21 May, 2012 (updated 9 minutes ago).
| Proposition 8 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Eliminates Rights of Same-Sex Couples to Marry. Initiative Constitutional Amendment
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Source: California Secretary of State[1] | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Proposition 8 (ballot title: Eliminates Rights of Same-Sex Couples to Marry. Initiative Constitutional Amendment; called California Marriage Protection Act by proponents) was a ballot proposition and constitutional amendment passed in the November 2008 state elections. The measure added a new provision, Section 7.5 of the Declaration of Rights, to the California Constitution, which provides that "only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California."[2][3][4]
By restricting the recognition of marriage to opposite-sex couples, the proposition overturned the California Supreme Court's ruling of In re Marriage Cases that same-sex couples have a constitutional right to marry. The wording of Proposition 8 was precisely the same as that which had been found in Proposition 22, which had passed in 2000 and, as an ordinary statute, had been invalidated by the State Supreme Court in 2008. California's State Constitution put Proposition 8 into immediate effect the day after the election.[5] The proposition did not affect domestic partnerships in California,[6] nor same-sex marriages performed before November 5, 2008.[7][8][9]
Proponents of the constitutional amendment argued that exclusively heterosexual marriage was "an essential institution of society", that leaving the constitution unchanged would "result in public schools teaching our kids that gay marriage is okay", and that gays "do not have the right to redefine marriage for everyone else." Opponents argued that "the freedom to marry is fundamental to our society", that the California constitution "should guarantee the same freedom and rights to everyone", and that the proposition "mandates one set of rules for gay and lesbian couples and another set for everyone else." They also argued that "equality under the law is a fundamental constitutional guarantee" (see Equal Protection Clause).[10]
The campaigns for and against Proposition 8 raised $39.9 million and $43.3 million, respectively, becoming the year's highest-funded campaign on any state ballot and surpassing every campaign in the country in spending except the presidential contest. After the elections, demonstrations and protests occurred across the state and nation. Same-sex couples and government entities filed numerous lawsuits with the California Supreme Court challenging the proposition's validity and effect on previously administered same-sex marriages. In Strauss v. Horton, the California Supreme Court upheld Proposition 8, but allowed existing same-sex marriages to stand (under the grandfather clause principle).
United States District Court Judge Vaughn R. Walker overturned Proposition 8 on August 4, 2010 in the case Perry v. Schwarzenegger, ruling that it violated both the Due Process and Equal Protection clauses of the United States Constitution.[11] Walker issued an injunction against enforcing Proposition 8 and a stay to determine suspension of his ruling pending appeal.[12][13] The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals continued the stay, keeping Walker's ruling on hold pending appeal.[14]
On February 7, 2012, in a 2–1 decision, a Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals panel affirmed Walker's decision declaring the Proposition 8 ban on same-sex marriage to be unconstitutional.[15] The panel also unanimously affirmed Judge Ware's holding that Walker was not obligated to recuse himself from the case because he is gay.[16] Still, the panel continued a stay on the ruling, barring any marriages from taking place pending further appeals.[17]
Contents |
Proposition 8 was a California ballot proposition that sought to change the California Constitution to add a new section (7.5) to Article I, that would read: "Only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California."[2][3][4] This change would restrict the definition of marriage to opposite-sex couples, and eliminate same-sex couples' right to marry, thereby overriding portions of the ruling of In re Marriage Cases by "carving out an exception to the preexisting scope of the privacy and due process clauses"[18] of the state constitution.
To qualify for the ballot, Proposition 8 needed 694,354 valid petition signatures, equal to 8% of the total votes cast for governor in the November 2006 general election. The initiative proponents submitted 1,120,801 signatures, and on June 2, 2008, the initiative qualified for the November 4, 2008 election ballot through the random sample signature check.[19]
On July 16, 2008, the California Supreme Court denied a petition calling for the removal of Proposition 8 from the November ballot. The petition asserted the proposition should not be on the ballot on the grounds it was a constitutional revision that only the Legislature or a constitutional convention could place before voters. Opponents also argued that the petitions circulated to qualify the measure for the ballot inaccurately summarized its effect. The court denied the petition without comment.[20] As a general rule, it is improper for courts to adjudicate pre-election challenges to a measure's substantive validity.[21] The question of whether Proposition 8 is a constitutional amendment or constitutional revision was ruled on by the California Supreme Court on May 26, 2009, and found that it was not a revision and therefore would be upheld. They also declared that the same-sex marriages performed prior to the passing of Prop 8 would remain valid.[22]
The measure was titled: "Eliminates Rights of Same-Sex Couples to Marry. Initiative Constitutional Amendment." The ballot summary read that the measure "changes the California Constitution to eliminate the right of same-sex couples to marry in California."[23][24]
Proponents of the measure objected to the wording of the ballot title and summary on the grounds that they were argumentative and prejudicial. The resulting legal petition Jansson v. Bowen[25] was dismissed August 7, 2008, by California Superior Court Judge Timothy M. Frawley, who ruled that "the title and summary includes an essentially verbatim recital of the text of the measure itself",[26] and that the change was valid because the measure did, in fact, eliminate a right upheld by the California Supreme Court.
California Attorney General Jerry Brown explained that the changes were required to more "accurately reflect the measure" in light of the California Supreme Court's intervening In re Marriage Cases decision.[27]
On July 22, 2008, Proposition 8 supporters mounted a legal challenge to the revised ballot title and summary, contending that Attorney General Brown inserted "language [...] so inflammatory that it will unduly prejudice voters against the measure".[28] Supporters claimed that research showed that an attorney general had never used an active verb like “eliminates” in the title of a ballot measure in the past fifty years in which ballot measures have been used.[28] Representatives of the Attorney General produced twelve examples of ballot measures using the word "eliminates" and vouched for the neutrality and accuracy of the ballot language.[29][30]
On August 8, 2008, the California Superior Court turned down the legal challenge, affirming the new title and summary, stating, "[t]he title and summary is not false or misleading because it states that Proposition 8 would 'eliminate the right of same-sex couples to marry' in California." The Superior Court based their decision on the previous Marriages Cases ruling in which the California Supreme Court held that same-sex couples have a constitutional right to marry under the California Constitution."[27][31] That same day, proponents of Prop. 8 filed an emergency appeal with the state appeals court. The Court of Appeal denied their petition later that day and supporters did not seek a review by the Supreme Court of California.[32][33] The deadline for court action on the wording of ballot summaries and arguments in the voter pamphlet was August 11, 2008.[34]
While turning down the challenge to the title and summary, the California Superior Court also found that the Yes on 8 campaign had overstated its ballot argument on the measure's impact on public schools and ordered a minor change in wording. The original arguments included a claim that the Supreme Court's legalization of same-sex marriage requires teachers to tell their students, as young as kindergarten age, that same-sex marriage is the same as opposite-sex marriage. The court said the Yes on 8 argument was false because instruction on marriage is not required and parents can withdraw their children. The court said the ballot argument could be preserved by rewording it to state that teachers "may" or "could" be required to tell children there is no difference between same-sex and opposite-sex marriage.[31]
By election day, volunteers on both sides spent thousands of hours getting their messages across to the state's 17.3 million registered voters.[35][36] The campaigns for and against Proposition 8 raised $39.9 million and $43.3 million, respectively.[37] Contributions totaled over $83 million from over 64,000 people in all fifty states and more than twenty foreign countries, setting a new record nationally for a social policy initiative and trumping every other race in the country in spending except the presidential contest.[38] Contributions were much greater than those of previous same-sex marriage initiatives. Between 2004 and 2006, 22 such measures were on ballots around the country, and donations to all of them combined totaled $31.4 million, according to the nonpartisan National Institute on Money in State Politics.[39] A ProtectMarriage.com spokeswoman estimated that 36 companies which had previously contributed to Equality California were targeted to receive a letter requesting similar donations to ProtectMarriage.com.[40][41][42][43]
In 2010, the California Fair Political Practices Commission fined the LDS church for failing to follow campaign disclosure policies during the last two weeks leading up to the election, which amounted to $37,000 in non-monetary contributions. They were fined $5,538.[44]
The ProtectMarriage.com organization sponsored the initiative that placed Proposition 8 on the ballot[46] and continues to support the measure. The measure also attracted the support of a number of political figures and religious organizations.
Republican presidential nominee and U.S. Senator John McCain released a statement of support for the proposed constitutional amendment.[47] Former Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich released a video in support. Both characterized the court ruling requiring recognition of same sex marriage as being against the will of the people.[48] A political action committee run by former Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney, who personally supported the proposition, donated $10,000 to the National Organization for Marriage during their campaign for the proposition.[49]
The Roman Catholic Church,[50] as well as a Roman Catholic lay fraternal organization, the Knights of Columbus,[51] firmly supported the measure. The bishops of the California Catholic Conference released a statement supporting the proposition,[52] a position met with mixed reactions among church members, including clergy.[53][54]
The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints,[55][56][57] whose members are commonly known as Mormons, also publicly supported the proposition. The First Presidency of the church announced its support for Proposition 8 in a letter intended to be read in every congregation in California. In this letter, church members were encouraged to "do all you can to support the proposed constitutional amendment by donating of your means and time."[55] Local church leaders set organizational and monetary goals for their membership—sometimes quite specific—to fulfill this call.[58][59] The response of church members to their leadership's appeals to donate money and volunteer time was very supportive,[60] such that Latter-day Saints provided a significant source for financial donations in support of the proposition, both inside and outside the State of California.[61] About 45% of out-of-state contributions to ProtectMarriage.com came from Utah, over three times more than any other state.[62] ProtectMarriage, the official proponent of Proposition 8, estimates that about half the donations they received came from Mormon sources, and that LDS church members made up somewhere between 80% and 90% of the volunteers for early door-to-door canvassing.[63] The The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints produced and broadcast to its congregations a program describing the support of the Proposition, and describing the timeline it proposes for what it describes as grassroots efforts to support the Proposition.[64]
Other religious organizations that supported Proposition 8 include the Union of Orthodox Jewish Congregations of America,[65] Eastern Orthodox Church,[66] a group of Evangelical Christians led by Jim Garlow and Miles McPherson,[67] American Family Association, Focus on the Family[68] and the National Organization for Marriage.[69] Rick Warren, pastor of Saddleback Church, also endorsed the measure.[70]
The Grossmont Union High School District in San Diego County, California, publicly voted on a resolution endorsing Proposition 8. The Governing Board voted 4–0 to endorse the amendment of the California State Constitution.[71]
The Asian Heritage Coalition held a rally in support of Proposition 8 in downtown San Diego on October 19, 2008.[72]
During the November 2008 election campaign, Porterville's City Council was the only City Council in California that passed a Resolution in favor of Proposition 8.[73]
In the months leading up to Election Day, Proposition 8 supporters released a commercial featuring San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom stating in a speech regarding same-sex marriage: "This door's wide open now. It's going to happen, whether you like it or not."[74] Some observers noted that polls shifted in favor of Proposition 8 following the release of the commercial; this, in turn, led to much speculation about Newsom’s unwitting role in the passage of the amendment.[75][76][77]
Equality for All was the lead organization opposed to Proposition 8.[78] They also ran the NoOnProp8.com campaign.[79] As with the measure's proponents, opponents of the measure also included a number of political figures and religious organizations. Some non-partisan organizations and corporations, as well as the editorial boards of many of the state's major newspapers, also opposed the measure.
While Democratic presidential nominee and U.S. Senator, Barack Obama stated that while he personally considered marriage to be between a man and woman,[80] and supported civil unions that confer comparable rights rather than gay marriage,[81] he opposed "divisive and discriminatory efforts to amend the California Constitution... the U.S. Constitution or those of other states."[82] Democratic vice-presidential candidate Joseph Biden also opposed the proposition.[83] Republican California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger stated that although he opposed and twice vetoed legislative bills that would recognize same-sex marriage in California, he respected and would uphold the court's ruling and oppose the initiative and other attempts to amend the state's constitution.[84][85] The U.S. House Speaker, California Representative (8th District), Nancy Pelosi[86] along with other members of the California congressional delegation and both of California's U.S. senators, Dianne Feinstein and Barbara Boxer, voiced their opposition to Proposition 8.[87] Also voicing their opposition were the Lieutenant Governor, State Controller John Chiang, former governor and Attorney General Jerry Brown, 42 of 80 members of the state assembly, half of the state senators, and the mayors of San Francisco, Los Angeles, and San Diego: Gavin Newsom, Antonio Villaraigosa, and Jerry Sanders, respectively.[88][89][90][91]
All six Episcopal diocesan bishops in California jointly issued a statement opposing Proposition 8 on September 10, 2008.[92] Southern California's largest collection of rabbis, the Board of Rabbis of Southern California, voted to oppose Proposition 8.[93] Other Jewish groups who opposed Proposition 8 include Jewish Mosaic,[94] the American Jewish Committee, Progressive Jewish Alliance, National Council of Jewish Women, and the Anti-Defamation League.[65] Los Angeles Jews were more opposed to Prop 8 than any other religious group or ethnic group in the city. Seventy-eight percent of surveyed Jewish Angelenos voted against the measure while only 8% supported the measure; the remainder declined to respond.[95] The legislative ministry of the Unitarian Universalists opposed Proposition 8, and organized phone banks toward defeating the measure.[96] They see opposition to the proposition as a civil rights and social justice issue and their actions against it as a continuation of their previous works in civil rights.
In addition, the California Council of Churches urged the "immediate removal of Proposition 8" – saying that it infringes on the freedom of religion for churches who wish to bless same-sex unions.[97]
The League of Women Voters of California opposed Proposition 8 because "no person or group should suffer legal, economic or administrative discrimination."[98] Additionally, all but two of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People's local chapters in California and NAACP national chairman Julian Bond and President Benjamin Jealous opposed Proposition 8.[99] Amnesty International also condemned Proposition 8, saying that "states should never withhold rights based on minority status".[100]
A coalition of Silicon Valley executives urged a 'No' vote on Proposition 8.[101] Google officially opposed Proposition 8 "as an issue of equality", donating $140,000 to the No on 8 campaign.[102][103] Apple Inc. also opposed Proposition 8 as a "fundamental" civil rights issue, and donated $100,000 to the No on 8 campaign.[103][104] Biotech leaders warned of potential damage to the state's $73 billion industry, citing Massachusetts as a top competitor for employees.[105]
Many members of the entertainment industry were opposed to Proposition 8.[106] Actor Tom Hanks, a strong supporter of same-sex marriage, was extremely outspoken about his opposition to the bill. Brad Pitt and Steven Spielberg each donated different amounts of money to the opposition campaign "No on 8."[107] In 2010, the documentary film 8: The Mormon Proposition premiered to sell-out audiences at the Sundance Film Festival.
The Los Angeles Unified School District Board of Education voted unanimously for a resolution to oppose Proposition 8.[108] The California Teachers Association donated one million dollars to fight Proposition 8.[109] Chancellor Robert Birgeneau of UC Berkeley urged a vote against the measure, claiming a likely threat to California's academic competitiveness if Proposition 8 is passed.[110]
All ten of the state's largest newspapers editorialized against Proposition 8, including the Los Angeles Times,[111] and the San Francisco Chronicle.[112][113][114][115][116][117][118][119][120] Other papers to have editorialized in opposition include The New York Times,[121] La Opinión (Los Angeles),[122] and The Bakersfield Californian.[123]
After the election, a number of protests were held against the referendum's passing. These included candlelight vigils outside organizations such as LDS churches that promoted the proposition.[124][125] Rallies against the amendment took place in California and across the country, with participants numbering in thousands.[126][127][128][129][130][131]
Boycotts were also a feature of public response to the outcome of the election. LGBT rights groups published lists of donors to the Yes on 8 campaign and organized boycotts of individuals or organizations who had promoted or donated to it.[132][133][134] Targets of the boycotts included the Sundance Film Festival in Utah, El Coyote Cafe, California Musical Theatre, and the Manchester Grand Hyatt Hotel.[134][135][136]
Some supporters of Proposition 8 reported receiving death threats, some of which claimed to be "stemming from Prop 8".[137][138] Some LDS churches were vandalized with spray paint.[139][140][dead link]
Fresno-area supporters of gay marriage were also harassed; "No On 8" signs at the Clovis Unitarian Universalist Church were torn up, with Reverend Bryan Jessup alleging that his church experienced vandalism "every night".[137] Santa Clara County Deputy District Attorney (DDA) Jay Boyarsky attributed a surge in anti-gay hate crimes, from 3 in 2007 to 14 in 2008, to controversy over Proposition 8.[141][dead link]
Various opinion polls were conducted to estimate the outcome of the proposition. Those margins with differences less than their margins of error are marked as "n.s.", meaning not significant (see Statistical significance). Those margins considered statistically significant are indicated with the percentage points and the side favored in the poll, as either "pro" for in favor of the proposition's passage (e.g., 1% pro), or "con" for against its passage (e.g., 1% con).
