Virginia GOP Targets Abortion Clinics - and Women - Yet Again

The twin pillars of The Family Foundation - a Christofascist hate group that parades under the guise of a "family values" organization - are (i) insuring that gays are stigmatized and kept inferior under the laws of Virginia and (ii) ending all abortions in Virginia as well as restricting access to contraception.  Since The Family Foundation controls the Virginia GOP, its agenda and policies become those of the Republican Party of Virginia.  Anyone who claims differently is either a bald face liar or trying desperately to convince themselves that the Virginia GOP hasn't become a religious party.  A number of my former GOP colleagues are in this latter category as they stick their heads in the sand rather than face the reality of the Christofascist take over.  Given the reality of who controls the Virginia GOP, it is no surprise that once again abortion clinics have been subjected to costly regulations and requirements not applicable to comparable out patient surgery facilities.  The goal is simply to shut them all down.  A piece in Politico looks at the latest effort to end abortions and the availability of contraception in Virginia.  Leading the charge is sodomy law supporter, Ken "Kookinelli" Cuccinelli.  Here are highlights:

The Virginia Board of Health gave final approval to a sweeping set of regulations for abortion clinics Friday.   Abortion-rights supporters say the regulations — which would require many clinics in the state to undergo costly renovations to stay in business — have one goal: to put abortion clinics out of existence.

“This is a political attack on abortion, designed to outlaw women’s health centers in the state,” said Jennifer Dalven, director of the ACLU Reproductive Freedom Project.

Under the new rules, which are the result of a law passed by the Virginia Legislature in 2011, a Virginia clinic that performs more than five abortions a month is categorized as a hospital. And that means Virginia’s 20 licensed abortion providers must now meet a host of new architectural requirements — which could mean anything from replacing the ceilings, to widening the hallways, to installing a drinking fountain.

Elizabeth Nash, state issues manager at the Guttmacher Institute, said about half the states have structural requirements in place for abortion clinics. But Virginia’s new rules, which are similar to those in Utah and Kansas, are “just about the most restrictive,” she said.  Rosemary Wilbur Codding, owner and director of the Falls Church Healthcare Center in Virginia, which provides abortions and gynecological care, said complying with all of the regulations could require her small facility to add five rooms and could cost up to $1 million.

“Realistically, in this climate, for any small business to be able to invest $1 million in unneeded upgrades is just outside of the spectrum of even thinking about,” she continued. “I’m not even sure how I’d manage $100,000.”  Codding said she’s not sure how she can afford to keep her medical center open — but she’s determined to fight the regulations.

Since the law was passed in 2011, finalizing the regulations has been a laborious, contentious process. Last year, Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli, a Republican who is anti-abortion, refused to certify the first round of regulations approved by the board, which would have “grandfathered in” existing clinics so they wouldn’t have to rebuild or renovate extensively.

Republicans Making Unforced Mistakes

In its quest to thoroughly prostitute itself the the ignorance embracing hate merchants of the Christofascist ranks of the GOP base, the RNC unanimously adopted a resolution demanded by an ugly who's who of the snake oil peddling hate groups and religious based charlatans.  Yes, I am talking about the so-called "family values" crowd with increasing has made hate and bigotry - and often racism - the modern face of Christianity.   Even Jennifer Rubin, who hardly counts among my favorite columnist, sees the idiocy of the RNC vote and the long term harm being done to the GOP brand.  She lets loose in a Washington Post column.  Here are excerpts:

As the Republican Party struggles to broaden its appeal and modernize its outlook, it will make mistakes.

A such blunder came Friday when the Republican National Committee, unanimously and without discussion, approved a resolution against same-sex marriage. It affirms the committee’s support “for marriage as the union of one man and one woman” and calls for the Supreme Court to defend “the sanctity of marriage.” The best that can be said is that the language is vague.  .   .  .  .    there is no sugar-coating this, or excusing the temper tantrum thrown by social conservatives (who threatened to bolt the party, whatever that means) to force this through.

Had RNC chairman Reince Priebus been on the ball, he might have included language expressing tolerance for other views or affirming states’ rights to define marriage. Instead, the RNC made itself an easy target for marriage-equality activists, the press and skeptics of its more open attitude.

