I agree with him. And I'm sure he'll get plaudits from a certain section of the media and pundits. Now, imagine if he were to say "I won't require judges to perform same sex civil marriages." Completely different reaction from the same people. ...
“I strongly support the enactment of laws that enable the city to ensure that public areas are clean and safe,” he said in a statement released by a spokesman. But Garcetti said he decided the ordinances do “not adequately achieve the proper balance” between keeping the streets clean and protecting the rights of people “who have no other choice but to live on them.”
The ordinances — one for sidewalks, the other for parks — give homeless people 24 hours to move their possessions or face having them seized. The city could destroy “bulky” or hazardous items and store the rest for 90 days. The only city storage facility is on skid row. Violators could be ticketed or charged with a misdemeanor.
Proposed amendments would, among other changes, drop the misdemeanor penalty, eliminate medications and documents from the list of items that could be impounded and spell out when property is considered unattended.
I was under the impression that staging for lymphoma was not that important, since lymphoma is systemic (lymph system is everywhere). I also started with a small lump in my neck but when finally diagnosed was told it was stage 4. I also was given rituxin with every chemo treatment.
My lymphoma was B cell mantle cell, but the indolent type. So I had no treatment for two years, until it further manifested itself.
Ohio Gov. John Kasich will jump into the crowded Republican presidential field on July 21 at the student union at his alma mater, The Ohio State University, in Columbus, advisers tell POLITICO.
Kasich, 63, who was overwhelmingly reelected in November, will aim to appear less scripted and guarded than the leading candidates. Advisers say he combines establishment appeal with a conservative record going back to his stint as House Budget Committee chairman, during his 18 years as a congressman from Ohio.
Despite his late start, Kasich will be one of the most closely watched candidates — partly because Ohio is such a crucial presidential state, putting Kasich on many short lists for vice president.
I happen to not agree with this - written in light of the same sex marriage legislation - that's what it really is - from the five member majority of the Supreme Court. I don't think Christians are supposed to Ghetto-ize themselves - what about going out and converting the world?
But people are talking about this Time Magazine essay, so here it is, with some excerpts below the link.
The alarm that the four dissenting justices sounded in their minority opinions is chilling. Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Antonin Scalia were particularly scathing in pointing out the philosophical and historical groundlessness of the majority’s opinion. Justice Scalia even called the decision “a threat to democracy,” and denounced it, shockingly, in the language of revolution.
It is now clear that for this Court, extremism in the pursuit of the Sexual Revolution’s goals is no vice. True, the majority opinion nodded and smiled in the direction of the First Amendment, in an attempt to calm the fears of those worried about religious liberty. But when a Supreme Court majority is willing to invent rights out of nothing, it is impossible to have faith that the First Amendment will offer any but the barest protection to religious dissenters from gay rights orthodoxy.
Indeed, Chief Justice Roberts and Justice Samuel Alito explicitly warned religious traditionalists that this decision leaves them vulnerable. Alito warns that Obergefell “will be used to vilify Americans who are unwilling to assent to the new orthodoxy,” and will be used to oppress the faithful “by those who are determined to stamp out every vestige of dissent.”
For one, we have to accept that we really are living in a culturally post-Christian nation. The fundamental norms Christians have long been able to depend on no longer exist.
Of course that began in 1973 with Roe V Wade ...
For another, LGBT activists and their fellow travelers really will be coming after social conservatives. ... The next goal of activists will be a long-term campaign to remove tax-exempt status from dissenting religious institutions. The more immediate goal will be the shunning and persecution of dissenters within civil society. After today, all religious conservatives are Brendan Eich, the former CEO of Mozilla who was chased out of that company for supporting California’s Proposition 8.
Third, the Court majority wrote that gays and lesbians do not want to change the institution of marriage, but rather want to benefit from it. This is hard to believe, given more recent writing from gay activists like Dan Savage expressing a desire to loosen the strictures of monogamy in all marriages. Besides, if marriage can be redefined according to what we desire — that is, if there is no essential nature to marriage, or to gender — then there are no boundaries on marriage. Marriage inevitably loses its power.
In that sense, social and religious conservatives must recognize that the Obergefell decision did not come from nowhere. It is the logical result of the Sexual Revolution, which valorized erotic liberty. ... The individualism at the heart of contemporary American culture is at the core of Obergefell — and at the core of modern American life.
