"Related to, or related to the celebration of, any civil union...." That is not limited to acts related to the celebration of a civil union. It covers acts related to any civil union, or related to the celebration of one.
Read the bill. It absolutely isn't limited to services in conjunction with a marriage ceremony. "In furtherance of a civil union..." That is terribly vague but clearly isn't limited to ceremonies, since that isn't what it says and those wouldn't be occurring here because they aren't legal here. In furtherance of a civil union could mean selling a gay couple a home, doing their taxes, selling them dinner, providing medical care, child care etc. it could be anything
uh, Rudy Gay did not get a contract with the Bucks. He is (still) under contract with the Raptors. Christ, you guys will argue all day about why its raining when there isn't a cloud in the sky.
So I bought the Sunday paper for the first time in years last weekend. I wanted to read an article that was paywalled on the site. It wasn't in the paper. More importantly I could not believe how little content was in that paper. God awful. I sometimes wish I could read an article or two but on balance I am so glad I don't waste money on that paper. They really need to increase their local reporting and analysis to have any hope of being relevant. Sad.
It may be part of our human nature not to step in when these situations arise, but it is also part of our human nature to expect that we will. Expecting people to do the right thing and being upset when they don't has nothing to do with being superior; it has to do with the fact that we'd all rather live in a world in which we expect the better angels of our nature to rise at the proper time than in a world in which we assume that, since the better angels don't always appear, we don't even expect them to show.
Mr. Baker, you last point is different from your first point. Your first point was basically "we don't know anything but hearsay" so we must somehow endure a long investigation before anyone can be fired Which of course is not true. We know from the grand jury report and from Paterno himself what happened vis a vis Paterno. And innocent until proven guilty doesn't apply outside the courtroom. But then when this is pointed out, you shift your argument. Now you are arguing not that we don't know what Paterno did, but that what he did was appropriate and sufficient. Entirely different argument. Most people think you are wrong, including Joe Paterno, because he said that he wished he'd done more. He was told that a child was raped in his facility. He called him boss and washed his hands of it. Never confronted Sandusky to find out if it was true or not, never tried to find out who the kid was, never called the cops. He was given a first hand account from someone who saw a man raping a child in a Penn State shower. That's a pretty strong basis on which to call the police. Or if you'd rather, to advise the 28 year old who did see it to go to the police. Given his position on campus, its hard to believe that anyone would find what he did to be sufficient. The right thing is not always the legal thing.
I am all for bike lanes, everywhere. But can we not turn this into another time when we call Memphis "a disfunctional Mayberry" or similar slur because there are people who disagree on this? We are hardly the only city in the country in which the placement of bike lanes is a subject of controversy. There is a great deal of debate going on in NYC over this very issue, and the complaints are just like those being made here. Disagreeing on this doesn't make us backwards, it doesn't mean we are rednecks or whatever. Let's stop running the city and its people down every time we don't all agree on everything, whether its consolidation or bike lanes.
All Comments »
By Richard Alley
download this issue
click here to see more »