Paul’s errors [during a speech at Howard University] are not of the magnitude of the RNC’s, to be sure. And unlike the committee, he demonstrated courage, not cowardice under the threat of his own party’s extremists, in going to Howard.

In the long run, it is much more important what Paul, Rubio, GOP governors and other party stars do than what a bureaucratic panel of no-names say at a retreat. It is the leaders, if they really are leaders, who will set the pace; the party regulars will follow. Paul and the others need to keep at it, improving and refining their message as they go.

Republicans are trying to rethink and revive their party, but not all Republicans are. Nevertheless, good-faith errors in pursuit of inclusion are forgivable; cowering from the threat of right-wing extremists is not. Somebody should think about a Sister Soldjah moment; some Republicans deserve it.

New Zealand Set to Approve Gay Marriage

While the justices of the U. S. Supreme Court likely ponder how to dodge having to rule directly on gay marriage on a broad scale, another ally of America is poised to approve gay marriage through the legislative process - something that will never happen in Virginia until the power of the Christofascists at The Family Foundation is broken and/or the GOP ceases to be a major political party.   TVNZ looks at developments in New Zealand where gay marriages could start in less than six months.  Here are highlights:

Politicians look set to make history this week with gay marriage likely to become legal.
However, the first wedding will not take place until mid-August.

Labour MP Louisa Wall's marriage equality member's bill is due to have its third reading in Parliament on Wednesday night.   The bill passed its committee stages with 77 votes to 43 last month and little change was anticipated for the final vote.

Big crowds, including a few celebrities, were expected to be in Parliament's public gallery to witness the vote.

The passing of the legislation was historic and would remove the last remaining legal inequalities for homosexual people, Hague said.  "After this bill passes we will effectively have equality under the law, which is one of the basic human rights."

Viewing parties and celebrations were planned to be held around the country if the bill does pass, Hague said.

The Conservative Party and lobby group Family First are both running publicity campaigns against same-sex marriage.  Family First spokesman Bob McCoskrie wants people to sign a "marriage pledge" saying they will not vote for an MP or political party that supports Wall's bill.

Full equality under the law.  Something America and Virginia claim to honor yet still fail to deliver.

 

Quote of the Day: Dan Savage on Religion

Like gay activist Dan Savage, I was raised as a Roman Catholic and church and religion dominated a great deal of my years through high school and even after.   However, unlike Dan, it took me far longer to face my sexual orientation and to ultimately let go of much of the brainwashing I had under gone as a Catholic youth in the late 1950's and 1960's.  In a column in the New York Times, Dan Savage reviews a new book, "Does Jesus Really Love Me?," by Jeff Chu.    The book among other things profiles gays and lesbians who are struggling to reconcile their faiths with their sex orientation.  Some, like some of my personal friends remain tortured by the indoctrination they received as children and find themselves unable to move on and see their faith traditions for what they are: made made constructs with money, power and control as their ultimate motivating forces.  In this category I would definite include the Roman Catholic Church, the Southern Baptist Convention, the Russian Orthodox Church (while for centuries worked hand in glove witht he rulers of Imperial Russia), and many fundamentalist denominations. Yet others end up rejecting religion completely.  Sadly, Chu is less kind to these individuals that the tortured gays who do not walk away from toxic denominations.  In the Column, Savage also talks about his own evolution.  Here are highlights:

A great many of the stories Chu relates are grim — I eventually lost count of the number of suicide attempts — but there are moments of humor. Andrew Freeman decides to move to Sweden at 26 in a last-ditch effort to turn himself straight. “I thought if there’s ever a place to find a beautiful woman, it’s Sweden,” he tells Chu. “Then I got there and I thought . . . this isn’t helping anything. Sweden has beautiful men!” 

And there is hope in this book, too.  .   .  .  .  A few months later she reversed herself, asked for her son’s forgiveness and gave him her blessing to come out. “I love this denomination,” Eva Sullivan-Knoff tells Chu, “but I love my son more.” 

A million moments like this are playing out all over the country. Taken together, they’re building toward a cultural tipping point, and as a result, the marriage of Christianity and homophobia is increasingly harming the churches that espouse it. The damage done by religious bigots used to go one way: churches preached homophobia, gays and lesbians suffered. Increasingly, religious bigots are hurting themselves.

