ADF attorney Steven Aden appeared on the Jody Hice Show to discuss “Personhood” Amendments.
The MP3 runs just over 17 minutes.
Related ADF Alliance Alert posts
MSNBC (AP): “[Personhood] Amendment language has been cleared, with petition drives under way, in Colorado, Mississippi, Montana and Nevada. Amendment language will be filed later this month in California and Florida.”
- Posted: 09/17/2009
- |
- Category: ADF in the News
- |
- Source: www.alliancealert.org
- Tags: ADF: Multimedia, ADF: Steven H. Aden, Alliance Defense Fund, Category: Sanctity of Life, Group: Planned Parenthood, State: California, State: Colorado, State: Florida, State: Mississippi, State: Montana, State: Nevada, State: North Dakota, State: Oklahoma, State: South Dakota, Topic: Abortion
C-FAM: “The European Parliament voted 349 to 218 today to condemn Lithuania for its “law on the protection of minors” which prohibits promotion of “homosexual, bisexual or polygamous relations” among children under 18 in the Baltic nation. Conservative critics contend that the measure, crafted in reaction to the domestic legislation of a sovereign member state pertaining to the family, oversteps the Parliament’s authority.”
- Posted: 09/17/2009
- |
- Category: Global
- |
- Source: www.c-fam.org
- Tags: Category: Global, Country: European Union, Country: Lithuania, Group: Agency for Fundamental Rights, Group: Iona Institute, Topic: European Parliament, Topic: Homosexual Agenda, Topic: International Law
Goldwater Institute: “In an era of burgeoning federal government power, state constitutions are full of untapped potential; many provide stronger protection of individual freedoms than does the federal constitution. But realizing that potential requires recognizing its existence and assessing which state constitutions offer the best opportunities for securing the principles of limited government. To that end, this report ranks each state in the United States according to its constitutional commitment to the principles of limited government from a classical liberal perspective.”
- Posted: 09/17/2009
- |
- Category: Bench & Bar
- |
- Source: www.goldwaterinstitute.org
- Tags: Category: Bench and Bar, Topic: Jurisprudence
National Right to Life press release: “The bill contains provisions that would send massive federal subsidies directly to both private insurance plans and government-chartered cooperatives that pay for elective abortion. This would be a drastic break from longstanding federal policy, under which federal funds do not pay for elective abortions or subsidize health plans that cover elective abortions. For example, current law prohibits any of the over 250 private health plans that participate in the Federal Employees Health Benefits (FEHB) program from paying for elective abortions, because these plans receive federal subsidies. These private plans cover over 8 million federal employees and dependents, including members of Congress.”
- Posted: 09/17/2009
- |
- Category: Sanctity of Life
- |
- Source: www.nrlc.org
- Tags: Category: Sanctity of Life, Group: National Right to Life, Topic: Abortion, Topic: Congress, Topic: Insurance
Bay Area Reporter: “A sought after Republican campaign adviser for three decades beginning in the 1970s, Fred Karger called it quits and retired nearly five and half years ago . . . In the process Karger has morphed into the main nemesis of the Alliance Defense Fund, an anti-gay group that has provided legal counsel to campaigns in numerous states against LGBT rights, and the National Organization for Marriage, a group helping to finance anti-gay ballot fights across the country . . . Timothy D. Chandler, an attorney with the Folsom, California-based Alliance Defense Fund, did not respond to a call seeking comment for this article. Chandler has subpoenaed Karger to appear at an October 13 deposition in the California case . . .”
