VP Debate and gay rights/marriage

Dogbean

Matt 7:24-27 - Standing on the Rock
Jun 12, 2005
1,442
159
48
Monterey, CA
✟10,262.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Politics
US-Republican
I just wanted to point out something I liked from the vice presidential debate last night. When asked about gay marriage and gay rights, Sarah Palin of course said she does not support gay marriage, but believes gays should not be denied the legal benefits in their gay relationships...benefits dealing with visitation, ownership, insurance policies, legal stuff. Of course Joe Biden supported these rights as well, but to my surprise he does not support gay marriage either. Both candidates support defining marriage as between one man and one woman.

To recap:
Both candidates are against gay marriage
Both candidates support rights for gay relationships
Both candiates favor traditional marriage, between one man and one woman
The democratic and the republican VP candidates are identical on the issue
 
C

catlover

Guest
I just wanted to point out something I liked from the vice presidential debate last night. When asked about gay marriage and gay rights, Sarah Palin of course said she does not support gay marriage, but believes gays should not be denied the legal benefits in their gay relationships...benefits dealing with visitation, ownership, insurance policies, legal stuff. Of course Joe Biden supported these rights as well, but to my surprise he does not support gay marriage either. Both candidates support defining marriage as between one man and one woman.

To recap:
Both candidates are against gay marriage
Both candidates support rights for gay relationships
Both candiates favor traditional marriage, between one man and one woman
The democratic and the republican VP candidates are identical on the issue


Yeah but I will still vote for Obama-
Biden helped make it illegal for men to beat the stuffing out of their wives...


Violence Against Women Act (VAWA) in the 1990s that set the national agenda on criminalizing violence against women and holding batterers truly accountable. It encouraged states to set up coordinated community responses to domestic violence and rape; was the catalyst for passage of hundreds of state laws prohibiting family violence; and provided resources to set up shelters so battered women abused by husbands and boyfriends had a place to go. The law also established the national hotline that over 1.5 million abused women have called for help. By empowering women to make changes in their lives, and by training police and prosecutors to arrest and convict abusive husbands instead of telling them to take a walk around the block, domestic
 
Upvote 0

Dogbean

Matt 7:24-27 - Standing on the Rock
Jun 12, 2005
1,442
159
48
Monterey, CA
✟10,262.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Politics
US-Republican
Violence Against Women Act (VAWA) in the 1990s that set the national agenda on criminalizing violence against women and holding batterers truly accountable.
Just curious...is there a way to find out how McCain voted on that bill?
 
Upvote 0

Polycarp1

Born-again Liberal Episcopalian
Sep 4, 2003
9,588
1,669
USA
✟25,875.00
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Democrat
In response to the OP, that's very interesting mixed news. I'd been given to understand that Gov. Palin's stance was against equal rights for gay Americans. Doe anyone have the relevant quote from the debate available to post?

Just curious...is there a way to find out how McCain voted on that bill?

In the same spirit of fact-gathering, I can give you this: It's highly likely that a measure like that went to roll-call vote, with each Senator's vote recorded. (Procedural and minor matters are done by voice vote or acclamation.) Presuming that's the case, the records of the relevant Congress would be preserved in the Senate archives, and probably ccessible online to someone who knows where to look and how to search it. (I don't.) Maybe someone reading this thread who's something of a politics wonk could find out and post the answer.
 
Upvote 0

Jase

Well-Known Member
Feb 20, 2003
7,330
385
✟10,432.00
Faith
Messianic
Politics
US-Democrat
I just wanted to point out something I liked from the vice presidential debate last night. When asked about gay marriage and gay rights, Sarah Palin of course said she does not support gay marriage, but believes gays should not be denied the legal benefits in their gay relationships...benefits dealing with visitation, ownership, insurance policies, legal stuff. Of course Joe Biden supported these rights as well, but to my surprise he does not support gay marriage either. Both candidates support defining marriage as between one man and one woman.

To recap:
Both candidates are against gay marriage
Both candidates support rights for gay relationships
Both candiates favor traditional marriage, between one man and one woman
The democratic and the republican VP candidates are identical on the issue
Palin's views on gay rights really have no meaning since she's a complete hypocrite. She has a pregnant 17 year old daughter, and has no problem with it. Picking Palin as VP basically destroyed any hope of McCain winning the election.
 