But while Chu is gentle with gay people who are working to reconcile their sexualities and their faiths — straining in some cases to do so — he is far less generous to those of us who are no longer believers. For gay people who’ve left organized religion, the condescension that creeps in around the edges of his narrative begins to feel like contempt.

Mr. Byers, as we learned on the previous page, gave up his parental rights after his wife divorced him; his wife’s second husband adopted his children, whom he hasn’t seen in more than a decade; his brother refuses to speak to him; and his parents think his lifestyle is despicable. Maybe such acts of emotional and spiritual violence, committed in the name of Christian beliefs, account for the sadness Chu detected. 

Chu worries that gay people like Mr. Byers have been “pushed out of the church.” That’s not true for all of us. My father was a Catholic deacon, my mother was a lay minister and I thought about becoming a priest. I was in church every Sunday for the first 15 years of my life. Now I spend my Sundays on my bike, on my snowboard or on my husband. I haven’t spent my post-Catholic decades in a sulk, wishing the church would come around on the issue of homosexuality so that I could start attending Mass again. I didn’t abandon my faith. I saw through it. The conflict between my faith and my sexuality set that process in motion, but the conclusions I reached at the end of that process — there are no gods, religion is man-made, faith can be a force for good or evil — improved my life. I’m grateful that my sexuality prompted me to think critically about faith. Pushed out? No. I walked out.

He captures the fractures and conflict at a moment when the issue of what to do with L.G.B.T. people is tearing Christian denominations apart. 

Like Savage, I wasn't thrown out of the Catholic Church.  I left and happily so - especially as the sex abuse coverage exploded in 2002.  By leaving Catholicism, I felt clean as opposed to those who remain and continue to bankroll the criminal conspiracy orchestrated from the Vatican.    If I do have any regrets, they focus on the lives of Catholic youths who continue to be warped and damaged by a church that is about everything but the true Gospel message of Christ.  It distresses me at times when I wonder how many of these young Catholics will see suicide as the only escape.  Unlike Dan Savage, I do not count myself an atheist.  I do believe that there is a high power or creator.  By I believe that this higher power bears little resemblance to the God fabricated by men seeking wealth, power and control of others.  Religion can be a force for good.  But if one tallies up the evil done over the centuries, I suspect the scales reveal that religion - especially fundamentalist Christianity and fundamentalist Islam - are a net evil in the world.

Should Democrats and Liberals Embrace Obama's Budget Proposals?

It was expected that the GOP - especially the saboteurs in the House of Representatives would reject any budget proposal coming from the White House.  But some liberals are acting nearly as hysterically about some budget cuts contained in the proposal (e.g., I just got a breathless e-mail from Daily Kos).  The reality is that to achieve  a workable mechanism to reduce the national debt bot cuts and tax increases are needed.  Tax increases alone will not solve the problem.  In short, some type of workable compromise needs to be cobbled together, including addressing social security and Medicare adjustments - and I say this as one not too many years from qualifying for both programs.  The adjustments proposed are minuscule.  Robert Shrum makes the case for less hysteria from the left and more of a unified front to put the pressure on the GOP to strike a meaningful deal that avoids the GOP goal of voucherizing Medicare and Social Security.  Here are  highlights from a piece in The Daily Beast:

You would think President Obama was proposing to repeal the New Deal. (Well, actually, that’s Paul Ryan.)

This wasn’t the Republican reaction, of course, to a budget that was pre-dead on arrival, dismissed in advance by House Speaker John Boehner and disdained by the Tea-spooked Senate Republican leader Mitch McConnell, who couldn’t take yes for an answer when the president called for the entitlement changes McConnell had previously promised “would get Republicans interested in new revenue.” Aside from the fiscal fallout of a failed budgetary process that could slow the economic recovery, the episode points to a likely and grim outcome of these two years—that not much will emerge living or lasting from this Congress.

And don’t just blame GOP members, largely trapped in their gerrymandered red districts, incapable of doing right even if they recognize it, as they cower before the threat of primary challenges. The Democratic base, and prominent Democrats in the Senate and House, rushed to scorn the president’s Social Security and Medicare reforms as a betrayal of progressive principle.   .  .  . . Rhode Island’s Sheldon Whitehouse insisted that Social Security “has no place in this debate over federal spending.”
 .

