Call It A Comeback
Apparently, environmentalists practice fear and I’ll demonstrate it by pointing out bad acts by
1) Local school administrators
2) Local Police
3) TSA
4) Border Patrol
5) FBI
But nothing about environmentalists.
Just say no to the stream of consciousness column.
I’ll just say I was stuck watching him last night due to Ms. ArchPundit’s Duran Duran fetish.
Who the hell gave this guy a talk show and why? The guest was the guy who plays Lex on Smallville and he kept bailing Daly out since Daly has no personality and thus no reaction.
Obama started his PAC calling it the Hope Fund.
Obama’s PAC, called Hope Fund, will give Obama more leeway to raise money than he has with his existing campaign committee, said Ron Michaelson, an expert in campaign finance, and David Axelrod, a consultant for Obama.
Gene Callahan, a longtime observer of Illinois politics, said the move signals Obama’s ambition for a larger national role, even while he represents Illinois on Capitol Hill. Robert Gibbs, Obama’s spokesman, could not be reached for comment.
Lots of people wring their hands over such moves and make sure to point out that the Senator is keeping an eye out for Illinois.
I think that is a bunch of pretense–I hope to see lots of Iowa and New Hampshire donations on those reports. Probably should wait a reporting cycle or two, but you can never start too early for 2012.
And to Jason Gerwig who complains about it on behalf of the Republicans–such donations also helps one get better committee assignments which does help the Citizens of Illinois.
Via Capitol Fax is a story from the Washington Times about Hynes refusing to pay the bill for flu vaccines that were never imported (though the last few days everyone in my family have been wishing they had).
But the fascinating bit to me is this:
The signed contract with Ecosse didn’t reach the comptroller’s office until Jan. 24, and with flu season half over. Hynes wants to know why the deal was signed.
Under law, contracts are supposed to be submitted within 30 days. So does that mean the contract was signed between Christmas and the 24th? I doubt it.
From Vasyl in e-mail
As it turns out, I’m the confused commenter on Rich Miller’s site about the gay rights bill. ?Here’s my quickie analysis:
1) The gay rights bill does not amend the exclusion for religious organizations. ?The bill’s language gets codified within the section of the Section of the Human Rights Act that uses a definition of employer that excludes religious organizations (to a limited extent) — so the bill would automatically exclude religious organizations.
2) Here’s how I read the religious exemption, with bracketed material to help organize the language:
“Employer” does not include any religious
? ? [1] corporation
? ? [2] association
? ? [3] educational institution
? ? [4] society
? ? [5] or non-profit nursing institution conducted by and for those who rely upon treatment by prayer through spiritual means in accordance with the tenets of a recognized church or religious denomination
[this exclusion applies] with respect to the employment of individuals of a particular religion to perform work connected with the carrying on by such corporation, association, educational institution, society or non-profit nursing institution of its activities.
3) Once the exclusion is parsed out, it seems that a religious institution can hire only members of its own religion. ?So, a Catholic school (e.g.) can hire only practicing and faithful Catholics. ?Thus (and in accordance with Catholic teachings), a Catholic church must hire celibate homosexuals, but may refuse to hire homosexuals who engage in same-sex relations. ?A religious institution that believes the mere state of being gay is sinful (i.e., you can’t be a member of the religion if you’re gay), could refuse to hire that person.
4) So, why did Carol Ronen say what she said? ?My best bet is that the staff analyst read only the bill, and not the already-existing statute. ?(Btw, that’s the flaw in the Anaclerio memo.) ?So, when Ronen was asked about religious insitutions, she simply answered with her opinion rather than with a legal analysis. ?The opinion got reported in the Sun Times, and LaBarbera goes off on his rant. ?I’d like to see the transcript of the debate before going with the short quotes in the Sun Times article to determine legislative intent.
So, I hope that makes things clearer — or maybe it makes things muddier.
_______________________________________
This is the same as how I read the law and the past restrictions put on who is affected by anti-discrimination laws. My Matt Hale example isn’t meant as satire, but as a real exception to the law that has long been allowed.
For those who insist differently, the same is held true along gender lines or the Catholic Church would be hiring Female priests as would several conservative Protestant denominations that do not allow female ministers.
LaBarbera and friends are terribly worried about ?No Name Calling Week?.
Really, because you know, it’s all gay and stuff.
How do we know? Because in the list of sponsors of “No Name Calling Week” is the Gay, Lesbian and Straight Education Network
Advocates for Youth
American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee
American Association of Colleges for Teacher Education
American Counseling Association
American School Counselor Association
American School Health Association
Amnesty International
Anti-Defamation League
Asian Pacific Islanders for Human Rights
Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development
Big Brothers Big Sisters of America
Children?s Defense Fund
Council for Children with Behavioral Disorders
Council of Chief State School Officers
Educators for Social Responsibility
Facing History and Ourselves
Gay, Lesbian and Straight Education Network
Girls Incorporated
Girl Scouts of the USA
Human Relations Media
Human Rights Watch
Mix It Up
National Association for Gifted Children
National Association for Multicultural Education
National Association of Elementary School
Principals
National Association of School Nurses
National Association of School Psychologists
National Association of Secondary School Principals
National Association of Social Workers
National Conference for Community and Justice
National Education Association
National Mental Health Association
National Middle School Association
National Urban League
New Moon Publishing
Planned Parenthood Federation of America
School Social Work Association of America
Simon & Schuster Children?s Publishing
Simon Wiesenthal Center?Museum of Tolerance
Skipping Stones, Inc.
