Canada: Poll results show confusion over abortion

Scottsdale Christian group at center of California same-sex “marriage” fight

Senators introduce bill to exclude abortion funding from new ObamaCare law

Kenya gives Obama abortion, Islamic courts

McConnell scolds Franken for making faces from dais during his speech

N.Y. Appellate Division revives child support order against lesbian co-parent

    Leonard Link: “A five-member panel of the New York Appellate Division, 2nd Department, unanimously ruled on August 3 that a woman is obligated to make child support payments to her former same-sex partner. Reconsidering the case after the state’s highest court, the Court of Appeals, had reversed the appellate division’s previous ruling that the Family Court did not have jurisdiction over the child support claim because New York State did not recognize the non-biological mother as a parent of the child, the Appellate Division panel now endorsed the use of the doctrine of equitable estoppel to resolve the case. In the Matter of H.M. v. E.T., 2007-09323 (Aug. 3, 2010).”


  • Posted: 08/05/2010
  • |
  • Category: Marriage & Family
  • |
  • Source: newyorklawschool.typepad.com

  • Tags: , , , ,

Maggie Gallagher: Prop. 8: Judge Walker’s bias will be overruled

Mexican Supreme court upholds capital’s same-sex “marriage” law

ND measures that missed ballot deadline still alive for 2012

Phil Lawler: “Contraception: Why we’re losing the arguments on same-sex marriage”

Kenya: Clergy accept defeat but push for amendment

Tebow’s eye black kicks up University of Florida statute controversy

India: Religious structures on gov’t land will have to pay rent

Advocates of anti-sharia measures alarmed by NJ judge’s ruling

Israel: Sperm donations become new import trend

California same-sex “marriage” ruling: political hot potato

Roberts will swear in Kagan on Saturday

Gerard V. Bradley: Was judge in California’s same-sex “marriage” case truly impartial?

James Taranto at WSJ: Why the same-sex “marriage” ruling will stand

Richard Epstein: Same-sex bombshell overturns Proposition 8

Justice Department steers money to favored groups

Austin Bramwell: The Perry decision creates “a new limit on government expression”

    Austin Bramwell writing at The League of Ordinary Gentlemen: “It strikes me that Perry is a revolutionary decision, and not just because it breaks new ground on the right to marry and equal protection. As far as I know (and I am furthest thing from a constitutional law scholar), heretofore the only limit on government expression was that the government may not convey a message that a particular religious belief is endorsed or preferred (the so-called ‘endorsement test’). This limit is derived from the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment. If Perry is upheld, we will have a new limit on government expression derived from the Due Process and Equal Protection Clauses of the Fourteenth Amendment. Call it the ‘non-disparagement test.” Unlike the endorsement test, which officially is designed to keep government neutral between competing viewpoints (religion and non-religion), the non-disparagement test will actually require the government to favor a particular viewpoint (egalitarianism). This seems like an ominous development for the future of liberty. That, at least is one reason to care about dispute in Perry.”


  • Posted: 08/05/2010
  • |
  • Category: Marriage & Family
  • |
  • Source: www.ordinary-gentlemen.com

  • Tags: , , ,

The Prop 8 decision and the “dictatorship of liberalism”

    Edward Feser writing at What’s Wrong With the World: What we’re seeing here is just one more application of the fraudulent principle of ‘liberal neutrality,’ by which the conceit that liberal policy is neutral between the moral and metaphysical views competing within a pluralistic society provides a smokescreen for the imposition of a substantive liberal moral worldview, on all citizens, by force. (Of course, liberals typically qualify their position by saying that their conception of justice only claims to be neutral between ‘reasonable’ competing moral and metaphysical views, but ‘reasonable’ always ends up meaning something like ‘willing to submit to a liberal conception of justice.’) . . . Pope Benedict XVI has famously spoken of a ‘dictatorship of relativism.’ But I think that that is not quite right. Most liberals are not the least bit relativistic about their own convictions. A more accurate epithet would have been ‘dictatorship of liberalism,’ and in Judge Walker that dictatorship has taken on concrete form.”


  • Posted: 08/05/2010
  • |
  • Category: Marriage & Family
  • |
  • Source: www.whatswrongwiththeworld.net

  • Tags: , , , , , , ,

Indonesia: Intimidation picks up ahead of Ramadan

CA: Barstow City Council hears Samoan church appeal

Target apologizes for donation to conservative MN candidate opposed to the H-Agenda

ACLJ is providing legal aid to persecuted Pakistani Christians

School meals go halal in London

Prop 8 reversal riles, pleases Jewish groups

Muslim woman sparks burka debate in Australian court case

Scotland: Lochaber Catholic and non-religious primary schools to share campus

Kosovo police to protect Serb monasteries

Mosque is no way to “build bridges”

Leon R. Kass: The end of courtship

MA gov Deval Patrick backs NYC mosque plan

California’s Proposition 8 ruling to affect Hawaii’s fight over civil unions

Robert George: Prop 8 decision is “assault on marriage and democracy”

The judiciary in Malaysia: High farce and small progress

The fate of Catholic Europe: The void within

    The Economist: “Among Europe’s historically Catholic lands, France is an outlier. Its leap into modernity took the form of a secular revolution; that differs from places like Ireland or Poland, where church and modern nationhood go together. Things are different again in Bavaria or the southern Netherlands, where the church inspires local pride; or in Spain, where Catholicism is at issue in an ideological war. But in many European places where Catholicism remained all-powerful until say, 1960, the church is losing whatever remains of its grip on society at an accelerating pace. The drop in active adherence to, and knowledge of, Christianity is a long-running and gentle trend; but the hollowing out of church structures—parishes, monasteries, schools, universities, charities—is more dramatic.”


