"MARRIAGE" In The News
 (December 2009)

• Love letter ad creates buzz  My San Antonio News,  By Jennifer R. Lloyd, December 23, 2009
  For “Raul,” a 37-year-old San Antonio man who placed an unusual half-page advertisement in the San Antonio Express-News, “Megan” is the one who got away. For readers of the love letter in Tuesday’s paper, the ad was a national conversation-starter that unleashed a variety of comments and more passionate tales of unrequited love. Dozens of readers weighed in on the letter Wednesday on mySA.com, analyzing what some called an “eloquent” message from a man who used only his first name to declare unending affection for Megan. More than 100 others commented on another Web site that posted Raul’s plea. In the ad, Raul said “You see, I wrote this letter and did it this way not because I couldn’t have dropped it in the mail, or have it hand delivered, or find some other means of putting it in your hands, but you see I did it this way because if I love you, really truly love you then it’s important that I look for the highest mountain to climb and shout it from the top of my lungs……..Never let go.” Raul shunned a reporter’s requests for further information — including Megan’s response, if any — and insisted that his privacy be respected. In an e-mail Wednesday, Raul elaborated only on his rationale for using an ad to reach out to Megan. “I shout it from the mountain tops not so that people can see me professing my unwavering love but instead; only because if I am lucky, then for just a brief moment she will be listening,” Raul wrote. “If there are any readers that found my letter in any way heart felt or even momentarily enraptured by my words then it is only because they too were once named Raul or Megan.” Raul paid $1,890 in cash to place the ad. The price ordinarily would have been $6,000, but Raul received a new business discount, said Yvette Salazar, the inside sales representative who sold him the ad. . . . . While some readers were busy commenting about how they thought the ad was a hoax, or advising Raul that he “needs to get a life” and move on, 22-year-old Megan Harlan contacted the newspaper looking for a Raul she once dated. Harlan found the story through the news aggregator Fark.com, where scores of comments were registered from around the nation. . . .

RELATED LETTER:  Dear Megan...

RELATED ARTICLE:  Spurned Lover Buys Pricey Love Letter Newspaper Advertisement  Asylum, By Jeremy Taylor, December 23, 2009
Somebody named Raul really wants somebody named Megan to know that he still loves her. We know this because Raul expressed his most heartfelt feelings for Megan, whom he broke up with an indeterminate amount of time ago, in a 1000-plus-word half-page love letter/advertisement he took out in the San Antonio-Express News Tuesday. . .

• Tis the season to be a grumpy old cow
  Gordon Ramsay can't make her cry - but Christmas does. This hilarious blast will strike a chord with every woman who's ever wrestled with a tangled set of fairy lights  The Daily Mail- UK, By Janet Street Porter, December 19, 2009
  You can sum up everything that’s wrong with Christmas in two words — fairy lights. Back in olden times, did they have fairy lights twinkling in the stable at Bethlehem? No, I thought not. Fairy lights as we know them were invented by a bloke (obviously) in the 20th century at around the same time as women started to claim a few rights beyond the vote and the right to be the person who always did the washing-up and the shopping. The minute we started to demand equal pay and better jobs, they invented fairy lights, the one thing that can reduce any highly intelligent woman normally capable of multi-tasking at an advanced level, to a crying, snivelling wreck. Every Christmas I get out the large brown cardboard box we have stored in the garage that has those evil words — Fairy Lights — written on the lid. (Please note, that in the whole soap opera of my life — the four husbands, the several long-term partners, and the current long-suffering chap who’s lasted a decade — not one of these men has ever offered to put up the fairy lights, or even managed to be in the house when the dreaded fairy-light day comes around each year). The time between me opening the box to screaming: ‘I am never doing this again!’ is only a matter of an hour, but it always follows the same gruesome ritual. Firstly, you are somewhat surprised that inside the box is a repulsive tangled mass of thin green wire. Didn’t you ask someone (male) to put away the fairy lights last year and place each set in a separate plastic bag? Of course you did, but they forgot, and now they have cleverly gone out to purchase your present so you are alone in the house with a wire puzzle that even Uri Geller could not mind-warp into unravelling itself. Next, you open a bottle of wine. Dear God, you deserve a drink for tackling this. . .
  
  
  

• Fenty to sign same-sex marriage bill at church in NW D.C.  Washington Post, By Nikita Stewart, December 18, 2009
  Mayor Adrian M. Fenty will sign legislation Friday to legalize same-sex marriage in the District at a bill-signing ceremony so historic that his staff scrambled to find the perfect location Thursday. Would it be All Souls Unitarian Church, a Northwest house of worship known for its diversity, liberalism and welcoming of same-sex couples? Would it be Covenant Baptist Church, a predominantly black church in Southwest where husband-and-wife team of Dennis and Christine Wiley serve as co-pastors and support gay marriage? Or would it be a secular site? Late in the day, Katie Loughary, executive director at All Souls, said it appeared that Covenant was winning. "We're disappointed, yes," she said. "But we're excited that it's happening." But the letdown was turned around when the Rev. Robert Hardies, All Souls' senior pastor, said that he had been contacted by the mayor's office and told that his church would be the spot. "We're honored to be able to host this historic bill-signing," he said. "We believe this is a historic step forward for justice and human rights in our nation's capital.". .
  
  
  
  RELATED ARTICLE: Under Pressure, Rick Warren Condemns Ugandan Anti-Gay Bill  Politics Daily, By David Gibson, December 10, 2009
  After weeks of growing pressure to speak out against a draconian bill against homosexuals in Uganda that is backed by many of his Christian allies in the U.S. and the East African nation, Pastor Rick Warren on Thursday released a video and statement defending his earlier silence but also vigorously condemning the bill. Warren is a megachurch pastor in Southern California whose bestselling books and close ties to politicians and world leaders has made him the most prominent American preacher since Billy Graham. He began his video statement by explaining that the Anti-Homosexuality Bill of 2009 is "a law that I had nothing to do with, completely oppose and vigorously condemn." "But because I didn't rush to make a public statement," Warren continued, "some erroneously concluded that I supported this terrible bill, and some even claimed I was a sponsor of the bill. You in Uganda know that is untrue." He also said he had not spoken out earlier because "it is not my role to interfere with the politics of other nations." But he added that because this is a moral issue and because he is a mentor to pastors in Uganda "who look to me for guidance," he decided to release a statement. . .
  

 RELATED ARTICLE:  No Case for Homosexuality in Bible   Washington Post- On Faith blog, By Joseph Bottum, John Mark Reynolds, Bruce D. Porter, December 15, 2008
The Bible offers no support for homosexual marriage. Christianity teaches love, mercy, and forgiveness for those who do bad things, true enough. Look, for example, at the story in the Gospel of John where Jesus offers his divine love, mercy, and forgiveness to a woman guilty of adultery. He shamed those who would stone her. He taught us all that we are sinners and often hypocrites. And then he told her, "Go and sin no more." He did not reinterpret the Old Testament to proclaim adultery another life-style choice. . .

RELATED ARTICLE:  Trends in HIV/AIDS Diagnoses Among Men Who Have Sex with Men --- 33 States, 2001--2006  Centers For Disease Control, June 27, 2008
Editorial Note:  During 2001--2006, male-to-male sex remained the largest HIV transmission category in the United States and the only one associated with an increasing number of HIV/AIDS diagnoses. In this analysis, statistically significant decreases in HIV/AIDS diagnoses were observed for all other transmission categories (i.e., among persons likely to have been infected through high-risk heterosexual contact, IDU, MSM and IDU, and other routes). Among MSM aged 13--24 years, statistically significant increases in diagnoses were observed in nearly all racial/ethnic populations. These findings underscore the need for continued effective testing and risk reduction interventions for MSM, particularly those aged <25 years. . .

RELATED BLOG:  Historical Christianity Can Not be Reconciled with Gay Christian(*a) Theology  Scripture Refiner's Fire- Rightly Dividing the Word of Truth in Love, January 26, 2008
. . .We believe God can forgive any sin including gay-sex, and we believe gays should be accepted in the church body like any other sinners. However, we do not accept their brazen attempt to legitimize immoral conduct that the Bible never commanded us to accept. It is not required for a sinner to repent first before they attend church, and they are welcome to attend, but it is required that they must abstain from injuring the church body by trying to legitimize immorality. In our opinion the gay Christian Movement is a Trojan horse to launch the gay-political agenda into the church. . .

RELATED ARTICLE:  Responding to Pro-Gay Theology  Leadership U, By Joe Dallas**
This three-part series will address the pro-gay theology by dividing its arguments--or tenets--into three categories: social justice arguments, general religious arguments, and scriptural arguments. A brief description of these arguments will be provided, followed by a response/rebuttal to each. . . . .When God is reputed to sanction what He has already clearly forbidden, then a religious travesty is being played out, and boldly. Confronting it is necessary because it (the pro-gay theology) asks us to confirm professing Christians in their sin, when we are Biblically commanded to do just the opposite. . .
** Editor's Note:  The author of this article, Joe Dallas, is the Founder of Genesis Counseling. He has authored several books on homosexuality, among them: * A Strong Delusion: Confronting the "Gay Christian" Movement   * Desires in Conflict   * Unforgiven Sins   * The Game Plan: The Men's 30-Day Strategy for Attaining Sexual Integrity   * When Homosexuality Hits Home: What to Do When a Loved One Says They're Gay.  A former gay rights activist and staff member of the largely gay Metropolitan Community Church, he has worked with hundreds of men and women struggling with homosexuality and related problems. . .


RELATED ARTICLE:  Judaism's Sexual Revolution: Why Judaism (and then Christianity) Rejected Homosexuality  OrthodoxyToday.org, By Dennis Prager
When Judaism demanded that all sexual activity be channeled into marriage, it changed the world. The Torah's prohibition of non-marital sex quite simply made the creation of Western civilization possible. Societies that did not place boundaries around sexuality were stymied in their development. The subsequent dominance of the Western world can largely be attributed to the sexual revolution initiated by Judaism and later carried forward by Christianity. . .

RELATED ARTICLE:  “Who Are You to Judge Others?” - In Defense of Making Moral Judgments  
It’s been said that the most frequently quoted Bible verse is no longer John 3:16 but Matthew 7:1: “Do not judge, or you too will be judged.”  We cannot glibly quote this, though, without understanding what Jesus meant.  When Jesus condemned judging, he wasn’t at all implying we should never make judgments about anyone.  After all, a few verses later, Jesus himself calls certain people “pigs” and “dogs” (Matt. 7:6) and “wolves in sheep’s clothing” (7:15)!  Any act of church discipline (1 Cor. 5:5) and rebuking false prophets (1 John 4:1) requires judgment.  What Jesus condemns is a critical and judgmental spirit, an unholy sense of moral superiority.  Jesus commanded us to examine ourselves first for the problems we so easily see in others.  Only then can we help remove the speck in another’s eye—which, incidentally, assumes that a problem exists and must be confronted.1  But let’s take a closer look at this charge that Christians are judgmental when we speak out on moral issues. . . . .Closely tied to the notion of “judgment” is “tolerance.”  Although many accuse absolutists of intolerance, these accusers most likely have an unclear and distorted notion of what tolerance really is.  They often are unaware that the concept of tolerance implies a close relationship to truth. Contrary to popular definitions, true tolerance means “putting up with error”—not “being accepting of all views.”. . .


RELATED ARTICLE:  Dale Martin's "arsenokoites and malakos" tried and found wanting  By Gary R. Jepsen, October 2006
In the multifaceted debate regarding homosexuality and the church, an issue that has surfaced is the proper interpretation of 1 Cor 6:9-10, where Paul writes that neither "homosexuals nor sodomites" (NKJV) shall inherit the kingdom of God. At first glance, the meaning of "homosexuals and sodomites" seems rather clear. But "Not so!" say those who advocate the normalization of homosexuality. Thus, this passage has become a hot issue with scholars aligning themselves along two basic lines of thought. Some say that the original words in Greek have been translated in an unnecessarily harsh way that condemns all homosexual behavior when in fact, they contend, Paul was merely condemning homosexual rape and other forms of sexual exploitation. Others reject this revisionist interpretation and hold that the traditional translation of the text (for example, as rendered above in the NKJV) is fair and accurate. This would be a traditionalist approach. So, who's right?. . .


RELATED ARTICLE:  WHAT GOD HATH NOT JOINED:  Why marriage was designed for male and female.  Christianity Today.com, By Edith M. Humphrey, Originally published September 1, 2004
Our radically confused society is debating the meaning of marriage with increasing intensity. That question leads to a host of other issues—especially the boundaries of sexual behavior and the nature of procreation. No one is untouched by this debate. Confusion in society spreads easily to the church. To help bring a biblical perspective to these discussions, Christianity Today offers this special section, the first of a series. Here we focus on the meaning of marriage in light of the national debate about gay marriage. In future issues, we'll go down other paths. As we address these issues over the long term, we hope to communicate two things: First, a definite "no" to calls to lower the moral bar (whether they come from within the church or from secular critics). And second, a decided "yes" to respect and extend compassion to the people who advocate views and practices we oppose. The issues are too important to fall short in either direction.    —Editors

• Sex makes people stupid  UExpress.com, By Maggie Gallagher, December 15, 2009
  Girls, can we talk? I don't really like piling on a man in the midst of a multimillion-dollar public and personal implosion, but here's one big obvious lesson to be learned from Tiger Woods: Sex makes people stupid. And not just the men. How else do you explain the mistresses and semipros coming forward to say that a married Tiger betrayed their trust by sleeping with other women, too. Sex makes people stupid. This is why we need a little thing called "civilization" to intervene between people and sexual passion, so we don't leave the young-uns to rely on their own genius to figure out certain enduring truths, like: A married man cannot betray you. You are not a betrayee. You are the co-betrayer; you invaded another woman's marriage for your own personal satisfaction. A married man can't be unfaithful to you. He can only be unfaithful with you, to his wife. Here's civilizational lesson No. 2: Having betrayed another woman by sleeping with her husband, don't compound the offense by going on national TV, or worse, by writing to the wife to tell her of the joys of your adulterous union. A new kind of other woman is emerging, and it's not a pretty sight. Worse than the whining is the new note of self-righteous aggression that is creeping into the other woman's tone. Two recent examples: Item one: A Manhattan artist named "Dawn" told The New York Post's Page Six that she had an affair with a married editor. All was peachy keen, until the husband broke the affair off. Dawn says she was "decimated." "I really loved this man," she explained "and he loved me." So what does Dawn do? This 20-something helpfully calls up the man's 57-year-old wife and says, "I am your husband's mistress." Why?. . .
  
  
  
  RELATED ARTICLE:  Judaism's Sexual Revolution: Why Judaism (and then Christianity) Rejected Homosexuality  OrthodoxyToday.org, By Dennis Prager
  When Judaism demanded that all sexual activity be channeled into marriage, it changed the world. The Torah's prohibition of non-marital sex quite simply made the creation of Western civilization possible. Societies that did not place boundaries around sexuality were stymied in their development. The subsequent dominance of the Western world can largely be attributed to the sexual revolution initiated by Judaism and later carried forward by Christianity. .
  
  
  

• D.C. Council Votes to Allow Same-Sex Marriage, Mayor Fenty to Sign
  Congressional Hurdles Remain for D.C. Gay Marriage After City Council's Approval   ABC News, By Elizabeth Gorman, December 15, 2009
  The D.C. Council today voted overwhelmingly for the final time to legalize same-sex marriage in Washington D.C., with two council members opposing. "This legislation is an important and historic step towards equal dignity, equal respect and equal rights for same-sex couples here in our nation's capital, which also preserves the right of clergy and congregations to adhere to their faiths," said Human Rights Campaign President Joe Solmonese. The legislation passed today would allow same-sex couples to be married in D.C., along with five other states, but not require clergy or religious organizations to provide services, accommodations, or facilities for the services. The clear majority vote was not a surprise to oberservers who anticipated the bill's easy passage today. . . . . The historic legislation faces a series of hurdles before gays can officially tie the knot in the nation's capital. . . . . .Mayor Adrian Fenty, a Democrat, still must sign the bill into law, which he has pledged to do most likely before Christmas. From the time the mayor signs the gay-marriage bill, Congress will have 30 legislative days to enact a joint resolution of disapproval. President Obama would have to sign that resolution for the city law to be blocked. If approved by the Democractic-controlled Congress as observers say they expect it will be, gay marriage is on track to become legal in Washington by late January, making it the first jurisdiction below the Mason-Dixon Line to allow full civil equality for gays and lesbians. But even if a resolution of disapproval is not enacted, members of Congress can try to attach an anti-gay marriage rider to another piece of legislation. . . .Beyond the efforts taking place in Congress, an additional anti-gay marriage effort is being made in D.C. Superior Court. A group called Stand4MarriageDC wants a ballot measure which says that "only marriage between man and woman" should be "valid or recognized" in the city. Last month, the D.C. Board of Elections and Ethics ruled that allowing residents to vote on a gay marriage ban would violate Washington's 1977 Human Rights Act, which prohibits discrimination.The Stand4MarriageDC group is now suing in Superior Court on the theory that if the Council has the right to change the law in order to allow same-sex couples to marry, then the people have the right to make laws on the same subject. . .
  
  
  
  RELATED ARTICLE:  CITIZEN JOURNALISM: 'Not a win' say foes of OK for gay marriage  Washington Times, December 17, 2009
  The D.C. Council on Tuesday passed the Religious Freedom and Civil Marriage Equality Act of 2009, which would allow gay marriage. Mayor Adrian M. Fenty has promised to sign the bill into law, which then would place the measure in the hands of Congress and President Obama. Council member and former Mayor Marion Barry and fellow council member Yvette Alexander, both of whom represent majority-black political districts, voted against the legislation. The majority of the voices quoted in the media were jubilant about the civil marriage aspect of the bill. Here are some that were not. . . . . .Businesswoman Kathy Pearson-West, who wants voters to decide the issue, said, "It is not over until God says it's over.". .
  
  
  RELATED ARTICLE:  The Preposterous Premise for Gay Marriage  Townhall.com, By Frank Turek, November 26, 2008
  After the passage of Prop 8 in California, homosexuals are still howling that they don’t have “equal rights.”  Hopefully, the California Supreme Court will respect the equal rights of voters by affirming Prop 8 because the howls of homosexuals are false. The truth is every person in America already has equal marriage rights! We’re all playing by the same rules—we all have the same right to marry any non-related adult of the opposite sex. Those rules do not deny anyone “equal protection of the laws” because the qualifications to enter a marriage apply equally to everyone—every adult person has the same right to marry. Homosexuals want the court to believe that because of their sexual desires they are a special class of persons that is being discriminated against. In other words, they think that sexual desires guarantee people special legal rights. That’s a preposterous premise! . . . . . . Gay complaints of “discrimination” are bogus as well. Marriage laws do not discriminate against persons, they discriminate against behavior. That’s true of most laws. . . .  The nonsensical comparisons to interracial marriage don’t work either. Race is irrelevant to marriage while gender is essential to it. . .
  
  
  
  

• Sanford’s Wife Files for Divorce   NY Times, By Robbie Brown, December 11, 2009
  Jenny Sanford filed for divorce on Friday from her husband, Gov. Mark Sanford of South Carolina, who confessed in June to an affair with a woman in Argentina. “As so many of us know, the dissolution of any marriage is a sad and painful process,” Ms. Sanford said in a statement. “Because Mark and I are public figures, we have naturally had less privacy with which to deal with our difficulties than do other couples. Indeed, I know it will soon become known, so I choose to release this brief notice that I am now filing for divorce.” The Sanfords have been separated since shortly after he admitted the affair in a teary-eyed news conference. Although Ms. Sanford has been living at the family’s beach house on Sullivan’s Island, S.C., with her four sons, the Sanfords have said publicly that they hoped to salvage the marriage. As recently as Thursday, Mr. Sanford told reporters that he wanted to remain married. But that proved untenable, Ms. Sanford said in the statement. “This came after many unsuccessful efforts at reconciliation,” she said, “yet I am still dedicated to keeping the process that lies ahead peaceful for our family.” She thanked supporters across the country for their “words of encouragement and prayers during this difficult time.” In her court filing, Ms. Sanford cited adultery as the grounds for divorce, according to the document, which was posted by The State, a newspaper in Columbia, S.C. . .
  
  
  
  RELATED ARTICLE & COMMENTS:  Exclusive: Read e-mails between Sanford, woman: Sanford-Maria e-mails shed light on governor's affair   The State, June 25, 2009
  E-mails, obtained by The State newspaper in December, between Gov. Mark Sanford and Maria, a woman in Buenos Aires, Argentina. At the time, efforts to authenticate the e-mails were unsuccessful. However, Sanford’s office Wednesday did not dispute their authenticity. The State has removed the woman’s full name and other personal details, including her street address, e-mail address and children’s names. . . . . . Comments.... Inca44 wrote on 06/30/2009 04:33:02 PM: Does anyone else feel at least somewhat uncomfortable reading these love notes on the internet? I couldn't even finish, not because I am so aghast at the content or offended by the affair, but because I find it wildly inappropriate--and a more than a little sadistic--for these messages to be exploited in this fashion. I cannot fathom why anyone would ever consider running for a political office in this country's overzealous "gotcha" climate where every sordid detail of every transgression is publicized in such excruciating detail. . .
  
  
  RELATED ARTICLE:  Does marriage stink? Part II: Jenny Sanford files for divorce from South Carolina Gov. Mark Sanford  Los Angeles Times, December 11, 2009
  In light of South Carolina First Lady Jenny Sanford's divorce filing this morning, months after the governor’s much-publicized admission of an affair with a woman in Argentina, we are feeling a little cynical about the sanctity of marriage. In case you too are tired of reading about the numerous illicit rendezvous of public figures and missed this one, Top of the Ticket and D.C. Now have reported that despite Gov. Mark Sanford’s reported desire to reconcile with his wife, Jenny Sanford is taking her four sons, ages 11 to 17, and her dignity and getting out. The governor will also face a hearing next month on 37 charges by the State Ethics Commission over his actions, which included allegedly using state planes for his clandestine Argentina trip. After a year of public figure infidelity from Sanford, Nevada Gov. Jim Gibbons, David Letterman, Jon Gosselin, Nevada Sen. John Ensign, and of course Tiger Woods, to name a few, we are wondering something again. Does marriage stink?. . .

RELATED VIDEO:  S.C. First Lady Asks for a Divorce From Governor  AP, December 12, 2009
South Carolina's first lady, a former Wall Street vice president who helped launch her husband's political career, announced Friday she is filing for divorce months after his tearful public confession of an affair with an Argentine woman. . .


RELATED VIDEO:  TEXTING: The new Lipstick on the Collar  ABC News, December 10, 2009
A look at how text messages can come back to haunt you.

RELATED ARTICLE:  A Joint Account That Underwrites Our Marriage  NY Times, By David Sarasohn, December 11, 2009
I have been married forever. Well, not since the Big Bang but since the Nixon administration — 35 years — a stretch long enough to startle new acquaintances or make talk-show audiences applaud. Recently one of my wife’s college students kept pressing us, with baffled curiosity, for our secret, as if there had to be some trick to it, like wearing each other’s clothes on Tuesdays. Back when we became engaged, our news was also greeted with baffled curiosity. It was the ’70s, after all, when the freedom to be able to hop from one relationship to the next was as essential as anything in the Bill of Rights. Our friends were profoundly perplexed; nobody, they thought, could want a fondue set that badly. . . . . Watching other couples break up also reminds me that divorce causes friends to choose between the two parties, and I would not like my chances. The appeal of the alternative is everywhere. In popular culture, predictability seems like a bear market compared with possibility, and falling into a pattern is the opposite of falling in love. But if you stay married long enough to make people speculate about your religious beliefs, you come to see that patterns are the point; there’s a reason the heart is an organ measured in rhythms. Being single is all about the future, about the person you’re going to meet at Starbucks or after answering the next scientific compatibility questionnaire. Being married, after a certain point, is about the past, about a steadily growing history of moments that provide a confidence of comfort, an asset that compounds over time. What you share is what you’ve shared, and measuring your communal property in decades puts you in a freakishly high bracket. . .


RELATED ARTICLE:  The Truth About Why Men Cheat: Counselor M. Gary Neuman surveyed 200 cheating and noncheating husbands to get at the real reasons behind men's infidelity   WebMD Feature from "Redbook" Magazine, By Nicole Yorio
What makes men cheat? Marriage counselor M. Gary Neuman dug through past research on male infidelity and found that most answers came from the wife's point of view. Wouldn't it make more sense to ask the guys? he thought. So for his new book, The Truth About Cheating, Neuman surveyed 200 cheating and noncheating husbands to get at the real reasons behind men's infidelity — including what cheating men say could have prevented them from straying. Here, some of his findings:. . .

• Court tosses Prop. 8 ruling on strategy papers  San Francisco Chronicle, December 11, 2009
  -- A federal appeals court in San Francisco has reversed a judge's order that backers of Proposition 8, the state initiative that banned same-sex marriage, give their campaign strategy documents to opponents trying to overturn the measure. In a unanimous ruling Friday, the Ninth U.S. Circuit of Appeals tossed out the order that Chief U.S. District Judge Vaughn Walker issued in October against backers of Prop. 8, which state voters approved in November 2008. Walker had said lawyers for two same-sex couples and a gay-rights group were entitled to see internal memos and e-mails between Yes on 8 strategists to look for evidence that the campaign had exploited prejudice against gays and lesbians. The plaintiffs are trying to show that the measure was discriminatory and thus unconstitutional. Prop. 8 sponsors argued that their discussions were constitutionally protected and that Walker's order would discourage candid communications in political campaigns. The three-judge appeals court panel unanimously agreed. "The freedom to associate with others for the common advancement of political beliefs and ideas lies at the heart of the First Amendment," Judge Raymond Fisher wrote for the court. Prop. 8 proponents, he said, had shown that turning over the documents "would likely have a chilling effect on political association and the formulation of political expression." The court had suspended Walker's order last week and signaled that it intended to reverse it. The trial over the lawsuit is still scheduled to begin Jan. 11 in San Francisco. . .

RELATED ARTICLE:  Foes of California's gay-marriage ban lose federal appeal:  9th Circuit judges reject the bid to see internal communications of Proposition 8 supporters, saying such a move would violate the 1st Amendment.  Los Angeles Times,  By Carol J. Williams, December 12, 2009
"We reverse," the three 9th Circuit judges, all appointees of President Clinton, said in an expedited ruling released Friday afternoon. "The freedom to associate with others for the common advancement of political beliefs and ideas lies at the heart of the 1st Amendment." Disclosing the inner workings of the Proposition 8 campaign "would have the practical effect of discouraging the exercise of 1st Amendment associational rights," the judges said, adding that the initiative's foes had failed to show that their need to review the communications outweighed the defendants' rights and interests. Andy Pugno, general counsel for Protect Marriage, said Proposition 8 backers were "very pleased" with the appellate ruling. "It's about the principle, that campaign leaders and workers should not have to be put on trial for their thoughts and beliefs," he said. "Whether they had been able to pry into campaign strategy memos or not, the campaign was singularly focused on protecting marriage and not attacking anyone.". . .


