 |
|
 |
|
News
Commonwealth Update - 6.2.10
Wednesday June 02, 2010 - 12:43 PM
Inside this issue: Breaking News: MA Senate releases gambling bill; Martha Coakley argues against DOMA; Rhode Island marriage fight likely to wait until next year; New York faces its on "Bathroom Bill" battle; Gallup finds America to be Pro-Life; Expedia partners with homosexuals; More on Don't Ask, Don't Tell repeal amendment; A timely column from Dennis Prager on the "T" in GLBT. Be sure to subscribe to receive Kris Mineau's Commonwealth Update in your Inbox every Wednesday.
| |
Breaking News: MA Senate releases gambling bill
|
|
| |
The Boston Globe is reporting that state Senate leaders have announced that they will propose that Massachusetts license three casinos in three regions of the state but no slot machines at the state's four racetracks. The legislation will be discussed during a closed-door caucus Thursday. Earlier this year, the House approved a bill that called for two casinos and 750 slot machines at each of the state's four racetracks.
The Senate bill is set for a public hearing Tuesday. Some details of the legislation – such as the rate at which the casinos would be taxed and the programs that would be paid for with casino revenue – have yet to be worked out.
Massachusetts Family Institute opposes any expansion of gambling, especially addictive slot machines. We will have more on the Senate's plan and Tuesday's hearing later. As always, you can get breaking news and action updates from MFI on twitter and on facebook.
Source: Boston Globe |
|
|
Top
|
| |
Martha Coakley argues against DOMA
|
|
| |
Massachusetts Attorney General Martha Coakley last Wednesday asked a federal judge to strike down the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), passed by Congress and signed by President Clinton in 1996. Her office claims that the law interferes with state’s rights to define marriage, and is therefore unconstitutional.
According to the Associated Press, Assistant Attorney General Maura Healey argued that states historically have been given the right to define marriage. She said the law could result in the denial of Medicaid and other benefits to married couples in Massachusetts, where same-sex unions have been legal since 2004.
A lawyer from the U.S. Justice Department, Christopher Hall, argued that the federal government has the right to set eligibility for federal benefits. U.S. District Court Judge Joseph Tauro did not indicate when he would rule on the challenge.
Source: Associated Press
|
|
|
Top
|
| |
Rhode Island marriage fight likely to wait until next year
|
|
| |
According to the homosexual website EDGE Boston, any efforts to legalize same-sex “marriage” in Rhode Island will likely have to wait until at least next year with the state Assembly making no plans to vote on a bill that would do just that. Supporters of same-sex “marriage” had hoped the election of openly homosexual Rep. Gordon Fox as House Majority Leader in February would expedite the passage of the bill, but the legislature decided to concentrate on more pressing issues such as the budget and dealing with a massive deficit.
Proponents are optimistic for 2011 as pro-marriage Gov. Donald Carcieri, last year’s MFI banquet speaker, will no longer be in office, prevented from running for a third term by term limits. Five gubernatorial candidates appeared at a State House rally in March to show their support for same-sex “marriage."
The Rhode Island chapter of the National Organization for Marriage will be holding their second annual Celebrate Marriage and Family Day on August 15 at the Aldrich Mansion in Warwick. “This is a great opportunity to take a stand for marriage as it was created: between a man and woman,” read a statement on NOM’s website. “Our goal is to esteem marriage to its proper place in society and make a statement that Rhode Islanders believe strongly in this cherished institution.”
Source: EDGE Boston
|
|
|
Top
|
| |
New York faces its on "Bathroom Bill" battle
|
|
| |
While the fate of the Massachusetts “Bathroom Bill” rests with the Judiciary Committee, the state of New York is also debating the merits of its own version known as the “Gender Expression Non-Discrimination Act (GENDA). As with our “Bathroom Bill,” their version would allow any man who says he feels like a woman trapped in a man’s body access to women’s restrooms, locker rooms, and shower facilities.
“If the bill were to become law, children are left in potentially dangerous situations,” writes the New Yorker’s Family Research Foundation. “For example, if a young female child went into a woman’s restroom and a man followed her into the facilities, her father could not prevent the man from entering the bathroom. If a father tries to stop another male (who is self-identifying as a female) from using the women’s restroom, the father could be charged with a hate-crime—a felony offense.”
The NYFRF’s website did note the following examples of problems that occurred in Colorado following their passage of a similar law:
- A female intern at Focus on the Family encountered a man in a women’s restroom in a local airport.
