said.


O'Hare Runway 22L closed Friday, but Pride said she expected it to reopen soon.


"The incident has not significantly affected traffic at the airport," she said.

---

Friday, July 18, 2008

Girl runs away from Bush, chipmunk




Maybe it was the president. Or that giant chipmunk mascot.

Something made little Emily from Kentucky run away crying after she was called out onto the field to meet President Bush on the South Lawn yesterday after a tee-ball game. Emily took a few steps toward Bush, then a lot more steps back, hugged the fence looking terrified, got pulled up there by some adults and then ran away.

She was going, going, gone.

Lots of kids get nervous during big moments (meeting Santa and birthday parties for example). So, Emily, it's OK. There are a lot of congressional Republicans running away from Bush during this election year too.

Chicago Tribune

Sunday, July 13, 2008

John McCain is learning how to use the internets

Pitiful:

I am learning to get online myself, and I will have that down fairly soon, getting on myself.


How long should it take to "learn" to get online? It's one point and a click.



Next up, John McCain tackles "the google."

NEW DailyDesultory Domain!!!!!

We are now easily accessible from the following domain:

http://www.dailydesultory.net



Movin' on up, to the east side... To that deeeeeluxe domain name......

Get this "Iraq war" charge off my bill!

Saturday, July 12, 2008

Friday, July 11, 2008

Nas Enters the Fox News Fracas

More fun with Fox News!

I've always been a fan of Nas... From "If I Ruled the World" back in '96 to "Hip Hop is Dead" in '07 and it continues today after watching the video to his new single "Sly Fox", which is a Fox News diss... Check it out.






Nas has a few choice lyrics for the station in his newest single, "Sly Fox," targeting in particular New York's own Fox 5, and, well, he seems kinda pissed! But there's more to the story, and it involves a strain of the very censorship he inveighs against. Seems he's capitulated in a more personal, extremely well-played battle and is scrapping plans to title his new album Nigger, opting instead for, sadly (and, media frenzy accomplished, smartly), Untitled. Nas tells the WSJ (!) of the sudden change: "Because of the heat coming down on me I saw it becoming a circus. I told myself that if it came to that point that I would make the change, because there's a message in that, too." We suppose there is!

Cubs fans will get cemetery that looks like Wrigley Field

CHICAGO (AP) -- Finally, the perfect answer for a team that has been killing its fans for 100 years: A place to put their remains.


A Chicago man and Bohemian National Cemetery on the city's North Side are joining forces to build for Cubs fans a final resting place that looks a lot like the spot where they saw their dreams of a pennant die year after year.


Called "Beyond the Vines," the 24-foot long ivy-covered wall is designed to look like the one in dead center at Wrigley Field.


It's all on the drawing board now, but the wall is expected to be up and ready to accept fans in October -- just about the time Cubs fans are starting their annual mantra of "Wait till next year."


And when it does go up, Dennis Mascari the president of Fans Forever, Inc., says it will transform the cemetery experience, if not for the dead, at least for the living.


"When you come to a cemetery to visit a loved one it's usually a pretty sad, gloomy situation," he said, standing on the lawn where the wall will be erected. "But when you come here and visit (what looks like) his home away from home ... Wrigley Field, it's going to be a great feeling for people."


Mascari, 60, is envisioning something special. There will be a stained-glass scoreboard. And at each of the 280 niches in the wall -- "eternal skyboxes, that's what we call them," he says -- there will be an urn emblazoned with the Cubs logo.


Near each urn will be a bronze baseball card with a photograph of the deceased fan who, Mascari said, depending on the wishes of the family can be dressed up in a Cubs hat, Cubs jersey or full Cubs uniform. It could also include the dead fan's 'statistics' such as date of birth, date of death, and maybe their favorite Cubs game and favorite Cub.


There's even talk of piping in Cubs games on speakers so nobody, living or dead, will miss an inning. Not only that, but if this idea appeals to more than 280 Cubs fans, the cemetery has set aside enough land to add a right-field wall and a left-field wall.


The price tag for interment will cost as much as $5,000, the "grand slam" package that includes pick up of the body and delivery to Bohemian for cremation in its brand new $100,000 cremation oven, a service, and, of course, the baseball card plaque and urn.


But Mascari knows there are plenty of fans who have long since died and their remains are just sitting in urns somewhere, waiting for their own Field of Dreams. Interment of those ashes can cost as little as $1,200.