RELATED ARTICLE:  Yes! Yes! and Yes! on California, Arizona and Florida Propositions 8, 102, and 2!  The Real Proposal magazine, October 22, 2008
Who knew that we would ever see the day when it became necessary to define what marriage is in America... or the world for that matter? That said, no one could follow, for any length of time, our continuing coverage on this very critical sociopolitical issue without realizing that, whether we like it or not, the on-going and increasingly aggressive battle to redefine marriage is the next civil rights frontier in America! Most people do not fully comprehend how we got to this place. Many have a distorted perspective on the issues based on what is being fed to us by the mainstream media, who are largely complicit with the homosexual agenda and follow their playbook and manifesto quite diligently in the effort to convert straight America into accepting homosexuality as anything but deviant behavior. Therefore, we urge you to spend some time going through our coverage on the issue. For, without a doubt, the blinders will fall away and it will become clear that there is a very careful, very deliberate, very well financed and orchestrated marketing strategy being executed by radical homosexual activists to normalize same-sex relationships in this country. And you will likely be outraged that somewhere along the way — while most of us who believe in traditional marriage were enjoying our precious freedoms, taking kids to soccer, ordering pizza and watching our favorite shows — we were being manipulated and vilified as society's new "haters," "bigots," and "homophobes.". . .

• New Jersey Marriage Vote Canceled  NY Times, By David Kocieniewski, December 9, 2009
  The battle over a bill that would legalize gay marriage in New Jersey shifted locations unexpectedly late Wednesday as sponsors of the legislation canceled a vote scheduled for Thursday in the State Senate, where the measure appeared headed for defeat. The sponsors, Senators Raymond J. Lesniak and Loretta Weinberg, both Democrats, withdrew the bill from the agenda in the Senate session, saying they wanted to first allow a hearing in the General Assembly, where support for same-sex marriage is believed to be stronger. But opponents were outraged by the last-minute switch and accused Democrats of abusing their leadership positions to force a controversial issue through the Legislature during the waning days of the session. The bill was passed narrowly on Monday by a Senate committee. “It makes a mockery of the legislative process,” said John Tomicki, president of the New Jersey Coalition to Preserve and Protect Marriage. “They’re using the Legislature as a propaganda tool. They didn’t have the courage to bring the issue up before the election, and now they’re playing games to do things that the public doesn’t approve of at the very last minute.”. . . . . The switch to the Assembly is likely to increase the frenetic lobbying over the issue, which has already intensified in the past few days. Gay rights activists are pressing to win legislative approval before Jan. 19 — when Gov. Jon S. Corzine, a Democrat who staunchly supports same-sex marriage, is replaced by Governor-elect Christopher J. Christie, a Republican who opposes the measure. . .
  
  
  RELATED ARTICLE:  After faltering in Senate, gay marriage bill awaits a hearing date in Assembly  NJ.com, By Mary Fuchs, Friday, December 11, 2009
  The Assembly speaker said Wednesday he has not set a hearing date for the state's gay marriage bill, as one group supporting the legislation apologized for the after-hours picketing of a lawmaker. The legislation landed in the Assembly yesterday after its Senate sponsors made a last-minute decision to withdraw it when it appeared to lack the 21 votes needed for passage in the upper house. . .

RELATED ARTICLE: Two Sides Spend Big in Battle Over Same-Sex Marriage in New Jersey  FOX News, December 10, 2009
The race is on in New Jersey -- in both lobbying and spending -- as advocates on both sides fight try to gain advantage in the latest same sex marriage battleground before the new chief executive takes office. Supporters of gay marriage are frantically pushing to get a bill to outgoing Democratic Gov. Jon Corzine before he leaves office next month. His successor, Republican Gov.-elect Chris Christie, has vowed to veto any such measure passed by the Legislature after he takes office Jan. 19. But if Corzine can sign the bill into law before then, Christie and opponents of same sex marriage will have to wait at least until the next state legislative elections in 2011 to fight back. "This is the whole ballgame," said Brian Brown, executive director of the National Organization for Marriage, which has spent more than $600,000 in radio and TV ads and robo-calls against same-sex marriage. "If it's signed into law, we have a long hard slog to shift the nature of the Legislature," he said. If we win this vote, this is dead for the next four years." The state Senate canceled a vote scheduled for Thursday at the request of the bill's sponsors amid growing worries that it would have gone down in flames. A handful of senators acknowledged late Wednesday that the bill lacked the 21 votes it needs to pass the Senate. . . . .  Brown called the effort to "ram" the legislation through a lame-duck session "morally and politically wrong." "What these legislators should be doing is allowing people to have a direct vote," he said. In a written statement, Brown urged lawmakers not to approve the bill. "Gay marriage is not the priority of New Jersey voters, and senators in New Jersey should follow New York's lead in rejecting this lame-duck effort to impose gay marriage," Brown said. He added that the group found in a poll of two swing senate districts that no more than 2 percent of voters considered gay marriage one of their top three legislative priorities for the session "Why would politicians follow defeated Gov. Jon Corzine's lead off this particular cliff?" he asked. . .

• Reporter Fired for Private Anti-Gay Marriage Email  EdgeBoston, By Kilian Melloy, December 9, 2009
  A reporter who blasted a gay equality group in a private email the morning after marriage parity was defeated in Maine has been fired from his job at a local newspaper. Larry Grard, an 18-year employee at Waterville, Maine’s The Morning Sentinel, had not covered the marriage equality vote last month that saw gay and lesbian families in that state lose the right to marriage that the state legislature had approved earlier this year. However, when Grard came in to work the morning after Election Day and saw an email message from the Human Rights Campaign, a GLBT equality lobby group, saying that anti-gay animus accounted for the result, he took umbrage and fired off a note in response. "They said the Yes-on-1 people were haters," Grard was quoted as saying in a Dec. 7 DownEast.com article. "I’m a Christian. I take offense at that. I e-mailed them back and said basically, ’We’re not the ones doing the hating. You’re the ones doing the hating.’ I sent the same message in his face he sent in mine." The person to whom Grard was referring was the HRC’s deputy communications director, Trevor Thomas, who contacted the paper to complain about the email Grard had sent. Sentinel editor Bill Thompson fired Grard the next week. According to Grard, Thompson told Grard that Thomas had demanded the paper terminate Grard’s employment. "There’s no wiggle room," Grard claimed Thompson told him. Thomas disputes that. In a response to the story, Thomas said, "The day following the loss in Maine, HRC released a statement and shortly thereafter reporter Larry Grard responded with the following: ’Who are the hateful, venom-spewing ones? Hint: Not the yes on 1 crowd. You hateful people have been spreading nothing but vitriol since this campaign began. Good riddance!’ "At no time did I ask Larry to be fired," Thomas continued, "but instead had one email interaction with his editor where I said: ’I received the below email this morning after our national media release was sent to your team. ... It’s frankly, just not acceptable coming from a news organization the morning after our defeat.’ "The editor did not contact me further," Thomas added. "The management team of the newspaper did let me know they had policies in place and were looking into the matter. It is my understanding they conducted their own review. I only learned Larry was fired from a reporter asking for comment." Not only did Grard lose his job, the DownEast.com article said, but his wife, who also wrote for The Sentinel, was also informed that her services would no longer be needed by the publication. . .
  
  
  
  RELATED ARTICLE:  Reporter, Fired for Anti-Gay Marriage E-Mail, Claims Wrongful Termination   MyFoxDC, December 11, 2009
  "This is an example of what can happen when you stand up for your beliefs," Grard told FoxNews.com. "I was the lone conservative wolf in that newsroom for years and I never said a thing because nobody agreed with me. I suppose that's what conservatives have to do today — just shut up.". . .
  
  
  RELATED ARTICLE:  The Intolerance of Tolerance   Townhall.com, By Gregory Koukl, December 14, 2006
  Probably no concept has more currency in our politically-correct culture than the notion of tolerance. Unfortunately, one of America's noblest virtues has been so distorted it's become a vice. There's one word that can stop you in your tracks. That word is "intolerant." . . . . The tolerant person allegedly occupies neutral ground, a place of complete impartiality where each person is permitted to decide for himself. No judgments allowed. No "forcing" personal views. That all views are equally valid is one of the most entrenched assumptions of a society committed to relativism. And it's a myth. . .
  

