A Southern California attorney’s “shoot the gays” initiative is not destined to become law — for one thing, it’s clearly unconstitutional. But Attorney General Kamala Harris is scheduled to clear it for circulation in May, and she may not have any choice.
Matt McLaughlin, a lawyer from Huntington Beach in Orange County, paid his $200 filing fee Feb. 26 to submit the “Sodomite Suppression Act” to the voters. Declaring it is “better that offenders should die rather than that all of us should be killed by God’s just wrath,” it would require that anyone who touches a person of the same gender for sexual gratification be put to death by “bullets to the head or by any other convenient method.”
While everyone’s attention was focused on the Senate and the Keystone XL decision on Tuesday, some pretty shocking stuff was quietly going on in the House of Representatives. The GOP-dominated House passed a bill that effectively prevents scientists who are peer-reviewed experts in their field from providing advice — directly or indirectly — to the EPA, while at the same time allowing industry representatives with financial interests in fossil fuels to have their say. Perversely, all this is being done in the name of “transparency.”
Read more: House Passes Bill that Prohibits Expert Scientific Advice to the EPA | Inhabitat - Sustainable Design Innovation, Eco Architecture, Green Building
US Family Research Council president Tony Perkins has warned that ‘climate change alarmists’ are seeking to ‘promote homosexuality’ to control the population growth of humans on the Earth - See more here.
Family Research Council president Tony Perkins warned yet again on Wednesday that he fears for the future of humanity if gays and lesbians are allowed their rights, saying he believes that equality for people in same-sex relationships is part of a conspiracy by people who believe in global warming.
Perkins made the comments in response to a caller on his Washington Watch radio show who said he suspected LGBTI rights were ‘promoted … because it doesn’t lead to reproduction.’
‘There’s this anti-life agenda, there’s a total anti-human, anti-life, “human beings are a virus,” type of mentality,’ the caller said.
Perkins told his caller that his suspicions were ‘absolutely correct’ and that he had warned before about how ‘climate change alarmists and those who are pushing population control … promote homosexuality’ because ‘there’s no procreation there.’
It’s not often that a Supreme Court justice makes a factual blunder in a formal opinion.
Legal experts say Justice Antonin Scalia erred in his dissent in the 6-2 decision Tuesday to uphold the Environmental Protection Agency’s authority to regulate coal pollution that moves across state lines. The Reagan-appointed jurist argued that the majority’s decision was inconsistent with a unanimous 2001 ruling which he mistakenly said shot down EPA efforts to consider costs when setting regulations.
“This is not the first time EPA has sought to convert the Clean Air Act into a mandate for cost-effective regulation. Whitman v. American Trucking Assns., Inc., 531 U. S. 457 (2001), confronted EPA’s contention that it could consider costs in setting [National Ambient Air Quality Standards],” Scalia wrote in his dissent, which was joined by Justice Clarence Thomas.
The problem: the EPA’s position in the 2001 case was exactly the opposite. The agency was defending its refusal to consider cost as a counter-weight to health benefits when setting certain air quality standards. It was the trucking industry that wanted the EPA to factor in cost. The 9-0 ruling sided with the EPA. The author of the ruling that Scalia mischaracterized? Scalia himself.
Atlanta, Georgia (CNN) — A FedEx package handler went on a shooting rampage early Tuesday at his workplace in suburban Atlanta, wounding six people — three of them critically — before turning the gun on himself, officials said.
“That individual is deceased here at the scene,” Cobb County Police Sgt. Dana Pierce told reporters. Police were sweeping the area with search dogs to ensure no secondary devices had been planted.
Pierce would not release the name of the employee, whose body was found near a shotgun. “That was the only weapon that he had at that time,” Pierce said. “As far as I know, he worked at this location.”
Joseph Epstein, op-ed contributor to the Wall Street Journal mourns the collapse of what he describes as the “genuine ruling class”
The op-ed can be found here
SALT LAKE CITY — A federal judge on Friday struck down Utah’s Amendment 3 — which defines marriage as the union of one man and one woman — finding that it violates rights to due process and equal protection as set forth in the 14th Amendment.
Within hours, Salt Lake County District Attorney Sim Gill confirmed that, in light of the ruling, he saw no reason to prohibit Salt Lake County Clerk Sherrie Swensen from issuing marriage licenses to same-sex couples.
I’m old enough to remember when elections had consequences. A time when voters made a decision as to what direction the country should head, at least politically. That “golden age” was as recent as 2005, when President Bush said, “We had an accountability moment, and that’s called the 2004 election.” Simply put, elections have consequences, and whether Democrats liked it or not, the people had spoken.
In 2012, the American public had a clear choice for which direction they’d like the country to move towards. Both major parties laid out clear and starkly contrasting visions: the Republican Party’s philosophy of, “You’re on your own,” versus the Democrat Party’s, “We are in this together.”
The centerpiece of the respective party’s opposing platforms was Obamacare. Romney said he’d repeal it. Obama said he’d affirm it. What did the voters say? Well, the election wasn’t even close. Obama crushed Romney in the Electoral College, 332-206, and carried every single battleground state except North Carolina. Not only did Obama win the popular vote by a margin greater than 5 million, House Democrats received 1 million more votes in congressional races than their Republican counterparts. THE PEOPLE SPOKE!
Read more at The Contributor
For-Profit Corporation Is Not A Person With Ability To Exercise Religious Freedom Rights, Federal Co
A Michigan-based for-profit business that manufactures fuel systems, power-steering systems and medical devices does not have the right to an exemption from the Obama administration’s birth control mandate, a federal appeals court ruled today.
In a unanimous opinion, the 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals found that Autocam Corporation is not entitled to an exemption from the contraceptive mandate, which requires most businesses to provide workers with health insurance that includes no-cost birth control. The court said a secular, for-profit company is not a person that can exercise religion under the Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA).