News Tips?
-- tips@phblend.com

PHB Mobile


About
-- The Blog
-- Pam | My home page
-- Autumn
-- Daimeon
-- Julien
-- "Radical" Russ
-- Terrance

Contact the Baristas

The Blend Blogrolls

Activism


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"

Content © 2004-2008
Pam Spaulding

House Blend logo © 2005
Melissa McEwan

Photo of Pam Spaulding
© Judy G. Rolfe
All Rights Reserved.


SITE TERMS AND CONDITIONS
Support the Blend




An Online Magazine in the Reality-Based Community.



Marriage equality mini-round up

by: Pam Spaulding

Sun Dec 03, 2006 at 08:04:04 AM EST


A few stories are percolating...

* Maryland's Supreme Court will hear arguments tomorrow on whether the state must grant marriage equality to same-sex couples.

"It's the beginning of the wait," said Dan Furmansky, executive director of the gay-rights group Equality Maryland. "If you look at this in the context of civil rights struggles, if you just won and won, it wouldn't be a struggle."

...But a ruling that falls short of marriage would be a disappointment to advocates of gay rights in Maryland. "Plenty of folks would be much more enthusiastic to take the safe route than grant full legal parity," Furmansky said. "It's simply wrong to exclude people from the same legal institution that has been set up to protect other families. It would be an incompletion toward the process of fairness and justice."

Del. Donald H. Dwyer Jr. said he plans to push a bill next year to ban gay marriage in the state constitution, a measure he has backed unsuccessfully in three legislative sessions. "I will be working for the next four years to be sure we can get that on the ballot the next election cycle," the Anne Arundel County Republican said. "If same-sex marriage is legalized in this state, it will very shortly be taught in public schools as normal sexual behavior, and I am totally opposed to having children taught that homosexuality is normal."

See Don Dwyer's constituent services for a laugh.

* California's going back to the drawing board as openly gay San Francisco Assemblyman Mark Leno will introduce a marriage equality bill almost identical to the one the Governator vetoed last year. The Golden State already has DP laws on the books that give nearly full equality.

Schwarzenegger's stance, btw, is that the courts should decide whether Proposition 22 is unconstitutional, which forbids California to recognize gay marriages sanctioned by other states. CaliTaliban Randy Thomasson couldn't wait to unleash this nonsense.

Predicting the gay marriage issue will be the ``biggest legislative battle'' next year, Randy Thomasson, president of Campaign for Children and Families, said Democrats ``have declared war upon marriage between a man and a woman.''

``To continue to push for full-blown gay marriage licenses is unlawful, unconstitutional and undemocratic,'' Thomasson said. ``The California Constitution specifically prohibits the Legislature from repealing voter-approved initiatives. This bill should be vetoed by Arnold Schwarzenegger on the same grounds as he vetoed it last year -- because the people have already voted to keep marriage between a man and a woman, just as God created it.''
* Canada's wingers are still trying to undo marriage equality. The countre's parliament will soon vote on whether to revisit last year's legislation that legalized marriage country-wide for gay couples.
A parliamentary debate on the matter will start next Wednesday and a vote could be held the same day or on Thursday, depending on how fast the government shuts down discussions, a member of the government told Reuters. Otherwise legislators would vote the week starting December 11.

Ministers rejected the idea that the government, which is sliding in opinion polls, secretly wanted the vote to fail so the matter could be put to rest once and for all before an election widely expected to be held early next year. Rob Nicholson, the minister responsible for steering the government agenda through Parliament, said one of the reasons legislators passed the law last year was that the then Liberal government ordered all its ministers to vote in favor.

"I'm confident that the vote is winnable. Certainly I believe that there are many people in the Liberal Party who felt constrained by the rules that were set in place a year and a half ago," he told reporters.

Pro gay-marriage activists say they are confident that a majority of legislators will vote against reopening the issue.

Pam Spaulding :: Marriage equality mini-round up
Tags: , , (All Tags)
Bookmark and Share
Print Friendly View Send As Email
California and Canada
I'm from California. I do believe that the ballot measure that "bans gay marriage" only prohibits the state from acknowledging gay marriages from other states. I hope Schwarzenegger signs the bill, he probably wont. We are going to have to wait a few years until we get a democratic governor. To be fair to the Governator though, he is pretty good for a Republican... That's not saying much though. His governing skills are still only about as good as his acting skills.

About Canada: if they repeal the marriage ban, where am I supposed to flee to when the fundie thought police come-a knockin?

<3 Sam


Press release:
Since I'm a member of the press, I'm releasing a statement to myself regarding Don Dwyer: "If heterosexist marriage jibber-jabber is permitted in California, it will very shortly be taught in public schools as normal behavior, and I am totally opposed to having children taught that homobigotry is normal."

