Representative John Lewis (D - GA) has been an opponent of DOMA since the day it was introduced. Here is the transcript from his testimony before Congress on July 11, 1996, when DOMA was first introduced:Let me say to the gentleman that when I was growing up in the south during the 1940s and the 1950s, the great majority of the people in that region believed that black people should not be able to enter places of public accommodation, and they felt that black people should not be able to register to vote, and many people felt that was right but that was wrong. I think as politicians, as elected officials, we should not only follow but we must lead, lead our districts, not put our fingers into the wind to see which way the air is blowing but be leaders.Mr. Chairman, this is a mean bill. It is cruel. This bill seeks to divide our nation, turn Americans against Americans, sew the seeds of fear, hatred and intolerance. Let us remember the Preamble of the Declaration of Independence: We hold these truths self-evident that all people are endowed by their creator with certain inalienable rights. Among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.This bill is a slap in the face of the Declaration of Independence. It denies gay men and women the right to liberty and the pursuit of happiness. Marriage is a basic human right. You cannot tell people they cannot fall in love. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. used to say when people talked about interracial marriage and I quote, `Races do not fall in love and get married. Individuals fall in love and get married.'Why do you not want your fellow men and women, your fellow Americans to be happy? Why do you attack them? Why do you want to destroy the love they hold in their hearts? Why do you want to crush their hopes, their dreams, their longings, their aspirations?We are talking about human beings, people like you, people who want to get married, buy a house, and spend their lives with the one they love. They have done no wrong.I will not turn my back on another American. I will not oppress my fellow human being. I have fought too hard and too long against discrimination based on race and color not to stand up against discrimination based on sexual orientation.Mr. Chairman, I have known racism. I have known bigotry. This bill stinks of the same fear, hatred and intolerance. It should not be called the Defense of Marriage Act. It should be called the defense of mean-spirited bigots act.I urge my colleagues to oppose this bill, to have the courage to do what is right. This bill appeals to our worst fears and emotions. It encourages hatred of our fellow Americans for political advantage. Every word, every purpose, every message is wrong. It is not the right thing to do, to divide Americans.We are moving toward the 21st century. Let us come together and create one nation, one people, one family, one house, the American house, the American family, the American nation.If you listen to his testimony from July 20, 2011, you can hear the same message he said back then. The Defense of Marriage Act is a stain on our democracy, and it is time to change it and give equality to all human beings. In case you don't know, this is what it does:DOMA enshrines discrimination into US law by only recognizing marriage between a man and a woman;DOMA allows states that don’t have marriage equality in their laws, the right to not have to recognize same sex marriages from other states; similar to former law that allowed states to not recognize interracial marriages during the Civil Rights fight in AmericaDOMA denies over 1,000 legal rights and privileges to same sex couples enjoyed by straight couplesDo you support Congress Repealing DOMA and passing the Respect for Marriage Act?
Let me say to the gentleman that when I was growing up in the south during the 1940s and the 1950s, the great majority of the people in that region believed that black people should not be able to enter places of public accommodation, and they felt that black people should not be able to register to vote, and many people felt that was right but that was wrong. I think as politicians, as elected officials, we should not only follow but we must lead, lead our districts, not put our fingers into the wind to see which way the air is blowing but be leaders.Mr. Chairman, this is a mean bill. It is cruel. This bill seeks to divide our nation, turn Americans against Americans, sew the seeds of fear, hatred and intolerance. Let us remember the Preamble of the Declaration of Independence: We hold these truths self-evident that all people are endowed by their creator with certain inalienable rights. Among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.This bill is a slap in the face of the Declaration of Independence. It denies gay men and women the right to liberty and the pursuit of happiness. Marriage is a basic human right. You cannot tell people they cannot fall in love. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. used to say when people talked about interracial marriage and I quote, `Races do not fall in love and get married. Individuals fall in love and get married.'Why do you not want your fellow men and women, your fellow Americans to be happy? Why do you attack them? Why do you want to destroy the love they hold in their hearts? Why do you want to crush their hopes, their dreams, their longings, their aspirations?We are talking about human beings, people like you, people who want to get married, buy a house, and spend their lives with the one they love. They have done no wrong.I will not turn my back on another American. I will not oppress my fellow human being. I have fought too hard and too long against discrimination based on race and color not to stand up against discrimination based on sexual orientation.Mr. Chairman, I have known racism. I have known bigotry. This bill stinks of the same fear, hatred and intolerance. It should not be called the Defense of Marriage Act. It should be called the defense of mean-spirited bigots act.I urge my colleagues to oppose this bill, to have the courage to do what is right. This bill appeals to our worst fears and emotions. It encourages hatred of our fellow Americans for political advantage. Every word, every purpose, every message is wrong. It is not the right thing to do, to divide Americans.We are moving toward the 21st century. Let us come together and create one nation, one people, one family, one house, the American house, the American family, the American nation.