RELATED ARTICLE:  How America Went Gay    Leadership U, By Charles W. Socarides, M.D.
Gays said they could "reinvent human nature, reinvent themselves." To do this, these reinventors had to clear away one major obstacle. No, they didn't go after the nation's clergy. They targeted the members of a worldly priesthood, the psychiatric community, and neutralized them with a radical redefinition of homosexuality itself. In 1972 and 1973 they co-opted the leadership of the American Psychiatric Association and, through a series of political maneuvers, lies and outright flim-flams, they "cured" homosexuality overnight-by fiat. They got the A.P.A. to say that same-sex sex was "not a disorder." It was merely "a condition"-as neutral as lefthandedness. . . 


RELATED ARTICLE:  Selling Homosexuality to America    Regent University Law Review, By Paul E. Rondeau
This article explores how gay rights activists use rhetoric, psychology, social psychology, and the media--all the elements of modern marketing--to position homosexuality in order to frame what is discussed in the public arena and how it is discussed. . . . The economics and education of homosexuals makes them prime players in a capitalistic society. Money means power, and education means the knowledge to use that power to gain more. Homosexuals have demonstrated they have access to the leadership in media, government, education, business and other centers of influence as well as access to capital. These are hardly traits of an oppressed minority. . .


RELATED ARTICLE:   Why We’re Losing Our Right to Speak Out  Townhall.com, By Chuck Colson, May 1, 2008
David Woodward is a political science professor at Clemson University—one who has first-hand experience on how dangerous it can be to speak out in favor of traditional values: He almost lost his job over it. In 1993, Woodward was asked to testify about the political power of homosexual groups in American life. He agreed to serve as an expert witness for the state of Colorado, which was fighting to defend the recently passed Amendment Two, which made it illegal to give protected status based on sexual orientation. In his new book, Why We Whisper: Restoring Our Right to Say It’s Wrong, co-authored by my friend, the able South Carolina Senator Jim DeMint, Woodward writes, “In that one decision, I unexpectedly jeopardized my academic career and entered . . . into the fiercest battle of the emergent culture wars.” To publicly oppose the campaign for same-sex “marriage” and gay rights was, he writes, “the equivalent to being sent to the university Gulag.” He was denied an administrative position on the grounds that he was “ideologically incompatible” with the values of the university. He often found the word homophobe scribbled on his office door. The press viciously attacked him for his views. But in private, Woodward was hearing a different message. People would call to whisper encouragement. So did parents and university staffers. Some students came into his office, carefully closed the door, and whispered their support. “The one thing they all had in common is that they were all scared, and they all spoke in whispers,” Woodward writes. Homosexuality is not the only issue Americans can no longer speak freely about. . .

RELATED ARTICLE:  Same-Sex “Marriage,” “Hate Crimes,” and the New Totalitarianism  LifeSite Special Report, By Michael D. O’Brien, February 28, 2005
Is it so far-fetched to consider the possibility that we are in a downward slide toward totalitarianism? Few people would go so far as to maintain that we are living in the early phase of an Orwellian 1984 or alternatively a softer form of totalitarian government such as Huxley’s Brave New World, yet the elements of State-enforced social reconstruction are now in operation. We should also consider the fact that in just over one generation we have been shifted from a society in which homosexual acts were a crime under the then existing law, to a society in which homosexual acts have become a government-protected and fostered activity, while voicing criticism of it “publicly” has become the crime. Call it by any name you like, but this is Thought Crime. As Orwell predicted, we have arrived at a situation in which “some of us are more equal than others.” . . .


RELATED ARTICLE:   Political bullying works  Jewish World Review, By Cal Thomas, April 5, 2001
Gay rights groups are experienced intimidators. Add to that the effective infiltration of the media, academia, religion and psychiatry by gay rights activists and their sympathizers and you see how this issue has been turned around in a single generation. . .

RELATED ARTICLE:  Hope for Homosexuals  Good News magazine, Interview with Dr. Joseph Nicolosi conducted by Melvin Rhodes
Dr. Joseph Nicolosi is a clinical psychologist. He is the president of NARTH, the National Association for Research and Therapy of Homosexuality, a 1,000-member organization. Dr. Nicolosi has successfully treated thousands of patients to help men transition from homosexuality to heterosexuality. He is author of several books, including A Parent's Guide to Preventing Homosexuality and Reparative Therapy of Male Homosexuality: A New Clinical Approach. He has spoken at hundreds of conferences worldwide and has appeared on hundreds of radio and television programs around the world as the preeminent authority on reparative therapy. He also heads the Thomas Aquinas Psychological Clinic in Encino, California. . . . .

GN: In the last few years, AIDS has become primarily a heterosexual problem internationally. In the United States it still affects gays disproportionately. Why is that?

• Ad Rant: Dockers ads claim "soft" khakis will make men more manly  WalletPop.com, By Jami Bernard, December 07, 2009
  Evidently, men's testosterone levels have been dropping, and so have sales of khaki pants. Coincidence? Dockers thinks not. Dockers, the clothing manufacturer that once put the "casual" in casual Fridays, sees a connection-at least the kind you can use to fuel an ad campaign. They're planning to reverse society's terrible double trend by teaching today's men how to be men and how to dress with a slogan that flirts with being sexist: "Wear the Pants." "It's time to answer the call of manhood," proclaims one of the new ads. It's nice to know that answering the call of manhood no longer has to involve winning at arm-wrestling when all you have to do is buy more khakis from Dockers. Manning up has never been simpler. The campaign debuted in early December, and the roll-out will include print, TV and billboards, plus a return to airtime during the Holy Grail of manly-man spectaculars: the Superbowl. Here's the full "Man-ifesto" posted on the Dockers website: "Once upon a time, men wore the pants, and wore them well. Women rarely had to open doors and little old ladies never crossed the street alone. Men took charge because that's what they did. But somewhere along the way, the world decided it no longer needed men." Oh, goodie! A return to the grand old days when women weren't allowed to vote!. . . . . . RELATED COMMENTS: #4:  12-09-2009 @ 7:22AM buccigrossi3 said... OMG! It's about time. Where have all the real men gone? All the men on TV look like their Gay brother dressed them. I want some real men!!!!!!!!! My husband can't even find any clothes to wear because they're all low waisted and big collars. And, HE looks like a model unlike those so-called men in the ads. Give us what we want...our men back!. . .
  
  
  RELATED ARTICLE:  Dockers Brings Back Khakis, Brandsweek, By Elaine Wong, Dec 1, 2009
  Dockers is on a mission to make khakis cool again. The brand, a unit of jeans maker Levi Strauss & Co., launched a campaign today (Tuesday), touting khakis as must-have work apparel of American men. Dubbed “Wear the Pants,” the effort aims to get men to rediscover khaki pants by positioning them as “masculine” and “versatile.” Ads are accompanied by the text: “Behold the second dawn of man.” Dockers is also trying to inject some life into the category, which has seen sales decline due to the lack of new product and marketing innovation over the last decade, said global marketing vp Jennifer Sey. As a result, Dockers is shaking things up via a new, nine-color khaki line. Sey chatted with Brandweek about the line and supporting ads by Draftfcb, which appear in publications like GQ. Here's what she had to say:. . . . .We started to do some research. In today’s world, men have lost a bit of footing, in part because women have come so far, but we also found a few surprising facts: Eighty-percent of those who suffered unemployment in the last year were men. Women outnumber men in the workforce now. But the most surprising fact of all was that men’s testosterone levels have been dropping by a percentage point a year for the last 20 years. All these factors add to up say, “Wow, men are struggling in today’s world.” [And we, as khaki manufacturers] have not really been talking to them. But men have told us that they are expected to be more sensitive, to do more at home. They are confused about what it means to be a man today. . .

RELATED SITE:  Dockers Man-ifesto 



RELATED ARTICLE:  Girly Men: The Media's Attack on Masculinity  Salvo Magazine 4, By S. T. Karnick
The tendency of the nation’s schools to suppress boys’ natural way of seeing and doing things, brilliantly documented by Christina Hoff-Sommers in her 2001 book The War Against Boys: How Misguided Feminism Is Harming Our Young Men, is becoming increasingly evident in the culture. . . . Boys mistreated by our educational system must advance into society and try to become men, having been taught to disrespect masculinity and suppress it in themselves. One obvious coping mechanism is for males to act more sensitively, making a determined effort to "share their feelings" and be less aggressive and competitive. .

RELATED ARTICLE:  The child-man in the Promised Land:Today's single young men hang out in a hormonal limbo between adolescence and adulthood   City Journal, By Kay Hymowitz, Winter 2008- Vol. 18, no.1
It’s 1965 and you’re a 26-year-old white guy. You have a factory job, or maybe you work for an insurance broker. Either way, you’re married, probably have been for a few years now; you met your wife in high school, where she was in your sister’s class. You’ve already got one kid, with another on the way. For now, you’re renting an apartment in your parents’ two-family house, but you’re saving up for a three-bedroom ranch house in the next town. Yup, you’re an adult! Now meet the twenty-first-century you, also 26. . .