- Posted: 09/17/2009
- |
- Category: Uncategorized
- |
- Source: www.ebar.com
- Tags: ADF: Tim Chandler, Category: Religious Freedom, Group: Equality California, Group: National Organization for Marriage (NOM), State: California, Topic: Homosexual Agenda, Topic: Marriage
Rachel M. Birnbach, Love Thy Neighbor: Should Religious Accommodations that Negatively Affect Coworkers’ Shift Preferences Constitute an Undue Hardship on the Employer Under Title VII? (September 13, 2009). Available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=1472698
“This Note argues against those courts that have found that imposing on shift preferences of coworkers, outside the context of a collective bargaining agreement, amounts to preferential treatment. It asserts that protecting the mere shift preferences of other workers effectively reduces the duty to accommodate to a level far below what Congress could have intended when it included the duty to accommodate religious employees under Title VII. The Note concludes that preferential treatment of the religious employee exists only when imposition on the coworkers creates an economic burden on the employer or would require coworkers to take on additional physically dangerous tasks.”
- Posted: 09/17/2009
- |
- Category: Religious Freedom
- |
- Source: ssrn.com
- Tags: Category: Religious Freedom, Topic: Legal Periodicals
Daniel Augenstein, Religious Pluralism Versus Social Cohesion? Normative Fault Lines of Human Rights Jurisprudence in Europe (September 15, 2009). U. of Edinburgh School of Law Working Paper No. 2009-23. Available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=1473893
“This essay explores the tension between religious pluralism and social cohesion in European human rights jurisprudence. Comparing the German, French, and British interpretation of the ‘social cohesion limitation’ of freedom of religion I argue that, at the national level, concerns for social cohesion stem from negative and defensive societal attitudes towards religious diversity that are difficult to reconcile with the normative premises of religious pluralism in a democratic society.”
- Posted: 09/17/2009
- |
- Category: Global
- |
- Source: ssrn.com
- Tags: Category: Global, Category: Religious Freedom, Country: European Union, Court: European Court of Human Rights, Topic: International Law, Topic: Jurisprudence
Courtney M. Cahill, Celebrating the Differences that Could Make a Difference: United States v. Virginia and a New Vision of Sexual Equality (September 15, 2009). Ohio State Law Journal, Forthcoming ; Roger Williams Univ. Legal Studies Paper No. 82. Available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=1474050
“This Essay contends that Ginsburg’s celebration of difference in Virginia could, and indeed should, be a model for gay rights advocacy, and perhaps in time for a gay rights jurisprudence. Where that advocacy has remained stubbornly tethered to a no-differences paradigm, one that insists on a one-to-one correspondence between gays and straights notwithstanding the reality of difference that exists between those two groups, their intimate pairings, and the families, if any, that they share, Ginsburg’s celebration of gender difference both in and beyond Virginia cogently demonstrates that difference need not defeat, nor be an impediment to, equality claims in our constitutional order.”
- Posted: 09/17/2009
- |
- Category: Marriage & Family
- |
- Source: ssrn.com
- Tags: Category: Marriage and Family, Court: U.S. Supreme, State: Virginia, Topic: Homosexual Agenda, Topic: Jurisprudence, Topic: Legal Periodicals, Topic: Marriage
|

Latest Posts
-
www.necn.com
05/18/2012
NECN.com (AP): Democrats who control the Senate Judiciary Committee have agreed to give Gov. Chris Christie’s third nominee to the state Supreme Court a hearing, but the gay, black Republican will face difficulty being confirmed because of his lack of courtroom experience and his vow to stay out of same-sex marriage cases.
-
www.turtlebayandbeyond.org
05/18/2012
Turtle Bay and Beyond: The Secretary of Gender, Youth and Child Development in Trinidad and Tabago, Verna St Rose Greaves announced this week that she supports not only the legalization of abortion but also the promotion of gay rights.
-
www.charlotteobserver.com
05/18/2012
Charlotte Observer: Our first instinct, as opponents of North Carolina’s constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriage, is to challenge it any way possible and show the harm it inflicts. So we understand those who encourage the Charlotte City Council to offer same-sex benefits to its employees – even if it gets the city sued. But council members made a smarter decision last night, voting 9-2 to get an opinion from the N.C. attorney general on the issue before including the benefits in the next fiscal year budget.

|