According to the director of the Field Poll, the discrepancy between the pre-election polls and ballot results is because "regular church-goers ... were more prone than other voters to be influenced by last-minute appeals to conform to orthodox church positions when voting on a progressive social issue like same-sex marriage."[142]
| Date of opinion poll | Conducted by | Sample size (likely voters) |
In favor | Against | Undecided | Margin | Margin of Error |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 29–31 October 2008[143] | SurveyUSA | 637 | 47% | 50% | 3% | n.s. | ±4% |
| 18–28 October 2008[144] | The Field Poll | 966 | 44% | 49% | 7% | 5% con | ±3.3% |
| 12–19 October 2008[145] | Public Policy Institute of California | 1,186 | 44% | 52% | 4% | 8% con | ±3% |
| 15–16 October 2008[146] | SurveyUSA | 615 | 48% | 45% | 7% | n.s. | ±4% |
| 4–5 October 2008[147][148] | SurveyUSA | 670 | 47% | 42% | 10% | 5% pro | ±3.9% |
| 23–24 September 2008[149][150] | SurveyUSA | 661 | 44% | 49% | 8% | 5% pro | ±3.9% |
| 9–16 September 2008[151] | Public Policy Institute of California | 1,157 | 41% | 55% | 4% | 14% con | ±3% |
| 5–14 September 2008[152] | The Field Poll | 830 | 38% | 55% | 7% | 17% con | ±3.5% |
| 12–19 August 2008[153][154] | Public Policy Institute of California | 1,047 | 40% | 54% | 6% | 14% con | ±3% |
| 8–14 July 2008[9][155] | The Field Poll | 672 | 42% | 51% | 7% | 9% con | ±3.9% |
| 17–26 May 2008[156] | The Field Poll | 1,052 | 42% | 51% | 7% | 9% con | ±3.2% |
| May 22, 2008[157] | Los Angeles Times/KTLA | 705 | 54% | 35% | 11% | 19% pro | ±4% |
| Proposition 8[1] | ||
|---|---|---|
| Choice | Votes | Percentage |
 Yes |
7,001,084 | 52.24% |
| No | 6,401,482 | 47.76% |
| Valid votes | 13,402,566 | 97.52% |
| Invalid or blank votes | 340,611 | 2.48% |
| Total votes | 13,743,177 | 100.00% |
| Voter turnout | 79.42% | |
Amending the California Constitution by voter initiative requires a simple majority to be enacted.[158]
Edison/Mitofsky conducted an exit poll on behalf of the National Election Pool which is the only source of data on voter demographics in California in the 2008 election.[159][160] The statistical trends from the exit poll of 2,240 voters suggested that an array of voters came out both in opposition to and in support of Proposition 8, with no single demographic group making up most of either the Yes or No vote. The initial analysis showed that support for Proposition 8 was strong amongst African American voters, interviewed in the exit poll with 70% in favor, more than any other racial group.[161] Subsequent analysis showed black support at only 58%, still above the 52% support received by all voters.[162][163] Those who described themselves as religious were the strongest supporters of prop 8.[164] Young voters were more likely to have voted against the ballot measure than older voters, while Republicans were more likely to have supported the measure than were Democrats.[165]
| County | Yes | Votes | No | Votes |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Kern | 75.3% | 175,167 | 24.7% | 57,496 |
| Tulare | 75.1% | 78,578 | 24.9% | 26,113 |
| Modoc | 74.2% | 3,279 | 25.8% | 1,142 |
| Kings | 73.7% | 25,821 | 26.3% | 9,244 |
| Madera | 73.5% | 30,906 | 26.5% | 11,193 |
| Glenn | 73.3% | 7,235 | 26.7% | 2,644 |
| Tehama | 72.8% | 17,777 | 27.2% | 6,675 |
| Colusa | 71.6% | 4,556 | 28.4% | 1,815 |
| Lassen | 71.3% | 8,021 | 28.7% | 3,241 |
| Merced | 70.8% | 44,800 | 29.2% | 18,520 |
| Sutter | 70.4% | 23,032 | 29.6% | 9,707 |
| Shasta | 69.7% | 55,698 | 30.3% | 24,224 |
| Imperial | 69.7% | 27,048 | 30.3% | 11,783 |
| Fresno | 68.7% | 185,993 | 31.3% | 83,122 |
| Stanislaus | 67.9% | 108,988 | 32.1% | 51,598 |
| Yuba | 67.6% | 14,323 | 32.4% | 6,868 |
| San Bernardino | 66.8% | 404,762 | 33.2% | 202,227 |
| San Joaquin | 65.5% | 135,728 | 34.5% | 71,747 |
| Riverside | 64.7% | 417,133 | 35.3% | 228,449 |
| Sierra | 64.2% | 1,273 | 35.8% | 711 |
| Amador | 64.0% | 11,945 | 36.0% | 6,725 |
| Calaveras | 63.9% | 14,624 | 36.1% | 8,588 |
| Tuolumne | 62.6% | 16,964 | 37.4% | 10,163 |
| Mariposa | 62.1% | 5,961 | 37.9% | 3,640 |
| Inyo | 60.6% | 5,116 | 39.4% | 3,334 |
| Del Norte | 60.1% | 5,658 | 39.9% | 3,770 |
| Siskiyou | 60.0% | 12,668 | 40.0% | 8,475 |
| Plumas | 60.0% | 6,576 | 40.0% | 4,401 |
| Placer | 59.8% | 102,977 | 40.2% | 69,444 |
| El Dorado | 58.3% | 53,837 | 41.7% | 38,534 |
| Orange | 57.7% | 659,037 | 42.3% | 484,015 |
| Trinity | 56.2% | 3,563 | 43.8% | 2,785 |
| Butte | 56.1% | 54,822 | 43.9% | 43,045 |
| Solano | 55.9% | 89,292 | 44.1% | 70,680 |
| San Benito | 54.8% | 10,657 | 45.2% | 8,794 |
| Sacramento | 53.9% | 289,378 | 46.1% | 248,444 |
| San Diego | 53.8% | 655,625 | 46.2% | 565,054 |
| Ventura | 52.9% | 178,719 | 47.1% | 159,284 |
| Lake | 52.0% | 13,036 | 48.0% | 12,080 |
| San Luis Obispo | 51.1% | 67,304 | 48.9% | 64,555 |
| Los Angeles | 50.1% | 1,624,672 | 49.9% | 1,622,287 |
| Nevada | 50.1% | 27,617 | 49.9% | 27,614 |
| Monterey | 48.4% | 62,251 | 51.6% | 66,191 |
| Santa Barbara | 46.4% | 80,117 | 53.6% | 92,305 |
| Contra Costa | 44.6% | 198,713 | 55.4% | 246,753 |
| Napa | 44.4% | 26,227 | 55.6% | 32,742 |
| Mono | 44.2% | 2,425 | 55.8% | 3,050 |
| Santa Clara | 44.2% | 291,347 | 55.8% | 367,053 |
| Alpine | 43.6% | 293 | 56.4% | 379 |
| Yolo | 41.3% | 32,816 | 56.4% | 46,537 |
| Humboldt | 39.9% | 25,296 | 60.1% | 37,963 |
| San Mateo | 38.2% | 114,695 | 61.8% | 185,127 |
| Alameda | 38.0% | 232,923 | 62.0% | 378,692 |
| Mendocino | 36.8% | 14,649 | 63.2% | 25,072 |
| Sonoma | 33.5% | 76,143 | 66.5% | 150,763 |
| Santa Cruz | 28.7% | 36,163 | 71.3% | 89,793 |
| Marin | 24.9% | 34,324 | 75.1% | 103,341 |
| San Francisco | 24.8% | 92,536 | 75.2% | 280,491 |
In California, a constitutional amendment passed by the electorate takes effect the day after the election.[158] On the evening of November 4 the "Yes on 8" campaign issued a statement by Ron Prentice, the chairman of ProtectMarriage.com, saying "The people of California stood up for traditional marriage and reclaimed this great institution."[166] The organizers of the "No on Prop 8" campaign issued a statement on November 6 saying, "Tuesday’s vote was deeply disappointing to all who believe in equal treatment under the law."[167] The counties of Los Angeles, San Francisco, Yolo, Kern, Santa Barbara, San Luis Obispo, Sonoma, San Diego, San Bernardino, Sacramento, and Tuolumne stopped issuing marriage licenses to same-sex couples the day after the election.[168][169][170][171][172]
Following the passage of Proposition 8, mass protests took place across the state. These included protests outside a temple of the LDS Church in Westwood, Los Angeles;[173] a march through Hollywood that blocked traffic and elicited police intervention;[174] and a candlelight vigil in front of the Sacramento Gay and Lesbian Center.[175] In San Francisco, thousands gathered in front of the City Hall, along with Mayor Gavin Newsom, to protest the proposition and to perform a candlelit vigil.[176]
These protests led to several lawsuits being filed in the State Supreme Court and the Federal District Court. On November 13, 2008, the California Supreme Court asked California Attorney General Jerry Brown for an opinion on whether the Court should accept these cases for review and whether the measure should be suspended while they decide the case. On November 19, the Court accepted three lawsuits challenging Proposition 8, which consolidated into Strauss v. Horton.[177]
After the California Supreme Court upheld the voter initiative, a suit, Perry v. Schwarzenegger was filed in a Federal District Court in San Francisco. On August 4, 2010, U.S. District Chief Judge Vaughn R. Walker overturned Proposition 8, stating it is "...unconstitutional under the Due Process Clause because no compelling state interest justifies denying same-sex couples the fundamental right to marry."[178] The court also determined that "Proposition 8 violated the Equal Protection Clause because there is no rational basis for limiting the designation of 'marriage' to opposite-sex couples."[179] The court also stayed the ruling; the voter initiative was to remain in effect pending appeal.[12] On August 12, Walker announced his decision to lift the stay (which would have allowed same-sex marriages to be performed) as of August 18, 2010.[180][181] However, on August 16, 2010, the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit indefinitely extended the District Court's stay, stopping new same-sex marriages in the state of California pending appeal. It also scheduled an accelerated time table for hearing an appeal of Walker's ruling.[182]
On January 4, 2011, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that Imperial County may not have standing to intervene in the lawsuit. Therefore, the court certified a question to the California Supreme Court as to whether non-governmental proponents of an initiative have standing to appeal when the State is no longer willing to defend it.[183] On February 16, 2011, the California Supreme Court unanimously agreed to address the Ninth Circuit's request.[184] The court set an expedited schedule for the hearing[185] and heard oral arguments on September 6, 2011.[186] On November 17, 2011, the court issued an advisory opinion that the proponents of Proposition 8 did have standing, and could defend it.[187][188]
On February 7, 2012, a three-judge panel on the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals issued a 2–1 majority opinion affirming the judgment in Perry v. Schwarzenegger, which declared Proposition 8 unconstitutional, saying it violated the Equal Protection Clause. The opinion, written by Judge Stephen Reinhardt and joined by Judge Michael Hawkins, states that Proposition 8 did nothing more than lessen the status and dignity of gays and lesbians, and classify their relationships and families as inferior to those of opposite-sex couples.[189] The court found that the people of California, by using their initiative power to target a minority group and withdraw the right to marry they once possessed under the California State Constitution, violated the federal Constitution.[190]
It was discovered that Proposition 8 had no purpose other than to impose the majority's private disapproval of gays, lesbians, and their relationships through the public law, and to take away from them the designation of marriage and its recognized societal status.[191] The findings of fact and expert witness testimony in District Court played an important role in this appellate decision, emphasizing that it is unreasonable to believe Proposition 8 was enacted to: promote childrearing by biological parents, encourage procreation, be cautious in social change, protect religious liberty, or control children's education.[192] The court declared that it is "implausible to think that denying two men or two women the right to call themselves married could somehow bolster the stability of families headed by one man and one woman."[193][194]
The dissenting judge, Judge N. Randy Smith, noted in his dissent that states do legitimately prohibit sexual relationships condemned by society such as incest, bigamy, and bestiality, and impose age limits for marriage without violating constitutional rights.[195] He stated that "gays and lesbians are not a suspect or quasi-suspect class" and are thus not entitled to the courts' increased scrutiny of laws that affect them.[195] He wrote, "The family structure of two committed biological parents – one man and one woman – is the optimal partnership for raising children." He also said that governments have a legitimate interest in "a responsible procreation theory, justifying the inducement of marital recognition only for opposite-sex couples" because only they can have children.[195] He urged judicial restraint, that the justices should refrain from striking down Proposition 8.[196]
Proponents appealed the judgment on February 21, requesting to have to the case reviewed en banc by the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals.[197] If granted, en banc review could take a year or more, which would delay possible U.S. Supreme Court review.[197] Pending the appeal, a stay has been continued, barring any marriages from taking place.[198]
Proposition 8 consisted of two sections. Its full text was:[199]
Section I. Title
Section 2. Article I. Section 7.5 is added to the California Constitution, to read:
- This measure shall be known and may be cited as the "California Marriage Protection Act."
- Sec. 7.5. Only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California.
 |
Wikinews has related news: |
Media related to California Proposition 8 (2008) at Wikimedia Commons
|
||||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||
A star-studded cast turns out for Marc Shaiman's "Prop 8 - The Musical."
gay Prop 8 Proposition 8 prop 8 the musical
A simple explanation of Proposition 8. Please share with family & friends who may be undecided on the issue.
proposition8 prop8 marriage california
Featuring an all-star cast including George Clooney, Brad Pitt, Martin Sheen, Jamie Lee Curtis, Jane Lynch, Kevin Bacon and others, "8" is a play written by Academy Award winning screenwriter Dustin Lance Black and directed by acclaimed actor and director Rob Reiner. It is a powerful account of the case filed by the American Federation for Equal Rights (AFER) in the US District Court in 2010 to overturn Proposition 8, a constitutional amendment that eliminated the rights of same-sex couples to marry in the state of California. Framed around the trial's historic closing arguments in June 2010, 8 provides an intimate look what unfolded when the issue of same-sex marriage was on trial. Pre-Show Music by Kill the Complex: One Great Wonder: itunes.apple.com Shine: itunes.apple.com
gay marriage proposition 8 prop 8 dustin lance black
The Rachel Maddow Show, MSNBC, 2-7-2012 Ted Olson
gay lesbian marriage proposition
Rob Reiner announces a history-making live streaming of a reading of "8," Dustin Lance Black's play about the Prop 8 trial. Visit AFER.org or http to watch the play live on March 3rd, 2012, at 7:30pm Pacific.
afer rob reiner live streaming play
Ellen DeGeneres, Jesse Tyler Ferguson, Cory Monteith and more celebs celebrate the ruling in California that makes gay marriage legal! BY NOW YOU'VE HEARD THE BIG NEWS... PROP 8 WAS OVERTURNED AND GAY MARRIAGE IS NOW LEGAL IN THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA... AND WE'VE GOT CELEB REACTION STRAIGHT FROM HOLLYWOOD... MODERN FAMILY STARS JESSE TYLER FERGUSON AND ERIC STONESTREET SHOWED THEIR SUPPORT, POSTING THIS PIC ON THEIR WHO SAY ACCOUNTS, ADDING, "Mitch & Cam have a question for you." AND OTHER CELEBS CHIMED IN ABOUT THE HISTORIC MOVE... ELLEN DEGENERES TWEETED, "Today we took another step towards equality. #Prop8 was found unconstitutional again. I couldn't be happier." SOPHIA BUSH POSTED THIS "HELL YES" RAINBOW ON HER WHOSAY PAGE, AND SAID, "#EqualityMatters Proposition 8 serves no purpose, and has no effect, other than to lessen the status and human dignity of gay men and lesbians in California. Fight for equality for EVERYONE. Be on the right side of history." KELLY OSBOURNE SAID, "Are my ears hearing this corectly? If so my eyes are filling with tears of joy! thank you lord" AND CORY MONTEITH OFFERED THIS..."Prop 8 has been ruled unconstitutional! In other news, the Pacific Ocean was discovered to be wet." GOOD ONE CORY...
Proposition unconstitutional celebs react
Mattheus Stephens, a civil trial lawyer who has more than a dozen years experience in LGBT law, and Charles LiMandri, general counsel for National Organization for Marriage, speak with Joanne Faryon about Proposition 8.
proposition 8 kpbs evening edition
"In a 2 to 1 ruling, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals has affirmed Judge Walker's decision declaring that Proposition 8 violates the Due Process and Equal Protection Clauses of the Constitution...".* The Young Turks host Cenk Uygur's take on the ban on gay marriage in California being ruled unconstitutional. * thinkprogress.org A Gay Apology Letter: www.youtube.com Subscribe to The Young Turks: bit.ly Find out how to watch The Young Turks on Current by clicking here: www.current.com The Largest Online New Show in the World. Google+: www.gplus.to Facebook: www.facebook.com Twitter: twitter.com
prop 8 prop 8 ruling proposition 8 prop 8 gay marriage
Educational Comments
Watch more of today's news youtube.com Gay marriage brings prop 8 to its knees... Philly D OFFICIAL APP: bit.ly Follow us on twitter: twitter.com Hosts: @leenewtonsays @joebereta Music: @hagemeister
Fox News host Bill O'Reilly ripped into the 9th Circuit Court Of Appeals which ruled that Prop 8 in California, which banned gay marriage, was unconstitutional. The Young Turks host Cenk Uygur explains why O'Reilly is wrong. www.huffingtonpost.com Subscribe to The Young Turks: bit.ly Find out how to watch The Young Turks on Current by clicking here: www.current.com The Largest Online New Show in the World. Google+: www.gplus.to Facebook: www.facebook.com Twitter: twitter.com
prop 8 prop 8 ruling bill o'reilly prop 8 o'reilly prop 8
Prop 8=Hate.
California Proposition 2008 Unconstitutional
Check out today's SourceFed!! www.youtube.com FACEBOOK: on.fb.me TWITTER: Twitter.com Philly D OFFICIAL APP: bit.ly ---------------------------- ALL of today's Stories: Motorcycle Circus Crash: gizmo.do Lilyhammer Netflix Launch: gaw.kr Machete Sequel?? bit.ly New Spiderman Trailer: chzb.gr Best. Bet. Ever: bit.ly Lindsay Lohan Photos: gaw.kr Jessica Nigri's Skyrim: bit.ly Cop Chase. For no reason. bit.ly Prop 8 "Unconstitutional" huff.to ---------------------------- music by: Ronald Jenkees: bit.ly @hagemeister @urbandelights
sxephil philip defranco Lindsay
Its doesn't matter how many millions vote to keep LGBT down - victory is guaranteed. New York Times article - 'Court Strikes Down Ban on Gay Marriage in California' www.nytimes.com Pasadena Sun article - 'Prop. 8 ruling 'particularly emotional' for Portantino' articles.pasadenasun.com
Proposition is Unconstitutional; Judicial
Prop 8 Victory Press Call, Feb 2, 2012
SFCC_Alliance: GO see 8: A Mormon Proposition, tonight at the Garland! It's a harbinger of things to come in Washington state... http://t.co/qXcmmpBd
aproposition: @andrewstranberg @Axwell Check out this amazing Villa: http://t.co/Pv7zYol1 info@a-proposition.com http://t.co/xu7HW8Jt
aproposition: @RayaLukic @rjrkidrock48065 Check out this amazing Villa: http://t.co/Pv7zYol1 info@a-proposition.com http://t.co/xu7HW8Jt
nevinjit: @raiedrahman I got a proposition for you. Care to smoke a cigar with us at 130pm tmr, expo hall 8? We lighting up straight after paper
NoOnPropH8: Proposition 2-1/2 requests head for town meeting vote in Winchendon: WINCHENDON - Voters at tonig... http://t.co/WpGqNqAi #prop 8 #prop8
RheaBradtke: American Apparel Legalize Gay All Over Sheer Jersey Raglan Tee: In the fall of 2008, Proposition 8 passed in Cal... http://t.co/gkFyqIVp
BizOwnersUnLTD: 8 ways to your unique proposition - http://t.co/ERG8Mb3H
nickbettes: 8 ways to your unique proposition - http://t.co/k6aRYAOK
corvetteBeth: RT @cwillardsmoot: @fasteddiekc Mormonism has already helped Calif>Proposition 8. THAT LDS Religion is the MOST important reason to NOT elect Romney! I know.
Neil095: RT @marxdudek: Seeing the aggressive role that The Mormon Church played in the Proposition 8 issue, you'd better believe Romney's religion is an issue.
