Tim Worstall writes at Examiner.com: “So if marriage is not necessary to have and to raise children and marriage isn’t necessary to have sex then marriage isn’t necessary at all then, is it? This doesn’t mean that marriage isn’t desirable, or enjoyable, or even good for society and children. It just means that Earl Woods was right: marriage is unnecessary in a society like ours.”
- Posted: 12/28/2009
- |
- Category: Marriage & Family
- |
- Source: www.examiner.com
- Tags: Category: Marriage and Family, Topic: Marriage
Karl Felsen writes at the Albany Times Union: “Brian Raum’s lawyerly Dec. 16 commentary, ‘Preserving marriage requires restricting it,’ is a good primer on why we find it so difficult as a society to sort out issues such as abortion and gay marriage. We are a nation of laws, and the most basic governmental reform our Founding Fathers created in defining what is unique about America is the separation of church and state. Yet we are also a religious people with many creeds and cultures flowing into our United States. So while Raum speaks of ‘Senate votes,’ ‘federal courts,’ ‘the New York judiciary,’ and other legal oriented phrases, he also slips in, either directly or by quoting judicial decisions, references to ‘culture and creed,’ ‘accepted truth,’ and ‘this belief. . . ‘”
- Posted: 12/28/2009
- |
- Category: ADF in the News
- |
- Source: www.timesunion.com
- Tags: ADF: Brian Raum, ADF: Media Clips, Alliance Defense Fund, Category: Marriage and Family, Category: Religious Freedom, State: New York, Topic: Homosexual Agenda, Topic: Marriage
SDNews.com: . . . Joe Infranco, a senior attorney with the Alliance Defense Fund, believes the outcome for the Mount Soledad Cross case will be affected by the Supreme Court’s decision in 2005 to permit a statue of the Ten Commandments to remain on public property in Texas due to its historical significance. ‘My impression is that the panel was attempting to reconcile its old views with the Supreme Court precedent, which is now very favorable to the cross,’ Infranco said. ‘This is a panel that, based on its history, would not be friendly to our perspective. Any panel, regardless of each judge’s philosophy, is still bound by Supreme Court decisions.’ . . . ”
ADF Media Information Page
- Posted: 12/28/2009
- |
- Category: Uncategorized
- |
- Source: www.sdnews.com
- Tags: ADF: Joe Infranco, Category: Religious Freedom, State: California, Topic: Monuments, ZZ: Trunk v City of San Diego
Religion Clause Blog: “In Commonwealth v. Marcavage, (MA App., Dec. 23, 2009), a Massachusetts Appeals Court upheld the conviction of a street evangelist who was arrested on Halloween night, 2007, in the city of Salem and charged with disorderly conduct under M.G.L., Ch. 272, S.53.”
- Posted: 12/28/2009
- |
- Category: Religious Freedom
- |
- Source: religionclause.blogspot.com
- Tags: Category: Religious Freedom, State: Massachusetts, ZZ: Commonwealth v Marcavage
Jim Manzi, senior fellow at the Manhattan Institute, writes in National Affairs: “The new normal, however, is different from the old normal. To begin with, certain strands of the old bourgeois consensus have frayed, and others have simply disappeared, at least for some parts of the population. The wealthier and better-educated segments of our society, for example, have re-established the primacy of stable families and revived their intolerance of crime and public disorder. But they have combined this return to tradition with very non-traditional attitudes about sex, masculinity, and overt piety.”
- Posted: 12/28/2009
- |
- Category: Marriage & Family
- |
- Source: www.nationalaffairs.com
- Tags: Category: Marriage and Family, Topic: Culture, Topic: Education, Topic: School Choice
Christian Post: “As part of the effort, conservative group Stand for Marriage D.C. has launched an ad campaign through the city’s transportation system – a move that is being opposed by Full Equality Now DC, which has demanded the ads be removed on the grounds that they disrespect LGBT residents . . . The people of D.C. have a right to vote on the definition of marriage,” commented Austin R. Nimocks, senior legal counsel at Alliance Defense Fund, which has filed a lawsuit on behalf of eight D.C. citizens. ‘The D.C. Charter guarantees the people the right to vote, and the council cannot amend the charter for any reason, much less to deny citizens the right to vote,’ he added in a statement.”
www.stand4marriagedc.com
- Posted: 12/28/2009
- |
- Category: ADF in the News
- |
- Source: www.christianpost.com
- Tags: ADF: Austin R. Nimocks, ADF: Media Clips, Alliance Defense Fund, Category: Marriage and Family, Topic: District of Columbia, Topic: Marriage
Wall Street Journal: “In Caperton v. Massey, the Supremes set out a new standard requiring judges to recuse themselves if there is a “probability of bias” in a case. That was a marked departure from historical standards, which required a judge to step off primarily when he had a direct financial interest. Under a new rule, created by the Michigan Supreme Court to govern the state’s judicial recusal standards, a judge’s impartiality may be challenged by the parties in the case, and if he declines to recuse himself, he may still be voted off the case by his fellow judges.”
- Posted: 12/28/2009
- |
- Category: Bench & Bar
- |
- Source: online.wsj.com
- Tags: Category: Bench and Bar, State: Michigan
|
|