Pope Francis’ call for legal acceptance of same-sex relationships

Pope Francis’ call for legal acceptance of #same-sex relationships has raised both hope and worries among #LGBTQ Catholics.

“What we need certainly to create is a civil union law,” the pontiff said in “Francesco,” an upcoming documentary from Russian American filmmaker Evgeny Afineevsky. “That way, these are typically legally covered. I stood up for that.”

Image: Pope Francis delivers "Urbi et Orbi" Christmas Day message from main balcony of St. Peter's Basilica

The remarks are a departure from earlier church messaging. Inside the last book, “Memory and Identity,” Pope John Paul II suggested same-sex marriage was “part of an innovative new ideology of evil.”

In 2003, Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, who later became Pope Benedict XVI, wrote that respect for gays and lesbians “cannot lead in any solution to the approval of homosexual behavior or even to legal recognition of homosexual unions.”

“Legal recognition of homosexual unions or placing them on a single level as marriage will mean not only the approval of deviant behavior,” Ratzinger wrote, “but would also obscure basic values which fit in with the normal inheritance of humanity.” It has not been long ago that African Americans and Whites could intermarry. At that time, some Whites believed that Blacks would destroy the white race. Now, we see that the Pope is making a bold statement. Why are some people concerned about others’ marriage when their marriage ends in divorce because of an unfaithful partner who may be practicing deviant behavior with an individual of a different gender or that same-gender, which leads to adultery? Why get in other people’s business if your business is not perfect? Who gives a person the right to tell others who to love when your Christian bible say, “save yourself”? What would G-d say about one’s prejudice toward a sister or brother who may not share the same beliefs? Are we better than the other person because we know scriptures and many times misquote them without knowing the historial context that time in which scripture was written? If we take the scriptures literally, should we be stoning people?There are gay people in our families, pulpits, professional life who are doctors, lawyers, teachers, nurses, firefighter, ministers, essential workers, and in the church serving in every ministry whether known or unkown. There are just questions to think about.

Reference
Pope’s civil union remarks raise hopes, doubts for gay Catholics. https://www.nbcnews.com/feature/nbc-out/pope-s-civil-union-remarks-raise-hopes-doubts-gay-catholics-n1244337?cid=referral_taboolafeed

How We Ought to Talk about Racial Disparities

America’s dominant cultural lens and narrative center on white persons and portray the country’s past primarily as a tale of social innovation and progress.

Within this narrative, contemporary problems like poverty and crime are individual and communal failings. By extension, racial disparities shows poor options or behavioral patterns, not historical and continued discrimination.

This narrative minimizes or removes the impact of human trafficking and bondage and the following terrorizing and humiliation of Black people through assault, the Black Codes, and Jim Crow. This implicitly perpetuates the belief that white people are doing better as they are inherently better or are operating harder, laying the bedrock for white supremacy.

Reference

How We Ought to Talk about Racial Disparities https://www.urban.org/urban-wire/how-we-should-talk-about-racial-disparities

Healthy Mendocino:: Resource Library: Health Equity and .http://www.healthymendocino.org/resource library/index/view?id=204973681343966914

Why did Fox News stands by Laura Ingraham after she defends white supremacist?

Fox News on Friday afternoon standing by Laura Ingraham after this lady defended a white supremacist plus many other fringe individuals who have been prohibited or disciplined by huge social news agencies.

Ingraham’s defense regarding the extremists on her prime time Fox showcase “The Ingraham Angle” came during the course of a segment on Thursday regarding House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s negative feedback of facebook or twitter for not getting rid of a video clip doctored to make it looks as if she was intoxicated and slurring her statement.

Ingraham stated calls for Facebook to get rid of the video clip happened to be a “pretext or be in a position to suppress voices.”

Subsequently, throughout the segment, Ingraham exhibited revealing visual photos regarding individuals she classified as well known voices censored on social mass media.

Reference

Fox News silent after Laura Ingraham defends white …. https://www.cnn.com/2019/05/31/media/laura-ingraham-paul-nehlen-extremists/

Why is it dangerous to wear a kippah in public?