TessTalks: RT @marxdudek: Seeing the aggressive role that The Mormon Church played in the Proposition 8 issue, you'd better believe Romney's religion is an issue.
marxdudek: Seeing the aggressive role that The Mormon Church played in the Proposition 8 issue, you'd better believe Romney's religion is an issue.
jerry6911: Justices will decide the fate of gay marriage: But challenges to DOMA and to California's Proposition 8, a voter... http://t.co/KvNiP7c8
LambdaLibris: Letters: Gay rights as civil rights: Eric J. Segall says lawyers working to overturn Proposition 8 via the court... http://t.co/EadLgUQJ
jerry6911: Letters: Gay rights as civil rights: Eric J. Segall says lawyers working to overturn Proposition 8 via the court... http://t.co/TJSkVIpT
Vulconus Erratacanus: TOPIC: Kidsexxx? Notice that yours truly did not title this piece: "Kidporn" - but instead: "Kidsexxx." That was done deliberately, for good reason. Before we delve into the subject, there is a serious warning to those who are in the process of wording the so-called Minnesota Marriage Amendment which is scheduled to appear on the November 2012 General-Election Ballot. IF the Amendment on that ballot is worded something like: Marriage shall consist of the union of one man and ONE woman, be it known that I myself will not vote for it . . . but if it instead reads: Marraige shall consist of the union of a man and woman, I will vote for it. Even if the ballot proposition is worded: Marriage shall consist of the union of a man and A woman, I will not vote for it. Can the reader detect why that is so? First of all, the way any of the three pro-heterosexual wordings above are written, it should be obvious that none of them specifically forbid or disallow homosexual marriages. The subject of homogay/homosodomite marriages is not even addressed or mentioned by any of the wordings. In fact, the possibilities of marriage to other lifeforms or inanimate objects is also NOT addressed nor mentioned by any of the wordings. What the ". . . one woman . . ." or even the " . . . a woman . . ." semantics also does not prohibit is the possibility of sexual connections with non-marital mistresses for men, nor even fornication or adultery with masseuses or escorts not presently married to the men they erotically connect with physically. What it does prohibit is legal allowance and civil recognition of a man having a polygamous union (NOT prosecutable in Canada!) with two or more wives simultaneously belonging to him, and/or a wife plus a concubine of his own simultaneously. Such harem-type multiple-spouse marriages would not be considered "legal" as far as State registration is involved IF the so-called Marriage Amendment passed into law . . . but certainly a sheik temporarily or semi-temporarily from a foreign country should not be arrested for having multiple wives or concubines of his own in America, whether previously or presently acquired within America. Both American police and American courts should recognize such multiple spouses belonging to such sheiks (be they Saudi, African, or whoever) as being married to him alone, with all the inheritance and social-services ramifications. And the allowance by both police and courts must not discriminatorily be limited to islamic or muslim sheiks alone, because the totality of the history and doctrines of both testaments of the Judeo-Christian Bible (relating to both Jews and Christians) neither forbids nor discourages patriarchal polygamy. Not to mention the cult of Mormonism. Such patriarchal polygamy is, of course, disdained by sexist feminists in their demonic chauventic quest to manipulate and control men at their exclusive and non-predictably selfish and moody whims, but such sexism is clearly satanic in both intentions and practice. Zep 3:9 Yes, at that time I will change the speech of the peoples to a pure speech [no more devious-semantical weasel-worded satanspeak], that all of them may call on the name of the LORD and serve Him with one accord. Relating to that, we get into the subject of child sexxx, which is something of a misnomer by nature for kids ranging in age from infancy to toddlers, even to younger tweens [previous to age 12]: Lev 27:1 The LORD said to Moses, 2 "Say to the people of Israel, 'When a man makes a special vow of persons to the LORD at your valuation, 3 then your valuation of a male from 20 years old up to 60 years old shall be 50 shekels of silver, according to the shekel of the sanctuary. 4 If the person is a female, your valuation shall be 30 shekels. 5 If the person is from 5 years old up to 20 years old [note that the cutoff is not age 18], your valuation shall be for a male 20 shekels, and for a female 10 shekels [not as much]. 6 If the person is from 1 month old up to 5 years old, your valuation shall be for a male 5 shekels of silver, and for a female your valuation shall be 3 shekels of silver . 7 And if the person is 60 years old [starting age for receiving Social Security checks?] and upward, then your valuation for a male shall be 15 shekels, and for a female 10 shekels." Why that is so is because children within those age ranges simply have not yet developed erotic cravings relating to their genitals. The males (such as I was previously during my early childhood) do show varying degrees of interest in the bared buttocks of playmate-toddler-and-older female humans, but the genitally-oriented desires are simply not there at that time. Pr 20:11 Even a [demonically-shrieking?] child makes himself known by his acts, whether what he does is pure and right. That is one strong reason to not advocate child porn, not only forced genital fornication or adultery attempts with their toddler or tween peers, but especially with sensually-matured adults with fully-developed post-puberty genital proclivities. If an innocently-and-ignorantly-inquiring or investigating toddler or young-tween boy sees or explores the private parts (i.e. crotch area) of a toddler or young-tween girl, he does not necessarily pity her for her lack of penis and instead bare crack consisting of her hairless pussy, but merely regards her as "different" than himself. Indeed, he most likely wonders how a baby could ever emerge out of such a small seemingly-closed opening between her bare legs. So 8:8 We have a little sister, and she has no breasts. What shall we do for our sister, on the day when she is spoken for? So 8:9 If she is a wall [destined to become and be married?], we will build upon her a battlement of silver; but if she is a door [destined to become and be single?], we will enclose her with boards of cedar. So 8:10 I was a wall, and my breasts were like towers; then I was in his eyes as one who brings peace. Eze 16:4 "And as for your birth, on the day you were born your navel string was not cut, nor were you washed with water to cleanse you, nor rubbed with salt, nor swathed with bands. 5 No eye pitied you, to do any of these things to you out of compassion for you; but you were thrown out on the open field, for you were abhorred, on the day that you were born. 6 And when I passed by you, and saw you nearly drowning in your blood, I said to you in your blood, 'Live, 7 and grow up like a plant of the field.' And you grew up and became tall and arrived at full maidenhood; your breasts were formed, and your hair had grown [where?]; yet you were naked and bare. 8 When I passed by you again and looked upon you, hey, you were at the age for love; and I spread my cloak over you, and covered your nakedness: yes, I promised to marry you and entered into a covenant with you," says the Lord GOD, "and you became mine. 9 Then I bathed you with water and washed off your blood from you, and anointed you with oil. 10 I clothed you also with embroidered cloth and shod you with leather, I swathed you in fine linen and covered you with silk." And if the tyke has heard rumors that he eventually is destined to insert his now-hopelessly flaccid-and-limpid pre-puberty penis into some future female crotch crack in the mysterious process of causing his opposite-gender partner to get pregnant and birth a baby someday, he might have some concern about how that penis of his could ever become erect enough to penetrate that small crack, what it would take to get it rigid, and exactly what would happen once it magically becomes stiff and inserted in between her legs. As most of the readers of this piece now know, the biological clock ticks each person into puberty, and both sights accidently or deliberately seen of certain exposed female body parts when in the early teens and older, along with contacting those body parts, result in automatic acquisition of the knowledge of experiencing both penile erections and seminal emissions . . . for the male, at least. So 7:5 Your head crowns you like Carmel, and your flowing locks [i.e. LOOSE long hair] are like purple; a king is held captive in the [enticingly-erotic mopheaded] tresses. Isa 3:16 (paraphrase) The LORD said: Because the daughters of Zion are haughty and walk with outstretched necks, glancing wantonly with their eyes, swaying their hips as they go along, slapping their bared soles with flipflops as they walk; Isa 3:17 the Lord will smite with a scab the heads of the daughters of Zion, and the LORD will lay bare their secret parts. Isa 20:4 so shall the king of Assyria lead away the Egyptians captives and the Ethiopians exiles, both the young and the old, naked and barefoot, with buttocks uncovered, to the shame of Egypt. Is 47:1 Come down and sit in the dust, virgin daughter of Babylon; sit on the ground without a throne, daughter of the Chaldeans! For you shall no more be called tender and delicate. Is 47:2 Take the millstones and grind meal, put off your veil, strip off your robe, uncover your legs, pass through the rivers. Is 47:3 Your nakedness shall be uncovered, and your shame shall be seen. I will take vengeance, and I will spare no man. Jer 2:25 Keep your feet from going unshod and your throat from thirst. But you said, 'It is hopeless, for I have loved strangers, and after them I will go.' In association with such, both male and female teens should have previously been instructed during their earlier years adequate sexually-oriented programming within the bowels of both the Old and the New Testament . . . as - for example - female humans should be warned about never being immodestly mis-dressed when in general mixed-gender public view, and the males warned about never exploring any types nor severities of pictoral or image pornography of misdressed or undressed females (which non-authorized exploration would invaribly result in messy, wasteful, and abusive self-sodomizing masturbation, ultimately leading gradually to frustrating and embarrassing increasing erectile dysfunction, disappointing impotence to various degrees, perhaps even prostate cancer . . . particularly in later years of life). De 25:11 When men fight with one another, and the wife of the one draws near to rescue her husband from the hand of him who is beating him, and puts out her hand and seizes him by the private parts, De 25:12 then you shall cut off her hand; your eye shall have no pity. Pr 5:18 Let your fountain be blessed, and rejoice in the wife of your youth, 19 a lovely deer, a graceful doe. Let her breasts fill you at all times with delight, be infatuated always with her love. 20 Why should you be infatuated, my son, with a loose woman and embrace the boobs of an adventuress? 21 For a man's ways are before the eyes of the LORD, and He watches all his paths. 22 The iniquities of the wicked ensnare him, and he is caught in the labors of his sin. 23 He dies for lack of discipline, and because of his great foolishness, he is lost. Isa 57:8 Behind the door and the doorpost you have set up your symbol; for, deserting me, you have uncovered your bed, you have gone up to it, you have made it wide; and you have made a bargain for yourself with them, you have loved their bed, you have looked on nakedness. Eze 16:37 Therefore, hey, I will gather all your lovers, with whom you took pleasure, all those you loved and all those you loathed; I will gather them against you from every side, and will uncover your nakedness to them, that they may see all your nakedness. Eze 23:9 Yet she increased her harlotry, remembering the days of her youth, when she played the harlot in the land of Egypt Eze 23:20 and doted upon her paramours there, whose members were like those of asses, and whose issue was like that of horses. Eze 23:21 Thus you longed for the lewdness of your youth, when the Egyptians pressed your virgin nipples for the sake of your young breasts. 1 Ti 2:8 I desire then that in every place the men should pray, lifting holy hands without anger or quarreling; 9 also that women should adorn themselves modestly and sensibly in decent apparel, not with broided hair [decorations] or gold or pearls or costly attire 10 but by good works, as befits women who profess religion. 11 Let a woman learn in silence with all submissiveness. 12 I allow no woman to teach or to have authority over men; she is to keep silent. 13 For Adam was formed first, then Eve; 14 and Adam was not deceived, but the woman was deceived and became a transgressor. 15 Yet woman will be saved through bearing children, if she continues in faith and love and holiness, with sobriety. In view of this, we readily ascertain that pre-puberty children have no interest in genital connections, and they thus should NOT be forced to experience such. Le 19:29 Do not profane your daughter by making her a harlot, lest the land fall into harlotry and the land become full of wickedness. De 22:20 But if the thing is true, that the tokens of virginity were not found in the young woman, De 22:21 then they shall bring out the young woman to the door of her father's house, and the men of her city shall stone her to death with stones, because she has wrought folly in Israel by playing the harlot in her father's house; so you shall purge the evil from the midst of you. 1Co 7:1 Now concerning the matters about which you wrote. It is well for a man not to touch a woman [includes penile-agitating brief or extended hugging, lap-sitting, cheek-kissing, hand-holding, neck-and-shoulders massaging, foot-washing, etc.]. 2 But because of the temptation to immorality, each man should have his own wife and each woman her own husband. 3 The husband should give to his wife her conjugal rights, and likewise the wife to her husband. 4 For the wife does not rule over her own body, but the husband does; likewise the husband does not rule over his own body, but the wife does. 5 Do not refuse one another except perhaps by agreement for a season, that you may devote yourselves to prayer; but then come together again, lest Satan tempt you through lack of self-control. 6 I say this by way of concession, not of command. 7 I wish that all were as I myself am. But each has his own special gift from God, one of one kind and one of another. 8 To the unmarried and the widows I say that it is well for them to remain single as I do. 9 But if they cannot exercise self-control [and few can], they should marry. For it is better to marry than to be aflame with passion [or screw around with or without condoms into VD and AIDS]. 36 But if any man think that he behaves improperly toward his virgin, if she pass the flower of her age [i.e. bloom of youth] and need so require, let him do what he will: he sins not; let them marry. 1Ti 5:14 So I would have younger women [Gr. ne(o)teras - not ch(e)ras, or "widows"] marry, bear children, manage their households, and give the enemy no cause to revile us. 1Ti 5:15 For some have already strayed after Satan. As with "consenting" adults, so children should especially be - in all sincere honestly - consenting as to whether they want or do not want to consciously and deliberately expose their nudity or any parts thereof to other kids and adults: Ge 34:1 Now Dinah the daughter of Leah, whom she had borne to Jacob, went out to visit the women of the land [dangerous, without a protective guard or escort]; 2 and when Shechem the son of Hamor the Hivite, the prince of the land, saw her, he seized her and lay with her and humbled [no longer sassy-arrogant after being raped] her. 3 And his soul was drawn to Dinah the daughter of Jacob; he loved the maiden and spoke tenderly to her. 4 So Shechem spoke to his father Hamor, saying, "Get me this maiden for my wife." 5 Now Jacob heard that he had defiled his daughter Dinah; but his sons were with his cattle in the field, so Jacob held his peace until they came. 25 On the third day, when they were sore [after becoming circumcised], two of the sons of Jacob, Simeon and Levi, Dinah's brothers, took their swords and came upon the city unawares, and killed all the males. 26 They slew Hamor and his son Shechem with the sword, and took Dinah out of Shechem's house, and went away. 27 And the sons of Jacob came upon the slain, and plundered the city, because their sister had been defiled; 28 they took their flocks and their herds, their asses, and whatever was in the city and in the field; 29 all their wealth, all their little ones and their wives, all that was in the houses, they captured and made their prey. 30 Then Jacob said to Simeon and Levi, "You have brought trouble on me by making me odious to the inhabitants of the land, the Canaanites and the Perizzites; my numbers are few, and if they gather themselves against me and attack me, I shall be destroyed, both I and my household." 31 But they said, "Should he treat our sister as a harlot?" Nu 5:18 And the priest shall set the woman before the LORD, and unbind the hair of the woman's head, and place in her hands the cereal offering of remembrance, which is the cereal offering of jealousy. And in his hand the priest shall have the water of bitterness that brings the curse. Ru 2:9 Let your eyes be upon the field which they are reaping, and go after them. Have I not charged the young men not to molest you? And when you are thirsty, go to the vessels and drink what the young men have drawn." Ru 2:22 And Naomi said to Ruth, her daughter-in-law, "It is well, my daughter, that you go out with his maidens, lest in another field you be molested." 2Sa 13:8 So Tamar went to her brother Amnon's house [Oh oh], where he was lying down. And she took dough, and kneaded it, and made cakes in his sight [Oh oh], and baked the cakes. 9 And she took the pan and emptied it out before him, but he refused to eat. And Amnon said, "Send out every one from me." [Oh oh] So every one went out from him. [Oh oh] 10 Then Amnon said to Tamar, "Bring the food into the chamber, that I may eat from your hand." [ Oh oh] And Tamar took the cakes she had made, and brought them into the chamber to Amnon her brother. [Oh oh] 11 But when she brought them near him to eat, he took hold of her, [Too late!] and said to her, "Come, lie with me, my sister." 12 She answered him, "No, my brother, do not force me; for such a thing is not done in Israel; do not do this wanton folly. 13 As for me, where could I carry my shame [a reputation problem] ? And as for you, you would be as one of the wanton fools in Israel. Now therefore, I beg you, speak to the king; for he will not withhold me from you." 14 But he would not listen to her; and being stronger than she, he forced her, and lay with her. 15 Then Amnon hated her with very great hatred; so that the hatred with which he hated her was greater than the love with which he had loved her. And Amnon said to her, "Get up, be gone." 16 But she said to him, "No, my brother; for this wrong in sending me away is greater than the other which you did to me." But he would not listen to her. 17 He called the young man who served him and said, "Put this woman out of my presence, and bolt the door after her." 18 Now she was wearing a long-sleeved full-length [NOT "multi-colored" - read the exact Hebrew-Text word indicating nothing about color but instead length covering the wrists and ankles] robe; for thus were the virgin daughters of the king traditionally dressed. So his servant put her out, and bolted the door after her. 19 And Tamar put ashes on her head, and rent the long-sleeved full-length robe which she wore; and she laid her hand on her head, and went away, crying aloud as she went. 20 And her brother Absalom said to her, "Has Amnon your brother been with you? Now hold your peace, my sister; he is your brother; do not take this to heart." So Tamar lived, a desolate woman, in her brother Absalom's house. 21 When King David heard of all these things, he was very angry. 22 But Absalom spoke to Amnon neither good nor bad; for Absalom hated Amnon, because he had forced his sister Tamar. 23 After two full years Absalom had sheepshearers at Baalhazor, which is near Ephraim, and Absalom invited all the king's sons. 24 And Absalom came to the king, and said, "Hey, your servant has sheepshearers; pray let the king and his servants go with your servant." 25 But the king said to Absalom, "No, my son, let us not all go, lest we be burdensome to you." He pressed him, but he would not go but gave him his blessing. 26 Then Absalom said, "If not, please let my brother Amnon go with us." And the king said to him, "Why should he go with you?" 27 But Absalom pressed him until he let Amnon and all the king's sons go with him. 28 Then Absalom commanded his servants, "Note when Amnon's heart is merry with wine, and when I say to you, 'Strike Amnon,' then kill him. Fear not; have I not commanded you? Be courageous and be valiant." 29 So the servants of Absalom did to Amnon as Absalom had commanded. Then all the king's sons arose, and each mounted his mule [Harley?] and fled. 30 While they were on the way, news came to David, "Absalom has slain all the king's sons, and not one of them is left." 31 Then the king got up, and tore his garments, and lay on the earth; and all his servants who were standing by tore their garments. 32 But Jonadab the son of Shimeah, David's brother, said, "Let not my master suppose that they have killed all the young men the king's sons, for Amnon alone is dead, for by the command of Absalom this has been determined from the day he forced his sister Tamar. Mr 5:15 And they came to Jesus, and saw the demoniac sitting there, clothed and in his right mind, the man who had had the legion; and they were afraid. Lu 8:35 Then people went out to see what had happened, and they came to Jesus, and found the man from whom the demons had gone, sitting at the feet of Jesus, clothed and in his right mind; and they were afraid. Joh 5:14 Afterward, Jesus found him in the temple, and said to him, "See, you are well! Sin no more, that nothing worse befall you." Joh 8:11 She said, "No one, Lord." And Jesus said, "Neither do I condemn you; go, and do not sin again." 1Co 15:34 Come to your right mind, and sin no more. For some have no knowledge of God. I say this to your shame. Permissive seduction is one thing, but involuntary rape is NOT acceptable from a Scriptural point of view (although it is, to some extent, understandable, for various incitements or irresponsible actions, be they accidental or on purpose): Ge 24:56 But he said to them, "Do not delay me, since the LORD has prospered my way; let me go that I may go to my master." Ge 24:57 They said, "We will call the maiden, and ask her." Ge 24:58 And they called Rebekah, and said to her, "Will you go with this man?" She said, "I will go." [permission granted] Ex 22:16 If a man seduces a virgin who is not betrothed, and lies with her, he shall give the marriage present for her, and make her his wife. De 22:25 But if in the open country a man meets a young woman who is betrothed, and the man seizes her and lies with her, then only the man who lay with her shall die. De 22:26 But to the young woman you shall do nothing; in the young woman there is no offense punishable by death, for this case is like that of a man attacking and murdering his neighbor; De 22:27 because he came upon her in the open country, and though the betrothed young woman cried for help there was no one to rescue her. De 22:28 If a man meets a virgin who is not betrothed, and seizes her and lies with her, and they are found, De 22:29 then the man who lay with her shall give to the father of the young woman fifty shekels of silver, and she shall be his wife, because he has violated her; he may not put her away all his days. Pr 7:10 And wow, a woman meets him, dressed as a harlot, wily of heart. 11 She is loud and wayward, her feet do not stay at home; 12 now in the street, now in the market, and at every corner she lies in wait. 13 She seizes him and kisses him, and with impudent face she says to him: 14 "I had to offer sacrifices, and today I have paid my vows; 15 so now I have come out to meet you, to seek you eagerly, and I have found you. 16 I have decked my couch with coverings, colored spreads of Egyptian linen; 17 I have perfumed my bed with myrrh, aloes, and cinnamon. 18 Come, let us take our fill of love till morning; let us delight ourselves with love. 19 For my husband [Oh oh] is not at home; he has gone on a long journey; 20 he took a bag of money with him; at full moon he will come home." 21 With much seductive speech she persuades him; with her smooth talk she compels him. 22 All at once he follows her, as an ox goes to the slaughter, or as a stag is caught fast 23 till an arrow pierces its entrails; as a bird rushes into a snare; he does not know that it will cost him his life. So 5:1 I come to my garden, my sister, my bride, I gather my myrrh with my spice, I eat my honeycomb with my honey, I drink my wine with my milk. Eat, friends, and drink: drink deeply, lovers! [Oral sex?] Isa 66:11 that you may suck [It's titty-time] and be satisfied with her consoling breasts; that you may drink deeply with delight from the abundance of her glory." Phm 1:13 I would have been glad to keep him with me, in order that he might serve me on your behalf during my imprisonment for the gospel; Phm 1:14 but I preferred to do nothing without your consent in order that your goodness might not be by compulsion but of your own free will. [ When a modestly-dressed woman says "No!" - she means: NO. ] CAN a child be coerced or bribed or enticed to engage in fellatio with one of their own age group, or an adult? CAN a child be coerced or bribed or enticed to engage in genital penetration from an aroused adult with turgid penis? Of course . . . but - honestly - the kid will NOT appreciate it in the sense of himself sensing any erotic gratification. What he will feel is both perplexed confusion, maybe some uncomfortable and unpleasant pain, guilt and shame, and inner resentment. SHOULD pics and vids of such probably-non-marital fornication or adultery be available on the internet? Sean Hannity of FOX adamently does not think so, nor does Chris Hansen of Dateline: To Catch a Predator. Even XXX porn purveyors on the web state a disclaimer that even they will not show nor tolerate child porn, and both federal and state statutes are concordant with that assessment. NAMBLA (North American Boy-Love Association), as similar groups, of course, see nothing wrong in engaging children into kid or adult sex, photographically recording scenes of such, viewing, and lusting over them. And, one wonders, simply from the titillation perspective, why not display kids having feigned sex with each other, or even actual sex with adults . . . if copious amounts of billion-dollar-a-year-industry pics and vids of adult-with-adult XXX sex are already "legally" rife and reeking on the internet? Jer 6:15 "Were they ashamed when they committed abomination? No, they were not at all ashamed; they did not know how to blush. Therefore they shall fall among those who fall; at the time that I punish them, they shall be overthrown," says the LORD. Jer 8:12 "Were they ashamed when they committed abomination? No, they were not at all ashamed; they did not know how to blush. Therefore they shall fall among the fallen; when I punish them, they shall be overthrown," says the LORD. Eze 16:30 "How lovesick is your heart," says the Lord GOD, "seeing you did all these things, the deeds of a brazen harlot." Eph 5:12 For it is a shame even to speak of the things that they do in secret . . . Reasons against portraying typical adult sex on the web are plentious and graphically-explicit-enough throughout the Holy Bible, and dissertation mentioned above is even more evident for certainly not forcing nor coercing (nor even bribing nor gently coaxing) impressionable children into involuntary fornication, adultery, and sodomy.' Ps 101:3 I will not set before my eyes anything that is base. I hate the work of those who fall away; it shall not cleave to me. Jer 5:7 "How can I pardon you? Your children have rejected me, and have sworn by those who are no gods. When I fed them to the full, they committed adultery and trooped to the houses of harlots. Jer 29:23 because they have committed folly in Israel, they have committed adultery with their neighbors' wives, and they have spoken in my name lying words which I did not command them. I am the one who knows, and I am witness," says the LORD. Mt 5:28 But I say to you that every one who looks at a woman lustfully has already committed adultery with her in his heart. Eph 5:3 But fornication and all [porno]-impurity or covetousness must not even be [suggested] among you, as is fitting among saints. Eph 5:5 Be sure of this, that no fornicator or [porno]-impure man, or one who is covetous (that is, a [porno]- idolater), has any inheritance in the kingdom of Christ and of God. ************************************************************** Personal salvation freely comes from Christ Jesus only, whose gracious gift to those who believe that, and obey His words, is justifying faith and works for Him first, then also those who belong to Him.