- A teen girl saw a man in a women’s restroom at a Colorado Springs-area Wal-Mart. The man then exposed his genitals to the girl.
- Two teenage girls discovered a man undressing in a women’s locker room in a Denver-area fitness facility.
- A mother and daughter in a Colorado mall bathroom were intruded upon by a man—in his 20s with a red-dyed Mohawk—who spent several minutes in the bathroom.
The New York State Assembly passed the “Bathroom Bill” in April of 2009, by a vote of 97-38, and again in 2010 by a vote of 100 to 43. However, the Bill awaits action by the New York State Senate, where it resides in the Investigations and Government Operations Committee.
Source: http://www.nyfrf.org/content/view/265/46/
|
|
|
Top
|
| |
Gallup finds America to be Pro-Life
|
|
| |
Early in May, Gallup released data that found that 50 percent of Americans view abortion as morally wrong, with only 38 percent saying that it was morally acceptable. The same poll also found that more Americans consider themselves “pro-life” than “pro-choice” (47% to 45%).
The Wall Street Journal had this to say yesterday:
Now, let's concede the critics their strongest point: It's true that most Americans want abortion to remain legal. Not only that, the numbers suggest that at least some of those who describe themselves as pro-life nonetheless do not support making abortion completely illegal.
Seldom, however, do the same critics delve much further than this. Possibly that's because they would find that while most Americans may not want abortion illegal, the majority in every age group want it legal, as Gallup phrased it, "only under certain circumstances."
You can read the full column HERE.
|
|
|
Top
|
| |
Expedia partners with homosexuals
|
|
| |
From Citizens for Community Values, the family policy council of Ohio:
Expedia has opened a homosexual travel site to serve as a resource for homosexuals, lesbians, bisexuals and cross dressing travelers. This site currently features ten domestic destinations and five international destinations that feature homosexual friendly hotels and locations that Expedia calls "hot spots."
Expedia.com believes the [site] will simplify and improve the shopping and booking experience for homosexual customers. It was based on research illustrating the difficulty in finding homosexual welcoming hotels. Tim MacDonald, senior vice president and general manager said "our solution was vetted by a group of homosexual professionals at Expedia."
Expedia.com states that homosexual customers can save big when booking at homosexual friendly hotels as a package through Expedia.com.
|
|
|
Top
|
| |
More on Don't Ask, Don't Tell repeal amendment
|
|
| |
From our sister organization, the Pennsylvania Family Institute:
By passing the Murphy Amendment, the President and his supporters disregard a study currently being conducted to look at the affects of the move on retention, readiness and recruitment.
Normalizing homosexual behavior in the military would necessarily harm religious liberty for both chaplains and service members. The day before the vote, our allies at the Alliance Defense Fund and Family Research Council joined more than 40 retired military chaplains in releasing a letter to President Barack Obama and Secretary of Defense Robert M. Gates.
The letter states, “Put most simply, if the government normalizes homosexual behavior in the armed forces, many (if not most) chaplains will confront a profoundly difficult moral choice: whether they are to obey God or to obey men. This forced choice must be faced, since orthodox Christianity--which represents a significant percentage of religious belief in the armed forces--does not affirm homosexual behavior…. By raising homosexual behavior to the same protected class as innate, innocuous characteristics like race and gender, the armed forces will cast the sincerely held religious beliefs of many chaplains and Service members as rank bigotry comparable to racism…. If chaplains are limited in teaching and counseling on their beliefs, then the men and women in uniform who share their faith and rely on their instruction will necessarily face a reduction in the free exercise of their faith.”
|
|
|
Top
|
| |
A timely column from Dennis Prager on the "T" in GLBT
|
|
| |
“Why the T in GLBT? To understand the answer is to understand much of what animates the sexual left.”
National Review Online – June 1, 2010
Excerpt:
Because the Left seeks to obliterate the distinction between men and women. They consider this distinction to be a social construct. That is why, to this day, despite all the scientific evidence (as if that were needed) proving how different male and female brains are, many left-wing academics still argue that boys play with trucks rather than with dolls because of sexist socialization.
And that is why, on the left, changing the definition of marriage is only worth a shrug. Since there are no inherent differences between men and women, what difference could it possibly make whether a man marries a man or a woman? Or if children have two fathers, two mothers, or a father and a mother?
For those of us who believe that the male-female distinction is vital to civilization, the Left’s attempts to erase this distinction are worth fighting against. For those who see no purpose in maintaining this distinction, its demise is worth no more than a shrug.
Read the full column HERE.
|
|
|
Top
|
|