Upvote 0

Dogbean

Matt 7:24-27 - Standing on the Rock
Jun 12, 2005
1,442
159
48
Monterey, CA
✟10,262.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Politics
US-Republican
I was able to find the transcript for that part of the debate. Here it is....

IFILL: The next round of -- pardon me, the next round of questions starts with you, Senator Biden. Do you support, as they do in Alaska, granting same-sex benefits to couples?
BIDEN: Absolutely. Do I support granting same-sex benefits? Absolutely positively. Look, in an Obama-Biden administration, there will be absolutely no distinction from a constitutional standpoint or a legal standpoint between a same-sex and a heterosexual couple.
The fact of the matter is that under the Constitution we should be granted -- same-sex couples should be able to have visitation rights in the hospitals, joint ownership of property, life insurance policies, et cetera. That's only fair.
It's what the Constitution calls for. And so we do support it. We do support making sure that committed couples in a same-sex marriage are guaranteed the same constitutional benefits as it relates to their property rights, their rights of visitation, their rights to insurance, their rights of ownership as heterosexual couples do.

IFILL: Governor, would you support expanding that beyond Alaska to the rest of the nation?

PALIN: Well, not if it goes closer and closer towards redefining the traditional definition of marriage between one man and one woman. And unfortunately that's sometimes where those steps lead.
But I also want to clarify, if there's any kind of suggestion at all from my answer that I would be anything but tolerant of adults in America choosing their partners, choosing relationships that they deem best for themselves, you know, I am tolerant and I have a very diverse family and group of friends and even within that group you would see some who may not agree with me on this issue, some very dear friends who don't agree with me on this issue.
But in that tolerance also, no one would ever propose, not in a McCain-Palin administration, to do anything to prohibit, say, visitations in a hospital or contracts being signed, negotiated between parties.
But I will tell Americans straight up that I don't support defining marriage as anything but between one man and one woman, and I think through nuances we can go round and round about what that actually means.
But I'm being as straight up with Americans as I can in my non- support for anything but a traditional definition of marriage.

IFILL: Let's try to avoid nuance, Senator. Do you support gay marriage?

BIDEN: No. Barack Obama nor I support redefining from a civil side what constitutes marriage. We do not support that. That is basically the decision to be able to be able to be left to faiths and people who practice their faiths the determination what you call it.
The bottom line though is, and I'm glad to hear the governor, I take her at her word, obviously, that she think there should be no civil rights distinction, none whatsoever, between a committed gay couple and a committed heterosexual couple. If that's the case, we really don't have a difference.

IFILL: Is that what your said?

PALIN: Your question to him was whether he supported gay marriage and my answer is the same as his and it is that I do not.

IFILL: Wonderful. You agree. On that note, let's move to foreign policy.
 
Upvote 0

Texas Lynn

Well-Known Member
Dec 17, 2002
10,352
665
47
Brooklyn, NY
✟14,982.00
Faith
Methodist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Democrat
The democratic and the republican VP candidates are identical on the issue

Not exactly. Democrats support ENDA (Employment Non-Discrimination Act) and Republicans don't. Democrats support repeal of the "Don't Ask Don't Tell" policy on military service and Republicans don't. Democrats do not support bars to LGBT families fostering and adopting, and Republicans such as Mike Huckabee do. There are other policy differences as well. Administrations consist of so many more than the President and Vice President. Democrats will bring many veterans of LGBT civil rights movements into government service. Republican gay appointees largely consist of small numbers of Log Cabin Republicans who are tokens. Appointees in civil rights compliance positions in Democratic administrations tend to be advocates of civil rights, while those appointed to those positions by Republicans tend to be opponents of civil rights enforcement.
 
Upvote 0

Dogbean

Matt 7:24-27 - Standing on the Rock
Jun 12, 2005
1,442
159
48
Monterey, CA
✟10,262.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Politics
US-Republican
Not exactly. Democrats support ENDA (Employment Non-Discrimination Act) and Republicans don't. Democrats support repeal of the "Don't Ask Don't Tell" policy on military service and Republicans don't. Democrats do not support bars to LGBT families fostering and adopting, and Republicans such as Mike Huckabee do. There are other policy differences as well. Administrations consist of so many more than the President and Vice President. Democrats will bring many veterans of LGBT civil rights movements into government service. Republican gay appointees largely consist of small numbers of Log Cabin Republicans who are tokens. Appointees in civil rights compliance positions in Democratic administrations tend to be advocates of civil rights, while those appointed to those positions by Republicans tend to be opponents of civil rights enforcement.
Texas Lynn,
The candidates own words are right in front of you; I posted the transcript of the debate. You may be right about republicans and democrats in general, but not all republicans stand the same way on issues, and not all democrats stand the same way on issues with other democrats. People are individuals, and identifying with a party does not necessarily mean they stand with all other party members on issues. Anyway, the question was not about the don't ask don't tell policy or fostering and adoption. It was a question about gay marriage and the legal benefits associated with gay relationships.
 
Upvote 0
C

catlover

Guest
While Bush reauthorized the Violence Against Women Act, McCain voted against funding for VAWA as recently as 2007. It was McCain's second vote against VAWA, as he opposed the first version of this landmark legislation in 1994.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/heath...jones/mccain-palins-extreme-pos_b_130518.html


Right-wing websites like Men's News Daily and Townhall greeted Joe Biden's selection as Obama's running mates with a chorus of misogynistic jeers. Referring to the democratic ticket as "GynObama" and "VAWA Joe," one Men's News Daily article asks men to "do a quick testicular self-exam.

Nice I guess some men want "the right" to beat up their girlfriends, wives, and daughters...sorry both McCain and Palin went down a notch
...


. Feminist for Life, the anti-choice group to which Palin belongs, charges that emergency contraceptives are a form of abortion, and some critics in turn have charged that Palin declined to pay for rape kits because of this idea. Palin's already stated that she's not above using the state to impose her feelings about abortion on rape survivors.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Dogbean

Matt 7:24-27 - Standing on the Rock
Jun 12, 2005
1,442
159
48
Monterey, CA
✟10,262.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Politics
US-Republican
What about social security survivors benefits, federal pension benefits, and the ability to file a joint income tax return? What about military dependents' benefits? Family health insurance for federal employees?
I told you, I don't feel these should be denied. Your question about military is kind of odd, for if a military member is found out to be having a same sex member as their "partner," they will be kicked out, at least in the American military.
 
Upvote 0

Crazy Liz

Well-Known Member
Oct 28, 2003
17,059
1,106
California
✟23,305.00
Faith
Christian
I told you, I don't feel these should be denied. Your question about military is kind of odd, for if a military member is found out to be having a same sex member as their "partner," they will be kicked out, at least in the American military.

Why is it odd? If gays had the same civil rights as everyone else, we could not have don't ask don't tell. Gays could serve in the military like everyone else.

I don't think either of the VP candidates addressed these issues, and while Biden's answer was not very reassuring that he favors equal rights like the ones I listed for gay unions, Palin's answer left a lot of wiggle room for significantly reducing civil rights in areas she didn't specifically mention.
 
Upvote 0

Dogbean

Matt 7:24-27 - Standing on the Rock
Jun 12, 2005
1,442
159
48
Monterey, CA
✟10,262.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Politics
US-Republican
I was asked earlier about whether this stuff will really be taught to little kids in school. From the website protectmarriage.com

First Graders Taken To San Francisco City Hall For Gay Wedding


October 11, 2008
Contact: Chip White/Sonja Eddings Brown, 916-215-4392
SAN FRANCISCO, October 11 – In the same week that the No on 8 campaign launched an ad that labeled as “lies” claims that same-sex marriage would be taught in schools to young children, a first grade class took a school-sponsored trip to a gay wedding. Eighteen first graders traveled to San Francisco City Hall Friday for the wedding of their teacher and her lesbian partner, The San Francisco Chronicle reported. The school sponsored the trip for the students, ages 5 and 6, taking them away from their studies for the same-sex wedding. According to the Yes on 8 campaign, the public school field trip demonstrates that the California Supreme Court's decision to legal same-sex marriage has real consequences.

"Taking children out of school for a same-sex wedding is not customary education. This is promoting same-sex marriage and indoctrinating young kids," said Yes on 8—ProtectMarriage.com Campaign Co-Manager Frank Schubert. "I doubt the school has ever taken kids on a field trip to a traditional wedding," Schubert said.