Paul Williamson: lest we forget : Only a virtuous people are capable of freedom. As nations become corrupt and vicious, they have more need of masters.”—Benjamin Franklin When Alexis de Tocqueville visited the United States in the 1830s, the scene the European encountered was confusing to him. The politicians prayed, the pastors were willing to preach on politics from a Biblical viewpoint, and neither group tried to exert control over the other. They were symbiotic, and as a result, the nation was good. The people were virtuous, and the standards of society, and in the body politic, were largely followed.In Britain the Church of England, with the king set up as head of the church, dominated the society, dictating the interests of the church, and the demands of the king, with an iron fist. In France, after the French Revolution, the Jacobins strove for a more secular society, where government disallowed the church to have any involvement in the body politic, in an attempt to keep any vestige of religious worship inside the four walls of the church. The result was chaos, out of control statism, and a suppression of religious freedoms. In many of the other European nations the Catholic Church exerted control, being overly influential in the workings of the nation. In the Barbary States of North Africa religion and the state were one and the same. Islam ran their governments through the strict decision making of the religious leaders, through a tyrannical authoritarian system that demanded compliance not only for the sake of their society, but as a requirement of salvation. Each system governed using extreme agendas. Either the government ruled over the people and their religion, the religion ruled over society and the system of governance, or the two were merged into one authoritarian system. America limited the federal government through the chains of the U.S. Constitution, reining in the powers of the governmental system to only those necessary to protect, promote, and preserve the union. All other authorities were reserved to the States. Religion, though not a controlling factor as it was in the European nations where Catholicism or The Church of England dominated people’s lives, was a very important part of the American experiment. Each session of Congress began with a prayer. A holiday of thanksgiving to The Lord had been established. The politicians even campaigned on their religious views as moral individuals. The laws of the United States found their foundation in the Ten Commandments. The people believed that the United States had been conceived through divine providence, and the government was expected to keep its hands off the people’s God-given rights. Yet, there was no religious litmus test allowed. One could be a member of any religion, or of no religion at all, and serve in the halls of government. Benjamin Franklin commented that Freedom was only possible through a virtuous people. John Adams commented that, “Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.” Ronald Reagan during the late twentieth century indicated that “Freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction.” These men understood that a people must remain virtuous to hold on to liberty, and they must fight to maintain that moral structure. Our moral and virtuous nature as a nation has been dwindling, and that fact became evident as we watched the events surrounding the Occupy Wall Street movement unfold. The Obama administration desired an answer to the TEA Party, and they thought that the Occupy Movement was it. The Democrat Party, and much of the media, embraced the occupiers, but it didn’t take long to see how unlike the TEA Party this new movement for change truly was. While the TEA Party respected local authorities, and left their event locations cleaner than they had been when the rally-goers arrived, the Occupy Movement was a stark contrast. The unwillingness of the authorities to stop the disruptions of people’s lives by the occupiers through trespassing, vandalism, and violence left people believing that somehow, because of their liberal left leanings, the Occupy crowd was getting preferential treatment. Such immunity for a group claiming to represent 99 percent of the population, when indeed they didn’t, was unprecedented, and it seemed as if they could get away with just about any ridiculous action against normal legal standards. The immoral activities of the occupiers, and their cry for democracy, a system the Founding Fathers proclaimed was dangerous and short-lived, revealed to us how serious our downward spiral into moral declivity truly was. The movement was a mob, calling for mob rule. The democrats welcomed such a concept. If you can’t beat your opposition through ideas and policies, perhaps they could silence their conservative counterparts through being loud and violent. Statism has not been able to break through America’s moral standards. The democrats want a system very different from what was created in the Constitutional Convention, regardless of the vote of the people, regardless of the rule of law as set forth by the United States Constitution, and regardless of any standards in place be they by law, or morality. In San Francisco, when the Occupy Movement mob smashed the plate-glass window of a small business shop, the owner put up some plywood to replace the glass, and the mob wrote graffiti on his plywood. The consequences? None for the mob, but a citation for the shop owner for not removing the graffiti. This is what our system is becoming. We are rewarding the immoral, the violent, and those that wish to destroy America as founded. It is up to us to uphold America’s standards, and not allow this kind of madness to happen. After all, our rights, our standards, and the philosophies in the U.S. Constitution are nothing more than ideas, and ink on paper, if we don’t fight for them. The authorities cannot maintain law and order without our support. The body politic will not follow the standards unless we are willing to follow our own standards, and then hold the politicians accountable for following theirs. If we abandon our standards, the government ignores their standards, and the law enforcement agencies begin to look the other way when people like those in the Occupy Movement take a crap on a police car, or vandalize private property, then we are welcoming a one way path into a world of lawlessness and barbarism. The American standards of decency and virtuous behavior begin at home, with the parents, in the family unit, of whom the rapidly growing governmental system mocks, and strives to destroy. Virtue and morality is an intangible nature of a civilization, without which the tangibles fail to function properly, and the structure of government, and society, crumbles. When standards deteriorate, disorder follows. Tyranny rises. Authoritarianism takes advantage of the society. Government will try to force religious organizations to go against their moral standards, such as the recent story where a bill is in the works to force churches to conduct gay weddings. Regardless of whether or not a group thinks that homosexuality has been justified, is it a part of America’s system of liberty for that group to force organizations to perform their ceremonies, even if the religious organization disagrees on moral grounds? Should one group be able to force another to literally change the definition of language in regards to the definition of marriage? Is this not an example the government taking an authoritarian stance against morality? The NAACP recently announced they support gay marriage. Obama recently announced he’s evolved to a point where he supports gay marriage. Has anyone asked why? Could it be because they believe that the immoral lifestyle of homosexuality is a natural part of society? Or is Obama saying such for the purpose of gaining votes? Is the NAACP doing so to try to convince the black vote, which in the case of Proposition 8 in California voted overwhelmingly to support the definition of marriage being as between a man and a woman, that it is now the black thing to do to change their moral standards to that of supporting sexual perversion? Those that wish to challenge America’s moral standards are even beginning to stage fake hate crimes in order to try and advance their agenda, as in the case of a lesbian couple in Parker, Colorado, who spray painted “Kill the Gay” on their garage door in the hopes of pinning it on those that dare to think unfavorably regarding their choice of lifestyle. The next day, the lesbians told local authorities they found a noose hanging on the handle of their front door. The women told officers investigating the incident they believed it was a retaliation from their neighbors and homeowner’s association, who had complained the couple did not pick up after their dogs. For their crime of staging the incidents, which was discovered after an investigation that included the FBI, the women have been charged with criminal mischief, false reporting, and one of them with an additional charge of forgery. Those who wish to destroy morality, America as founded, religious institutions, like marriage and religion, have stooped to any level they feel necessary to accomplish their goals. To stop the dwindling of America’s standards, we must be pro-active, and be actively involved in conserving the standards that were so integral in the prosperity of this nation over the last two hundred plus years. Be it the violent protesters in Chicago acting in a defiant manner to societal standards and law enforcement, to ridiculous attempts to silence the opposition, as in the case of the student being told by a teacher that he could be arrested for criticizing Obama, the downward spiral is evidently in high gear. When a society deteriorates to the point that moral standards are seen as mere guidelines, and simply the ranting of ancient fools that one may ignore, the political structure follows suit. As we fail to follow the standards set forth regarding moral and virtuous behavior, so will the body politic fail to follow the standards set forth regarding their authorities and behavior as provided in the United States Constitution. Stopping all of this is in our hands. It is up to us to fight for America’s standards of morality and freedom. America’s greatness lives and dies based on our willingness to defend her. If we fail to defend our standards, a tyranny will rise in its place.
Alan Schlar: ALAN SCHLAR FOR CONGRESS 949-891-4522 Why are you running? Washington is broke, special interest and lobbyist run Washington. People first, not politics is one of many issues facing this great country. Partisan politics is destroying this country. For the first time in 70 years the United State of America’s credit rating has been lowered from AAA to AA+. Partisan politics is main reason this embarrassing situation took place. These so called patriots put partisan politics and special interests first. This is why Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger was smart and gave California, Proposition 14, California's brand new open election law. I am happy and proud to be the first candidate in a new party and new Congressional District 48. NPP no party preference is 352,000 voters in orange county and 96,000 voters are unhappy with the two party system. I believe Dana Rohabacher and the federal government has grown out of control and out of touch with the American People. Dana Rohabacher has been in Congress since 1989. We must have term limits on members of Congress. It should be illegal (Felony) to go from serving in Congress to becoming a lobbyists and working for special interest groups. WASHINGTON WILL NOT LISTEN, BUT I WILL. The backbone of this great country is the middle class and it’s being pushed to extinction by being ignored. I am not a politician I'm just average citizen fed up with partisan politics, lobbyist and special interest, over spending, crushing taxation and regulation on business, 16 trillion debt, No energy plan, bailouts and corruption. I Alan Schlar believe that ethics should be a serious issue debated. I feel that ethics is one reason people just don’t trust government. Code of Ethics for Government Officials Adopted July 11 1958. Resolved by the House of Representatives {the Senate concurring}, “That it is the sense of the Congress that the Code of Ethics should be adhered to by all Government employees, including officeholders.” I Alan Schlar pledge to uphold the code of Ethics for government officials Adopted July,11, 1958. Adopted July 11, 1958 Code of Ethics for U.S. Government Service Resolved by the House of Representatives {the Senate concurring}, That it is the sense of the Congress that the following Code of Ethics should be adhered to by all Government employees, including officeholders. CODE OF ETHICS FOR GOVERNMENT SERVICE Any person in Government service should: 1. Put loyalty to the highest moral principles and to country above loyalty to Government persons, party, or department. 2. Uphold the Constitution, laws, and legal regulations of the United States and of all governments therein and never be a party to their evasion. 3. Give a full day's labor for a full day's pay; giving to the performance of his duties his earnest effort and best thought. 4. Seek to find and employ more efficient and economical ways of getting tasks accomplished. 5. Never discriminate unfairly by the dispensing of special favors or privileges to anyone, whether for remuneration or not; and never accept for himself or his family, favors or benefits under circumstances which might be construed by reasonable persons as influencing the performance of his governmental duties. 6. Make no private promises of any kind binding upon the duties of office, since a Government employee has no private word which can be binding on public duty. 7. Engage in no business with the Government, either directly or indirectly which is inconsistent with the conscientious performance of his governmental duties. 8. Never use any information coming to him confidentially in the performance of governmental duties as a means for making private profit. 9. Expose corruption wherever discovered. 10. Uphold these principles, ever conscious that public office is a public trust I'm a marketing and sales executive with over 25 years of fixing complex problems. I am running for congress because of the bloated size of the federal government is threatening rights, liberties, and the property of the American people. With your support we can take back America from the special interest and lobbyist, who now run Washington. On June 5th Please vote for ALAN SCHLAR for Congress. VOTE FOR REAL CHANGE, VOTE FOR NPP. What makes you the person for the job? I have a very serious plan and will briefly highlight this plan. Let’s put America back to work. Tax cut plan: Middle Class cut: It's time we adjust the Bush Tax Cuts and gear them to help main street (common people) which have been hit hard by the great recession, unemployment, and foreclosure fraud. It's time we take away tax breaks for the rich and the few and start helping State, County, and local governments; create jobs by expanding economic development matching funds through block grants. It's time to offer early retirement to federal employees, shrink the vast size of the federal workforce, and take that money directly to the states. We must focus on giving state and local governments complete control through comprehensive state rights legislation. Business tax cut: " NEW BLOOD"FRESH IDEAS” Let’s put America back to work. Lower the federal corporate rate to 18% flat. Let's jump start manufacturing by offering 0 percent rate so we can have the incentives to say to business, move the jobs back and we will help you. It’s time we create a lean mean economic development plan that rewards companies for bringing jobs back to the USA and penalizes companies that export jobs. We must have a balanced budget amendment to force Washington to make tough decisions. We must end corporate welfare. The United States is $16 trillion in debt; we are broke and must spend like it. We must take all the money we save and have a very aggressive incentive program that will help subsidized, bringing companies back to the USA. The Chinese unfairly specialize in subsidizing Chinese businesses. The United States must do the same and tell the Chinese by creating a lean mean economic development machine. It's time we play hard ball with the Chinese. We have a $312 billion trade deficit with Chinese. We must stop Chinese aggression; A great way to do this and create lots of new jobs is too sell billions of dollars of the newest military technology, Fighter jets, tanks and ships to Taiwan and Japan. We must repeal the entire cap and trade legislation that is killing thousands of jobs. We must repeal and put an end to the job killing regulations that cost over a trillion dollars according to the SBA (small business administration). Right now a huge problem is small business can’t get any money to expand and grow . The federal government bailed out the banks, Wall Street, and forgot to have an incentive and loan plan to help small business that will create jobs. The Alan plan, is a comprehensive plan to create a level playing field and will lower the cost of doing business in the USA. The Mark Cuban plan is a great idea that I support. I will work hard at bringing jobs back to the USA and the state of California. ( http://blogmaverick.com/2011/08/10/an-idea-for-the-economy-that-will-freak-out-a-lot-of-people-but-could-be-fun-to-discuss/) We must start a new federal website that will ask companies, “What do you need and how much money do you require to grow your company? How many jobs can you create with the amount of money that you are requesting? How many jobs can we bring back to this great nation if we can get rid of all the red tape and expensive regulation? "NEW BLOOD" FRESH IDEAS We must fix Social Security and Medicare so our seniors and disabled citizens don’t have to worry. Here are the two main components that will help bring jobs back by lowering the cost of doing business in the USA. Remove the Social Security earnings cap now at $108,000. This will be the largest middle class cut and the largest business tax cut in the history of the USA. President Obama is stealing from the social security trust fund by giving a temporary 93 billion tax cut from the trust fund with no way to pay for this. This plan is shortening and threatening solvency of social security, because the $93 billion is not being paid back to the fund. Our seniors and disabled could see funds running out faster unless we have major reform, which I support. The Social Security tax normally at 6.2% from wage earners and matched by business at 6.2% that cap is a huge break for the rich. Example: A CEO of one of the banks which taxpayers just bailed out, is 7 million dollars a year. However he is only paying social security tax up to the cap, $108,000. The 6.9 million, left, is untaxed for social security. Remove the cap and trillions of new dollars will appear in the social security trust fund; helping the disabled and elderly. The Alan Plan is going to lower the social security tax to 3% from the 6.2 and 3% for business. This will lower the cost of owning business significantly. This will be great news for the disabled and seniors, because now we’ve secured the future of social security. Another huge expense for business is medical insurance. The Alan plan is in favor of repealing Obama Care and the largest federal entitlement passed in the last 20 years, medicare part D. Republicans created an entirely new Medicare program, Part D, that pays for prescription drugs, and didn’t finance a penny of it with spending cuts or tax increases; it all went on the national credit card. Funny, in 2003 almost every Republican including Dana Rohabacher and Paul Ryan voted for this $100 billion entitlement. This is big government, republicans, hard at work. I am in favor and will work hard for a single payer medical insurance plan a hybrid version of the Canada, Australia, and Taiwan’s, single-payer health insurance system. This would save business billions of dollars because the insurance is not paid by the company you work for it’s paid by a national sales tax. Medical insurance needs to stay with the customer. The problem with the old system was it was a huge cost for businesses and the customer would lose the insurance if terminated from the employer. With my plan, by time you get out of high school and start working; if you lose your job, your medical insurance follows you and you have the same doctors and keep the insurance. Also under this plan, business expenses will be lowered with no more huge medical insurance expenditures charged to businesses. As a representative, I can go to many corporations and say, “We have lowered the cost of doing business in the USA by huge amounts. What do you need to bring jobs back to America?” The results will be huge reduction of unemployment in the next 5 years, starting in 2013. What we need is a marketing and sales executive who loves to negotiate and conduct negotiations with corporations in the US and overseas. The United State’s business climate will become highly competitive. Operating cost will fall to very low levels. This will put an end to the current job killing regulations that has been starving this nation of job creation. I Alan Schlar Pledge to work hard at bringing corporations and jobs back to ORANGE COUNTY, the Great State of California, and the United States. With your support and vote on June 5th we can have great debate on the plans and ideas I have talked about, and challenge Congressmen Rohabacher to outline his plan with specifics, for the future growth of Orange County and the state of California. The National debt is a huge problem that must be fixed now, not in 20 years. 16 Trillion in debt. I have a plan that will pay down the debt in 8 years. This plan will get our credit rating back much faster. Very tough and painful budgetary decisions need to be made. Starting in 2013 we take spending levels back to 2.8 trillion dollars. (2007 spending levels) For 8 years we only raise the budget 1%. Medicare as we now it will merge with a one payer national health care system that will save hundreds of billions of dollars. We provide a middle class tax cut and raise taxes on the rich. We fix Social Security by eliminating the cap now at $108,000. With all the new jobs being created revenue will be going up. We must continue on that frugal path for 8 years. Starting in 2014 The USA pays 1 trillion off the debt for 8 straight years. Straight talk is needed to all federal employees. Major pay cuts and benefits package reductions may be necessary. Major work furlough and 4 day work week may have to become reality till we fix this problem. I am ready to roll up my sleeve and help make those tuff decisions. If elected, what would be your priority? Creating a lean mean economic plan that brings good jobs back to Orange County and the great state of California. Energy plan I support the Pickens plan. There are several pillars to the Pickens Plan: http://www.pickensplan.com/theplan • Build the keystone pipeline now before the Chinese make a deal and get it moved to the west coast of Canada. • Use America’s abundant natural gas to replace imported oil as a transportation fuel; • Build a 21st century backbone electrical transmission grid; • Develop renewable energy sources, such as wind and solar power; and, • Provide incentives to homeowners and the owners of commercial buildings to upgrade their insulation and increase efficiency. While dependence on OPEC oil is a critical concern, it is not a problem that can be solved in isolation. Americans must begin to think about energy as a whole, and that begins by considering our energy alternatives and thinking about how we will fuel our world in the next 10 to 20 years and beyond. Balance the budget and work with State, County and Local governments to help bring business to our District. End cap and trade and all the job killing regulations. Paying the debt down in 8 years Single payer medical insurance plan Tort reform Special dream of job creating I Alan Schlar have a very special vision. The US Government sells seal beach Naval weapons station seal beach all or part of the base. I Alan Schlar pledge to work hard at creating the largest ship manufacturing and industrial complex in the western United States. We have one of the largest ship building corporations right here in Los Angeles, Northrop Grumman. I look forward to the challenge of bringing auto manufacturing to the Seal Beach industrial complex that I have a vision for. If we can play hard ball with the Chinese and make them open up exports of us made automobiles in exchange for paying our debt much faster or because of the 300 plus billion trade deficit. I vision a huge amount of good jobs being created for export because of all the hard work we have done to make America much more competitive through all the operational cost cutting the US government has done from the plan above. You're running against a long-time incumbent, do you really think you'll have a chance election day to take the seat? I have an actual plan that includes tough ethics, paying down the debt, fixing social security, turning the USA into a job creating machine by lowering the cost of doing business here in the USA Giving the USA a competitive advantage ,single payer insurance, a special vision for Seal Beach and the state of CA. I am just an average guy with a dream of public service. I have the heart and desire of service excellence in the public sector and have no doubt that I can beat Congressman Rohabacher and look forward to many debates. My plan that I briefly laid out will be articulated many times more when I get to the general election. ALAN SCHLAR FOR CONGRESS 949-891-4522