Homobigotry isn't normal.  Homobigots aren't born that way.  Homobigotry is a choice and an anti-American choice that precludes liberty and the pursuit of happiness for millions of American citizens.


Define "Normal"
I just get furious when I see these people slinging around the word "normal" -- like THEY own it.  Heterosexuality is abnormal for me, but normal for a het.  How can they be so friggin THICK?

"About Canada: if they repeal the marriage ban, where am I supposed to flee to when the fundie thought police come-a knockin?"

England! :D Really, we're great, you'll love the scones and Sunday Roasts.

Anyway, onto my rant for the day:

The definition lately for 'normal' families seems to be the 50's model. But the thing is, the 50's was, in comparison to previous decades and eras, NOT normal at all. In most families the woman also worked, mainly because a lot of families were unable to afford having only one income coming in. And that's what people ignore. They think that women working and not always staying at home is a new invention, when it's entirely the opposite. No, women didn't have what was deemed as manly jobs; but they still had them. A lot of families simply can't afford having only one person working.

There's also the fact that during the 50's, women didn't leave their jobs willingly. Many women worked during the war and liked it, and were basically forced to stay at home, whether they liked it or not. Any woman who didn't was deemed 'abnornal', hell Feminism was considered to be a mental illness.

Families can't be perfect, or perfectly normal. Because human beings by their very nature are flawed creatures. Therefore, families are flawed. Those weirdo little fundie groups don't seem to grasp that fact and want to believe everyone has the same personality and that people are merely robots who play happy families all the time. It's simply not true, not in the slightest.

Honestly, women working and not having as many children as their fertility will allow and 'gasp' - having sex for pleasure is NOT a new invention. All these things have existed since women started getting pregnant. In mre ancient times, women were able to control their fertility by more natural means. None of these things are new; and the fundies  know this and refuse to recognise it.


British civil partnerships
Sophie, can you fill we non-UKers in on the status of CPs?  Are they really absolutely identical to civil marriage?  What are the important differences, if any?  What's the guess about when/if they'll ever be converted into bona fide marriages?  If you have a CP and go to Canada or Netherlands, is it considered a marriage there or something else or nothing at all?  Thanks!

Click HERE and sign up: Campaign For Military Partners.

Lurleen on Twitter.


[ Parent ]
Yes, it's basically identical to marriage, here's some info from Wiki:

"The Civil Partnership Act 2004 is a British Act of Parliament enacted in 2004. Its provisions grants same-sex couples rights and responsibilities identical to civil marriage. Civil Partners are entitled to "a range of property rights, the same exemption as married couples on inheritance tax, social security and pension benefits, and also the ability to get parental responsibility for a partner's children [1] as well as responsibility for reasonable maintenance of one's partner and their children, tenancy rights, full life insurance recognition, next-of-kin rights in hospitals, and others. There is a formal process for dissolving partnerships akin to divorce"

The wiki article: http://en.wikipedia....

The Official Civil Partnership Act Text: http://www.opsi.gov....

Hope that helped. :)


Canadian clarification
Just to clarify, the vote in parliament this month is not on whether to repeal the equal marriage law, but only on the question of whether they should reopen the debate on the marriage law.

It is highly unlikely it will pass, but even if it did, they will still have to debate and vote on a bill changing the law and in the unlikely event that should pass, it will mean absolutely nothing to the 90% of Canadians who live in jurisdictions that have had court rulings affirming equal marriage.


notwithstanding
well that's a relief, Stephanie in Victoria.  i didn't realize it was a vote just to open debate.  so would this have somethiing to do with the "notwithstanding clause"?

Click HERE and sign up: Campaign For Military Partners.

Lurleen on Twitter.


[ Parent ]
Worst case scenario

If the Conservatives did manage to pass a bill repealing equal marriage, they could insert a clause in the bill saying that it is enforceble "notwithstanding" the fact that the constitution says the bill is illegal. This clause automatically expires after 5 years unless parliament votes to renew it. Since the maximum length for a term of government is 5 years, that means the Conservatives would have to get re-elected before they could renew it.

In the 25 years that Canada has had its current constitution, no federal government has used the clause and it is (rightfully) considered to be political suicide for any party that does use it.

If Stephen Harper used the notwithstanding clause on the marriage issue, that probably be the death of the Conservative party in its current incarnation.

Wikipedia on the notwithstanding clause:
http://en.wikipedia....


[ Parent ]
Menu

Make a New Account

Username:

Password:



Forget your username or password?




Join the Blend Chat Room



Report TOS Violations

Premium Sponsors



BlogAds






Search the Blend
Current site


PHB 2.0 Web
Search Blend 1.0 Archives
Ad Networks


BlogSheroes BlogAds


Miscellany

RSS Feeds

Subscribe with Bloglines

Visit NCBlogs


frontpage hit counter

Stats

Powered by: SoapBlox