Women?s Educational Media
Women’s Sports Foundation
Even if one disagrees with one’s sexual orientation, is LaBarbera and gang suggesting that nonviolence and nondegrading responses aren’t the proper response?
he assault an traditional American culture continues. Would you believe that the very day the ?gay rights? bill was passed in the General Assembly, State Representative Larry McKeon, who admits to being a homosexual, has again introduced pro-?gay? legislation – this time seeking health benefits for same-sex ?partners? of Chicago Public School Teachers.
Inch by inch, step by step – homosexual activists are pushing their agenda in an attempt to incrementally implement (in law) acceptance and government protection of dangerous, perverse but changeable behavior.
This legislation might as well be called the ?Homosexual Teacher Recruitment Bill?, as it most certainly will attract homosexuals activists to Chicago classrooms. Yes, there is a shortage of good teachers in Chicago, but we don? want gay or lesbian teachers spending 5-6 hours a day with your children anymore than the Boy Scouts wanted homosexual scout leaders escorting young men on camping trips. Make no mistake, this bill will be provide an incentive to draw homosexual activist teachers to come to Chicago schools. Not exactly something parents want their children exposed to.
Of course, many private companies already offer such benefits and while the cost issue is the big one currently, the extension of benefits isn’t that controversial. Even more bizarre is his suggestion at the bottom:
Governor Blagojevich?s signature of SB3186, guarantees that homosexual teachers the ?right? to talk about their homosexual partner in the same way that a normal married teacher can talk about their spouse. Imagine the day when Mr. Jones? partner drops off lunch, and before leaving exchange a quick kiss. Is this really something you want your children to think is acceptable or normal?
Of course, the CPS had a policy of non-discrimination based on sexual orientation before so the impact of SB 3186 on the CPS was, nothing.
Joining The Peoria Pundit, are Springer Radio–and not the Jerry Springer show, but daily talk show out of Ohio. I haven’t been able to listen yet, but given its on when Randi Rhodes is on Air America, it might be welcome relief. Tomorrow–It’s new release day on XRT.
Second, is a new ad linking to a site focusing on the effects of Bush’s idiotic plan to privatize social security. More on that later. Dude, Where’s My Retirement is an interesting take and I’m glad to see it given the long touting of the idea that most young people don’t expect to see benefits. Young people during the cold war expected a nuclear holocaust too….
Anyway, check out all three sponsors–they keep the bandwidth flowing.
Peter LaBarbera is having coniption after coniption over the passing of SB 3186 which includes sexual orientation in the Illinois Human Rights Act
Rich Miller is doing admirable work dispelling Peter’s rantings, but I’d like to add a little bit. First, here is the simple legal analysis concerning the law.
I have to admit, as one Rich’s commenters does, I’m quite confused by the legal analysis because SB 3186 doesn’t seem to affect this portion of the Human Rights Act
(2) “Employer” does not include any religious
corporation, association, educational institution, society, or non‑profit nursing institution conducted by and for those who rely upon treatment by prayer through spiritual means in accordance with the tenets of a recognized church or religious denomination with respect to the employment of individuals of a particular religion to perform work connected with the carrying on by such corporation, association, educational institution, society or non‑profit nursing institution of its activities.
The lawyers out there can correct me, but my view on this is that the above paragraph would make any religious organization able to discriminate based on any characteristic relevant to the tenets of the recognized church or religious denomination. So the UCC couldn’t discriminate based on sexual orientation, but the Catholic Church could.
The alternative view, if I’m guessing correctly, is that if someone was Gay and Catholic, they couldn’t be discriminated against.
Where this is relevant to other characteristics is in race where Matt Hale’s church is free to not hire a black person because the World Church of Losers believes they are inferior. Any other organization couldn’t discriminate, but in such a case, becasue the tenets of the religion hold that being white is part of the religion, the corporate versions of the church are free to discriminate against any non-whites.
The parallel is exactly the same and while I don’t have it at my fingertips, the case law is pretty clear so I’m unclear on why there is even a big deal about clarifying the 1st Amendment Rights–it’s already been done with other classifications that have been granted protected status.
IOW, Peter LaBarbera is full of shit. Nothing new there though.
IlliniPundit (who will soon be on the blogroll) and Rich Miller at the Capitol Fax point out the SBOE’s server is sending internal links outward. Either they are purposely sending external links outward or they have their system configured wrong–either way, the system should be open to linking so that the media and others can effectively point towards campaign finance documents.
ArchPundit