When asked by the Yes on 8 campaign, The San Francisco Chronicle reporter said she did not know if the school had ever sponsored a field trip for students to a traditional wedding. Telling the Chronicle that the field trip was "a teachable moment," the school's principal believes it is perfectly appropriate for first graders to attend a same-sex wedding. Officials in other school districts disagree.

"Prop. 8 protects our children from being taught in public schools that 'same-sex marriage' is the same as traditional marriage," said Santa Ana Unified School District board member Rosemarie "Rosie" Avila. "We should not accept a court decision that results in public schools teaching our kids that gay marriage is okay. That is an issue for parents to discuss with their children according to their own values and beliefs. It shouldn't be forced on us against our will," Avila added.

The lesbian teacher's wedding was officiated by San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom. Newsom is featured in a Yes on 8 television ad, released last week, in which he arrogantly declares of same-sex marriage: "The door's wide open now. It's gonna happen, whether you like it or not."

The Yes on 8 campaign's ads explain that if the voters do not overturn the California Supreme Court's same-sex marriage ruling, teachers will be required to teach young children that there is no difference between gay marriage and traditional marriage. “It's totally unreasonable that a first grade field trip would be to a same-sex wedding," said Chip White, Press Secretary for Yes on 8. "This is overt indoctrination of children who are too young to understand it.” The field trip underscores the Yes on 8 campaign’s message that unless Prop. 8 passes, children will be taught about same-sex marriage in public schools. “Not only can it happen, it has already happened,” White said.
 
Upvote 0

Crazy Liz

Well-Known Member
Oct 28, 2003
17,059
1,106
California
✟23,305.00
Faith
Christian
Look up who got California's Education Code written so as to include marriage as a subject of the curriculum at all grade levels.

You don't want kids in public schools taught that any unmarried adult has a right to marry any other adult by mutual consent, then take that provision out of the Ed Code. Pretty simple.

But I remember being taught things in school and coming home & having my parents say we don't believe/do that because we're Christians. It never hurt me. In fact, I learned a lot about my parents' faith and politics that way. Why shouldn't parents who disagree with something taught in the schools let their kids go to the lessons and then explain at home why they disagree?

And I'm sure school kids have gone to teachers' weddings before. Usually they're not held during school hours, but I'd be surprised to hear this was the first time ever.
 
Upvote 0

Crazy Liz

Well-Known Member
Oct 28, 2003
17,059
1,106
California
✟23,305.00
Faith
Christian
BTW, here's what the Ed Code says right now:


CALIFORNIA CODES
EDUCATION CODE
SECTION 51880-51881


51880. This chapter shall be known and may be cited as the
Comprehensive Health Education Act of 1977.



51881. The Legislature finds and declares that although many of the
communicable diseases and environmental hazards which plagued
earlier generations have been controlled, major health problems and
hazards are prevalent among today's school-age children and youth
including the abuse of alcohol, narcotics, and tobacco; emotional
instability; forced marriage; self-medication; dental caries;
nutritional disorders; suicide; and accidents.
The Legislature finds and declares that an adequate health
education program in the public schools is essential to continued
progress and improvement in the quality of public health in this
state, and the Legislature further believes that comprehensive health
education, taught by properly trained persons, is effective in the
prevention of disease and disability.
It is further the intent of the Legislature that, to the maximum
extent possible, the present state-funded projects in the school
health unit of the Department of Education shall be redirected to
carrying out the provisions of this chapter and maximum use shall be
made of existing state and federal funds in the implementation of
comprehensive health education.


CALIFORNIA CODES
EDUCATION CODE
SECTION 51890


51890. (a) For the purposes of this chapter, "comprehensive health
education programs" are defined as all educational programs offered
in kindergarten and grades 1 to 12, inclusive, in the public school
system, including in-class and out-of-class activities designed to
ensure that:
(1) Pupils will receive instruction to aid them in making
decisions in matters of personal, family, and community health, to
include the following subjects:

(A) The use of health care services and products.
(B) Mental and emotional health and development.
(C) Drug use and misuse, including the misuse of tobacco and
alcohol.
(D) Family health and child development, including the legal and
financial aspects and responsibilities of marriage and parenthood.