RELATED ARTICLE:  A Real Man's Responsibilities Townhall.com, By John Hawkins, May 16, 2008
You can scarcely pick up a paper these days without reading about someone talking about "rights." However, the word "responsibilities" doesn't seem to come up as often. That's a shame because our "responsibilities" are every bit as important as our "rights." In fact, the "responsibilities" are more important in some ways because of our nature. We human beings are born savages, not much different than highly intelligent wolves. It's only because we have been socialized, civilized, taught better, and bathed in the grace of God that we have the wherewithal to live together respectfully in a civilized society. Moreover, because men are bigger, stronger, and more naturally aggressive than women, we particularly need to be schooled on what our duties are -- not just as human beings, but as men. . .


RELATED ARTICLE:  Feminists created Mr Sensitive, but what we REALLY want is a man to fix the car  The Daily Mail- UK, By Lowri Turner, May 15, 2008
I am part of a generation which has spent the past 20 years proving to men that we don't need them. In doing so, we have painted ourselves into a corner, literally in some cases since we have given up waiting for the men in our lives to redecorate the spare room and girls are now doing it for themselves, as well as everything else. I look at myself and my girlfriends, all so tired from being bravely, fabulously independent, and I wonder if, in wanting to show we are not silly damsels in distress, we have let men off the hook? When it comes to domestic chores, we do seem to have a bad deal. These days, we do our mother's work, the cleaning, cooking etc, and our father's DIY, putting stuff in the loft, as well. This is, admittedly because it's often quicker to do it ourselves than wait for the men to get off the sofa and we don't have to waste energy nagging. But it is exhausting. For those of us who are single parents with sons, the example we set is worrying. I look at my two boys, seven and five, and wonder if they will grow up to assume that women do the shopping, cleaning, cooking, washing, car maintenance, DIY etc. while men tinker round the edges, doing the odd run to the bottle bank or buying overpriced salami at the organic deli. Yes, it's good to show boys that a woman's talents have no limit, but not if it means they are going to sit on their bottoms and expect their girlfriends to put the rubbish out. So, perhaps the time is now ripe for the return of Macho Man, not the knuckle-dragging Neanderthal but a chap who knows where to put water in the car, decides where to go for dinner and can clear blocked guttering. Emotional intelligence is all very well, but if a pigeon dies in your cold water tank, it's not much use being able to discuss how you feel, you want someone to get the blinking thing out. . .

RELATED ARTICLE:  Why women are to blame for killing off real men   The Daily Mail- UK, By Carol Sandler, May 7, 2008
When we longed for the coming of what we once liked to call the New Man, don't you sometimes think we should have been more careful what we wished for? Back then, we thought we knew what we wanted. Moreover, what we thought we wanted didn't sound unreasonable. Put-upon women - run ragged by Neanderthal demands that we perform in the office, kitchen and bedroom - believed that if our partners could just be kicked up the backside of their latent sensitivity, they'd graduate from cavemen to soul-mates, and our lives would be that much easier for it. . . . . You could call it turning the tables...but two wrongs don't make a right. And now, after all these years of our efforts to "retrain" men, up to and including ridiculing them, what have we really achieved? We have achieved a generation of women who still earn, as a national average, only 70 per cent of men's wages, and who still do five hours of housework to every measly hour's contribution from the man of the house. Yet we have also achieved a new generation of men who, worrying signs suggest, are turning into a bunch of sissies. So well done, ladies. Take a look at your handiwork now. . . . And worse is on the way. The latest casualty of our well-meaning efforts, research says, is a huge decline in male libido. It's not that they can't have sex (we've got Viagra for that). No, it's that they won't have sex. Not interested. Can't be bothered. . .


RELATED ARTICLE:  Not tonight darling - I've got a headache: The sexual confessions of a husband who's lost his libido   The Daily Mail- UK, May 8, 2008
According to new research, more middle-aged men than ever before are going off sex. So it is no longer the wife saying: "I have a headache"; this time men are to blame for the dip in married couples' sex lives. Here Ross, 47, and Diana Appleyard, 46, from Argyll in Scotland, who have been married for 20 years and have two children Beth, 20, and Charlotte, 14, share their very differing views. . .


RELATED ARTICLE:  What child-men need is some tradition   The Dallas Morning News, By Rod Dreher, January 27, 2008
Some years ago, a young painter about to complete art school complained bitterly to me about his education. "They told us all that we were geniuses the first day we showed up," he said. "They never taught us the basics. Whatever we wanted to do, our teachers thought was brilliant. Now I'm about to graduate, and I don't know much more about being an artist now than when I started." The young artist's point was actually more profound than I realized then and helps explain the pathetic phenomenon of child-men – those woebegone males who seem stuck in perpetual adolescence.  This unhappy student rightly recognized that the preceding generation – the baby boomers – had failed in its responsibility to pass on to him a tradition. Had his art teachers only drilled him in tradition, they likely would have bludgeoned his creativity with mannerism. Instead, they declared tradition irrelevant and made each student's individual desire the only necessary standard. Without a tradition against which to measure oneself as an artist, there is nothing to learn, no impetus to learn it and no penalty for not learning it. The student asked a question – What is an artist? – for which his culture no longer provided an authoritative answer. But if you ask a far more important question – What is a man? – the culture comes up equally short, and for the same reason. . .

• Parenting Issues:  The rising tide of teen dishonesty  OneNewsNow, By Mark Gregston, December 09, 2009
  Some claim that the silly gesture of crossing your fingers behind your back to cover up a lie originated with Roman persecution of Christians. To escape death, those who lied about their faith in Christ, just as Peter did, made the sign of the cross behind their back to ask God's forgiveness. That sounds more like a fable to me, but it's a fact that teenagers today seem to be crossing their fingers behind their back more and more. They are cheating and stealing more, too. The latest "Report Card on the Ethics of American Youth" by the Josephson Institute of Ethics shows teens are lying more often and more easily than ever. The report indicates an increase in lying, cheating, and stealing among youth since 2006, when the report was first published. . . . Dishonesty may seem like a minor issue in comparison to other problems like drug abuse, sexual promiscuity, and eating disorders, but it is a vice that parents should never ignore. Dishonesty is rooted in an attitude of disrespect; disrespect for others, disrespect for authority, disrespect for other people's things, disrespect for your family's values, and disrespect for oneself. If you ignore dishonest actions by your teen today, you may have to deal with bigger problems later. It won't usually go away with the mere passage of time. It will reappear at significant stress points later in your child's life — when they go off to college, get a job, or get married. Getting away with lying, cheating, or theft today can lead to a lifetime of dishonesty, and that can land them in real trouble or heartache in the future. . . And by the way, be sure to model honesty yourself, and make it a habit to be truthful.  If you think you've hidden dishonesty from them in the past, think again. Teens can read their parents like a book. They don't miss a thing, and they detest hypocrisy. So, if you know you've been dishonest in front of your teen, ask their forgiveness, and give yourself some consequences for the bad behavior, so your teen knows how important it is to be honest. Teens need some good role models in regard to honesty.  If not you, then who?. . .
  
  
  RELATED REPORT:  The Ethics of American Youth – 2008 summary   CharacterCounts.org
  Survey of teens reveals entrenched habits of dishonesty — stealing, lying, and cheating rates climb to alarming rates. Josephson Institute's 2008 Report Card on the Ethics of American Youth is based on a survey of nearly 30,000 students in high schools across the U.S. The results paint a troubling picture of our future politicians and parents, cops and corporate executives, and journalists and generals. . . As bad as these numbers are, it appears they understate the level of dishonesty exhibited by America’s youth. More than one in four (26 percent) confessed they lied on at least one or two questions on the survey. Experts agree that dishonesty on surveys usually is an attempt to conceal misconduct. Despite these high levels of dishonesty, the respondents have a high self-image when it comes to ethics. A whopping 93 percent said they were satisfied with their personal ethics and character and 77 percent said that when it comes to doing what is right, I am better than most people I know. . .
  
  
  RELATED QUIZ:  What kind of example do you set? Take our new survey for adults   Josephson Institute
  
  
  
  

• New 'State of Our Unions' Report Focuses on Money and Marriage During Great Recession  UVa Today, December 7, 2009
  It's a bad time to be a working-class man with no college education. Such men have borne the brunt of job losses since 2007, and new research finds that men are 61 percent less likely to be happy in a marriage if they work fewer hours than their wives. The study predicts that the so-called "mancession" will undercut marriage in working-class communities, furthering a "divorce divide" that has been  growing since the 1980s between couples with college degrees and those with less education. That's one of the findings of the 2009 "State of Our Unions" report, issued today by the National Marriage Project at the University of Virginia and the Institute for American Values. With a focus on how the so-called "Great Recession" may be roiling or solidifying marriages, the "Money and Marriage" report includes several new studies alongside a statistical wrap-up of marriage in America based on the latest numbers from the U.S. Census Bureau and elsewhere. Among the findings:
  
  • Divorce fell during the first full year of the Great Recession – the first annual dip since 2005 – evidence that the challenges of job losses, foreclosures and depleted retirement accounts may be driving some couples to stick together. The divorce rate fell 4 percent in 2008 to 16.9 divorces per 1,000 married women, after rising from 16.4 in 2005 to 17.5 in 2007 (a 7 percent increase). If trends observed during and after the Great Depression of the 1930s are once again at work, some of the decline is due to economic factors that lead couples merely to temporarily delay divorce, but there is also another dynamic at work: Tough times foster real family solidarity and encourage many couples to stick together, said U.Va. sociology professor W. Bradford Wilcox, director of the National Marriage Project. Many couples are rediscovering the longstanding sociological truth that marriage is one of society's best social insurance plans, he said.
  