IPlains Iplains: Creating hits and traffic to websites It is the goal of any website to get traffic to the site, to be seen. In the case of creating traffic for a business website it is literally a case of have traffic or have your business die.If you create a new site your chance of having a visitor just stumble on your site is about the same as winning the lottery.If your generating a page for general interest or fun without traffic your goals are not met.Google has about 8 billion pages indexed on the net and its growing everyday. The following are some of the most common methods.One of the problems is the internet is now so huge that there are more pages on the internet than people on the planet.How can you get hits and a flow of traffic to your solitary page?It doesn't matter if you have the best website, with great content, fantastic pictures, audio, video and a multimedia experience better than Disneyland, if no one comes it is for naught. The internet is not like field of dreams "if you build it they will come", no they won't.How then do we change the game so people can at least appreciate the work put into a website, or in the case of a business or affiliate website visit to make a decision to buy? Search Engine optimization Basically this means you optimize your pages with the right keywords in the right places so that the search engines index your page as having great CONTENT in relation to key search words.The internet is no different, gossip is one of the most popular topics)wonder why there are so many gossip magazines?All is not lost, it is possible still to create a niche website and get rated in the first page e.One a blog and the other an article, probably a boring topic for most people but for gardeners a nice niche topic.If you were to create a new website about one of these people thinking hey I will get some of that traffic for myself - I'll do an Oprah Winfrey site, content rich, etc your chance of getting to the top is practically nil, why, firstly because you have 1000's to millions of competitors and your chance of being optimized not only with great content but with relevant links and relevant links with the important keywords will be nil as well.Remember though the more competitive the keywords the harder this will be to achieve.In summary one of the first methods of traffic generation is to have a site geared to keywords and content that will draw in search engine traffic.I am rated number two and three (at least at the time of writing this article, remember nothing stays still on the net)The simple fact of the matter is that your chance of being on page one of the most popular search terms is next to nil.You will find thanks to the American domination of the internet that the most popular searched keywords tend to be American personalities, like Oprah Winfrey, Paris Hilton, Britney Spears, etc.Some companies specialize in generating rich content and links from other like rich content sites targeted to high rating keywords and charge big money for the privilege 50,000, etc, why? Its not a university degree on the subject but the basics on the subject and it rates high because the site's content strongly matches the search phase vegetable gardening on hard clay, type in gardening or vegetables though and the site is lost from the radar. Ad words Firstly it brings targeted traffic to your site.However I know of businesses that survive on Google ad words alone for advertising and make a very good turnover on their business products so it works well for them.Not much point in advertising your English content site in Mongolia, firstly because not many mongols speak English, but secondly because not many have internet access either.Advantage of this method is you are guaranteed traffic - disadvantage - its costs and takes time to tweak your ads so they work at maximum efficiency.Yahoo, Google, etc sell advertising space.But one again the greater demand for the keyword, the greater the number of competitors there are. Another method of traffic generation is to buy it.Obviously the target audience is further limited by language.The advantage of targeted traffic is these people are looking for your exact topic and thus more likely to stay on your site and it results in higher conversion rates.To explain this further, Google will lower your cost of your clicks and even raise you in the list if more people are clicking through - its says it is rewarding you for having a relevant site - the truth though is its rewarding you for having a great ad that people want to click on. If your paying money for advertising on the internet make sure you are reaching the right audience for your ad.In the case of Google ad words you can pay to have you site on the first page but this can be an expensive proposition, 1 or more a click, to mere pennies.There is one way to can cut this disadvantage down though, choose to limit your target audience to a particular country, region or even city.Why do people choose this method.The problem is although Google says its rewards content rich sites with lower click costs the truth is the better ad wins, not necessarily the better or most relevant site. Longer term methods. I call these longer term methods because they require a greater work on your part, however they can result in great traffic results. One of these is article writing. Articles submitted to articles sites like go articles, article fever, etc act as a magnet for search engines. Content rich and quality controlled if you get an article listed in one of these forums/ libraries you have the ability to have a constant stream of traffic through attached links. Why do you think I've written this article. To generate traffic. Yes I like helping and educating others and I do create not for profit websites and articles but most are to generate traffic. Another long term method is to contact and link to other similar sites. You can do this by requesting other webmasters to do this or create you own sites and link them to one another. Another long term method is to create an op-in e-mail list and encourage people from you list to visit your 'great' site with your 'unbelievable' offer. Creating a blog like this doesn't hurt either. In summary I don't reccommend any method over any other. Each has advantages and disadvantages. It can depend on what you are advertising. On the whole though I don't think you can go wrong if you do all the above methods as a wholistic internet campaign. If you do over time your internet presence will increase as will your total traffic.
Mandla ThejustmanoftheLord Blose: Book of Malachi, Malachias {mal' - uh - ky} (Hebrew Mál'akhî) General Information Malachi is the last of the 12 books of the Minor Prophets in the Old Testament of the Bible. Malachi means "my messenger" in Hebrew, and few scholars believe that it is the actual name of the prophet. The prophet's themes include the ritual purity of sacrifices, the evils of mixed marriages and divorce, and the coming day of judgment. The book, consisting of six oracles, is believed to have been written after the reconstruction of the Temple (516 BC) and before the reforms of Ezra and Nehemiah (c. 450 BC). BELIEVE Religious Information Source web-site BELIEVE Religious Information Source - By Alphabet Our List of 2,300 Religious Subjects E-mail Book of Malachi, Malachias Brief Outline 1.Sins of the Priests (1:1-2:9) 2.Sins of the people (2:10-4:1) 3.Coming of the Son of Righteousness (4:2-6) Malachi Advanced Information Malachi, messenger or angel, the last of the minor prophets, and the writer of the last book of the Old Testament canon (Mal. 4:4, 5, 6). Nothing is known of him beyond what is contained in his book of prophecies. Some have supposed that the name is simply a title descriptive of his character as a messenger of Jehovah, and not a proper name. There is reason, however, to conclude that Malachi was the ordinary name of the prophet. He was contemporary with Nehemiah (comp. Mal. 2:8 with Neh. 13:15; Mal. 2:10-16 with Neh. 13:23). No allusion is made to him by Ezra, and he does not mention the restoration of the temple, and hence it is inferred that he prophesied after Haggai and Zechariah, and when the temple services were still in existence (Mal. 1:10; 3:1, 10). It is probable that he delivered his prophecies about B.C. 420, after the second return of Nehemiah from Persia (Neh. 13:6), or possibly before his return. (Easton Illustrated Dictionary) Prophecies of Malachi Advanced Information The contents of the book are comprised in four chapters. In the Hebrew text the third and fourth chapters (of the A.V.) form but one. The whole consists of three sections, preceded by an introduction (Mal. 1:1-5), in which the prophet reminds Israel of Jehovah's love to them. The first section (1:6-2:9) contains a stern rebuke addressed to the priests who had despised the name of Jehovah, and been leaders in a departure from his worship and from the covenant, and for their partiality in administering the law. In the second (2:9-16) the people are rebuked for their intermarriages with idolatrous heathen. In the third (2:17-4:6) he addresses the people as a whole, and warns them of the coming of the God of judgment, preceded by the advent of the Messiah. This book is frequently referred to in the New Testament (Matt. 11:10; 17:12; Mark 1:2; 9:11, 12; Luke 1:17; Rom. 9:13). (Easton Illustrated Dictionary) Prophecies of Malachi From: Home Bible Study Commentary by James M. Gray This book is a continuous discourse, so that, properly speaking, there are no intervening events. The prophet is a contemporary of Nehemiah, following closely Zechariah and Haggai. The evidence of this is chiefly internal and gathered from two facts: (1) That the second temple was evidently in existence at the time, and (2) That the evils condemned by Nehemiah are those which he also condemns. This will appear as we proceed, but compare Malachi 1:7, 8; 2:11-16; 3:8-10 with the last chapter of Nehemiah, especially verses 10-14, 23-29. Following an outline by Willis J. Beecher, we have: The Introduction 1:1-5 What word in verse 1 indicates that the message, or messages, are in the nature of rebuke rather than comfort? With what declaration does verse 3 begin? While Jehovah thus declares Himself towards His Israel, how do they receive it? This skeptical insinuation in the interrogation, "Wherein hast thou loved us?" is a peculiarity of the book, and shows the people to have been in a bad spiritual frame, calculated to give birth to the practical sins enumerated later. Be careful not to read a wrong meaning into that reference to Esau, as though God caused him to be born simply to have an object on which He might exercise His hate, or as if that hate condemned the individual Esau to misery in this life and eternal torment beyond. The hate of Esau as an individual is simply set over against the choice of Jacob as the heir to the promised seed of Abraham. Esau did not inherit that promise, the blessing to the world did not come down in his line, but that of his brother Jacob, and yet Esau himself had a prosperous life; nor are we driven to the conclusion by anything the Bible says that he was eternally lost. Moreover, the particular reference is not so much to Esau as a man as to the national descendants of Esau, the Edomites, who had not only been carried into captivity as Israel had been, but whose efforts to rebuild their waste places would not be successful as in the case of Israel, because the divine purposes of grace lay in another direction. The Second Division 1:6-3:4 consists of an address to the priests and Levites, more especially the former, in which they are charged with three kinds of offenses. The first is neglect of their temple duties, see chapter 1:6-2:9. The character of the offense is seen in verses 7 and 8, and 12 and 13 of chapter 1, while the punishment in the event of impenitence is in chapter 2:1-9. The second offense concerns unholy marriages, verses 10-16 of chapter 2. It was for this sin as well as the preceding one that Jehovah refused to accept their offerings (13, 14). Notice the strong argument against divorce found in verse 15. God made one wife for one man at the beginning though He had the power to make more, and He did this because of the godly seed He desired. The third offense is that of skepticism, and as Beecher calls it, a bad skepticism, for there is a species of doubt which deserves compassionate treatment and which cannot be called evil in its spirit and motive. That, however, is hardly the kind of doubt now under consideration (See chapter 2:17). This division closes, as does the division following, by a prediction "concerning a day in which the obedient and disobedient shall be differentiated and rewarded." This "day" we have often recognized as the "day of the Lord" still in the future both for Israel and the Gentile nations (3:1-4). Notice the partial fulfillment of verse 1 in the career of John the Baptist, as indicated in the words and context of Matthew 11:10; Mark 1:2; Luke 1: 76. But the concluding verses of the prediction show that a complete fulfillment must be ahead. The offering of Judah and Jerusalem has not yet been so purified by divine judgments as to be pleasant unto the Lord as in the days of old, but it shall yet come to pass. The Third Division 3:5-4:3 consists of an address to the people as a whole, who like the priests, are charged with three kinds of offenses. The first is certain public wrongs in which are grouped false swearing, adultery, oppression and injustice (3:5-7). The second is the failure to support the temple and its ministers (3:8-12), in which case notice the charge of divine robbery, and the blessing promised to faithfulness in tithes. The third is the same kind of skepticism as with the priests (3:13-15). The prediction concluding this section covers verses 3:16-4:3, and is more comforting in character than the preceding one. The Fourth Division 4:4-6 is a grand conclusion in which the great day of the Lord is once more referred to, and Elijah the prophet named as His forerunner. We learn from Matt. 11: 14, Mark 9:11 and Luke 1:17 that John the Baptist is to be considered the type of this forerunner, but that Elijah is to come again to this earth is the opinion of many. There are those who believe that he and Moses are the two witnesses in Revelation 11 that shall do wonders in Jerusalem during the reign of the Antichrist. Questions 1. What is the peculiarity of this book? 2. Give the proof that Malachi is contemporary with Nehemiah. 3. How do you explain God's "hatred" of Esau? 4. What argument against divorce is found here? 5. How do some interpret the prediction about Elijah? Malachias (Malachi) Catholic Information (Hebrew Mál'akhî), one of the twelve minor prophets. I. PERSONAGE AND NAME It is the last book of the collection of the twelve Minor Prophets which is inscribed with the name of Malachias. As a result, the author has long been regarded as the last of the canonical prophets of the Old Testament. All that is known of him, however, is summed up in the tenor of his preaching and the approximate period of his ministry. The Jewish schools identified him quite early with the scribe Esdras. This identification, which is without historical value and is based according to St. Jerome on an interpretation given to Mal., ii, 7, was at first probably suggested by the tradition which beheld in Esdras the intermediary between the prophets and the "great synagogue", whose foundation was attributed to him and to which he was considered to have transmitted the deposit of doctrine handed down by the prophets (Pirqe Abhôth, I, 2). The position of intermediary fully belonged to Esdras on the hypothesis that he was the last of the prophets and the first member of the "great synagogue". The name Malachias figures at the head of the book in the Septuagint. The Alexandrine translator, however, did not understand Mal., i, 1, to contain the mention of the author's proper name; he translates the passage: "The word of the Lord by the hand of his Angel," so that he has evidently understood the Hebrew expression to be the common noun augmented by the suffix; he has, moreover, read Mál'akhô instead of Mál'akhî. We cannot say whether this reading and interpretation should not be considered as an effect of Jewish speculations concerning the identity of the author of the book with Esdras, or whether an interpretation of this kind was not at the foundation of the same speculation. However that may be, the interpretation of the Septuagint found an echo among the ancient Fathers and ecclesiastical writers, and even gave rise, especially among the disciples of Origen, to the strangest fancies. A large number of modern authors likewise refuse to see in Mál'akhî the proper name of the author. They point out that in Mal., iii, 1, the Lord announces: "Behold I send my angel (mál'akhî)...". According to them, it is from this passage that the name Mál'akhî was borrowed by a more recent author, who added the inscription to the book (i, 1). But, in the first place, this epithet Mál'akhî could not have the same value in i, 1, as in iii, 1, where it is the noun augmented by the suffix (my angel). For in i, 1, the Lord is spoken of in the third person, and one would expect the noun with the suffix of the third person, as in fact is given in the Septuagint (his angel). The messenger of the Lord is moreover announced in iii, 1, to arrive thereafter (cf. iv, 5; Hebrew text, iii, 23); consequently no one could have imagined that this same messenger was the author of the book. There would remain the hypothesis that Mál'akhî in i, 1, should be understood as a qualifying word signifying angelicus --- i.e. he who was concerned with the angel, who prophesied on the subject of the angel (iii, 1). This explanation, however, is too far-fetched. It is at least more probable that Mál'akhî in i, 1, should be understood as the proper name of the author, or as a title borne historically by him and equivalent to a proper name. We are no doubt in presence of an abbreviation of the name Mál'akhîyah, that is "Messenger of Yah". II. CONTENTS OF THE BOOK The Book of Malachias in the Hebrew comprises three chapters. In the Greek Bible and in the Vulgate in contains four, chapter iii, 19 sqq., of the Hebrew forming a separate chapter. The book is divided into two parts, the first extending from i, 2, to ii, 16, and the second from ii, 17, to the end. In the first the prophet first inveighs against the priests guilty of prevarication in their discharge of the sacrificial ritual, by offering defective victims (i, 6-ii, 4), and in their office of doctors of the Law (ii, 5-9). He then accuses the people in general, condemning the intestine divisions, the mixed marriages between Jews and Gentiles (ii, 10-12), and the abuse of divorce (ii, 13-16). The second part contains a discourse full of promise. To a first complaint concerning the impunity which the wicked enjoy (ii, 17), Yahweh replies that the Lord and the angel of the New Testament are about to come for the purpose of purifying the sons of Levi and the entire nation (iii, 1-5); if the people are faithful to their obligations, especially with respect to the tithes, they will be loaded with Divine blessings (iii, 6-12). To a second complaint concerning the afflictions that fall to the lot of the just, while the wicked succeed in everything (iii, 13), Yahweh gives answer that on the day of his justice the good will take a glorious revenge (iii, 14 sqq.). The book closes with a double epilogue; the first recalls the remembrance of Moses, and the laws promulgated on Mount Horeb (iv, 4; Hebrew text, iii, 22); the second announces the coming of Elias before the day of Yahweh (iv, 5-6; Heb., iii, 23-24). The unity of the book taken as a whole is unquestionable; but many critics consider as the addition of another hand either both the epilogues or at least the second. There is indeed no connexion between these passages and what goes before, but from this consideration alone no certain conclusion can be drawn. III. DATE OF COMPOSITION The opinion brought forward some time ago, that the book of Malachias was composed in the second century B. C., has received no support. Critics are practically agreed in dating the book from about the middle of the fifth century B. C. The text itself does not furnish any explicit information, but many indications are in favour of the assigned date: (a) mention of the Peha (i, 8), as the political head of the people takes us back to the Persian period; the title of Peha was indeed that borne by the Persian governor especially at Jerusalem (Haggai 1:1; Ezra 5:14; Nehemiah 5:14-15); (b) the book was not composed during the first years that followed the return from the Babylonian captivity, because not only the Temple exists, but relaxation in the exercise of worship already prevails (Malachi 1:6 sqq.); (c) on the other hand it is hardly probable that the discourses of Malachias are of later date than Nehemias. In the great assembly which was held during the first sojourn of Nehemias at Jerusalem, among other engagements, the people had taken that of paying the tithes regularly (Nehemiah 10:38), and history testifies that in this respect the adopted resolutions were faithfully carried out, although in the distribution of the tithes the Levites were unjustly treated (Nehemiah 13:5, 10, 13). Now Malachias complains not of the injustice of which the Levites were the object, but of the negligence on the part of the people themselves in the payment of the tithes (iii, 10). Again, Malachias does not regard mixed marriages as contrary to a positive engagement, like that which was taken under the direction of Nehemias (Nehemiah 10:30); he denounces them on account of their unhappy consequences and of the contempt which they imply for the Jewish nationality (Malachi 2:11, 12); (d) it is not even during the sojourn of Nehemias at Jerusalem that Malachias wrote his book. Nehemias was Peha, and he greatly insists upon his disinterestedness in the exercise of his functions, contrary to the practices of his predecessors (Nehemiah 5:14 sqq.); but Malachias gives us to understand that the Peha was severely exacting (i, 8); (e) The date of composition can only fall within some short time before the mission of Nehemias. The complaints and protestations to which this latter gives expression (Nehemiah 2:17; 4:4 sq.; 5:6, sqq., etc.) are like an echo of those recorded by Malachias (iii, 14, 15). The misfortune that weighted so heavily upon the people in the days of Malachias (iii, 9 sqq.) were still felt during those of Nehemias (Nehemiah 5:1 sqq.). Lastly and above all, the abuses condemned by Malachias, namely, the relaxation in religious worship, mixed marriages and the intestine divisions of which they were the cause (Malachi 2:10-12; cf. Nehemiah 6:18), the negligence in paying the tithes, were precisely the principal objects of the reforms undertaken by Nehemias (Nehemiah 10:31, 33, sqq., 10:38 sqq.). As the first mission of Nehemias falls in the twentieth year of Artaxerxes I (Nehemiah 2:1), that is in 445 B. C., it follows that the composition of the Book of Malachias may be placed about 450 B. C. IV. IMPORTANCE OF THE BOOK The importance lies (1) in the data which the book furnishes for the study of certain problems of criticism concerning the Old Testament, and (2) in the doctrine it contains. (1) For the study of the history of the Pentateuch, it is to be remarked that the Book of Malachias is directly connected with Deuteronomy, and not with any of those parts of the Pentateuch commonly designated under the name of priestly documents. Thus Mal., i, 8, where the prophet speaks of the animals unfit for sacrifice, brings to mind Deut., xv, 21, rather than Lev., xxii, 22 sq.; the passage in Mal., ii, 16, relating to divorce by reason of aversion, points to Deut., xxiv, 1. What is even more significant is that, in his manner of characterizing the Tribe of Levi and its relations with the priesthood, Malachias adopts the terminology of Deuteronomy; in speaking of the priests, he brings into evidence their origin not from Aaron but from Levi (ii, 4, 5 sqq.; iii, 3 sq.). Consequently, it would be an error to suppose that in this respect Deuteronomy represents a point of view which in the middle of the fifth century was no longer held. Let us add that the first of the two epilogues, with which the book concludes (iv, 4; Hebrew text, iii, 32), is likewise conceived in the spirit of Deuteronomy. The examination of the Book of Malachias may be brought to bear on the solution of the question as to whether the mission of Esdras, related in I Esd., vii-x, falls in the seventh year of Artaxerxes I (458 B. C.), that is to say, thirteen years before the first mission of Nehemias, or in the seventh year Artaxerxes II (398 B. C.), and therefore after Nehemias. Immediately after his arrival in Jerusalem, Esdras undertakes a radical reform of the abuse of mixed marriages, which are already considered contrary to a positive prohibition (Ezra 10). He tells us also that, supported by the authority of the King of Persia and with the co-operation of the governors beyond the river, he laboured with full success to give to religious worship all its splendour (Ezra 7:14, 15, 17, 20-8:36). And nothing whatever justifies the belief that the work of Esdras had but an ephemeral success, for in that case he would not in his own memoirs have related it with so much emphasis without one word of regret for the failure of his effort. Can data such as these be reconciled with the supposition that the state of affairs described by Malachias was the immediate outcome of the work of Esdras related in I Esd., vii-x? (2) In the doctrine of Malachias one notices with good reason as worthy of interest the attitude taken by the prophet on the subject of divorce (ii, 14-16). The passage in question is very obscure, but it appears in v. 16 that the prophet disapproves of the divorce tolerated by Deut., xxvi, 1, viz., for cause of aversion. The Messianic doctrine of Malachias especially appeals to our attention. In Mal. iii, 1, Yahweh announces that he will send his messenger to prepare the way before Him. In the second epilogue of the book (iv, 5, 6; Heb., text, iii, 23 sq.), this messenger is identified with the prophet Elias. Many passages in the New Testament categorically interpret this double prophecy by applying to John the Baptist, precursor of our Lord (Matthew 11:10, 14; 17:11-12; Mark 9:10 sqq.; Luke 1:17). The prophecy of Malachias, iii, 1, adds that, as soon as the messenger shall have prepared the way, "the Lord, whom you seek, and the angel of the testament, whom you desire," will come to His temple. The Lord is here identified with the angel of the testament; this is evident from the construction of the phrase and from the circumstance that the description of the mission of the angel of the testament (vv. 2 sq.) is continued by the Lord speaking of Himself in the first person in v. 5. A particularly famous passage is that of Mal., i, 10-11. In spite of a difficulty in the construction of the phrase, which can be avoided by vocalizing one word otherwise than the Massoretes have done (read miqtar, Sept. thymiama, instead of muqtar in verse 11), the literal sense is clear. The principal question is to know what is the sacrifice and pure offering spoken of in v. 11. A large number of non-Catholic exegetes interpret it of the sacrifices actually being offered from east to west at the time of Malachias himself. According to some, the prophet had in view the sacrifices offered in the name of Yahweh by the proselytes of the Jewish religion among all the nations of the earth; others are more inclined to the belief that he signifies the sacrifices offered by the Jews dispersed among the Gentiles. But in the fifth century B. C. neither the Jews dispersed among the Gentiles nor the proselytes were sufficiently numerous to justify the solemn utterances used by Malachias; the prophet clearly wants to insist on the universal diffusion of the sacrifice which he has in view. Hence others, following the example of Theodore of Mopsuestia, think they can explain the expression in v. 11 as referring to the sacrifices offered by the pagans to their own gods or to the Supreme God; those sacrifices would have been considered by Malachias as materially offered to Yahweh, because in fact Yahweh is the only true God. But it appears inconceivable that Yahweh should, by means of Malachias, have looked upon as "pure" and "offered to his name" the sacrifices offered by the Gentiles to this or that divinity; especially when one considers the great importance Malachias attaches to the ritual (i, 6 sqq., 12 sqq.; iii, 3 sq.) and the attitude he takes towards foreign peoples (i, 2 sqq.; ii, 11 sq.). The interpretation according to which chap. i, 11, concerns the sacrifices in vogue among the Gentiles at the epoch of Malachias himself fails to recognize that the sacrifice and the pure offering of v. 11 are looked upon as a new institution succeeding the sacrifices of the Temple, furnishing by their very nature a motive sufficient to close the doors of the house of God and extinguish the fire of the altar (v. 10). Consequently v. 11 must be considered as a Messianic prophecy. The universal diffusion of the worship of Yahweh is always proposed by the prophets as a characteristic sign of the Messianic reign. That the phrase is construed in the present tense only proves that here, as on other occasions, the prophetic vision contemplates its object absolutely without any regard to the events that should go before its accomplishment. It is true that Mal., iii, 3-4, says that after the coming of the angel of the testament the sons of Levi will offer sacrifices in justice, and that the sacrifice of Juda and Jerusalem will be pleasing to the Lord. But the new institutions of the Messianic reign might be considered, either inasmuch as they were the realization of the final stage in the development of those of the Old Testament (and in this case they would naturally be described by the help of the images borrowed from the latter), or inasmuch as they implied the cessation of those of the Old Testament in their proper form. In Mal., iii, 3-4, the religious institutions of the Messianic reign are considered from the former point of view, because the language is consolatory; in Mal, i, 10, 11, they are considered from the latter point of view, because the language here is menacing. Certain authors, while admitting the Messianic character of the passage, think that it should be interpreted not of a sacrifice in the strict sense of the word, but of a purely spiritual form of devotion. However, the terms employed in v. 11 express the idea of a sacrifice in the strict sense. Moreover, according to the context, the censured sacrifices were not considered impure in their quality of material sacrifices, but on account of the defects with which the victims were affected; it is consequently not on account of an opposition to material sacrifices that the offering spoken of in v. 11 is pure. It is an altogether different question whether or not the text of Malachias alone permits one to determine in a certain measure the exact form of the new sacrifice. A large number of Catholic exegetes believe themselves justified in concluding, from the use of the term minhah in v. 11, that the prophet desired formally to signify an unbloody sacrifice. The writer of the present article finds it so much the more difficult to decide on this question, as the word minhah is several times employed by Malachias to signify sacrifice in the generic sense (i, 13; ii, 12, 13; iii, 3, 4, and in all probability, i, 10). For the rest, the event has shown how the prophecy was to be realized. It is of the Eucharistic sacrifice that Christian antiquity has interpreted the passage of Malachias (cf. Council of Trent, Sess. XXII, 1). Publication information Written by A. Van Hoonacker. Transcribed by Thomas J. Bress. The Catholic Encyclopedia, Volume IX. Published 1910. New York: Robert Appleton Company. Nihil Obstat, October 1, 1910. Remy Lafort, Censor. Imprimatur. +John M. Farley, Archbishop of New York Bibliography TORREY, The Prophecy of Malachi in Journal of Soc. for Biblical Lit. (1898), pp. 1 sqq.; PEROWNE, Book of Malachi (Cambridge, 1896); REINKE, Der Prophet Maleachi (1856). Consult also Commentaries on te Minor Prophets by SMITH (1900); DRIVER (Nahum-Malachi; Century Bible); KNABENBAUER (1886); WELLHAUSEN (1898); NOWACK (1904); MARTI (1904); VAN HOONACKER (1908); also Introductions to the Old Testament (see AGGEUS.) Holy Prophet Malachias (Malachi) Orthodox Information Commemorated January 3 Prophet Malachias ("messenger of God") is the last of the twelve minor Prophets, and also of all the Prophets of the Old Testament. He prophesied in the days of Nehemias, a wise man among the Hebrews, who also held a high and powerful position in the court of Artaxerxes the Long-armed, King of the Persians, who reigned from 465 to 424 BC. Malachias' book of prophecy is divided into four chapters; he foretold the coming of Christ as the Sun of Righteousness (4:2). Dismissal Hymn of the Prophet (Second Tone) A we celebrate the memory of Your Prophet Malachias, O Lord, through him we beseech You to save our souls. Kontakion of the Prophet (Fourth Tone) On this day You have appeared Since the gift of prophecy dwelt in you richly, you, O Prophet, clearly foretold the coming of Christ God and the salvation of the entire world, which is enlightened through grace by His shining forth. Book of Malachi Jewish Perspective Information ARTICLE HEADINGS: -Biblical Data: Contents. Prophetic Tone. -In Rabbinical Literature: -Critical View: -Biblical Data: The Book of Malachi is the last in the canon of the Old Testament Prophets. It has three chapters in the Masoretic text, while in the Septuagint, the Vulgate, and the Peshiṭta it has four. The King James Version also, following the latter versions, has four chapters. As in the books of Isaiah, Lamentations, and Ecclesiastes, the last verse in the Masoretic text is a repetition of the last verse but one. The style of the book is more prosaic than that of any of the other prophetical books; the parallelism met with in the others is here less pronounced, and the imagery often lacks force and beauty. The method of treatment is rather novel; it approaches the teaching method of the schools; Cornill speaks of it as "casuistic-dialectic." Thus the prophet first states his proposition; then he follows with remonstrances that might be raised by those he addresses; finally he reasserts his original thesis (comp. i. 2 et seq., 6 et seq.; ii. 13 et seq., 17; iii. 8, 13 et seq.). This form adds vividness to the argument. The book may be divided into three sections-(1) i. 1-ii. 9; (2) ii. 10-17; (3) iii. (A. V. iii. and iv.), the divisions given being those of the Masoretic text. Contents. Ch. i. 2-ii. 9 represent Yhwh as Ruler and loving Father. It opens with a tender allusion to the love shown by Yhwh to Judah in the past; yet Judah acted faithlessly, deserting its benefactor. Malachi then addresses himself to the priests, those who are to lead the people in the way of Yhwh. He castigates them for being derelict in their duty by offering on Yhwh's altars polluted bread and animals that have blemishes. By doing so they show that they despise Yhwh (i. 6-10). But Yhwh can do without their worship, for the time will come when the whole heathen world will worship Him (i. 11-14). If the priests will not heed the admonition, dire punishment will be visited upon them (ii. 1-8). Ch. ii. 10-17 speaks of Yhwh as the supreme God and Father of all, and inveighs against those who had left their Jewish wives and married heathen women. Ch. iii. (A. V. iii. and iv.) speaks of Yhwh as the righteous and final Judge. It begins with the announcement that the messenger of Yhwh will come to prepare the way for Him by purifying the social and religious life (1-4). Yhwh will call to judgment all those who have transgressed the moral law and have been lax in the observance of the ritual; He invites all who have gone astray to return to Him and receive His blessings (5-15). The faithful will be blessed, while those who persist in disobeying the law of God will be punished (16-21). The book closes with a final exhortation to the godly. Prophetic Tone. Malachi, as opposed to the other prophetical books, lays much stress upon ceremonial observance (i. 6 et seq., 13 et seq.; iii. 7 et seq., 22): the priest is Yhwh's messenger (ii. 7, iii. 3 et seq.), and the law of Moses, with its statutes and observances, must be strictly observed (iii. 22). Yet he is not a formalist; the book breathes the genuine prophetic spirit. Thus, from the idea of the brotherhood of all Israelites he deduces the social duties which they owe to one another (ii. 10). Ceremonial observance is of value in his eyes only so long as it leads to spiritual service. In scathing language he lays bare the moral degeneracy of his time, a time given over to adultery, false swearing, oppression of the hireling and the widow and the fatherless (iii. 5 et seq.). Especially severe is he toward those who had entered into wedlock with heathen women (ii. 11-16). The conditions that existed under his predecessors Haggai and Zechariah seem to have existed at the time of Malachi. The Exile is a matter of the past; the Temple is built, and sacrifices are being offered (i. 10, iii. 1-10). Malachi describes most faithfully the temper of his generation. The people had strayed away from Yhwh, and sought, by an assumption of indifference and by mockery, to hide their restlessness. The exiles had been disillusioned when they found the land of their fathers a wilderness. Drought, locusts, failure of harvests (iii. 10 et seq.) had deepened their discontent. Yhwh's sanctuary had been rebuilt, but still their condition did not improve; they were growing impatient and were asking for proofs of Yhwh's love (iii. 13 et seq.). Under the pressure of these unfavorable circumstances, priests and people neglected to show Yhwh the honor due to Him (i. 2 et seq.). Malachi lays stress upon the inevitableness of the Day of Judgment, the coming of which would prove to the skeptical that devotion and fear of God are not in vain, but will be rewarded. The messenger of Yhwh and the Last Judgment form the closing theme of Malachi's prophecy. The messenger will come in the person of Elijah, who will regenerate the people and restore them to union with Yhwh. -In Rabbinical Literature: Malachi is identified with Mordecai by R. Naḥman and with Ezra by Joshua b. Ḳarḥa (Meg. 15a). Jerome, in his preface to the commentary on Malachi, mentions that in his day the belief was current that Malachi was identical with Ezra ("Malachi Hebræi Esdram Existimant"). The Targum of Jonathan ben Uzziel to the words "By the hand of Malachi" (i. 1) gives the gloss "Whose name is called Ezra the scribe." According to Soṭah 48b, when Malachi died the Holy Spirit departed from Israel. According to R. H. 19b, he was one of the three prophets concerning whom there are certain traditions with regard to the fixing of the Jewish almanac. A tradition preserved in pseudo-Epiphanius ("De Vitis Proph.") relates that Malachi was of the tribe of Zebulun, and was born after the Captivity. According to the same apocryphal story he died young, and was buried in his own country with his fathers. -Critical View: The name is not a "nomen proprium"; it is generally assumed to be an abbreviation of (="messenger of Yhwh"), which conforms to the Μαλαχίας of the Septuagint and the "Malachias" of the Vulgate. The Septuagint superscription is ὲν χειρὶ ἀγγήλου αὐτοῦ, for . Wellhausen, Kuenen, and Nowack consider ch. i. 1 a late addition, pointing to Zech. ix. 1, xii. 1. Cornill states that Zech. ix.-xiv. and Malachi are anonymous, and were, therefore, placed at the end of the prophetical books. Mal. iii. 1 shows almost conclusively that the term was misunderstood, and that the proper name originated in amisconception of the word. The consensus of opinion seems to point to 432-424 B.C. as the time of the composition of the book. This was the time between the first and second visits of Nehemiah to Jerusalem. Some assert that the book was written before 458 B.C., that is, before the arrival of Ezra in Jerusalem. Isidore Singer, Adolf Guttmacher Jewish Encyclopedia, published between 1901-1906. Bibliography: Boehme, in Stade's Zeitschrift, vii. 210 et seq.; Driver, Introduction: D. Knobel, Prophetismus der Hebräer, i. 386, Breslau, 1837; Bleek, Introduction to the Old Testament, 2d ed., i. 357; Cornill, Einleitung in das Alte Testament, pp. 205 et seq., Freiburg, 1896; Cornill, The Prophets of Israel, p. 158, Chicago, 1895.S. A. G.
Gary Bennett: Our Statement of Confidence We believe that the Bible, consisting of a total of 66 books in the Old and New Testaments, is without error in the original manuscripts. The Originator of the Bible is God the Holy Spirit who guided each human author without distorting his person or character so that the writings each human author produced were verbally and plenarily inspired. Since the Bible is from God, and therefore, necessarily true and precise, and accurately unveils His will for all mankind, it is, then, the sole authority for life and service. Providentially, by God’s singular care through the multiplicity of the many Hebrew and Greek language-copies of Scripture, the Bible has been kept pure through the ages and is the authentic Word of God for us today. This being true, any translation of the Bible into any human language may be embraced as sound and authoritative when that translation accurately represents the original autographs. With great respect and reverence for historic English translations like the King James Version and the 1901 American Standard Version, and while endorsing several outstanding contemporary English translations as fitting the above description (i.e. the 1995 New American Standard Version), we have chosen to use the New King James Version in our congregational worship. For those who are seeking an immediate and deeper statement on the authority and inerrancy of the Bible, we recommend The Chicago Statement on Biblical Inerrancy (1978), and we solemnly embrace their 18 articles of affirmation and denial. We further support their opening statement as accurate and true which reads, in part: The authority of Scripture is a key issue for the Christian Church in this and every age. Those who profess faith in Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior are called to show the reality of their discipleship by humbly and faithfully obeying God’s written Word. To stray from Scripture in faith or conduct is disloyalty to our Master. The Impact of This Statement on Our Church Experience Since we understand the Word of God as described above, every aspect of our ministry is shaped by our loyalty, joy, and satisfaction in the truths of Scripture. Our music energetically reflects the delight and theological content of the Word of God, our Adult and Children's Bible Studies are devoted to the enthusiastic study of Scriptural truths, our pulpit ministry—each Sunday morning and evening—is dedicated to the exegesis of Scripture and its passionate expository expression, our counseling ministry and our selective weekly, small group studies, such as Teens, Singles, Ladies and Men’s groups, are fully committed to the personal relevance and the full sufficiency of the Word of God. Inherent within our Text-based ministry is the church-wide commitment to a literal, grammatical, literary, and historical understanding of the Scriptures. In other words, the Bible cannot be understood unless this grid is properly applied. Any notion that the Old Testament, for example, can have a valid meaning by using an allegorical or non-literal interpretive scheme is unacceptable. We are dedicated to the proposition that the Holy Spirit superintended each human author to write a document which is understandable by every reader in a normal, literal fashion and that each written prophecy God expressed will come to pass as the author gave it. This being the case, we consider the dispensational approach to Bible interpretation as the most satisfying manifestation of Scriptural truth, for it maintains a consistent, literal hermeneutic, insists upon the clear distinction between ethnic Israel and the church, and fully promotes the glory of God as the single foundation for all that is written in the Holy Text. Texts We Considered in This Declaration Deuteronomy 17:14-20; I Samuel 3:1, 19-21; Psalm 119; Jeremiah 16:16; 20:9; 31:23-40; Ezekiel 39:21-29; Hosea 8:11- 12; Matthew 28:18-20; John 5:39, 46-47; 14:26; 16:13-15; Acts 3:18-26; Romans 9-11; 16:25-27; II Timothy 2:15-16; 3:1-4:5; II Peter 1:12-21; 2:1-3; 3:1-2; Revelation 22:18-21
Michelle J Boyd: This week, the hip-hop star-entrepreneur and longtime supporter of Barack Obama echoed the president's sentiments on the topic of gay marriage. Denouncing gay rights "is no different than discriminating against blacks," Jay-Z told CNN. "It's discrimination, plain and simple." Jay-Z is one of the most powerful figures in a genre that over the last decade has been shedding its perceived anti-gay tendencies, a dialogue that went mainstream after the union of Eminem and Elton John at the 2001 Grammy awards. To be fair, Jay-Z himself used an anti-gay slur more than once in his early works, but he left no room for misinterpretation this week when he stated that the refusal to allow gay couples to wed is "holding the country back." Jay-Z could prove to be a powerful ally. For one, his "Empire State of Mind" has positioned him as a modern-day Frank Sinatra, and his daughter with Beyoncé, Blue Ivy, is treated like American royalty. But more important, American voters remain divided on the issue, and ballot box polling has shown that gay marriage is a particularly contentious issue among African Americans. The Times recently reported that in "2008 more than 9 in 10 black voters in California backed Obama, then overwhelmingly voted for Proposition 8, the successful ballot measure to overturn the state Supreme Court's decision allowing same-sex marriage."
