In an op-ed published in the Advocate, Biden wrote:
“Last weekend, more than 1.2 million Irish voters took a courageous stand for love and family when they overwhelmingly chose marriage equality.
“They recognized the fundamental truth that every person is entitled to dignity and respect, and that there can be no justification for the denigration or persecution of anyone because of who they love or who they are.
“I cannot improve upon the perfectly Irish statements they made following this historic vote, but I can echo [Prime Minister Enda Kenny’s] words when he described the Irish as ‘a generous, compassionate, bold and joyful people,’ and that their choice will be ‘heard loudly across the living world as a sound of pioneering leadership.’”
He also noted that despite progress, there is still much work to be done on gay rights worldwide:
“There are still too many nations that deny people even the right to be safe from violence and severe discrimination, and too many states here in America that allow a person to be fired simply for being lesbian, gay, transgender, or bisexual."
Last month, Biden said that if the U.S. Supreme Court rules in favor of nationwide marriage equality in June, Obergefell v. Hodges will be remembered alongside the landmark civil rights case Brown v. Board of Education.
Libertarian favorite and 2016 presidential candidate Sen. Rand Paul sat down with Jon Stewart on Tuesday's The Daily Show to chat about his new book and his recent "filibuster" against NSA spying.
In the ensuing discussion on the hypocrisy of the GOP saying it's opposed to big government while supporting the surveillance state, Stewart brought the parallels between these inconsistencies and the "religious liberty" argument against same-sex marriage that is currently a favorite among many Republican (including Paul).
"You portray it as well we don't want to force people to have to agree with your beliefs," said Stewart. "But we're not, we're asking them to do the thing that they do for their business."
Attempting to demonstrate how the issue is a "freedom"debate at its core, Paul pointed to the Lexington-based printing company found guilty of violating the city's nondiscrimination ordinance for its refusal to print gay pride t-shirts back in 2012 (a county circuit judge later ruled in favor of the print shop).
Stewart, however, still wasn't buying the "freedom" argument:
"It seems like gay marriage looms a lot larger in the minds of certain conservatives than it does in the Bible. And the only thing I would say is, don’t they sell cakes to sinners all the time? Adulterers? When you come in do you go 'I'd like a cake,' and they go 'Do you use the name of the Lord in vain?' How do you figure that out? It feels disingenuous."
Watch, AFTER THE JUMP...
An anti-gay marriage amendment died Wednesday night in the Texas Senate, joining more than 20 other pieces of anti-LGBT legislation that failed to pass this year.
Recognizing they wouldn't have time to take up the amendment, Republican senators hastily introduced a non-binding resolution in opposition to same-sex marriage. The resolution is along the lines of a letter issued by the House Republican Caucus earlier this month.
The Texas Tribune reports:
The body's 20 Republican senators and state Sen. Eddie Lucio Jr., D-Brownsville, voted for Senate Resolution 1028, authored by state Sen. Kelly Hancock, R-North Richland Hills, that affirmed "the present definition" of marriage in the state.
“This resolution is intended by those of us who signed it to demonstrate that we continue to support what the people of this state have expressed," state Sen. Jane Nelson, R-Flower Mound, said.
During debate on the resolution, Lucio announced he'd withdraw the bill containing an amendment designed to undermine a U.S. Supreme Court ruling in favor of same-sex marriage. From the Associated Press:
The Senate deadline for passing bills was midnight Wednesday. But with less than four hours to go - likely enough time for Democrats to run out the clock if the bill came up - the proposal was dropped. Republicans instead only passed a resolution that reaffirmed their belief of marriage being between a man and a woman.
"Good legislation was sacrificed, but appropriately so to see this language fail," said Democratic state Rep. Garnet Coleman, whose unrelated bill was used by the Senate to carry the marriage-license amendment. "It is offensive to my constituents, it's offensive to me, and it's offensive to our constitution."
The Texas legislative session, which saw the most anti-LGBT proposals in the history of any state, doesn't officially end until Monday. But with the death of the anti-gay marriage amendment, the LGBT community appeared to be out of the woods:
Sphere: Related Content
Having no force of law and with anti-LGBT bills dead for the session, this was just a petty swipe at LGBT Texans. #txlege— Tx Freedom Network (@TFN) May 28, 2015
George Pataki, a Republican who served as Governor of New York from 1995-2006, launched his presidential bid this morning with a campaign announcement video touting (among other things) his leadership during the September 11 attacks.
