Planned Parenthood Funding Sources

This purports to list companies (probably not all of them) that provide funding to Planned Parenthood, in case you’re interested in starting a boycott because of the recent videos about selling body parts.

I have some doubts about the list, since it includes Tostitos, which is not a company (it’s a brand belonging to Frito-Lay, which in turn belongs to PepsiCo, which is elsewhere on the list). Similarly, they list both Dockers and Levi Strauss.

Makes one wonder how carefully the list was put together.

A Moral Dilemma

Let’s imagine that you are very much to the left on social issues.

As such, you are strongly in favor of gay rights, gay marriage, and everything those on the social right lump together and call the ‘gay agenda’. You are also 100% in favor of abortion on demand, with no restrictions, never, no how, no way.

So let us imagine further that science soon isolates a ‘gay gene':

A genetic analysis of 409 pairs of gay brothers, including sets of twins, has provided the strongest evidence yet that gay people are born gay. The study clearly links sexual orientation in men with two regions of the human genome that have been implicated before, one on the X chromosome and one on chromosome 8.
 

The finding is an important contribution to mounting evidence that being gay is biologically determined rather than a lifestyle choice.

I know many social conservatives don’t want to believe that anyone is born gay. But this isn’t a question directed at them. Remember, for this question, you are on the left socially. So, if this happens, would you, as the extreme social liberal described above, object to parents choosing to abort a fetus because it would be gay?

I find the question almost impossible to answer.

Bonus Question: Would liberals want to have such testing covered under Obamacare and/or require that it be covered under employer-provided insurance programs?

Ban Dante!

A UN-affiliated group has recommended that Dante’s Divine Comedy be removed from schools around the world for being homophobic, islamophobic, and numerous other things they disapprove of.

The classic work should be removed from school curricula, according to Gherush 92, a human rights organisation which acts as a consultant to UN bodies on racism and discrimination. Dante’s epic is “offensive and discriminatory” and has no place in a modern classroom, said Valentina Sereni, the group’s president.
 

“We do not advocate censorship or the burning of books, but we would like it acknowledged, clearly and unambiguously, that in the Divine Comedy there is racist, Islamophobic and anti-Semitic content. Art cannot be above criticism,” Miss Sereni said.

There’s that classic formulation: “We do not advocate censorship or the burning of books, but …”

A happy note:

    Franco Grillini, the head of Gaynet, a gay rights’ organisation, said the suggestion that Dante’s writings should be prohibited marked “an excess of political correctness”.

Why Can't Republicans Get Over the Gay Thing?

A Republican representative from New Jersey, Scott Garrett, has told his fellow Republicans that he refuses to pay his dues to the National Republican Campaign Committee, “because it actively recruited gay candidates and supported homosexuals in primaries.”

A Contract for Sex

I can picture it: “”Uh, babe, we need to sign this contract, and then we’ll take a selfie holding the contract, OK? Yeah, I know you’re naked, so what? It’s the law. Babe, why are you putting your clothes back on? Leaving? Why?”

 A “yes means yes” advocacy group, the Affirmative Consent Project, is instructing college students to take a picture with a contract before they have sex with each other just to make absolutely sure both parties are officially consenting. In fact, the group has been distributing contracts to schools nationwide as part of its Consent Conscious Kit, according to an article in the Washington Examiner. If no camera is available, students are encouraged to fill out the form on the back of the contract which states, “On this date [fill in the blank], we agree to have consensual sex with one another” followed by a space for students’ printed names and signatures.

What, no space for the witnesses’ signatures?

The kit does contain breath mints and a condom, though.

A World Cup Kiss Goes Viral

After winning a major sports event, it is not uncommon for a player to run to the stands to embrace a family member, spouse or child. That's what Abby Wambach, one of the most popular players on Team USA did Sunday. Wambach's spouse is female, and the gesture gathered some comments on blogs. Here's a screen shot of a representative sampling from a popular conservative blog, Gateway Pundit.

Wedding Cake Gag Order Explained

I had heard about this 'gag order'  forbidding a bakery in Oregon from stating their opposition to being required to provide wedding cakes for same-sex marriages. It sounded like a pretty outrageous violation of free-speech rights (regardless of one's position on SSM itself)

This explanation (read the whole thing) by Eugene Volokh (a libertarian/conservative) in The Washington Post makes it much more understandable.

Statutes prohibiting similar communications (including as to race, religion, and sex, and as to employment and housing as well as public accommodations) are common, and generally thought to be constitutional. But why? Here’s what I think is the right answer, though I agree that courts haven’t been clear on it. 

Assume that it is indeed against the law to refuse to serve someone based on race, religion, sexual orientation, and so on — and, in particular, to refuse to provide a cake for a same-sex commitment ceremony. Then, saying we “will … refuse[]” to provide a cake is essentially a true threat of illegal conduct. 

To be sure, it is not a threat of violence, or even a threat to commit a crime, but it is a threat to act illegally (by violating the anti-discrimination statute). And it is a threat that would have much the same effect as an outright refusal to provide a cake to someone who shows up and asks for it, because it tells people that it’s futile to even ask.

Makes sense. Of course, if one does not believe the state has a right to order the bakery to bake the cake, then the question is moot, but as far as the gag order is concerned, based on this logic, it seems reasonable..

Mexico's Supreme Court Has Effectively Legalized Same-Sex Marriage

Another country, one we may not have expected, has (effectively) legalized same-sex marriage.

In ruling after ruling, the court has said that state laws restricting marriage to heterosexuals are discriminatory. Though the decisions have been made to little public fanfare, they have had the effect of legalizing gay marriage inMexico without enshrining it in law. 

Several other countries in Latin America have done the same as Mexico. This may run contrary to our perceptions about highly-Catholic populations and macho cultures.

… the Mexican court’s rulings have added the country to a slowly growing list of Latin American nations permitting same-sex unions.  

Argentina, Uruguay and Brazil already allow same-sex marriage. Chile plans to recognize same-sex civil unions this year; Ecuador approved civil unions in April; and Colombia grants same-sex couples many of the same rights extended to heterosexual married couples.

Pew Says Support for Gay Marriage Is at a Record High

Unless you: a) have been living under a rock, or b) are a social conservative in deep, deep denial –
you will not find that headline a surprise. What is surprising is the degree of support that exists for gay marriage and (as many have pointed out before me) the incredible swiftness of the change.

As the accompanying graphs show, in only ten years, we've gone from a seventeen point margin against to an eighteen point margin for – a thirty-five point swing. And while there continues to be a huge difference in opinions by party affiliation, the trend line for Republicans is as the same as for Democrats and Independents.

Many more graphs and demographic breakdowns at the Pew site.

Got a Problem with Caitlyn Jenner?

I don't, as I mentioned several weeks back (though the Caitlyn' part will probably take some getting used to).

But some folks do, it seems. And it may not be one of the problems you expect.

 Hill, in case you've never heard of him (as I hadn't), is a lefty talking head at CNN.