If this sounds, well, crazy, urns with the logo of the Cubs and other sports teams are already on the market and the maker of those urns -- Eternal Image -- says last year that Cubs urns accounted for 10 percent of their Major League urn sales.


And nobody who saw survivors of dead Cubs fans bring photographs to the 2003 playoffs will forget the sight of them trudging home, pictures under their arms, after the Cubs once again failed to reach the World Series.


Besides, Cubs fans have for years been scattering ashes of loved ones at Wrigley Field -- a tradition immortalized by the late singer-songwriter Steve Goodman, in whose "A Dying Cub Fan's Last Request" an old man asks his own family to do just that at the "ivy-covered burial ground." Those ashes include some of Goodman's, scattered there by family and friends a year after his death.


That tradition reminds Mascari that his wall can offer something to fans they can't possibly get from having their ashes scattered on the outfield grass: Peace of mind.


"Last year the turf (at Wrigley) was removed," Mascari explained. "So something like this would make sure that fans would never have to worry about any turf being removed and put somewhere else."


Over at Wrigley, the Cubs aren't saying much. Team spokesman Peter Chase said in an e-mail that nobody connected with the team had heard of the wall or wanted to talk about it.


A longtime Cubs fan himself, Mascari hopes the team likes the idea, if for no other reason it might prompt fans to head to his wall and not Wrigley with dead fans' ashes.


But since there won't be a Cubs logo on the wall and the company that makes the urns is already licensed to do so by Major League Baseball, he doesn't think the Cubs can stop the wall if they wanted to.


One man who is talking about it is Philip Roux, the superintendent at the cemetery.


"I think this is great, the best publicity a cemetery could have," said Philip Roux, Bohemian's superintendent.


For one thing, he said it would remind people that the cemetery perhaps best known for being the final resting place for Anton Cermak, the Chicago mayor who was assassinated by a man aiming for President Franklin D. Roosevelt, is still open.


"We have space available," Roux said.


The big test will, of course, be convincing Cubs fans their remains belong in the friendly confines of Bohemian National Cemetery.


Out at Wrigley, where the Cubs were playing this week, fans' opinions varied. Some said they hated the idea. Others said they liked it but wouldn't want their remains to be alone and they just couldn't imagine their family members joining them.


Steve Kopetsky, a 53-year-old fan who lives in Corte Madera, Calif., said he didn't have a problem with spending the money to reserve a spot on the wall as much as he did if word got out that he'd done so.


"My wife would kill me," he said.


But Don Rood, a 31-year-old Chicagoan who wore his "Die-Hard Cub Fan" shirt to the game, said it makes perfect sense.


"What else are you going to do, lay in a box next to loved ones?" he asked. "It would symbolize what your passion is, what you enjoyed about your life."

SI

Wednesday, July 9, 2008

Favre To Miami?


From the "Highly Unlikely Department"

This Miami Herald columnist

gcote@MiamiHerald.com

has a feeling the Dolphins could court Favre if the Packers said "no" if he asked to return after all... HAHAHAHA
------------------------------------


B
rett Favre seems like he wants to parachute back into the NFL. They ought to be drawing a big ''X'' in the middle of the Dolphins' huddle and coaxing him to a soft landing right here in Miami.

(Dear Brett: You may have heard. Our weather is somewhat kinder to old bones than Green Bay's. We average about one inch of light snow every 35 or 40 years down here. And don't worry about that pay cut you'd probably have to take. We lead the nation in retiree-pleasing Early Bird specials.)


I know that some of you out there are saying of Favre becoming a Dolphin, ''It could never happen.'' But it could, and I'll tell you why.


I know some others are saying, ''It should never happen.'' But you're wrong. And I'll tell you why on that, too.


Remember that need + need = possibility.


Favre by most indications is a quarterback who needs to play again. Seems he has had a change of heart and wishes to recant his March 4 retirement, but Green Bay appears to have yanked away the welcome mat, like Lucy used to yank away the football just as Charlie Brown was about to kick it.


But Miami is a team that needs a QB it can trust and rely on in 2008. Favre last missed a game in 1992. Seriously. Tomorrow's sunrise cannot be trusted and relied on like this dude.


Granted, plenty could prevent this brief-but-blissful marriage from happening, such as Favre staying retired (unlikely) or (more likely) the Dolphins' hierarchy misguidedly thinking that rebuilding means you don't try to be as good as you possibly can now.


If you're Miami of course you don't pursue Favre if you believe that veteran journeyman Josh McCown is better. But not even people in McCown's family could possibly believe that.


You don't pursue Favre if you think John Beck will be ready, in two months, to make your team as good as Favre would. But you know that isn't the case, either.


And you don't pursue Favre if you are committed to handing the future, right now, to Chad Henne. But that also isn't the situation, as Henne prepares for the NFL equivalent of a redshirt season.


So here's what you do, Dolphins: You do what Green Bay isn't doing. You welcome Favre back to football. You trade lame-duck Jason Taylor (whom the Packers have coveted) to get him. You put McCown up for sale. And then you let Beck and Henne develop for a year under the unhurried tutelage of a master -- thereby being as good a team as you can be right now while also letting the roots take on future success at that position.


From Miami's perspective, having a quality QB now, even for one year, makes sense because the team ought not forsake 2008 in the name of rebuilding. This is a team that lost six games by only three points last year despite itself. A team much improved. And a team with what seems a ridiculously soft schedule. Add Favre and you're thinking .500. Maybe even wild-card hunt.


Dolfans have suffered too much for too long to see their club dismiss this coming season as hopeless. If you can shoot for a dramatic turnaround now while also shaping your future, you do both at once.


IT MAKES SENSE


From Favre's perspective, there also is some logic. This is a team that spent its past two No. 1 picks on a receiver and a blocker. A team with two solid running backs. A team with the imprimatur of Bill Parcells in charge. And a team whose fans will regard you as a civic hero if you win six games and a saint if you win eight.


It makes sense in so many ways.


The old ''he-should-stay-retired'' argument does not apply here. Favre looked closer to tank-full than on-fumes last season. He made the Pro Bowl, completed a career-high 66.5 percent of his passes, threw for 4,155 yards and 28 touchdowns, took his second-fewest sacks ever as a starter and had his lowest interception rate since 2000. Favre went out with his best QB rating (95.7) in more than a decade. He was just plain great, in other words.


The old ''he's-broken-down-physically'' notion certainly doesn't apply.


The ''he-should-go-out-a-Packer'' sentiment hardly fits, either. He surely would, if there were indications the Pack wanted him back. But there aren't. Besides, Favre would hardly be setting precedent. Johnny Unitas went out a Charger, Joe Namath a Ram and Joe Montana a Chief. Did Michael Jordan finish as a Bull? Oh, and Dan Marino came very, very close to signing with the Vikings in 2000, by the way.


Favre saying of the comeback, ''it's all rumor,'' hardly qualifies as him snuffing out the speculation. Packers cornerback Al Harris said, ''I know he has the itch to come back and play.'' Favre's brother told a Milwaukee TV station Favre has been working out and that he ''wouldn't be surprised'' if his brother un-retired. Their mother told a different station that Favre thinks Packers general manager Ted Thompson -- who has invested three years in first-round pick Aaron Rodgers and just drafted two other QBs -- doesn't want him.


DANCING NO. 99


Meantime, Favre has yet to file formal retirement papers with the league, meaning he is technically an active player with three years left on his contract.


So if he chose to come back but the Packers weren't interested, they'd have to trade him or release him. In that scenario The Dancing Defensive End, No. 99, might be enough to make a deal work.


Is it all far-fetched? Maybe. But the best ideas often seem that way -- until somebody has the foresight or nerve to make them real.

Free Money!!!!!????

(WCCO) It's one of the best kept political secrets in Minnesota: Free money. The state will give you $50 for contributing to an election campaign.

It's TRUE.

If you donate to a political party, or a candidate for statewide office, or a candidate for Minnesota legislature, fill out this form, and the state sends you back up to $50. Seriously.

IN FACT...

Since 1995, the state of Minnesota refunded almost $58 million to Minnesota donors who gave money to political campaigns. Some call it the "Ronald Reagan Effect".

Here's WHY.

State and federal political donations used to be deductible on state and federal income tax forms. However, a massive overhaul of America's tax system by President Reagan abolished the deduction.

And Minnesota replaced it with a refund program to encourage small givers.

That's NOT THE WHOLE STORY.

The refund only applies if you donate to candidates who agree to public spending limits on their campaigns. The contribution is over and above the public money they already get from the state. However, the money also goes to political parties, and it's a lot of money.

So here's what you NEED TO KNOW.

Political parties, not candidates, get almost half of all that tax money going out in campaign refunds.

To check the resources click on the links below.
Minnesota Political Contribution Refund
Tax Information: Political Contribution Refund
Form: 2007 Political Contribution Refund Application
2006 Contribution Refund Summary by Candidates
2006 Contribution Refund Summary by Political Party

Your Info