Inequality for the non-heterosexual must end. I’ve been a beneficiary of having my straight relationship recognized by the government. As some white people once stood for the rights of the oppressed blacks, now I feel it is my duty to stand for the rights of my fellow humans who are Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual and Transgender to not be persecuted or shamed, and to have the same right to benefit from a government sponsored relationship that I have. Equal protection under the law.
Here are some videos that have moved me in the last week to make this post…
The Protect-IP act in the senate and the Stop Online Piracy Act in the House are dangerous legislations that can have a destructive affect on the Internet.
SOPA and PIPA would endanger the internet as we know it. It can endanger the operators of URL shorteners. It will endanger user generated content. It will push the internet underground into fragmented dark nets which will make anti-piracy detection and enforcement more difficult.
Here’s what Jared Polis recommends you can do to influence the opinion of your representative or senator:
“in order of impact from most to least:
1) Show up at a town hall or talk to them in person, check their schedule w their office 2) phone call, ask for the Legislative Associate in charge of the issue 3) Snail mail 4) email 5) post on their facebook wall or tweet them 6) sign petition”
My Colorado senators Mark Udall and Michael Bennet recently withdrew their support for PIPA because exactly this kind of action. Don’t believe that you can’t make a difference!
Sadly this kind of rhetoric is not so uncommon from my fellow countrymen:
Williams remarks about how Senator Boehner’s golf match with President Obama was like Hitler playing golf with Israeli Prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu. This is politics at its ugliest: rattling the sabers for a second civil war.
I say on behalf of the veterans that fought in WWII.
I say on behalf of the Jews whose lives were snuffed out in the Nazi concentration camps.
My inquiry as to the meaning of “general welfare” in the constitution garnered a huge amount of discussion on both Google+ and Facebook. Among other insightful responses, the following post by Mila Jacob Stetser bears repeating:
The Constitution was written over two centuries ago and is an actively re-interpreted and occasionally amended document. The Supreme Court exists specifically to interpret the Constitution within the context of modern situations that are not always clearly covered or even conceived of under the original language of the document as written. Health insurance didn’t even exist for almost another 100 years after the Constitution was ratified, so it stands to reason that the ‘founding fathers’ had no concept of it at the time. Continue reading Guest Blog: Hamiltonian vs. Madisonian Constitutional Interpretations Of General Welfare