On July 20, 2011, the Senate had their first hearings for possible legislation that would repeal the 1996 Defense of Marriage Act. Thomas Minnery of Focus on the Family provided testimony in the hearing in defense of DOMA. As part of his testimony, Minnery submits a written testimony citing a study about nuclear families. Senator Al Franken just happened to also read the study, and had a different understanding of the study. Minnery claims nuclear family requires opposite sex parents, but Franken argues nuclear family's only require a loving committed couple that are either the biological, adoptive, or legal parent of the children in the family. Listen to the Video and then consider: Senator Al Franken vs Thomas Minnery of Focus on the Family: Which definition of nuclear family was right?
In an article, State Intervention in Life-Threatening Childhood Obesity, appearing in the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) on Tuesday, July 12, 2011, Harvard researchers, Lindsey Murtagh, JD, MPH; David S. Ludwig, MD, PhD, make the following argument:Many biological, psychosocial, and behavioral factors affect energy balance and, therefore, childhood weight gain, with parents playing an important mediating role. Ubiquitous junk food marketing, lack of opportunities for physically active recreation, and other aspects of modern society promote unhealthful lifestyles in children. Inadequate or unskilled parental supervision can leave children vulnerable to these obesigenic environmental influences. Emotional distress and depression, or other psychological problems arising from abuse and neglect, may exacerbate this situation by leading to disordered eating and withdrawal from sports and other social activities.Even relatively mild parenting deficiencies, such as having excessive junk food in the home or failing to model a physically active lifestyle, may contribute to a child's weight problem. Typically, the potential harm involves an increased risk for obesity-related chronic disease later in life. Most overweight and obese children have the opportunity to ameliorate these risks through behavior change and weight loss..They continue stating 1/3 of US children are obese and overweight, and some of the extreme cases of obesity are likely to lead to serious health problems later on in life. If parents can't manage their children's obesity after being given a fair amount of time, the researchers recommend the state remove the kids from their household and place them under foster-care.This research has received a lot of critique and criticism, which is not surprising by any means. After all, the researchers are talking about removing children from their parent's home. Also, there are many holes and issues in the argument the Harvard researchers have put forward.For one, how do you know the child will become better in another household? A child's weight and obesity are not in the complete control of the parents. Other factors, such as biology also play a role. It cannot be said definitively that a child's parents are at fault. Removing the child, does not guarantee results.Also, our entire culture plays a major role in child obesity. Fast food, video games and computers instead of playing outside, and commercialism all play a major role in a child's obesity. With such external factors at work, to take the children away from the parents when they did not necessarily cause and the parents can not necessarily completely control all of the external factors seems extreme. From a practical standpoint, we could not afford to fund such a program properly. Our nation is broke, and implementing such a program would cost billions of dollars. We also don't have and wouldn't be able to get enough foster homes and parents willing to take in the children. Legally speaking, this program would be on shaky ground. The legal standard for when a child should be removed from his/her parent's household is only when the child's life is under imminent danger. For example, if a set of parents were refusing to treat a curable medical illness by refusing to administer life-saving medications and the results of such would lead to the child's death, the state can step in and take the child away charging the parents with child abuse.Anyways, what do you think? Should parents lose custody of obese and overweight children?
Many biological, psychosocial, and behavioral factors affect energy balance and, therefore, childhood weight gain, with parents playing an important mediating role. Ubiquitous junk food marketing, lack of opportunities for physically active recreation, and other aspects of modern society promote unhealthful lifestyles in children. Inadequate or unskilled parental supervision can leave children vulnerable to these obesigenic environmental influences. Emotional distress and depression, or other psychological problems arising from abuse and neglect, may exacerbate this situation by leading to disordered eating and withdrawal from sports and other social activities.Even relatively mild parenting deficiencies, such as having excessive junk food in the home or failing to model a physically active lifestyle, may contribute to a child's weight problem. Typically, the potential harm involves an increased risk for obesity-related chronic disease later in life. Most overweight and obese children have the opportunity to ameliorate these risks through behavior change and weight loss..
J. D. voted on
Should Jim Boeheim resign as head coach of Syracuse for attacking a victim of molestation?
Hottest Girl in College - South
PAN AM: Laura Cameron dates an African-American, would you have had the courage to do the same in...
Oklahoma vs Kansas State: Will the Sooners be able to rebound after being upset last weekend?
Michigan State vs Nebraska: Can the Cornhuskers upset the Spartans?
Florida vs Georgia: Who Has the Hottest Girls?
Florida vs Georgia: Who Wins the World's Largest Outdoor Cocktail Party?
Will the Georgia Bulldogs win the SEC East?
Is Herman Cain's 9-9-9 Tax Plan the answer for our economy?
Hottest Girl in College - North
WhosRight.com on Facebook