  • Credit card debt and financial conflict are corrosive to marriages, whereas financial assets strengthen the marital bond, finds new research by Jeffrey Dew, a professor of family studies at Utah State University and formerly a postdoctoral research associate at U.Va. His research indicates that financial conflict is a top predictor of divorce. Couples who report disagreeing over finances once a week are over 30 percent more likely to divorce than couples who disagree about finances a few times per month. Dew also finds that couples who had no assets were 70 percent more likely to divorce than couples with $10,000 in assets.
  
  • Men, particularly working-class and poor men, have absorbed 75 percent of job losses since 2007. This "mancession," particularly among those with only a high-school education, might foster gender-role reversals in contemporary marriages as unemployed or underemployed men take up more child care and housework. That's good news for gender equality and marital comity, argues Christine Whelan, a professor of sociology at the University of Iowa. But new research by Wilcox suggests the "mancession" will undercut marriage in working-class communities, furthering a "divorce divide" between college-educated couples and those with less education that has been growing since the 1980s. His analysis of the 2000 Survey of Marriage and Family Life finds that, among couples with children at home, husbands who work less hours than their wives are 61 percent less likely to report that they are "very happy" in their marriages compared to men who work as many or more hours than their wives.
  
  • Couples can improve their finances by reversing a stereotypical division of labor – have her do the investing while he handles the shopping. . .

RELATED REPORT (PDF):  The State of Our Unions, Marriage in America 2009: Money & Marriage  National Marriage Project- Editor: W. Bradford Wilcox, Associate Editor: Elizabeth Marquardt, Founding Co-editors: David Popenoe & Barbara Dafoe Whitehead
The State of Our Unions monitors the current health of marriage and family life in America. Produced annually, it is a joint publication of the National Marriage Project at the University of Virginia and the Center for Marriage and Families at the Institute for American Values. The 2009 State of Our Unions makes clear that money matters for contemporary American marriages. In particular, this edition of The State of Our Unions answers the following questions:

    * How is the Great Recession affecting the institution of marriage, as measured by changes in marriage and divorce rates in the U.S.?
    * How do family finances—especially credit card debt and family assets—shape the quality and stability of contemporary married life in America?
    * What do evolutionary psychology and the contemporary study of finance have to tell us about the best division of financial labor for husbands and wives?
    * Is the Great Recession likely to foster egalitarian relationships between husbands and wives?. . .



RELARED ARTICLE:  Can the Recession Save Marriage?  Wall Street Journal, By W. Bradford Wilcom, December 11, 2009
There may be a silver lining in all this financial pain. For most married Americans, the Great Recession seems to be solidifying, not eroding, the marital bond. The divorce rate is actually falling. . . the recession has made the soulmate model look impoverished. Today spouses are rediscovering the value of a husband with a good health-care plan, a wife with a good job or in-laws who are willing to provide free child care or a temporary rent-free place to live. In other words, Americans are rediscovering the power that family ties have to carry them—financially, socially and emotionally—through tough times. . .

RELATED REPORT (PDF):  BANK ON IT: Thrifty Couples Are The Happiest    National Marriage Project, By Jeffrey Dew
Over the course of the last two decades, Americans—especially younger adults—went on a credit card-enabled binge, accumulating billions in consumer debt. For example, in January 1988, American consumers had nearly $170 billion in revolving debt. By December 2008, U.S. consumers had amassed a staggering $988 billion in revolving debt – just short of $1 trillion. The financial consequences of this massive increase in consumer debt have been readily apparent in the nation’s recent recession. But new research on marriage and money—which has focused on the influence that debt, assets, spending patterns, and materialism have on marriages—suggests that our recent spending spree has also been important for the quality and stability of marriages in the United States. This research indicates that consumer debt (e.g., credit card debt) plays a powerful role in eroding the quality of married life. Consumer debt fuels a sense of financial unease among couples, and increases the likelihood that they will fight over money matters; moreover, this financial unease casts a pall over marriages in general, raising the likelihood that couples will argue over issues other than money and decreasing the time they spend with one another. . .


RELATED ARTICLE:  Money Fights Predict Divorce Rates  NY Times blog- Economix, By Catherine Rampell, December 07, 2009
You know it in your gut, and you’ve seen it in the splintered marriages around you. Finance-related tensions — however you define them — raise the risk of divorce. A new study, by Jeffrey Dew at Utah State University, attempts to quantify that risk. His finding: Couples who reported disagreeing about finance once a week were over 30 percent more likely to get divorced than couples who reported disagreeing about finances a few times a month.Professor Dew looked at responses from about 2,800 couples surveyed in 1987 by the National Survey of Families and Households. In this survey, both husbands and wives were asked, separately, about how often they disagreed with their spouse over chores, in-laws, spending time together, sex and money. These same respondents were then contacted again several years later, in 1992, and asked if they were still married. Of all these common things couples fight about, money disputes were the best harbingers of divorce. For wives, disagreements over finances and sex were good predictors of divorce, but finance disputes were much stronger predictors. For husbands, financial disagreements were the only type of common disagreement that predicted whether they would get a divorce. These findings were presented last month at the annual conference of the National Council on Family Relations, and appear in “The State of Our Unions,” a report on marriage and money released today by the University of Virginia’s National Marriage Project and the Center for Marriage and Families at the Institute for American Values. .


RELATED ARTICLE:  Money Talks to Have Before Marriage  NY Times, By Ron Lieber, October 23, 2009
Divorce tends to be emotionally gut-wrenching for the people who go through it (not to mention those around them). But most couples don’t realize that divorce can also be among the most ruinous financial moves anyone can make. Sure, you could bet big and lose on a single stock or money manager. Or your small business could go bankrupt, taking your life savings with it. But divorce and the costs that often come with it — from legal bills to the sudden need for an additional residence — affect far more people. . .


RELATED ARTICLE:  What Are We Fighting Over When We Fight Over Money?  NY Times blog- Economix, By Catherine Rampell, August 17, 2009
“People are not really fighting over money,” said Professor Stevenson. “They’re fighting over an allocation of money.” In other words, it’s not the act of buying that should concern couples, but what’s being bought, and the opportunity costs of that purchase. Money-related fights aren’t about whether one person has the character of a cheapskate or the qualities of a wastrel; it’s about withholding spending on something that someone else sees as important, or freely spending on something that someone else sees as less important. Noting that money is just a medium of exchange, Professor Stevenson said, “I’ve certainly seen people fight about ‘money,’ but what they were really upset about is that all the cash to going to buy things for the kids. Or that the family never took a nice vacation without the kids. Or they have no money for retirement, causing a lot of anxiety as well as realistic perceptions of working at old ages — or consumption falling in old age.” When you’re in a relationship that feels mismatched in attitudes toward spending, she continued, “What you’re really mismatched on is how much do you want to consume today versus tomorrow, or in retirement — not how much do you want to consume, period.”. . .

• New Jersey gay marriage bill clears state Senate Judiciary Committee; full Senate vote is next  NY Daily News, By AP, December 7, 2009,
  - A bill to legalize gay marriage cleared the state Senate Judiciary Committee on Monday, paving the way for a full Senate vote Thursday. Monday night's committee vote, after about seven hours of debate, was 7-6. New Jersey is the best chance for proponents to add a sixth state allowing same-sex unions. Proponents want the bill passed quickly because Democratic Gov. Jon Corzine has said he'd sign it before leaving office. Republican Gov.-elect Chris Christie, who takes office Jan. 19, has said he'd veto it. A similar measure was voted down last week in the New York state Senate. Last month, voters in Maine overturned a law that was enacted this year to allow same-sex marriages but never took effect. . . . Public opinion polls show the majority of Americans oppose allowing gays to marry. And that's been reflected in votes on constitutional amendments to ban them. Such amendments have been adopted by voters in 30 states - every one where it's been brought to a vote. . .
  
  
  
• Senate Panel in N.J. Approves Gay Marriage Bill  NY Times, By David Kocieniewski, December 07, 2009
  The battle over same-sex marriage in New Jersey headed toward a legislative showdown Monday night, when a bill that would allow such unions narrowly cleared a key legislative committee and was set for a vote by the full State Senate. The 7-to-6 vote by the Senate Judiciary Committee — which came after years of efforts by gay rights advocates and a day of emotionally charged testimony by dozens of supporters and opponents of the bill — was the first time any legislative body in the state had ever approved a gay marriage bill. The approval brought cheers from hundreds of supporters who crammed the State House committee room. But the measure faces an uphill fight when it is put up for a vote on Thursday before the full Senate, where even supporters concede that they do not yet have the 21 votes needed to pass it. If it does pass, it will go to the Assembly, where passage is considered more likely. . .