It is dangerous to determine publicly as Jewish in Germany, including wearing a kippah or yalmulka, Germany’s commissioner warned.

In an interview, Felix Klein told the Berliner Morgenpost on May 24 that he could not endorse that Jews wear a kippah everywhere and any time in Germany. Klein said servants that are public should be more educated on how to combat anti-Semitism in Germany.

Recent government statistics showed a 20 percent rise in the number of anti-Semitic crimes reported within the past year, with an overall total of about 1,800 in the year of 2018. The vast majority of crimes for which a perpetrator or motive is well known were related to the far-right wing.

When looking at the controversial interview published in newspapers of the Funke Media Group, Klein – appointed to his position into the Interior Ministry just last year – was inquired about the security of wearing the traditional Jewish head covering.
Reference
Dangerous to wear a kippah in public, Germany’s anti …. https://www.jta.org/2019/05/26/global/dangerous-to-wear-a-kippah-in-public-germanys-anti-semitism-czar-says

Jews in Dayton cautioned to keep away from the KKK rally

The representative of the Jewish Community Relations Council of Dayton called on the Jewish public to avoid a Ku Klux Klan rally arranged for Saturday in the Ohio metropolis.

Rabbi Ari Ballaban mentioned in a statement issued previously this week that a counter gathering planned to take place right next to the Honorable Sacred Knights, an Indiana-based white supremacist group, would just give the crowd the conflict it is looking for.

Ballaban called on the Jewish community to either remain home or attend the “positive alternative programming” sponsored by the localized NAACP chapter and a coalition of some forty city organizations. Titled “An Afternoon of Love, Unity, Peace and Diversity,” the program is being presented about a mile from the KKK gathering in the downtown area Courthouse Square.

About twenty participants of the KKK cluster are anticipated to march on Saturday. They reportedly will be permitted to carry legal sidearm weapons but not rifles, bats or shields, Newsweek reported. About one thousand demonstrators are also anticipated.

The city authorized the rally in February after the application to use the general public space was filled out correctly and submitted.

Mayor Nan Whaley also called on citizens to steer away of the KKK gathering.

“This hate group that is coming in from outside the community wants to instigate troubles in the community and people need to end that from happening,” she advised Ohio’s Fox45. The people actually do not need people to go downtown because that is what this hate group wants, and we don’t want to render this hate group exactly what they want.

Whaley in her comments additionally stated that Judaism standards the preservation of life on top almost anything else.

Can you believe that Russian documents reveal the desire to sow racial discord — and violence — in the U.S.?

Russians who were connected to interference into the 2016 U.S. election discussed ambitious intends to stoke unrest as well as violence within the U.S. as recently as 2018, based on documents reviewed by NBC News.

The documents — communications between associates of Yevgeny Prigozhin, a Kremlin-linked oligarch indicted by special counsel Robert Mueller for previous influence operations resistant to the U.S. — laid out an innovative new plot to govern and radicalize African-Americans. The plans show that Prigozhin’s circle has sought to exploit racial tensions well beyond Russia’s social media marketing and misinformation efforts linked with the 2016 election.

The documents were obtained through the Dossier Center, a London-based investigative project funded by Russian opposition figure Mikhail Khodorkovsky. NBC News has not yet independently verified the materials, but forensic analysis by the Dossier Center appeared to substantiate the communications.

One document said that President Donald Trump’s election had “deepened conflicts in American society” and suggested that, if successful, the influence project would “undermine the country’s territorial integrity and military and economic potential.”

The revelations come as U.S. intelligence agencies have warned of probable Russian meddling within the 2020 election.

The documents contained proposals for all ways to further exacerbate racial discord in the future, including a suggestion to recruit African-Americans and transport them to camps in Africa “for combat prep and trained in sabotage.” Those recruits would then be sent back to America to foment violence and strive to establish a pan-African state in the Southern U.S., including South Carolina, Georgia, Alabama, Mississippi and Louisiana.

There’s no indication that the plan — which is light on details — was ever put into action, however it offers a fresh exemplory instance of the mindset around Russian efforts to sow discord when you look at the U.S.