  • Posted: 08/05/2010
  • |
  • Category: Global: Miscellaneous
  • |
  • Source: www.economist.com

  • Tags: , , , , , , , ,

U.S. court orders Russia to return documents to Chabad

Ed Whelan: Prop 8 judge obscures procreation “as much as possible”

    Ed Whelan writing at National Review Online / Bench Memos: “Walker obscures as much as possible the central purpose of marriage as a vehicle for helping to ensure that children are raised by their father and mother. That purpose is advanced even when a husband and wife can’t procreate together (because one of them is infertile), as the marital obligation of fidelity helps ensure that the fertile spouse doesn’t have children outside the marriage. That purpose is also advanced when a husband and wife don’t intend to procreate, for the obvious reason that they may nonetheless end up having children together (and also may change their intent). And, of course, there are plenty of countervailing privacy reasons why the state wouldn’t be exploring ‘procreative capacity.’”


  • Posted: 08/05/2010
  • |
  • Category: Marriage & Family
  • |
  • Source: www.nationalreview.com

  • Tags: , , ,

Kagan confirmed to U.S. Supreme Court

Italian atheists lobby against church bells

Expert: U.S. AG’s new strategy to stop sexual abuse of children is flawed

Mozambique study suggests prayer actually heals

Heritage Foundation: The Obama elite vs the American people

California Senate: Boxer (D) 45%, Fiorina (R) 40%

Arizona couple fulfills death pact

Newt Gingrich: No on Kagan

Russia: Ombudsman calls St. Petersburg sharia court a reckless scheme and promises to address the matter

Russia: Two arrested for setting fire to church in Penza Region

UK: Watchdog ruling upholds controversial abortion ad

UK: Former “locked-in” patient speaks of her will to live

Hawaii gov pushes for Leonard as new Chief Justice

Ruth Bader Ginsburg raves as Elena Kagan is set to officially become third woman on Supreme Court

Florida won’t appeal campaign-finance ruling

Pro-abortion Constitution passes in Kenya, opponents seek amendments

Kenya passes new Constitution despite opposition from churches

Prop 8 ruling drives strong religious reactions: Church statements

Prop. 8 Ruling: “Fantastic” decision or “judicial activism”?

Vaughn Walker vs. President Obama on marriage

John Eastman: The predictable Vaughn Walker

    John Eastman writing at The FlashReport: “For those who attended the trial or watched its proceedings from afar, it seemed all but certain that this 66-year-old single man, living in San Francisco and reported by the San Francisco Chronicle to himself be homosexual, would find a way to rule Proposition 8 unconstitutional . . . Truth be told, this should have been a relatively short and easy opinion to write, under existing precedent. As the Supreme Court has frequently recognized, ‘The Equal Protection Clause directs that “all persons similarly circumstanced shall be treated alike,”‘ but it ‘does not require things which are different in fact or opinion to be treated in law as though they were the same.’ I have chosen this particular formulation of that oft-repeated principle, from the Court’s decision in Plyler v. Doe, because it was penned by Justice William Brennan, widely recognized as the most liberal (or, to use the left’s preferred term these days, ‘progressive’) Justice ever to sit on the high Court. The relevant question is whether heterosexual and homosexual couples are similarly situated with respect to marriage.”


  • Posted: 08/05/2010
  • |
  • Category: Marriage & Family
  • |
  • Source: www.flashreport.org

  • Tags: , , , , ,

The Evangelical Christian case against contraception

    Matt C. Abbott writing at Renew America: “Evangelical Christian, Bryan C. Hodge, has given the issue serious treatment in his book The Christian Case against Contraception: Making the Case from Historical, Biblical, Systematic, and Practical Theology & Ethics. Below is the full Introduction (minus footnotes) to Hodge’s book . . . ‘Any ethic that has its foundation in temporal concerns of mankind rather than eternal concerns of God must be seen as human-made, and produced for the sake of convenience rather than conviction and devotion. Ethics based on a human-centered conception of the world can have nothing in common with genuine Christianity, which by its very nature is God-centered from start to finish.’”


  • Posted: 08/05/2010
  • |
  • Category: Sanctity of Life
  • |
  • Source: www.renewamerica.com

  • Tags: ,

Officials tweet Prop. 8 ruling

GOP could dominate state redistricting

WSJ: Civil rights groups choose the teachers unions over black kids

GM donates $41,000 to lawmakers’ pet projects

Karl Rove: Will the GOP storm the Statehouses?

In Prop 8 case, nearly all of plaintiffs’ “experts” were political activists for “gay causes”

What does the Prop 8 ruling mean in Washington?

“Gay marriage supporters say Prop 8 ruling hard to overturn”

ADF attorneys on radio just before and after the Cal. Prop. 8 marriage ruling

Daniel Blomberg: Why the California marriage decision must be appealed