That’s an amazing statement, given that Social Security and Medicare account for 35 percent of federal outlays, and the trust funds for both are in serious and not-so-long-term trouble. We are far from the bipartisan moment in the 1980s when Ronald Reagan, House Speaker Tip O’Neill, and Alan Greenspan rescued Social Security—by, yes, gradually raising the retirement age.

But what’s the reality, not the abstract jeremiads about a sacrosanct safety net, but the specific dollars-and-cents impacts of the proposals? The president didn’t ask for any fundamental changes in either Social Security or Medicare, which the House Republican budget would voucherize.

Obama would shift the annual cost of living increases for Social Security to a new formula with the unfortunate name “chained CPI.” But the consequences for benefits are not draconian, or even substantial—and as I’ve argued before, the formula has been altered in the past. It’s not sacrosanct, a matter of basic principle, even if the program is. Chained CPI would initially yield about $2 less a month in the average Social Security check. And as its effects multiplied, in 20 years, the difference would be $126—approximately $2,100 instead of $2,200 a month.

Beyond that, the president of the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities Bob Greenstein, one of the landmark defenders of the safety net and a passionate advocate but a cooler head, pointed out that Obama was offering essential offsets to chained CPI: “[His] budget includes a series of adjustments and protections for the very old and for people with low incomes... It should prevent an increase in the overall poverty rates among the very old.”

As for Medicare, the president is seeking cuts in payments to providers, especially the pharmaceutical industry. Good for him. He also wants wealthier seniors to pay higher premiums and he proposes a surcharge on those who buy the most generous and expensive Medigap insurance to cover out-of-pocket costs that Medicare doesn’t. 

And what’s the alternative to calibrated entitlement reforms that reform rather than gut Social Security and Medicare? Virginia Democratic Sen. Mark Warner explains: “You squeeze early childhood programs, you squeeze Head Start, you squeeze education and veterans.” Or now, or later, Congress could lift the eligibility age for Medicare to 67 or beyond, potentially leaving millions of seniors without any coverage while saving hardly any money.

The question here, the question the president had to answer, is what’s both acceptable and attainable.  .   .   .   .   .   The Obama budget does raise taxes on the wealthy by capping their deductions—which is one reason Democrats should rally to it. And there’s another: it increases spending now, while back-loading steeper deficit reduction, to support and speed the pace of the recovery. Do Democrats really think it’s smart to go into the midterms weighed down by the vulnerability of a sluggish economy? That didn’t work out so well for them in 2010.

They are concerned about another vulnerability—being tagged as the Social Security, Medicare-cutting party. The chairman of the House Republican campaign committee promptly and predictably assailed the president’s budget as “a shocking attack on seniors.” It was high hypocrisy: he had voted for the Ryan budget’s thermonuclear attack on seniors.

So Democrats, fearful for different reasons than the GOP, are now distancing themselves from Obama.  .   .   .  .  Just because the GOP is unserious about government doesn’t mean Democrats should be unserious too. The president has been responsible and brave. In any event, his party could fight out 2014 on Medicare and Social Security against an opposition that has a long record, and a contemporary one, of inveterate hostility to the social safety net.

Democrats could prove willing, as they showed during the battle at the fiscal cliff, to compromise—and settle for the Obama budget. They should.

We non-Republicans need to turn the tables on the GOP by accepting minimal adjustments to Social Security and Medicare and reminding the public what the Paul Ryan budget passed by the House GOP would do in comparison.  The GOP hypocrisy will need to be slammed head on.

Ireland - The Next Catholic Country to Approve Gay Marriage

This past week saw Uruguay enact full gay marriage and the French Senate approve both gay marriage and gay adoption, all but guaranteeing that gay marriage will be legal soon in France.  And these developments have taken place despite the strenuous - dare we say nearly hysterical - opposition of the Roman Catholic Church hierarchy and its front organizations.   Now, it appears that Ireland - once a bastion of Catholicism where the Church wielded immense power - may be moving towards full gay marriage as well.  All of which, in the view of this blog is a very positive thing.  The Church needs to be pushed out of politics completely despite the hierarchy's longing of the "good old days" of the Inquisition and a time when the Pope could make rulers bend to his whims.  As the Irish Examiner reports, the Irish Constitutional Convention has approved a referendum of gay marriage an, based on recent polls and the Irish public's contempt for the Church hierarchy, the referendum will likely pass.  First these excerpts from the Irish Examiner story:

The Constitutional Convention has passed a vote calling for a referendum on same-sex marriage.