This is profoundly incompatible with orthodox Christianity. But this is the world we live in today.
One can certainly understand the joy that LGBT Americans and their supporters feel today. But orthodox Christians must understand that things are going to get much more difficult for us. We are going to have to learn how to live as exiles in our own country. We are going to have to learn how to live with at least a mild form of persecution. And we are going to have to change the way we practice our faith and teach it to our children, to build resilient communities.
I believe that orthodox Christians today are called to be those new and very different St. Benedicts. How do we take the Benedict Option, and build resilient communities within our condition of internal exile, and under increasingly hostile conditions? I don’t know. But we had better figure this out together, and soon, while there is time.
More if you hit the link; I excerpted about half the essay.
During his hour-long stump speech here, Sanders railed against the “billionaire class” and pledged to make large corporations pay their fair share of taxes if he becomes president. But much of his message focused on improving the lot of the lower and middle classes — by providing free college; guaranteeing workers vacation time, sick leave and family leave; and raising the minimum wage to $15 an hour.
“I don’t believe it is a terribly radical idea to say that someone who works 40 hours a week should not be living in poverty,” Sanders told a crowd of about 300 people.
As Margaret Thatcher said: "Socialism is great until you run out of other people's money.
In the Netherlands, for example, psychiatrists legally kill their patients with the approval of colleagues and the culture. Indeed, the Dutch Journal of Psychiatry has encouraged psychiatrists to euthanize patients with severe mental illnesses (corrected Google translation):
Assisted suicide, as a last resort in psychiatry, legally admissible since 2002, has recently been legitimized in practice. The midwife of Death is now appropriate forpsychiatric patients, representing an emancipation of the psychiatric patient and psychiatry itself.
Netherlanders responded positively to their “emancipation”: The number of euthanasia deaths of the mentally ill rose from fourteen in 2012 to forty-two in 2013. Not coincidentally, a just-released study reports that 34 percent of the country’s general practitioners would consider euthanizing a mentally ill patient.
Belgium is even more enthusiastic than the Netherlands about euthanizing those with psychiatric illnesses. The most well-known case is that of Godelieva De Troyer, who was euthanized by oncologist and palliative medicine professor Wim Distelmans. De Troyer did not have cancer; after a lifelong struggle with depression, she consulted with Distelmans (now a famous euthanasia doctor and advocate) for the sole purpose of being made dead.
Distelmans also made the news when he euthanized Nathan Verhelsta, who requested and received lethal injection after becoming distraught over his female-to-male sex change surgery. Needless to say, Verhelsta didn’t have cancer, either.
A morally sane country would strip Distelmans of his license to practice medicine and prosecute him for murder. Instead, not only does he have nothing to fear from colleagues or prosecutors, but he was recently awarded the Liberal Humanist Prize for having “demonstrated in his life and work a genuine and sustained liberal humanist engagement.” Belgian doctors have also coupled the euthanasia of the mentally ill with organ harvesting. One particularly disturbing case involved a patient who was a chronic self-harmer (auto-mutilation); her death and the harvesting and transplant of her lungs was written about approvingly in an international medical journal.
He begins: "Petitioners make strong arguments rooted in social policy and considerations of fairness." But that fairness only reaches the policy level. It's for the legislatures. It's not a constitutional right.
The fundamental right to marry does not include a right to make a State change its definition of marriage. And a State’s decision to maintain the meaning of marriage that has persisted in every culture throughout human history can hardly be called irrational. In short, our Constitution does not enact any one theory of marriage. The people of a State are free to expand marriage to include same-sex couples, or to retain the historic definition.
So he's coming down hard on the "definition" argument, which I've always disliked. The legal issue isn't over who gets to define words, it's about how government can treat people. Government needs at least a legitimate interest for excluding same-sex couples from the various benefits of the status of marriage, which it maintains in the legal system. Government needs at least a legitimate interest for everything it does. (Oddly, the words "legitimate" and "interest" appear nowhere in any of the Obergefell opinions!)
[T]he Court invalidates the marriage laws of more than half the States and orders the transformation of a social institution that has formed the basis of human society for millennia, for the Kalahari Bushmen and the Han Chinese, the Carthaginians and the Aztecs. Just who do we think we are?
That ignores — for the moment — the majority's argument that marriage has not stayed the same over time. (Justice Kennedy wrote that "The history of marriage is one of both continuity and change," and cited many examples of evolution in the institution, notably the changes in "the role and status of women," who under the doctrine of coverture were regarded as part of "a single, male-dominated legal entity.")
