Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Archive for the ‘blogging’ Category

Ah! It’s good to be back “home” online… to feel free (safe) again – to write, report equality news, express, vent and connect with the online community.

Thanks to the guardian!


I was sidelined by trolls (one, two and three) at WordPress in 2010 & tried to blog occasionally from Blogger, hoping to avoid trolls. By 2012 my blogging expressions had eventually slowed to a halt.

There are guardians everywhere around us… let us tune our spirits to “see,” and purpose in our souls to be the same protectors to the vulnerable amongst us all.

For example, there are a world of transgender teens all around us who have been marginalized, rejected, threatened, misunderstood. With the newest news coverage of Caitlyn Jenner and the very public transition journey from born a male Olympian, to becoming a very public re-born female trailblazer.


Transgender teens hope Jenner inspires acceptance.

Read On!

http://www.usatoday.com/videos/news/nation/2015/06/02/28352153/

Each of us can carry the torch and blaze a trail safe enough for all transgender teens to be able to safely arrive at their destination.

Read On!

http://m.huffpost.com/us/news/transgender-teens

Advertisements

Read Full Post »

I saw this below quote posted somewhere yesterday after the news broke that Proposition 8 in California was overturned:

“9th Circuit Court in California overturns the rights of the people in today’s ruling on gay marriage. Remember the time when a majority ruled in this country?”

And that got me thinking.

So many of our important human rights decisions in America’s history would likely not have ever been made if it had been put to a popular vote–or up to majority rule.

What if, in 1865, the abolition of slavery was put to a vote instead of the 13th amendment being added to the Constitution? What would the outcome have looked like if the Civil Rights Act of 1875 had been put to a majority rule vote? During World War I, blacks served in the United States Armed Forces in segregated units. Pressure to end racial segregation in the government grew among African Americans and progressives after the end of World War II. On July 26, 1948, President Harry S. Truman signed Executive Order 9981, ending segregation in the United States Armed Forces. Chances are that such an executive order at that time in American history never would have survived a popular vote by the majority rule. It is not a stretch to imagine what would have happened in the 1960’s if racial segregation was put to a vote instead of laws being passed against it. Such as with the Civil Rights Act of 1964. I imagine that if that had been put to a “majority rule” popular vote back then — it never would have happened.

“No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life liberty or property without due process of law, nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.”

Even if a lot of people within a given State want to, rights are not supposed to be put up for a vote.

“Fundamental rights may not be submitted to a vote; they depend on the outcome of no elections.” (Prop. 8 Trial)

Based on the evidence at trial, Judge Walker found:

1. “Individuals do not generally choose their sexual orientation. No credible evidence supports a finding that an individual may, through conscious decision, therapeutic intervention or any other method, change his or her sexual orientation.”

2. “California has no interest in asking gays and lesbians to change their sexual orientation or in reducing the number of gays and lesbians in California.”

3. “Same-sex couples are identical to opposite-sex couples in the characteristics relevant to the ability to form successful marital unions. …”

4. “Marrying a person of the opposite sex is an unrealistic option for gay and lesbian individuals.”

5. “The availability of domestic partnership does not provide gays and lesbians with a status equivalent to marriage because the cultural meaning of marriage and its associated benefits are intentionally withheld from same-sex couples in domestic partnerships.”

6. “Permitting same-sex couples to marry will not affect the number of opposite-sex couples who marry, divorce, cohabit, have children outside of marriage or otherwise affect the stability of opposite-sex marriages.”

7. “Proposition 8 places the force of law behind stigmas against gays and lesbians, including: gays and lesbians do not have intimate relationships similar to heterosexual couples; gays and lesbians are not as good as heterosexuals; and gay and lesbian relationships do not deserve the full recognition of society.”

8. “Proposition 8 increases costs and decreases wealth for same sex couples because of increased tax burdens, decreased availability of health insurance and higher transactions costs to secure rights and obligations typically associated with marriage.”

9. “Proposition 8 singles out gays and lesbians and legitimates their unequal treatment. Proposition 8 perpetuates the stereotype that gays and lesbians are incapable of forming long-term loving relationships and that gays and lesbians are not good parents.”

10. “The gender of a child’s parent is not a factor in a child’s adjustment. The sexual orientation of an individual does not determine whether that individual can be a good parent. …”

So, what’s next? That is not exactly clear. This issue will eventually go before the Federal Supreme Court as lawyers on both sides expect the ruling to be appealed and ultimately reach the U.S. Supreme Court during the next few years. And then eventually (hopefully) D.O.M.A. will be overturned — paving the way for Federal recognition of same-sex unions across State lines.


Read Full Post »

This content is password protected. To view it please enter your password below:

Read Full Post »

This content is password protected. To view it please enter your password below:

Read Full Post »

This content is password protected. To view it please enter your password below:

Read Full Post »

What another sucky day in paradise for Ali on last night’s installment of The Bachelorette. Well, her first two Tahitian dates with Roberto and Chris had such a sweet quality about them. Each of those two men seem like genuine choices. 

Then came time for the ever angst and insecure Frank to have his time. His part of the show did not begin in Tahiti with Ali though. It began with him bemoaning the fact that while he was falling in love with Ali — he felt the resurrection of feelings for his most recent ex-girlfriend (that he had broken up with). Of course this meant that he had to seek out this ex-girlfriend (with the camera crew in tow of course) and share his revelation with her. What person would just open their door to their ex and allow them to prance on inside with a camera crew? Anyway, this was a slow painful exhibition of Frank telling his ex how amazing his exotic dates had been with the amazing Ali. I was thinking “that’s not exactly how to endear yourself to your ex-girlfriend.” Eventually Frank mentioned that he still had feelings for this girl on the sofa. Then, the ex-girlfriend said she had not stopped thinking of Frank since he left and that it was “time for him to come home.” (Probably Frank got tired of living with his parents after he came back from Paris). Then Frank told his soon-to-be-once-again girlfriend that he now had to go to Tahiti and tell Ali he was leaving her for his ex-girlfriend.

Of course we have Chris Harrison playing counselor to Frank (and eventually Ali). Then it is time for Frank to drop the bomb on Ali. Just sad. Why couldn’t this guy simply have called Ali from Chicago and told her that he was staying with his girlfriend? One word. Ratings. Well, two words: drama and ratings.

I would like to think that Ali will end up choosing one of the sweet and seemingly genuine men remaining at that final rose ceremony. But, the checkout aisle tabloids have already been “spoiling” that notion for weeks. What can we expect from “reality TV” made-to-order love stories?

Read Full Post »

Well the bridge is definitely out for these two ill fated lovers (at left). Watching Monday’s latest installment of The Bachelorette with Ali and the remaining “mild five” was fairly uneventful. It was the last 20 some odd minutes that brought the heckle value up a notch or five.

The usual post rose ceremony champagne “high five” for Ali and the remaining men was preempted last night to show Jake Pavelka and Vienna Girardi crash and burn as they officially explained their break up to Chris Harrison. This was not the best publicity for Jake the “fame whore” (Vienna’s “pet name” for Jake).

In the end Jake sounded like he was channeling Ross Perot! “Can I finish? Can I finish?…Can I finish?” — Love may begin with roses, but so often it seems to end with tears. I’m just guessing, but I bet that Jillian, Ali and Tenley are glad they didn’t end up hitching their wagon to this guy’s star!

Fast forward to later that night when Jake had Chinese food for dinner…

Read Full Post »

Older Posts »