|
-- tips@phblend.com
PHB Mobile
| Best of the Blend |
|
Blog Posts
Special Events and Interviews
| Blend-o-licious endorsements... |
The Christian Civic League of Maine's Mike Hein calls Pam's House Blend:
"a leading source of radical homosexual propaganda, anti-Christian bigotry, and radical transgender advocacy."
He is "praying that Pam Spaulding will "turn away from her wicked and sinful promotion of homosexual behavior."
(CCLM's web site, 10/15/07)
Ex-gay "Christian" activist James Hartline on Pam:
"I have been mocked over and over again by ungodly and unprincipled anti-christian lesbians."
(from "Six Years In Sodom: From The Journal Of James Hartline," 9/4/2006, written from the "homosexual stronghold" of Hillcrest in San Diego)."Pam is a 'twisted lesbian sister' and an 'embittered lesbian' of the 'self-imposed gutteral experiences of the gay ghetto.'" -- 9/5/2008
Peter LaBarbera of Americans for Truth Against Homosexuality heartily endorses the Blend, calling Pam:
A "vicious anti-Christian lesbian activist."
(Concerned Women for America's radio show [9:15], 1/25/07)
"A nutty lesbian blogger."
(MassResistance radio show [16:25], 2/3/07)
Pam's House Blend always seems to find these sick f*cks. The area of the country she is in? The home state of her wife? I know, they are everywhere. Pam just does such a great job of bringing them out into the light.
--Impeach Bush
who monitors yours Bevis ?? Just thought I would drop you a line,so the rest of your life is not wasted.
--"Joe"
|
Support the Blend
|
|
An Online Magazine in the Reality-Based Community.
|
Sun May 11, 2008 at 20:30:00 PM EDT
|
This victory nearly slipped under the radar. New York's highest court decided not to review a ruling in February that same-sex marriages performed elsewhere (Massachusetts and Canada, for instance, where Kate and I married), must be recognized by the state.In a cryptically worded one-sentence order issued on May 6, the New York Court of Appeals, the state's highest, declined, for the time being at least, to review a February 1 appellate court ruling out of Rochester that a lesbian couple, Patricia Martinez and Lisa Ann Golden, who married in Canada in 2004 are entitled to legal recognition of that marriage by Monroe Community College, Martinez's employer.
Since the Rochester ruling is the only New York appellate court ruling - coming from the Appellate Division's 4th Department - on the marriage recognition question issued to date, the decision stands as legal precedent statewide unless contradicted by one of the other appellate departments or reversed by the Court of Appeals.
The Empire State Pride Agenda, New York's statewide LGBT lobby group, taking note of that precedent, was quick to claim victory from the high court demurring on the issue.
"Today's action by New York's highest court means that the state of the law remains the same," said Alan Van Capelle, ESPA's executive director, in a written statement. "Same-sex couples who have gone to places like Canada to get married, or have moved to New York from places like Massachusetts, will continue to be treated as the married couples they are here in New York." Legislation that would officially legalize marriage equality within the state is still pending, and the key is to ensure there is a pro-marriage majority in the state Senate, and that means turning that body over to Democratic control in the fall."Until a law is passed by the New York State Legislature, there will always be the possibility that another court decision could undo Martinez v. County of Monroe and strip away from otherwise legally married same-sex couples all of the 1,324 state-based rights and responsibilities that come with a marriage license in New York," Van Capelle said in his written statement. "Besides, no loving, committed couple should ever have to leave their home state to make sure that their family has the protection and stability of marriage." Wouldn't you know it, look who was waiting by the phone to give his reaction:Peter LaBarbera of Americans for Truth About Homosexuality says activist judges are now forcing homosexual marriage on New York citizens. "[T]his is a very sad day for New Yorkers, and we hope this doesn't happen in [other] states across this nation," he comments.
"This is precisely what we feared with the whole onset of homosexual 'marriage' - different states being required, through activist judges ... to recognize [gay] marriages of other states [or] a foreign country." The over-the-top Freepi reaction is below the fold. |
| Pam Spaulding :: NY: Out of state same-sex marriages are legal (for now) |
The knuckle-draggers of the swamp managed to toss some Muslim bashing (?!) in for good measure. 
Actual Freeper Quotes
Tolerance sucks rocks. I just don't know what else to say. If they called for a revolution, nobody would come.
Only one state, Arizona, has tried and failed to pass a Defense of Marriage Act ...Guess what' going to be shoved up AZ's a$$ in the very near future.
Peter LaBarbera of Americans for "Truth About Homosexuality" says activist judges are now forcing homosexual marriage on New York citizens. You mean it's not just legal, it's mandatory?
Contempt of courts is my mantra. These men who work in dresses are responsible for all this crap.
And when a Muzzi shows up with 5 or 6 'legal' wives, what happens?
Wow, who would have ever thought gubberment would mess marriage up. Gubberment has such a great track record with everything else...
I discussed this last year on a thread regarding the Florida anti-gay marriage campaign ""Ultimately a waste of time I think. Eventually the matter will be before the Supreme Court where the United States Constitution's "Full Faith and Credit Clause" will trump the local restrictions.
Florida can choose to set its own restrictions on marriages performed in that jurisdiction, but legal marriages from elsewhere are legally binding on Florida and any other state. To illustrate, consider how different states set varying age requirements for marriage, but the marriage isn't void when moving to a state that sets a higher age. And interstate travel to marry in a more accommodating state is already common.
You also had the same situation in the old days when divorce was much more limited. People got around this by going to Nevada for a quickie divorce the original restrictive state was forced to recognize.
Absent a federal constitutional amendment, which apparently isn't going to happen, I really see no other final outcome.""
How curious that this would break on Friday, when Friday was the first time in 4 years here that I actually saw one colorfully dressed professional male walk another to the corner and give him a "have a nice day" peck.
Like your typical muslim kneeling in public (I've seen more of those here than the other), there is an unmistakeable sense that the performance is just that: a performance, done for effect. That sort of motivation dies out when its audience yawns and loses interest.
IT needs to be settled in the United States Supreme Court. It's a sad day, that people lack common sense and force perversion on everyone. It's no longer "tolerance". It's FORCED acceptance.
More proof a Federal Marriage Amendment is needed.
Of course McCain is essentially FOR homosexual marriage.
|
|
|