Ray Atkinson: Play based on the transcripts of the Proposition 8 trial.
Isabelle Malenfant: Ben oui, je vais donner mon opinion à propos du conflit étudiant et peut-être insulter des gens. Allons-y. Au début, quand on a commencé à nous jaser de l’éventualité d’une grève et de la hausse des frais de scolarité, j’en avait rien à foutre. Ça me passait 10 pieds par dessus la tête que mon voisin d’en dessous s’endette pour aller à l’école (mais ça c’est parce que mon voisin d’en dessous, je l’haït, alors c’est pas tant un bon exemple). Je me foutais donc éperdument que certaines personnes n’aient pas accès à une éducation supérieure sous prétexte de manque de fonds. Parce que j’ai été élevée dans la mentalité que quand tu veux quelque chose, tu travailles pour. Je le penses toujours d’ailleurs et je l’applique dans ma vie quotidienne, mais vient un moment où tu te rends compte que le débat est plus nuancé que ça et que tu n’avais pas nécessairement raison. J’ai été chanceuse et je n’ai jamais eu d’énormes problèmes financiers malgré quelques dettes que je suis venu à bout de régler (dû au dit travail cité plus haut). Je me suis rendu compte que tout le monde n’a pas cette chance ou encore simplement les outils pour se coller de l’argent. Tu te rends compte, pour revenir au sujet principal, que ton gouvernement flambe des milliards on sait pas trop où. Qu’il veut vendre le gaz de schiste à rabais à de gros industriels over riches et qu’il y a le Plan Nord. Que ça fait des années qu’on parle de corruption. Que les recteurs des universités sont payés plusieurs centaines de milliers (voire des millions) de dollars par année, et qu’ils ont en plus une prime de départ de 500 000 à 1 million $. Parce que t’as vraiment besoin d’une prime de départ avec ce genre de salaire, y paraît. Nous, travailleurs, quand on quitte un emploi, on nous donne 4%, pis le gouvernement fédéral se fait un beau projet de faire en sorte qu’on pas droit au chômage, pour économiser quelques centaines de dollars. Donc voilà, en gros je me suis rendu compte que les étudiants ne se battent pas seulement pour économiser une couple de piasses, mais que c’était pour le principe. Pis là, ya eu une manif de soir, pis les gens se sont fait poivrer. S’cusez, je vais préciser. Des gens marchant tranquillement dans la rue, deux doigts en V pour faire un beau signe de peace, se sont fait matraquer, poivrer, gazer, arrêter. “Oui, mais la manifestation était illégale à cause des méchants casseurs-en-noir-anarchistes-qui-mangent-des-bébés-chiens-et-qui-avaient-attaqués-de-pauvres-policiers-en-armure-sans-défense-à-coup-de-AKA47”, dira Yolande de Québec, interviewé par TVA. HAN? Ah oui, c’est vrai! J’avais presque oublié. Les policiers avaient effectivement déclaré la manifestation illégale. SUR TWITTER. Oups, on a oublié de leur dire, aux méchants manifestants qui marchaient en scandant des slogans rigolos. Ils allaient troubler la paix sociale et peut-être qu’un policier allait risquer de se faire lancer une roche sur son casque, éventuellement. Sauf que ça s’enlignait pas pour ça. Pis tu rentre pas dans 1000 personnes à coups de matraque parce que ya un taré qui avait l’air louche. Tapper dans le tas, expliquer plus tard. Ya des choses dont je me suis jamais foutu dans la vie par contre, c’est l’abus de pouvoir, la corruption, la brutalité policière, la violence inutile, la justice et tout ce qui va avec. Chaque soir, chaque jour, certains policiers se pensent dans une game de Call of Duty. Lancer une balle en caoutchouc sur un manifestant en t’écriant “T’in mon calisse, d’in fesses”, ça aide pas vraiment tes amis polices à avoir l’air de bonnes personnes. Poivrer une dame de 68 ans en la traitant de vieille peau non plus. Ni gazer des gens qui prennent une bière sur une terrasse. Ah, pis arrêter des gens qui se promènent en autobus jaune sans motif valable autre que “troubler la paix sociale” alors qu’ils n’ont rien fait, c’est moron sur un esti de temps. Bref, j’étais pas ben contente et donc le lendemain je suis allé à une manif même si il pleuvait (“on est pas fait en pisse”, disait Josiane). On est parti du Parc Émilie-Gamelin, on a tourné sur Berri vers le sud, puis sur René-Lévesque vers l’ouest. Ça faisait même pas 5 minutes qu’on marchait qu’en tournant sur le dit boulevard qu’on s’est fait bloquer les issues par l’anti-émeute. Les boucliers pis la matraque pis toute, prêts à nous rentrer dedans. Avant même que la manif soit déclarée illégale, avant même que le moindre papier d’emballage de gomme ne soit lancé par un méchant-anarchiste-étudiant-voulant-mettre-en-cendre-tout-le-Québec, on nous faisait comprendre qu’on avait nul part où aller. De quoi faire monter la tension et instaurer un climat de peur. Après, on a tourné en sens inverse sur St-Denis (j’avoue que ça c’est pas fort), pour se faire revirer de bord et aller prendre St-Laurent. On nous a alors annoncé plus ou moins clairement que le rassemblement était illégal, à l’aide d’un camion de police de l’autre côté du parc et d’un speaker qui griche. Yavait des paniers à salade pas trop loin, dans une rue transversale qu’on a croisé. Les gens sont partis, parce qu’ils ont eu peur de revivre le même scénario de guérilla que la veille. Nous, on est resté (PARCE QU’ON EST VRAIMENT TOUGH… not). Une fois sur Sherbrooke, ah ben ah ben, c’est plus illégal. Maintenant que la moitié de la foule s’est poussé, on peut vous contrôler plus facilement. Tout s’est terminé dans le calme, heureusement, et je suis rentré chez nous avec une toute autre vision du mouvement. Ensuite il y a eu les négos et on y a cru, à cette proposition. Le PLQ a tout fait foirer, on a voté contre (note à Charest; arrête de rire du monde, ça va aider), les gens ont dit que les méchants-étudiants voulaient tout avoir gratisse. Faut se mettre du côté des grévistes une petite minute. Quand ça fait 12 semaines que t’es prit dans un conflit, que ta session risque déjà très fortement d’être scrap et que tu te vois offrir quelque chose de pas trop clair, tu te dis que t’es aussi ben d’aller jusqu’au bout et de ne pas accepter de demi-mesure. PIS LÀ, YA EU LA LOI SPÉCIALE. …sacrament. Là, je comprend les gens qui sont contre les étudiants, qui se sont fait bloquer le pont, qui sont pas ben ben content, bla bla bla. J’appuie pas tous les moyens de pression, by the way. Sauf qui serait peut-être temps de vous réveiller, citoyens du Québec. C’est pas les étudiants extrémistes, c’est pas un groupe de manifestants masqués à l’air louche qu’on empêche de se rassembler. C’est TOUT LE MONDE. Et là je vais énumérer quelques points qui sont pour moi des abus. - Être passible d’amende pour porter le carré rouge, sous prétexte que ça encourage la désobéissance civile. - Tout groupe de 50 personnes ou plus doit fournir son itinéraire 8 heures à l’avance, empêchant toute manifestation spontanée. - Des amendes de 7000$ à 35 000$ pour avoir organisé une manifestation qui devient illégale? BEN VOYONS? Comme si une personne avait le pouvoir de tenir par la main tous les amis de la manif en leur disant d’être sages. Ça donne moins envie d’en organiser, tout d’un coup. - Les tweets surveillés… Ça va Big Brother? On est tu à veille de sortir les mesures de guerre aussi? C’est ce qui s’appelle museler un peuple. Charest, t’as laissé pourrir le conflit, pensant que les étudiants allaient se tanner, rentrer sagement en classe pis que t’allais pouvoir bâtir ton Plan Nord en paix pendant ce temps là. T’as évité le sujet principal, soit les frais de scolarité pendant les négos et t’as ensuite clamé avoir gagné le combat et n’avoir aucun engagement à respecter les recommendations de la proposition faite aux étudiants. T’es un des pires imbéciles de l’histoire, assurément. Vu que t’as manqué ton coup, t’as juste décidé de mettre ça sur la glace et de suspendre les sessions, remettre ça à plus tard en espérant encore que les gens se tannent d’eux-mêmes. Pendant tout le conflit, t’as mit l’emphase sur les casseurs. BEL ÉPAIS. Bon, on a eu droit à Beauchamp aussi, mais elle je l’épargne dans ce texte parce que je pense qu’à s’est assez fait maganer de même, pis qu’elle a eu le bon sens de se retirer. Plus tu opprimes le peuple, plus il va être violent. Vous avez tous pu voir les images d’hier soir, le feu dans la rue, etc. Le 22 mars, entre 100 000 et 200 000 personnes étaient présentes à la manifestation pacifique et rien n’a bougé. Après 15 semaines, vous vous attendez à quoi? Oh, vous en avez ras-le-bol d’en entendre parler à LCN? Vous aimeriez mieux que Denis Lévesque ait plus de temps d’antenne pour pouvoir le voir parler à un nain roux unijambiste amateur de chat, mais qui y est allergique? How sad. Le reste du mouvement lui, est aussi tanné. Tanné d’être ignoré, tanné de voir les droits des gens bafoués, tanné de se faire dire que des droits, on n’en a plus quand une manifestation devient illégale, tanné de recevoir des coups de matraque pour avoir posé une question ou pour avoir tenté d’aider un ami qui vient de se faire asperger de poivre. Les policiers aussi sont tannés. Tannés des heures supplémentaires, tannés des insultes, des roches, des manifestations tous les soirs. Moi? Moi je suis tanné aussi. Tanné du conflit, oui. Tanné de voir le gouvernement rire du peuple et de l’ignorer. Tanné de voir des images de gens qui brisent des vitre. Tanné de voir la police gazer pour rien, juste pour prouver qu’ils sont plus forts. Quand le peuple craint la police, c’est là que ça devient dangereux. Hier quelques centaines de personnes ont foutu le feu à la rue. Parce que c’est là que le conflit est rendu: foutre la marde. J’étais là hier. Un moment donné on est entré sur le campus de l’Université McGill (parce que la loi spéciale, on s’en calisse) et peu après la marche a cessé. Ensuite ça s’est mit à pousser et à courir. Quand tout ce que tu vois c’est des gens courir vers toi dans tout les sens, t’as pas vraiment le temps de penser. Je sais que c’est pas la meilleure solution, mais mon instinct me disait que c’était la seule chose à faire, donc j’ai couru vers la sortie la plus proche, en remontant une côte. J’avais pas envie de me faire prendre en souricière ni de respirer du gaz ou de me faire arrêter. J’ai vu plus tard sur vidéo que l’anti-émeute avait décidé de stopper la tête de la manif sans avertir ni motif valable, prenant les gens par surprise et ils ont ensuite chargé (notamment sur une fille en jupe de 95 livres SUR LE TROTTOIR qui n’a offert aucune résistance autre que ne pas se tasser et aussi sur une dame en FAUTEUIL ROULANT). C’est à cause de ça que ça s’est mit à courir et que je me suis sauvé. Un peu plus loin, un camion de police a annoncé qu’il fallait se disperser et prendre une autre rue. Tout ça après avoir chargé. BELLE FAÇON DE TRAVAILLER. Le peuple québécois en faveur de la loi 78? Je lisais plus tôt un article qui résume très bien la situation et qui disait en gros à ce sujet: “il y a les gens pour, les gens contre, et la grosse masse molle au milieu”. Arrêtez d’être mou. Prenez position, sortez de votre zone de confort. Certains disent qu’on a pas à s’exprimer dans la rue et qu’on a le droit de parole une fois aux 4 ans. ÇA, c’est mou de quoi de rare. Pour terminer, j’aimerais vous aviser que vraisemblablement, la violence et la tension vont monter au cours des prochaines semaines, pendant que Charest va continuer à mépriser le plus grand mouvement étudiant de l’histoire du Québec. Les casseurs, c’est plus des cas isolés. C’est la démonstration de l’écoeurantite aigue du peuple. C’est un mouvement contre le gouvernement qui est né de la grève étudiante. Je sais que ça se passe surtout à Montréal et je trouve dommage que le reste du Québec ne soit pas aussi solidaire. Je m’adresserai ici à tout ceux qui s’en crisse, tout ceux qui disent que les manifestants sont des malades mentaux qui ne mérite que de se faire tirer: premièrement, changez de poste. Cessez d’écouter les médias de masse corrompus. Deuxièmement et pour terminer: j’espère sincèrement que vous n’aurez jamais rien à revendiquer. J’espère de tout coeur que vous vous complairez toute votre vie dans votre divan payable en 36 versements sans intérêt devant votre télé 3D et que vous aurez tout le plaisir du monde à aller en Floride à bord de votre voiture hybride de l’année qui vous donne l’impression d’avoir une certaine conscience sociale. J’espère que vous aurez un abonnement à vie à LCN et que vous vous sentirez comblé en vous disant “mais mon dieu, c’est épouvantable, yavait une mouche dans son Timbit”.
Scott Horn: Judge overturns California's ban on same-sex marriage Full story: www.cnn.com A federal judge in California has knocked down the state's voter-approved ban on same-sex marriage, ruling Wednesday that the state's controversial Proposition 8 violates the U.S. Constitution.
Marriage Equality USA: Marriage Equality USA Press Release Marriage Equality USA Welcomes NAACP Resolution New York/San Francisco · 19 May 2012 ― Marriage Equality USA is thrilled the national NAACP Board of Directors followed the lead of President Barack Obama and California Conference of the NAACP President Alice Huffman in confirming support for marriage equality. During the 2008 No on Proposition 8 campaign, Marriage Equality USA allied with the California Conference of the NAACP and is pleased to recognize the national NAACP as part of that continuing alliance. Brian Silva, Marriage Equality USA Executive Director, stated, “The NAACP has been a long-time ally in the fight for marriage equality. Today's vote cements the bond of our common struggle to insure that all Americans are treated equally. We thank our friends at the NAACP for their action today.” In their resolution the NAACP Board affirmed, “…the NAACP has opposed and will continue to oppose any national, state, local policy or legislative initiative that seeks to codify discrimination or hatred into the law or to remove the Constitutional rights of LGBT citizens.” The NAACP Board was unequivocal in the announcement released today, with President and CEO Ben Jealous declaring, “Civil marriage is a civil right and a matter of civil law. The NAACP’s support for marriage equality is deeply rooted in the Fourteenth Amendment of the United States Constitution and equal protection of all people.” ”The NAACP has an unbroken history of standing up for civil rights for all Americans, right up through their stand against the discriminatory Amendment 1 in North Carolina, and now today’s historic vote affirming marriage equality for all loving and committed couples,” said Stuart Gaffney, MEUSA Media Director. “Standing together from coast-to-coast with allies such as the NAACP is what is going to make the dream of marriage equality for all loving and committed couples a reality.”