The Chief tells us that the "premises supporting this concept of marriage are so fundamental that they rarely require articulation." Only male-female sex produces children, and a children are better off (usually) if their parents stay together:
Therefore, for the good of children and society, sexual relations that can lead to procreation should occur only between a man and a woman committed to a lasting bond.
That brings up a couple ways marriage has changed: We don't restrict sex to married couples. And we let married people divorce pretty easily.
[B]y bestowing a respected status and material benefits on married couples, society encourages men and women to conduct sexual relations within marriage rather than without.
According to religious news agency Matters India, Sr. Nirmala suffered from kidney failure and other complications. Despite being advised by doctors to undergo dialysis, the she chose to be with her sisters in her final hours.
Following her release from the hospital on Friday, Sr. Nirmala’s health declined and died on Monday after midnight.
Born in 1934, Sr. Nirmala converted to Catholicism and shortly after joined the Missionaries of Charity.
She went to Panama and became one of the first Missionaries of Charity to head a mission. In 1976, Sr. Nirmala started and led the contemplative branch of the Missionaries of Charity until her election as Mother Teresa’s successor in March 1997.
She served as Superior General of the congregation until March 25th, 2009.
Married in Mandeville, Jamaica in 1979 where we'd met. We were both teachers in Mandeville at the time.
As Don Imus would say, "That's 19 wonderful years."
Here's Brigid on our honeymoon - with my brother Phil. We brought my parents and brother with us to Treasure Beach on the south coast of Jamaica. They'd come down for the wedding and we couldn't very well not take them ... My father was always embarrassed by this. Phil was our altar boy at the wedding.
Now here's Brigid a few weeks ago, climbing the Popolopen Torne just north of Bear Mountain. 36 years later and she looks excellent - about the only difference is she's got clothes on in this picture.
This doesn't seem to be the type I had (mine was mantle cell) but sounds pretty serious. "Advanced" and "aggressive". Mantle cell is a serious lymphoma, but I had the indolent (slow moving) version, which occurs in about 15% of cases. I had the treatment described under "treatment options" at the link above, and of course documented my chemo and stem cell transplant on this blog. That is the original reason I started it.
It occurs to me that, while the odds are long, the hand grenade at my feet could very well have been thrown by my father, the 26-year-old captain and commander of G Company, Second Battalion, Fifth Marine Regiment, First Marine Division (G-2-5). He lost 30 men on this ridge.
The Yankees surprised their fine former pitcher and pitching coach Mel Stottlemyre with a plaque in Monument Park.
Stottlemyre is fighting a recurrence of multiple myeloma and the outlook is dicey. Since he didn't know about the honor (his family did know but kept it from him) this is certainly a wonderful off the cuff thank you.
It was a moving scene, so much that it was clear the misty weather wasn't responsible for the wet eyes in the stands and on the field.
The honor was Hal Steinbrenner's idea after it was called to his attention that the Yankees had never honored Stottlemyre, the five-time All-Star who was 164-139 with a 2.97 ERA over his career from 1964-1974. He had 40 career shutouts and was a three-time 20-game winner whose career undoubtably would've been even better had the Yankees not crumbled after their early 60s dynasty was over. Stottlemyre, who retired prematurely because of a shoulder injury, was also the beloved pitching coach of Joe Torre's championship teams from 1996 and 1998-2000.
"Mel was the franchise during those dark years (1960s-early 70s)," Steinbrenner said. "And we needed to do this."
Zachary Ben Hample is an American sports writer and Major League baseball collector. He is best known for having collected more than 8,000 baseballs from major and minor league ballparks in America. Wikipedia
You can put it on a computer or other device. I plan on reading it over the weekend. I've already read the intro 1-12, and sections 115 to 125. Great stuff. And not a difficult read. But it won't be available (in English) in book form for another month.
Over a week ago I posted this video interview, Cardinal Kasper interview RE: marriage . Here's an interesting commentary on the issue in general and the interview in particular by a theology professor (a woman, Monica Migliorino Miller).
Kasper’s argument rests on a distinction between what is referred to (especially among canon lawyers) as the internal versus the external forum. The internal forum is a person’s own subjective conviction of their spiritual state, while the external forum is the objective judgment of the Church.