The blueprint, entitled “Development Strategy of a Pan-African State on U.S. Territory,” floated the thought of enlisting poor, formerly incarcerated African-Americans “who have experience in organized crime groups” as well as people in “radical black movements for participation in civil disobedience actions.”

The target was to “destabilize the internal situation within the U.S.”

Florida’s police was caught using mug shots of African American men for target practice

A South Florida family is furious at North Miami Beach law enforcement after mug shots of African American men were utilized as targets at a shooting range for law enforcement education.

It absolutely was a typical Saturday morning last month when Sgt. Valerie Deant arrived at the shooting range in Medley, or so she thought.

Deant, who plays clarinet aided by the Florida Army National Guard’s 13th Army Band, along with her fellow soldiers were during the shooting range for his or her annual weapons qualifications training.

What the soldiers discovered once they entered the range made them angry: mug shots of African American men apparently used as targets by North Miami Beach law enforcement snipers, that has used the number ahead of the Guardsmen.

A lot more startling for Deant, among the images was her brother. It had been Woody Deant’s mug shot that taken fifteen years ago, after he had been arrested in connection to a drag race in 2000 that left two different people dead. His mug shot was one of the pictures of five minorities used as targets by North Miami Beach law enforcement, them all riddled by bullets.

Find out more at: http://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/family-furious-after-finding-law enforcement-using-mug-shots-target-practice?fbclid=IwAR0Va6yOV35Bf6fFYBExSiuBRSY0nESPjUcwzFww6CZDcf6ShTrXwKPQjt8

Missouri passes the strongest abortion bills in U.S.,sending a message to women in the state

Missouri is sending a message to women, and it is time for women to stop being silent about the issue. Women’s rights are at stake. The government should not legislate human bodies. If they do this cease to be a free society.

Missouri’s Republican-led Senate passed a bill to outlaw abortions at eight weeks of pregnancy. This happened hour after Alabama’s governor signed an abortion ban into law. However, the Missouri bill needs to have another vote of approval in the GOP-led House which is headed by Republican Gov. Mike Parson, who voiced support for this bill.

The bill would include exceptions for medical emergencies, but not for pregnancies caused by rape or incest. The doctor who performs an abortion would face five to 15 years in prison for violating the eight-week cutoff. The women who receive abortions would not be put on trial.

Republican Senate handler Sen. Andrew Koenig identified this bill as “one of the strongest” abortion bills yet passed in the U.S.

The state of Missouri has the most restricting abortion access regulations in the nation. Missourians in search of an abortion are open to a 72-hour postponing period and just one abortion clinic is present in the state.
Missouri joins an undertaking of GOP-dominated state legislatures encouraged by the probability that a more conservative Supreme Court may well reverse its milestone ruling legalizing the practice. Its senators voted 60 minutes after Alabama’s governor endorsed the most severe abortion prohibition in the country, making executing an abortion a crime in approximately all cases.

Does Trumps new immigration plan sway Republicans from not addressing DACA?

The White House is planning to discharge a broad outline of recommended immigration reforms targeted at unifying congressional Republicans about the concern, following weeks of conversations between senior adviser Jared Kushner and a lot of conservative teams.

However, the proposition is short of trustworthy information and omits discourse on the Obama-era Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program that Democrats have frequently stated they desire to solve.

President Donald Trump is scheduled to reveal the master plan Thursday. The White House is advertising the blueprint as responding to border protection and shifting toward a merit-based immigration structure, which provides personal preference to highly trained and educated persons.

However, the release of the innovative concepts comes among discord inside the Trump current administration over how to deal with immigration guidelines.

The discord led to the latest departure of Homeland Security Secretary Kirstjen Nielsen, who also was a part of primary interactions in the White House concerning an immigration strategy.

The White House approach to change the country’s immigration structure likewise comes up against the backdrop of the steep uptick of worries on the southern national boundaries. Additional individuals have been apprehended unlawfully crossing the US-Mexico boundary this fiscal year compared to any year since 2009, as outlined by Customs and Border Protection statistics.

America has been fighting for equal right since it became a country, do you believe that the old Equal Rights Amendment is not viable today?