(E) Oral health, vision, and hearing.
(F) Nutrition, which may include related topics such as obesity
and diabetes.
(G) Exercise, rest, and posture.
(H) Diseases and disorders, including sickle cell anemia and
related genetic diseases and disorders.
(I) Environmental health and safety.
(J) Community health.
(2) To the maximum extent possible, the instruction in health is
structured to provide comprehensive education in health that includes
all the subjects in paragraph (1).
(3) The community actively participates in the teaching of health
including classroom participation by practicing professional health
and safety personnel in the community.
(4) Pupils gain appreciation for the importance and value of
lifelong health and the need for each individual to take
responsibility for his or her own health.
(5) School districts may voluntarily provide pupils with
instruction on preventative health care, including obesity and
diabetes prevention through nutrition education.
(b) Health care professionals, health care service plans, health
care providers, and other entities participating in a voluntary
initiative with a school district may not market their services when
undertaking activities related to the initiative. For purposes of
this subdivision, "marketing" is defined as making a communication
about a product or service that is intended to encourage recipients
of the communication to purchase or use the product or service.
Health care or health education information provided in a brochure or
pamphlet that contains the logo or name of a health care service
plan or health care organization is not considered marketing if
provided in coordination with the voluntary initiative. The
marketing prohibitions contained in this subdivision do not apply to
outreach, application assistance, and enrollment activities relating
to federal, state, or county sponsored health care insurance programs
that are conducted by health care professionals, health care service
plans, health care providers, and other entities if the activities
are conducted in compliance with the statutory, regulatory, and
programmatic guidelines applicable to those programs.


CALIFORNIA CODES
EDUCATION CODE
SECTION 51930


51930. (a) This chapter shall be known and may be cited as the
California Comprehensive Sexual Health and HIV/AIDS Prevention
Education Act.
(b) The purposes of this chapter are as follows:
(1) To provide a pupil with the knowledge and skills necessary to
protect his or her sexual and reproductive health from unintended
pregnancy and sexually transmitted diseases.
(2) To encourage a pupil to develop healthy attitudes concerning
adolescent growth and development, body image, gender roles, sexual
orientation, dating, marriage, and family.




CALIFORNIA CODES
EDUCATION CODE
SECTION 51933


51933. (a) School districts may provide comprehensive sexual health
education, consisting of age-appropriate instruction, in any
kindergarten to grade 12, inclusive, using instructors trained in the
appropriate courses.
(b) A school district that elects to offer comprehensive sexual
health education pursuant to subdivision (a), whether taught by
school district personnel or outside consultants, shall satisfy all
of the following criteria:
(1) Instruction and materials shall be age appropriate.
(2) All factual information presented shall be medically accurate
and objective.
(3) Instruction shall be made available on an equal basis to a
pupil who is an English learner, consistent with the existing
curriculum and alternative options for an English learner pupil as
otherwise provided in this code.
(4) Instruction and materials shall be appropriate for use with
pupils of all races, genders, sexual orientations, ethnic and
cultural backgrounds, and pupils with disabilities.

(5) Instruction and materials shall be accessible to pupils with
disabilities, including, but not limited to, the provision of a
modified curriculum, materials and instruction in alternative
formats, and auxiliary aids.
(6) Instruction and materials shall encourage a pupil to
communicate with his or her parents or guardians about human
sexuality.

(7) Instruction and materials shall teach respect for marriage and
committed relationships.