"We understood we were all Americans who had been attacked and were going to rise up together and we did," Pataki says in the video. "We need to recapture that spirit, that sense that we are one people. When we do, we will stop empowering politicians and empower ourselves with the opportunities to have an unlimited bright future.
Pataki is the only declared GOP candidate to explicitly endorse same-sex marriage.
TIME notes Pataki's chances at capturing the GOP nomination, however, are slim:
In a Quinnipiac University national poll of the Republican field released Thursday morning, Pataki received no support, and he faces a steep uphill climb even to make the debate stage in August. In a New Hampshire WMUR poll this month, Pataki placed at 2% in the first-in-the-nation primary state.
Watch Pataki declare his candidacy, AFTER THE JUMP...
Alabama Chief Justice Roy Moore Wants Ruth Bader Ginsburg Impeached For Officiating Gay Wedding: LISTEN
If Alabama Chief Justice Roy Moore could have his way, Ruth Bader Ginsburg would be facing impeachment for her decision to officiate a same-sex marriage ahead of the Supreme Court’s upcoming ruling that will determine the fate of marriage equality in the U.S. Technically speaking, Ginsburg’s role as the officiator of a same sex wedding makes her the second justice (along with Kagan) to give her tacit support of marriage equality. Speaking to FRC hate leader Tony Perkins, Moore insisted that Ginsburg’s implicit support of gay marriage was proof enough of an inappropriate lack of professional objectivity on her part.
“Now she’s commenting on a case which is before her, and under judicial ethics of federal judges, she can’t do that,” he exclaimed. “[Ginsburg] is doing it in the face of plain evidence that she’s violating the ethical rules for federal judges… If Congress is going to let these justices disobey the Constitution they’re sworn to uphold, then Congress has a check and a balance. It’s called impeachment.”
As Think Progress points out, however, Ginsburg was well within her power as a Justice to oversee the union between two men. Even more important to highlight, though, is the fact that she acted within the parameters of the official code of conduct that all Supreme Court Justices are beholden to:
Most of the code speaks to impartiality, the notion that judges should not be biased because of familial connections, personal grudges, financial interests, or other affiliations with the parties or the issues at hand that would compromise their ability to be impartial.
As per the Justices’ code of conduct, the Justices are barred from making public statements “on the merits of a matter pending or impending in any court” barring instances where they find themselves explaining court procedures or sharing information for expressly educational purposes. Though some have speculated the meaning woven into Ginsburg’s tone during her officiating remarks during the ceremony, she made no explicit endorsements or condemnations of same-sex marriage.
Listen to Moore’s full tilt screed against Ginsburg AFTER THE JUMP...
The heterosexual community seems to have to recently discovered what bears, chasers, and the pro-DILF community has known for quite some time: guys don’t have to be super fit to be hot. “Dad Bod,” a term coined earlier this year by Mackenzie Pearson, an undergrad at Clemson University, quickly became an internet buzzword, inspiring dozens of thinkpieces arguing whether the concept was sexist or not.
One of the things about Dad Bod that’s fueled the fascination with the concept is its nebulousness. Taken literally Dad Bod should refer to the stereotypical bodies we assign to men as they settle into fatherhood--see: middle age spread. The thing is, though, if you were to ask a group of people to define a classic Dad Bod, you’d probably get a handful of different descriptions. With that issue in mind, the good folks at The New York Times set out to quantify the average differences between the bodies of actual fathers and their childless counterparts:
“The skinny: On average, dads are 10 pounds heavier than non-dads; they’re carrying nearly an extra two inches on their waist; and their bellies stick out an extra half-inch.
The latest data from this survey found that half the non-dads in our 18-to-45 bracket had a sagittal abdominal diameter of less than eight inches, but only 29 percent of the dads did. But dads seem to wear their extra paunch with some degree of comfort. Despite the extra 10 pounds, nearly as many dads described themselves as being “about the right weight” as those who are not dads. (The exact proportions are 49 percent and 53 percent.)”
Check out the full article here and weigh in with your thoughts on the Dad Bod phenomenon in the comments.Sphere: Related Content