Pankaj Arya: Number 10: Motorola Razr 10. Motorola Razr Don't be thinking you've got caught in a time vortex - the Motorola Razr of old is back, but in a totally new form factor. The Motorola Razr is one of those phones that, like the Atrix, we instantly looked forward to when we saw it launched. A super thin body, oodles of RAM, Kevlar casing and a top end processor are all things we want to see in a phone of this ilk, and it's good to see Moto attempting to compete with the likes of Samsung and Apple. Motorola needed a phone like the Razr in its arsenal, and now it has one to be proud of. It's got all the dual-core power of the Atrix, plus a superior screen; more importantly, it's jumped from a squat chassis to a sumptuous slimline affair that glides into the pocket. Quick verdict The Motorola Razr is something of a Galaxy S2 clone in a number of ways - but that's no bad thing for a smartphone. It has a decent identity of its own, with Smart Options in particular automating your phone in clever ways. It's a trifle expensive and doesn't really offer too much in the way of a unique selling point - but it functions well in all areas and those looking for a slightly sharper screen will find a decent pocket- mate here. Motorola Razr review Compare the best Motorola Razr deals Number 9: HTC Desire S 9. Desire S The Desire S has surprised us all with its popularity - decent price drops already have seen it become a valuable proposition and place it as a good HTC alternative to the dual-core power of the HTC Sensation. Excellent call quality, a decent camera, strong build and clever- as-ever social networking integration make this a class- leader once more, despite it no longer being the HTC top dog since the Sensation has landed. Quick verdict The HTC Desire S is a slick, compact and attractive handset that's an improvement on its predecessor with more compact lines and an improved Sense experience - which has now been updated to the Sensation- matching Sense 3.5 offering. It may only have a 5MP camera, but it's got a budget-busting £20 price tag, so that means it's still going to have a decent customer uptake even though the HTC Sensation has arrived - and we rate it ahead of the Incredible S thanks to a smoother design, greater pocketability and more advanced software upgrades, even though the camera is poorer. HTC Desire S review Compare HTC Desire S offers Number 8: Nokia Lumia 800 8. Nokia Lumia 800 The Nokia Lumia 800 is the Finnish firm's first handset to use Windows Phone, and it's been a quite success - a million devices have been sold worldwide so far. The size, shape and weight of the Nokia Lumia 800 provides a quality feel, and is a unique shape compared to many other phones on the market. The GUI feels intuitive with a very impressive speed of response, providing a continuity of feel between applications. Essentially, the Nokia Lumia 800 takes the best of Windows Phone - Xbox Live integration, fantastic Office tools and a clever tile-based user interface - and adds in a great quality screen with a nice- feeling chassis. Quick verdict The Nokia Lumia 800 certainly isn't an iPhone 4S or Samsung Galaxy S2 beater - but it's the best Windows Phone device out there. If you're a fan of a simple interface with some quality add- ons, then you should definitely look at Nokia's new flagship. Nokia Lumia 800 review Compare the best Nokia Lumia 800 deals Number 7: Samsung Galaxy Nexus 7. Samsung Galaxy Nexus The first 'Google phone' to come without the search giant's branding, the Samsung Galaxy Nexus is meant to be the device that preaches the power Ice Cream Sandwich to the awe-struck Android masses. There's something great about having a 'pure Google' phone and the show-off factor is strong here since few will be able to get their hands on this. It's got a fantastic screen, a superb new OS and extra elements like Android Beam for sharing photos, contacts or (in the future) connecting to peripherals. And as a smartphone or even mini computer, it's a great size with a nice weight that doesn't feel too cumbersome to carry or use. The screen, when lit up, looks fantastic. Its 4.65-inches with a resolution of 720 x 1280, giving a ppi of 316. It really is super sharp. We would have expected nothing less with Samsung's mobile displays among the best out there but it's cracking for internet and video. Quick verdict The Samsung Galaxy Nexus is mostly buoyed by the presence of Ice Cream Sandwich, but the high quality screen, slim chassis and fast processing speeds make it a top device in our eyes. It's not worthy of the top spot, but it's a great pre-cursor to the Samsung Galaxy S3 . Samsung Galaxy Nexus review Compare the best Samsung Galaxy Nexus deals Number 6: BlackBerry Bold 9900 6. BlackBerry Bold 9900 RIM's been in the doldrums a little in 2011, but that hasn't stopped it doing what it does best: bringing out the industry's top messaging devices. The Bold 9900 is the best BlackBerry ever created, with a solid chassis, easy to use keys, a superbly hi-res screen and touch capabilities too. BB OS 7 might not be much of an upgrade, but it still just works on a phone with a QWERTY keyboard / smaller screen combo. The internet is faster (although not market leading), the camera has been improved and NFC capabilities push the Bold 9900 into next generation territory. Quick verdict If you're a BlackBerry fan, this is the phone for you without doubt. Well, that is if you can afford the oddly high price tag - it's only this that's stopping us ranking the Bold 9900 higher in our definitive guide. BlackBerry Bold 9900 review Compare the best BlackBerry Bold 9900 offers Number 5 5. Sony Ericsson Xperia Ray Sony Ericsson has had something of a smartphone reboot in 2011, with the likes of Xperia Arc and Xperia Mini proving big hits. But there's another winner from the soon-to-be-just-Sony brand, with the Xperia Ray winning more than a few admiring glances. It's got the innards of the Arc, plus the same pixel count - in a much smaller screen. That means the display is pin sharp, and while a little small compared to the competition, it's a very pocketable affair indeed. The 8MP camera isn't as strong photographically as its rivals, but it still delivers quality snaps for a cheaper price tag. Quick verdict Well-packaged and packing in a host of top-end Sony tech, the Xperia Ray is a smaller smartphone that squeezes a large amount of power into a pocketable package. Sony Ericsson Xperia Ray review Compare the best Sony Ericsson Xperia Ray offers Number 4 4. Sony Xperia S We used to love the Xperia Arc S - but we're a fickle bunch, and now Ericsson has been cast aside, we're all over the new brand like a cat on a fresh set of curtains. The Xperia S almost has too many positive points to list, with a new HD screen, 12MP camera and dual core processor all combining to make one of the finest smartphones of 2012. If you want to see the new phone in action, you can check out our fancy hands on video as well: As you may have gathered from our review, the Sony Xperia S has both an amazing screen and a dual core processor that never slows down - plus that 12MP camera is really one of the best out there. Sony has also very kindly bundled lots of software with the Xperia S out of the box, which saves you having to dash to Google Play as soon as you turn on to grab vital apps. Battery life is the only slight wobble (if you don't mind a plastic casing) but it will generally last a day under normal conditions, and that's a solid enough benchmark for is. Quick verdict There are still some niggles with the Xperia S but we think it says a lot that when deciding on the pros and cons for the device, we really struggled with the cons section. This handset may not be the cheapest (although still costing less than the likes of the iPhone 4S and Samsung Galaxy S2 when it launched), and it may feel like a Sony Ericsson without the Ericsson bit printed on the front, but we are really impressed with what Sony has done for its first solo foray. Sony Xperia S review Compare the best Sony Xperia S deals Number 3 3. HTC Sensation XE We know it's terribly geeky, but the battle between the HTC Sensation and the Samsung Galaxy S2 was one we were salivating over. Both are dual core powerhouses, both have cutting-edge software and both the brands behind them have been enjoying success with Android in recent times. The HTC Sensation is a cracking piece of kit despite being behind the S2 (and now the iPhone 4S ), with Sense 3.0 being a real joy to use. The camera is quality, browsing and UI speeds are lightning fast and the overall build quality is sure to entice a number of users to pick up the Sensation and play with it in their local phone outlet. And HTC has now added a faster processor into the mix, boosting it to 1.5GHz and increasing the battery size - and more importantly adding Beats Audio processing into the mix. Quick verdict The HTC Desire was the phone that showed the world what HTC could do, and the Sensation is a big step change once more. The dual-core power really shows, and the HTC Watch service is one to, well, watch as bringing movie downloads to a phone on the go could be the next big thing. A Beats-style upgrade brought red flashes and helped make up for the disappointment of the HTC Sensation XL - and cements its place as the third best phone in the world. HTC Sensation XE review Compare the best HTC Sensation XE deals Number 2 2. iPhone 4S You might have noticed that Apple recently announced a new phone - it's the iPhone 4S though, and not the iPhone 5 as many were expecting. But a phone by any other name would smell as sweet, and despite being identical in looks to the iPhone 4, there's enough here to warrant its high place in our rankings. Siri voice recognition has shown itself to be more than a novelty, the dual-core processor has made phone operation even slicker and we're salivating over what the seven times more powerful graphics chip will be able to do. We were hoping for a larger display and things like a lack of Bluetooth transfer, no Flash integration with the internet browser and an uninspiring contacts app still grate - but they're no match for the sheer ease of use and general operation of Apple's best smartphone to date. Quick verdict OK, so it doesn't feel different in the pocket, and the updates don't seem to be that ground-breaking - but that doesn't matter for Apple, and the amazing camera, slick iOS 5 platform and superb display are still the things other phones should benchmark themselves against. It's one of the most expensive phones on the market, so have a think whether you really want the latest features, as the iPhone 4 and 3GS are cheaper alternatives... but make no mistake, this is another cracking smartphone from Apple, and while many will be undoubtedly upset it's not number one, if you're an Apple fan: this is your number one phone. iPhone 4S review Compare the best iPhone 4S offers Number 1 1. Samsung Galaxy S2 Did you think it could hold onto the crown and see off the challenge of the iPhone 4S ? Well, despite Apple releasing its best smartphone to date, we still have to recommend Samsung's challenger for its mix of good looks and functionality. What we love about the Samsung Galaxy S II is the sheer amount of stuff that's packed in under the chassis - but more important is the way Samsung has used all that tech to create a phone that just works near-flawlessly. Check out our Samsung Galaxy S2 video review: The dual-core 1.2GHz processor, the Super AMOLED plus screen and the excellent sonic performance of the media player all combine to make a real doozy of a mobile phone. Recording in 1080p is a nice touch (given that it actually works most of the time) and the camera is more than enough to take great shots in a short space of time - although we suggest you check out the iPhone 4S, as we rate the camera on Apple's device that little bit higher if you're not bothered about tinkering with a number of settings. In short, be it internet browsing, navigation, media, or social networking- the Samsung Galaxy S2 is our pick of the bunch for all those functions in one phone. Quick verdict The Samsung Galaxy S2 is a phone we're excited to whip out in a pub and show off to our friends - and millions of people already are. It's the ultimate media mobile, the next generation in web browsing thanks to slick Flash integration, a very good replacement for a pocket camcorder and, goshdarnit, it makes calls pretty well too. The Samsung Galaxy S II not only set a new bar for smartphones in 2011; it smashed the bar, recreated it in its own image and even managed to see off the competition of an Apple smartphone that doesn't drop signal all over the place. Samsung Galaxy S2 review Compare Samsung Galaxy S2 offers
Kyle Neven: This is huge. The reason most agree that on November 4, 2008 Proposition 8 passed in California, amending the state Constitution to ban same-sex marriage was because the African American vote. Many leaders at the time convinced their congregation to ban equality and we lost by a fraction. This could easily help rectify that mistake when the vote come back up again this Nov. HUGE!
Fred Davis: Boo! Hiss! "Comcast, of course, says that its new, usage-based pricing policy is pro-consumer, and to a certain extent it is. The average broadband subscriber — those who only use up about 8 GB or 10 GB of data a month — shouldn’t necessarily pay the same as those whose usage goes above 300 GB in the same period of time. But for those of us who are avid streaming video users, usage-based pricing models could change the overall value proposition of watching video on the Internet."
Ben Lowe: "Away from all the hubbub over that other social network, how is Google+ – described by Larry Page and others as the new “social spine” of the company – doing? As far as user numbers go, swimmingly: Page said that it has crossed the 100 million user mark. In April, Vic Gundotra said that “More than 170 million people have upgraded to Google+”. That’s a lot. That’s more than Twitter claims as monthly active users (140 million). But as far as user engagement goes, previous studies have said that it’s not a hit. What we don’t know is how many of those 170 million are active users of Google+ in the past 30 days. The suspicion, because Google has been evasive, is that the answer is: not many at all. And now a new analysis from RJMetrics is reinforcing that suspicion. It says: • The average Google+ post has less than one +1, less than one reply, and less than one re-share. • 30% of users who make a public post never make a second one. Even after making five public posts, there is a 15% chance that a user will not post publicly again. • Among users who make publicly-viewable posts, there is an average of 12 days between each post • A cohort analysis reveals that, after a member makes a public post, the average number of public posts they make in each subsequent month declines steadily. This trend is not improving in newer cohorts. The obvious question to ask of that analysis – which, as a caveat, is only made against public posts (because private posts are, well, private, and there’s no way of knowing how many of them there are) – is how it compares against other social networks, partciularly Facebook, Twitter and the new kid on the block, Pinterest. Note too that these are averages. There will be significant extremes; this is unlikely to be a normal curve. Most likely at one end there is a colossal number who don’t do anything (and whose engagement may have been minimal – and perhaps nonexistent), while at the other is Robert Scoble, who never stops. That would suggest the likely distribution of Google+ users is bathtub-shaped – high at both ends, very low in the middle. Because the people who like it really like it, as with any social network. So how high are the ends and the middle? Analysing the sides The Google+ data from RJMetrics says that the chances are good that someone will make a second post – 70%. But, says Robert Moore, the author of the post, “after that, Google Plus does not perform as well as other social services that we have analysed. In charts like these, we typically expect to see the probability of repeat posts shoot up to well north of 90% by the time the user has made several posts. This is basically the ‘once you’re using it you’re hooked’ principle.” But instead, he says, “with Google Plus, this number never crosses the 90% mark. Even after having made five such posts, the chance of making a sixth is only 85%. That means that 15% of people who have made five posts never came back to make a sixth.” It’s possible of course that the sixth is made privately – but it seems counterintuitive for someone to post publicly five times in a row and then shift entirely to private sharing. Moore also notes that Google+ users “are less and less likely to make additional posts even a few months after initially joining.” In other words, Google+ just isn’t sticky. Or, alternatively, it’s attracting people who start and then go “periscope down”. But is this a pattern that’s common to social networks? Not at all, he says, and contrasts it with Pinterest – which recently won an investment round valuing it at over $1bn. Pinterest: pinteresting RJMetrics did a similar analysis against Pinterest in February, and found completely different behaviour. “Pinterest’s traffic charts aren’t hockey sticks – they’re rocket ships,” Moore noted then. It found that Pinterest was retaining and engaging users two to three times more efficiently than Twitter had been at a similar stage in its history. Over 80% of “pins” were re-pins from elsewhere on the site, indicating a lot of viral activity. (For Twitter at the same age, only 1.4% of tweets were retweets.) But it was the user engagement that was surprising. By breaking people down into cohorts based on the months in which they joined, it could follow how active they were – with the expectation that they would drift away and become less active. But instead, the older cohort remained just as active. “This either means that no one who starts using Pinterest ever stops or – more likely – that users who continue to use Pinterest become so much more engaged over time that their activities fully make up for those of any users who leave,” Moore noted. Of course a key point about Pinterest compared to Google+ is that Google’s nascent social network is much larger, so you might not expect the same level of excitement on average. Another potential factor is that many new joiners are in effect co-opted in via their Gmail account, which “upgrades” them to Google+ whether they particularly want to or not. That’s always going to degrade the level of user interaction compared to something that people actively choose to join. But Pinterest users look like a determined bunch. “Between 40% and 60% of [Pinterest] users are still actively pinning even as far out as week 8,” notes Moore. “This may seem like a steep dropoff, but for a consumer internet business it’s exceptionally good.” And then, Twitter And for comparison, he goes back to a Twitter analysis he did in 2009 – when the service was just three years old. I did ask Moore whether there have been any more recent analyses of Twitter; he doesn’t (though might run one now). What he found then was that Twitter decay rate – how many unique tweeters were still at it 8 weeks ahead – was down around the 20-22% mark. And also: “Once a user has tweeted once, there is a 65% chance that they will tweet again. After that second tweet, however, the chance of a third tweet goes up to 81%.” And: “If someone is still tweeting in their second week as a user, it is extremely likely that they will remain on Twitter as a long-term user.” Remember that this was back in 2009, when it was still part of a comparatively tiny demographic, and by his estimate had about 49 million accounts. Now that’s up to 140 million, according to Twitter’s release earlier this week. But here’s his conclusion on Pinterest in February: “Pinterest demonstrates some of the strongest user engagement, retention, and virality metrics I have ever seen in an online business. The company has found tremendous success among its core demographic”. OK, and now how about Google+? Less good. In fact all the metrics are less good (apart from the user numbers). On average, a user waits 15 days between making their first public post and making their second. This number declines with each subsequent post, but not drastically. There is an average of 10 days between a user’s fifth and sixth public posts. But we’ve already brought up the caveat about public posts, and it’s entirely possible that some people make their first post in public, but after that restrict themselves to private posts, or keep posting with a constant frequency but only make their posts public occasionally. (One challenge is that it’s hard, if you’re a Google+ user who’s in someone’s circle to which they post, to know whether that post is public or not. So Google+ users themselves aren’t in a great position to know this.) Next, Moore looks at the much more public face of Google+: +1s, replies and sharing. He writes: Of all the categories, we feel that this is the least likely to be biased by the fact that we only studied public posts. These public posts will still be visible to each member’s private networks, and actually could attract +1s, shares, and replies from external users as well. If anything, we would expect our numbers here to be higher than in the general population. Nope. From 70,000 posts, he gets • an average of 0.77 +1s per post (or, put another way, out of 10 posts, 3 won’t even get the equivalent of a Facebook “Like”) • an average of 0.54 replies per post (ie, about 1 reply per two posts – no wonder people don’t post; it’s unrewarding) • an average of 0.17 re-shares per post (or slightly less than 1 in 5) I asked Moore what, of all the data about Google+, he found the most remarkable. “It’s not the absence of activity that we find noteworthy here, but the drop-off,” he responded. “You can speculate on the reasons why people stop posting publicly (in certain cases maybe it was a behavioural change from wanting to post publicly to wanting to post privately), but the drop-off is so consistent across the population we studied that we speculate there may be an underlying drop-off in overall activity.” He added: “I would not expect our stats on likes, +1s, and re-shares to be biased downward. Activities like these on public posts are just as visible to private circles and also can be acted upon by members of the public.” Conclusion It’s interesting to look back at what Steve Rubel, a PR expert, wrote back in June 2011 when Google+ started. On the plus side, pun intended, the company has clearly rethought how people may want to share and they have learned. Google+ is basically what Google Buzz should have been. However, unlike its predecessor, there’s no easy way for consumers to pull in content from other networks – at least for now. However, at least where we sit today, I believe that Google+ will leave consumers nonplussed – e.g. bewildered. While the interface is terrific and Circles and Hangouts both offer a strong value proposition, Google+ doesn’t solve a consumer problem that Facebook already hasn’t – or soon will – solve."
Debrah Lynne Brooks: Uploaded by JohnMacArthurGTY on Jan 8, 2010 The Belt of Truthfulness and The Breastplate of Righteousness http://www.gty.org/Videos/T8290-365 Fitting yourself into the spiritual armor God has fashioned to keep you safe is more than a one-time only proposition. You need to protect yourself anew every day. Pastor MacArthur's CD series titled "The Believer's Armor" is designed to help you do that because you can take it wherever you go. Listen in your car. Download it to your laptop and your iPod. In other words, keep these valuable lessons fresh in your thoughts as you walk -- and wage war alongside -- our Lord. To order this helpful CD set from Grace to You you can visit our website, http://www.gty.org/Resources/Sermon+Series/307
Lester Delmundo: mahal ko ang aking ina
Malini Agarwal: Awww isn't this cute?! Tina G. Bedi
Moses Akpubak: Daily Times Zamfara governor threatens striking workers As workers down tools to protest failure to fully implement new minimum wage Article | May 19, 2012 - 8:51am | By Ibrahim Bello The governor of Zamfara state, Alhaji Abdulaziz Yari has threatened to sack any state worker who does not resume for work on Monday, following the state chapter of the Nigeria Labour Congress’ directive that all workers should boycott work until further notice. The workers in Zamfara, on Friday, commenced an indefinite strike to demand full implementation of the new national minimum wage by the State Government.In a radio announcement by the NLC Chairman in the state, Abdullahi Modomawa, the union directed all its members to stay at home “because the State Government has failed us and we have not reached an agreement”.The strike followed the failure of the State Government's negotiators and officials of labour to agree on details of the minimum wage. The negotiation was reportedly deadlocked as the government team insisted that even if the government would pay the minimum wage of N18,000, it would not pay other attached allowances, a proposition that the workers rejected.Labour insisted that all allowances accruing to workers should be settled, including weighing allowances for media practitioners.On Friday, most government ministries and departments as well as banks, were sealed off by members of the NLC, while many vehicles plying the streets of Gusau, the state capital, carried leaves to show solidarity with the workers.The governor, while addressing the workers, denied refusing to implement the minimum wage.“I will not beg the workers to return to work and I will not hesitate to stop the salary of any of them who fails to return to his duty post by Monday,” Yari said. “If there is anyone on the State Government's pay-roll collecting less than the N18,000, such worker should come forward and say so; no one can compel me to pay beyond that.”The governor said that the introduction of the N18,000 minimum wage had shot the State Government's monthly expenses on salaries to N1.33 billion from an initial N838 million monthly.
Shubha Ghosh: Got to follow the letter of the law, especially when its spirit is corrupted.
Proposition 8 (ballot title: Eliminates Rights of Same-Sex Couples to Marry. Initiative Constitutional Amendment ; called California Marriage Protection Act by ...
Proposition 8 Eliminates Right of Same-Sex Couples to Marry State of California Initiative Constitutional Amendment - Majority Approval Required
Links to religious, political, legal and scholarly viewpoints about Proposition 8, California's marriage amendment.
Supporting proposition 8, which would eliminate same-sex couples' right to marry in California.
Prop 8, officially titled Proposition 8 - Eliminates Right of Same-Sex Couples to Marry, is a statewide ballot proposition in California. On November 4, 2008, voters ...
Prop 8: coverage of the gay marriage decision from the Los Angeles Times
SAN FRANCISCO — Same-sex marriage moved one step closer to the Supreme Court on Tuesday when a federal appeals court ruled California's ban ...
prop 8: eliminates right of same–sex couples to marry. initiative constitutional amendment.
Beyond Prop 8: Same-sex couples and their struggles to marry updated: Wed Jan 13 2010 09:16:00. Jeffrey Zarrillo and Paul Katami want to get married in ...
Proposition 8 was a ballot proposition in California that added the following text to Section 7.5 of Article I of the California Constitution: Only marriage between a ...
Manual approval, high quality, powerful web directory. Category. Arts Blogs Business Computers Education Entertainment
Proposition 8 - Stories from The Sacramento Bee, a newspaper and Web site covering Northern California
Big News on Prop 8. Includes blogs, news, and community conversations about Prop 8
A federal appeals court Tuesday struck down California's ban on same-sex marriage, clearing the way for the U.S. Supreme Court to rule on gay marriage as ...
8: The Mormon Proposition is an American documentary that examines The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (LDS Church) and its support of California ...
Yes
No