The Convention decided to recommend that the Constitution be changed to allow for civil marriage for same-sex couples, with 79 of the 100 members in favour of the motion.  Nineteen delegates voted against, with one 'no opinion'.

A report will now be drafted and the recommendations of the Constitutional Convention will now go to Government.

After the report is officially sent to the Oireachtas, the Government are committed to responding within four months by way of a debate in the Oireachtas and if it agrees with the recommendation to amend the Constitution, to include a timeframe for a referendum.

The result was announced by Convention Chairman Tom Arnold, to applause from the floor. 

As for the polls on public support, a story in the Irish Times earlier this year looked at the 75% of the population that supported civil marriage for same sex couples.  Here are excerpts:

There has been a 12 percentage point increase in support of same-sex civil marriages since 2008, according to a new poll.

The poll, which was carried out in late 2012 by Millward Brown Lansdowne for Marriage Equality, shows 75 per cent of people would vote yes in a referendum to extend civil marriage to same-sex couples. In 2008, 63 per cent of respondents said they would vote yes.

The only age range where the majority of people said they would vote no is the over-65s, which went from 27 per cent in 2008 to 43 per cent.

A further two out of three people said they felt Ireland’s reputation as a modern society will be strengthened by allowing same-sex couples to have civil marriages, while three out of five people agree that allowing same-sex couples to have civil marriages will promote a more tolerant environment in Ireland.

When asked about adoption, 69 per cent of people agree that being raised in a loving home by parents is a more significant factor for a child’s wellbeing than being raised by a mother and a father. A total of 54 per cent agree that same-sex couples should be legally allowed to jointly adopt a child.

All very good news for equality and modernity and bad news for the geriatric child rapist protectors in the Catholic Church hierarchy.

Sunday Morning Male Beauty

McDonnell and Cuccinelli Should Have Known Better

It is actually becoming rather entertaining to see newspaper after newspaper across the Commonwealth lay into Bob "Taliban Bob" McDonnell and Ken "Kookinelli" Cuccinelli for their ethically challenged dealings with Star Scientific, including receive thousands of dollars of gifts.  The latest newspaper to get in on the beat down is the News Leader.   Here are highlights from the paper's editorial:

Political power and prestige can blind those who achieve it. Surely, Gov. Bob McDonnell and Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli, in less frantic days, knew better than to get so chummy with Star Scientific CEO Jonnie Williams.

Since ethical problems in their relationships with Williams were first revealed last month, episode after episode has made us question McDonnell and Cuccinelli’s judgment.

Williams had already lavished McDonnell with $100,000 worth of campaign travel on his private jet and $9,600 worth of food, lodging and entertainment.


Most educated people would have agreed that accepting money to pay the catering tab crossed too many lines, especially since the giver was filing suit against the Commonwealth.



That’s where Attorney General Cuccinelli’s repeated lapses come in. In 2011, Star Scientific filed a lawsuit against Virginia, after the state assessed sales and use taxes on tobacco-curing barns it owned in Mecklenberg. Cuccinelli said he wasn’t aware of the suit – though he and Williams are personal friends – when a few months after its filing, he bought almost $10,000 worth of Star Scientific stock to add to the approximately $10,000 he already owned. By law, the Attorney General was required to report his holding of that stock, but he did not for a year, because he said he didn’t realize the value exceeded the $10,000 threshold.

Conflicts of interest are not easy to avoid when raising millions of dollars to get elected. But avoided they must be. Our governor and attorney general should have been wiser, all the way around.

As arrogant as Cuccinelli is now, should he be elected in November to the Governor's mansion, I suspect what we've seen to date would pale compared to the egomaniac would do as governor.  Virginia does not need a corrupt extremist as governor.