Equal Rights Amendment resolutions are introduced in every Congress meeting since 1923. This period of Congress is virtually no different. There seemed to be a hearing on the Equal Rights Amendment in the House currently. Many will attempt to inform an individual that ratification is just around the corner. On the other hand, the Equal Rights Amendment they may be speaking about has vanished. That has not necessarily halted the Alice Paul Institute, for example, from conversing up a unique three state technique concerning ratifying the 1972 Equal Rights Amendment.

The motion was put before the states and approved by 35 for ratification. Close to four decades Social Justice Activists persuaded Nevada And Illinois to ratify the Amendment which left the Amendment one state of being added to the Constitution, the activist would like us to believe. That is not the case.

Five reasons why the Equal Rights Amendment sent to the states in 1972 is no longer viable.

First, it left Congress with a due date of seven years concerning state ratification. The time clock happened to run out on the 1972 Equal Rights Amendment along with 35 states on board. Active supporters and workers would like people to disregard that reality. Second, Congress later approved, and President Carter authorized in 1978 an expansion to 1982. The active supporters and workers would like people to overlook that due date also. The Congressional Research Service records that this expansion indicates that a neverending ratification interval is probably not allowable.In other thoughts, the expansion that Equal Rights Amendment supporters wanted in 1978 undercuts their particular situation currently that each ratification deadlines happen to be unacceptable. Furthermore, no added states ratified the Equal Rights Amendment concerning 1979 and the end of the prolonged ratification due date in 1982.

Third, five states that in the beginning ratified the Equal Rights Amendment ended up rescinding their authorization before the initial due date involving seven years. Active supporters and workers declare the rescissions are unacceptable and really should be overlooked; however, it is certainly not easy. Article V of the Constitution provides that amendments could be recommended by way of a convention referred to us by our elected representatives “around the application of the legislatures to two-thirds of the number of states.” It has been debatable whether a particular state could make or rescind the current application.

Many groups endorse the Equal Rights Amendment signed a letter which meant they were trying to rescind Article V convention. There of these stated tried later on to rescind their applications for an Article V convention. It is a difficult decision for a state to change its minds about a convention, but not on a proposed amendment.

Fourth, Equal Rights Amendment activists prefer to explain that this 27th Amendment, the newest conjunction with the Constitution, has been suggested in 1789 but not ultimately ratified till May 1992. What are the 47 years given that Congress delivered the Equal Rights Amendment to the states, these people inquire, as compared to the 203 years involving proposal and ratification of the 27th Amendment? On this concern, on the other hand, there exists a variation with a massive difference in that the 27th Amendment had zero ratification due date.

Fifth, several courtroom judgments weaken the idea the fact that Equal Rights Amendment delivered to the states in 1972 continues to be in existence. The Supreme Court made the decision Dillon versus Gloss in 1921, two years before the very first Equal Rights Amendment was recommended. As the Congressional Research Service had summarized it, the justices presented that this ratification of the Constitutional Amendment needs to happen within a reasonable period following the Amendment is recommended. That case included the 18th Amendment which, like the 1972 Equal Rights Amendment, had a ratification due date regarding seven years.

In the 1939 decision in Coleman versus Miller, the Supreme Court presented that several components assist in identifying a realistic periodto ratify an amendment for the Constitution. Most of all, though, the justices declared that Congress, not the courts, ought to decide. Congress did exactly that in 1972 and 1978, figuring out that a maximum of Ten years was initially sufficient to determine that three fourths from the states wanted the Equal Rights Amendment in the Constitution. The truth is that they failed to.

In the 1982 decision in Idaho versus Freeman, a district court presented that the authentic Equal Rights Amendment ratification due date seemed to be constitutional. The due date expansion itself was not constitutional, and the ratifications rescissions happen to be legitimate. The Supreme Court left this judgment once the 1982 ratification due date passed and made the case moot. However, the justices failed to tackle the value of the findings from the lower court.

Most likely the active supporters and workers may have far better fortune with the quantity of Equal Rights Amendment settlements launched this season. However, it is merely fictional the Equal Rights Amendment proposed throughout the 92nd Congress is still on the affirmation trail currently. This has been inactive at least THIRTY-SEVEN years.