(8) Commencing in grade 7, instruction and materials shall teach
that abstinence from sexual intercourse is the only certain way to
prevent unintended pregnancy, teach that abstinence from sexual
activity is the only certain way to prevent sexually transmitted
diseases, and provide information about the value of abstinence while
also providing medically accurate information on other methods of
preventing pregnancy and sexually transmitted diseases.
(9) Commencing in grade 7, instruction and materials shall provide
information about sexually transmitted diseases. This instruction
shall include how sexually transmitted diseases are and are not
transmitted, the effectiveness and safety of all federal Food and
Drug Administration (FDA) approved methods of reducing the risk of
contracting sexually transmitted diseases, and information on local
resources for testing and medical care for sexually transmitted
diseases.
(10) Commencing in grade 7, instruction and materials shall
provide information about the effectiveness and safety of all
FDA-approved contraceptive methods in preventing pregnancy,
including, but not limited to, emergency contraception.
(11) Commencing in grade 7, instruction and materials shall
provide pupils with skills for making and implementing responsible
decisions about sexuality.
(12) Commencing in grade 7, instruction and materials shall
provide pupils with information on the law on surrendering physical
custody of a minor child 72 hours or younger, pursuant to Section
1255.7 of the Health and Safety Code and Section 271.5 of the Penal
Code.
(c) A school district that elects to offer comprehensive sexual
health education pursuant to subdivision (a) earlier than grade 7 may
provide age appropriate and medically accurate information on any of
the general topics contained in paragraphs (8) to (12), inclusive,
of subdivision (b).
(d) If a school district elects to offer comprehensive sexual
health education pursuant to subdivision (a), whether taught by
school district personnel or outside consultants, the school district
shall comply with the following:
(1) Instruction and materials may not teach or promote religious
doctrine.
(2) Instruction and materials may not reflect or promote bias
against any person on the basis of any category protected by Section
220.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Crazy Liz

Well-Known Member
Oct 28, 2003
17,059
1,106
California
✟23,305.00
Faith
Christian
We have all that code, but not every teacher/principal follows it to the letter.

Beliefs about marriage should be taught in the home, and leave english, math, science, etc. to the schools.

Then get those laws repealed.

Taking a subject out of the school curriculum is less intrusive on civil rights than taking away the rights of some citizens to marry.
 
Upvote 0

Zaac

Well-Known Member
Nov 19, 2004
8,430
426
Atlanta, GA.
✟12,748.00
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Single
Palin's views on gay rights really have no meaning since she's a complete hypocrite. She has a pregnant 17 year old daughter, and has no problem with it. Picking Palin as VP basically destroyed any hope of McCain winning the election.

Where has she said that she doesn't have a problem with it? I'm sure that you're not gonna find anywhere that Palin has said that she's happy her 17 year old daughter got pregnant out of wedlock.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Dogbean
Upvote 0

Texas Lynn

Well-Known Member
Dec 17, 2002
10,352
665
47
Brooklyn, NY
✟14,982.00
Faith
Methodist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Democrat
While Bush reauthorized the Violence Against Women Act, McCain voted against funding for VAWA as recently as 2007. It was McCain's second vote against VAWA, as he opposed the first version of this landmark legislation in 1994.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/heath...jones/mccain-palins-extreme-pos_b_130518.html


Right-wing websites like Men's News Daily and Townhall greeted Joe Biden's selection as Obama's running mates with a chorus of misogynistic jeers. Referring to the democratic ticket as "GynObama" and "VAWA Joe," one Men's News Daily article asks men to "do a quick testicular self-exam.

Nice I guess some men want "the right" to beat up their girlfriends, wives, and daughters...sorry both McCain and Palin went down a notch...


. Feminist for Life, the anti-choice group to which Palin belongs, charges that emergency contraceptives are a form of abortion, and some critics in turn have charged that Palin declined to pay for rape kits because of this idea. Palin's already stated that she's not above using the state to impose her feelings about abortion on rape survivors.

Thank you for posting this information. I had not heard of this "Men's News Daily" but it seems slightly more unreliable than the paranoid site World Net Daily. There are some "men's rights" groups which are quality people though. The primary issue these groups address is child custody.

The far right has a history of opposing services to battered spouses and rape victims, so none of this this is surprising at all.

Much of the far right ideology, related to gender relations, consists of advocacy of power and control over women.

As the slogan says, "Men of quality are not threatened by women of equality".
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums
C

catlover

Guest
Thank you for posting this information. I had not heard of this "Men's News Daily" but it seems slightly more unreliable than the paranoid site World Net Daily. There are some "men's rights" groups which are quality people though. The primary issue these groups address is child custody.

The far right has a history of opposing services to battered spouses and rape victims, so none of this this is surprising at all.

Much of the far right ideology, related to gender relations, consists of advocacy of power and control over women.

As the slogan says, "Men of quality are not threatened by women of equality".

You are most welcome Texas Lynn.
It's abhorrent the far right wants to make it acceptable for children and spouses to be abused...perhaps the right is protecting it's own. to carry on with disgusting behavior..
Maybe that is what they mean by "family values". The "right" and "value" of a man to beat his wife and children.
 
Upvote 0