An Overview of the RNC Spring Meeting: Failed Ideas

Typical Republican position on gays

On social issues by all reports the spring meeting of the Republican National Committee had more the tenor of a meeting of the leadership of the Southern Baptist Convention than the leadership of a political party seeking to lead and govern a modern, industrialized nation.   The event is yet further proof that the GOP is now a de facto sectarian party that is more concerned with enforcing extreme Christianist religious views than in embracing the 21st century and modern knowledge.  It all traces back to the late 1980's when the so-called GOP establishment signaled to Christofacists that they were welcome within the ranks of the party.  Now, the zealots and Bible thumpers have taken over the party despite what country club Republicans like to think.   Capital Hill Blue has a piece that in some excerpts summarizes what the GOP has become:

Homophobia ruled at the spring gathering of the Republican National Committee this week in Los Angeles as the group approved — with no debate — yet another resolution affirming the party’s steadfast opposition to gay marriage.

The resolution flies in the face of a trend of an increasing number of Republicans who are changing their positions on gay marriage but showcases that the party is still controled by a rabid right-wing element.

Conservatives worked up the resolution to try and quiet conservatives who say the party is becoming too mainstream and too in step with a majority of Americans. They want the GOP to keep the party in a bygone era of intolerance that includes homophobia, racism and bigotry

The RNC also approved a resolution that supports “core values” of virtually unlimited gun ownership and use, marriage only between a man and woman, draconian border security and the standard hardcore opposition to abortion.

“The more things change, the more the Republican party stays the same,” longtime GOP activist Josh Samuelson told Capitol Hill Blue. Samuelson said he will be working for Democrats in upcoming elections

"It’s interesting,” says Joanna Kingston, another longtime but now disaffected Republican. “Nowadays, the only thing the Republicans can honor are failed ideas and failed elected officials."

And so the exodus of sane individuals from the GOP continues and the party becomes more of a extremist religious revival meeting than political party.   As my grandchildren grow up, I suspect they will wonder how any of their family members could ever have been Republicans.

Nike Ready to Sponsor Gay Pro Athlete

Many closeted gays athletes fear that coming out of the closet could ruin their careers or cut them off from lucrative endorsements and sponsorships.  Nike and the NFL are out to change that perception.  Indeed, the first pro athletes to come out could well find them selves reaping a financial windfall as Nike and others embrace them.  Bloomberg looks at the situation and one can only hope that soon players will come out and tear down the pro sports bastion of homophobia.  Here are some highlights:

By the time former Phoenix Suns executive Rick Welts’s I-am-gay announcement appeared on the front page of the May 15, 2011, New York Times, he already had revealed his secret to friends, co-workers and business associates.

Among those told before the article was published were NBA Commissioner David Stern and senior executives at Nike Inc (NKE)., the world’s largest sporting-goods company .  .  .  .  Nike asked Welts to deliver a message to anyone thinking about becoming the first openly gay athlete in major U.S. team sports -- the company wants him as an endorser.

“They made it clear to me Nike would embrace it,” Welts, 60, now president of the National Basketball Association’s Golden State Warriors, said in a telephone interview. “The player who does it, they’re going to be amazed at the additional opportunities that are put on the table, not the ones that are taken off.”

According to Bob Witeck, 61, a gay-marketing strategist and corporate consultant, the first openly gay team-sport athlete -- provided he’s a recognizable name -- would earn millions in endorsements and speaking engagements from companies seeking to capture more of a U.S. lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender adult population whose annual buying power he pegs at almost $800 billion.

“We’ve passed the tipping point to where national advertisers are no longer afraid of the gay market,” said Mark Elderkin, chief executive officer of the Fort Lauderdale, Florida-based Gay Ad Network.
The National Hockey League isn’t backing away from the issue. Yesterday, the league aligned itself with a gay-rights organization in a partnership aimed at fighting homophobia in sports. 

Witeck says a gay athlete endorser makes most sense for a company in the beverage, automotive, financial or technology fields. “There’s higher reward than risk right now,” he said. “The first time you do something you get most of the benefit.” 

It will be interesting to see when someone summons the courage to come out.  It will certainly be a step in breaking down the stigmatizing stereotypes our enemies seek to paint of gays.   And needless to say the One Million Moms Bitches will go batshit crazy when it happens.