RELATED VIDEO:  Same-sex marriage supporters march on statehouse in New Jersey  NJ.com, December 03, 2009

RELATED ARTICLE:  N.J. gay marriage debate heats up following Christie governor's race victory  NJ.com, By AP, November 04, 2009
Although New Jersey's election produced an about-face in the governor's office on the gay marriage issue, both sides of the debate have been readying for a post-election battle in the Legislature. Gay marriage advocates have regularly launched their campaigns in the lame-duck sessions between Tuesday elections and Jan. 12, when the session ends. But if New Jersey, one of a handful of states that offers civil unions, is going to adopt a law to legalize gay marriage anytime soon, lawmakers need to act quickly. . .


RELATED ARTICLE:  Gay Rights vs. Democracy   Townhall.com, By Dinesh D'Souza, May 19, 2008
It is the essence of democracy that people should be able to decide the moral rules that govern the nature of a community. If people don't have that power, then they are living under an autocracy. True, this majority rule is not unlimited. It is limited by what the government has the power to do. Consequently the majority cannot, in general, vote to seize the homes and accumulated savings of rich people. Leaving aside exceptional cases, government cannot mandate how parents how should raise their children. These kinds of power lie outside the scope of government in a free society. Majority rule is also circumscribed by individual rights. But these are the rights clearly specified in the Constitution. A majority of citizens cannot prevent an individual from voting because voting is a basic right, as is the right to freedom of speech and freedom of religion, and so on. The state is constitutionally prohibited from undermining these enumerated rights. Now the high court of California has made gay marriage into a right that is immune from restriction by the majority of citizens in the state. We already know what California citizens think about gay marriage: they oppose it. A referendum outlawing gay marriage was passed with the support of the state's voters. More than 60 percent of voters cast their ballots against gay marriage. How, then, can a court invalidate the referendum and over-rule the will of the people? Basically through a kind of legal fraud. . .

RELATED ARTICLE:  The Deceit of Gay "Marriage"  Boundless.og, By David Orland
To justify giving privileges or exemptions or subsidies to some particular group in society, the benefit of doing so for society at large must first be shown. With heterosexual marriage, the case is clear enough. Heterosexual marriage is a matter of genuine social interest because the family is essential to society's reproduction. The crux of my argument, in other words, was that married couples receive the benefits they do, not because the state is interested in promoting romantic love, or because the Bible says so or because of the influence of special interest groups but rather because the next generation is something that is and should be of interest to all of us. And, by definition, this is not a case that can be made for homosexual unions. To that degree, the attempt to turn the question of domestic partnership into a debate about fairness falls flat. . . .


RELATED ARTICLE:  The Deceit of Gay Marriage: Round Two  Boundless.org, by David Orland
Where to start? In the first place, homosexuals are not denied the right to marry — they are denied a right to marry other homosexuals, which is something else altogether. Next, the argument trades on the idea — superficially appealing but practically empty — that discrimination is by definition a bad and evil thing. Denying legal status to gay marriage does indeed involve discrimination — but it is discrimination of a perfectly legitimate kind. Finally and most crucially, the argument assumes what it is meant to prove: the rights of gays are being violated only if you already agree that one of their rights is to get married to a person of the same sex as themselves. But that, of course, is precisely what is at issue. It's as if proponents of gay marriage believe that saying you have a right, loud enough and often enough, gives you one. While this tactic may succeed in silencing some of their opponents, it falls miserably short of making the sort of case that needs to be made if a specifically "gay right" to marriage is to be recognized. If gays hope to show that they have a right to marry one another, they will have to prove that they meet the same conditions that give heterosexual couples this right. There's no way around it: any discussion of gay marriage must begin with a discussion of marriage in general. So why is heterosexual marriage recognized as a right? . . .

• Foreclosures Can Offer Deals, but Buyer Beware   NY Times, By TARA SIEGEL BERNARD, December 05, 2009
  So you’re looking to buy a new home, and you think a foreclosed house may be the best deal. You’ve probably noticed, then, that many of the big banks’ Web sites are beginning to look a bit like real estate brokerages, showcasing the many properties that they’ve repossessed. These houses often sell for about 15 to 20 percent less than comparable homes in the same neighborhood, according to the National Association of Realtors. And while the banks have been careful not to flood the market with all their properties at once, there are hundreds of thousands of listings now, and half a million more expected in the coming year. Despite the seemingly high inventory, though, anyone considering buying a distressed property should heed the classic warning: Caveat emptor, or let the buyer beware. Closing a deal in a desirable neighborhood can be hard to do. Many aspiring homeowners have lost out to all-cash bidders. Buyers also need to search more aggressively than usual, which means figuring out which brokers have the best foreclosure listings, religiously checking for new ones and visiting the properties shortly thereafter. Buyers also need to ensure that the home is truly a good deal and not a money pit — most of these homes are sold as is.Still, as Rick Sharga, senior vice president of RealtyTrac, a foreclosure listing service, put it, “The best discounts have been on bank-owned property.” If you are still interested in buying a distressed property, you have several options. You can buy it through a preforeclosure sale, at a public auction or through a bank or other entity that has taken ownership of the home — these properties are known as real estate owned, or R.E.O.’s. Below is a more detailed description of the potential risks and benefits of buying R.E.O.’s and preforeclosure transactions known as short sales, where the bank agrees to sell a home for less than is owed on the mortgage. Through October, foreclosures and short sales accounted for nearly 37 percent of all home sales, on average, according to the Realtors’ association.
  
  R.E.O.’s
  
  Traditional homebuyers are generally discouraged from buying homes at auction because there are too many risks — you can’t tour the inside of the home, which increases your chances of buying a house that will drain your bank account. Equally important, the home won’t necessarily have a clear title, which means there may be tax liens or other debts against the property. And when you buy the home, you buy those issues, too. One of the benefits of R.E.O.’s is that the bank typically clears any title issues before it puts the house on the market. “It’s easiest because there is a price already, there is access, you can do your estimate for repairs, and you can write your offer and go,” said Alexis McGee, president of Foreclosures.com, which lists foreclosures and offers classes for foreclosure investors. But you need to do your share of preparatory work. Start by getting acquainted with the listings in your target area. All R.E.O.’s are sold through an agent. You can find their listings directly on the big banks’ Web sites, like Bank of America and Wells Fargo, as well as regional banks like SunTrust. Fannie Mae offers its listings through the HomePath Web site and Freddie Mac through HomeSteps. . . 

RELATED ARTICLE:  US Treasury sets guidance to simplify 'short sales'  Reuters.com, By Al Yoon, November 30, 2009
The U.S. Treasury on Monday set long-awaited guidance on a plan for mortgage companies to speed "short sales" of homes and other loan modification alternatives to stem a rising tide of foreclosures. The Home Affordable Foreclosure Alternatives Program provides financial incentives and simplifies the procedures for completing short sales, a growing practice in which a lender agrees to accept the sale price of a home to pay off a mortgage even if the price falls short of the amount owed, according to an announcement on the Treasury's website. Guidelines address barriers that have often sidelined short sales by setting limits on the time it takes a bank to approve an offer, freeing borrowers from debt and capping claims of subordinate lenders. . .

RELATED ARTICLE:  Mortgage fraud up 276%: How you can avoid being a victim  WalletPop.com, By Charles Feldman, December 07, 2009
There is something about human nature that when times get tough, crooks get more bold. Such is the case with mortgage-related fraud. The FBI is reporting that there is an estimated 276% leap in mortgage-related fraud cases over last year. The agency is keeping tabs on more than 174,000 new cases from coast to coast -- though California, Arizona, Michigan and Nevada seem to be among the most hard hit areas. "From foreclosure frauds to subprime shenanigans," says the FBI website, "mortgage fraud is a growing crime threat that is hurting homeowners, businesses, and the national economy." How to protect yourself: If it weren't so easy to become a victim of mortgage-related fraud, there wouldn't be such a long list of victims, right? Nonetheless, the FBI says there are steps you can -- and should -- take to at least minimize the chances of being caught off guard. . .


RELATED ARTICLE:  MORTGAGE FRAUD: How to Avoid Becoming a Victim   FBI Press Room, August 14, 2008
Sub-prime loans. Foreclosures. Government bailouts. You can’t read a newspaper or watch the evening news these days without seeing stories about the current mortgage crisis and the fraud that goes along with it. The FBI, of course, plays a major role in investigating mortgage fraud—and our caseload has more than tripled in the past five years. But while we’re focusing on the perpetrators, what can you as a consumer do to protect yourself from becoming a victim of mortgage fraud?. . .


RELATED ARTICLE:  Renters in Foreclosure: What Are Their Rights?  Nolo.com
Renters and tenants whose landlords have lost their properties through foreclosure now have important rights. . . . Before May 20, 2009, most renters lost their leases upon foreclosure. The rule in most states was that if the mortgage was recorded before the lease was signed, a foreclosure wiped out the lease (this rule is known as "first in time, first in right"). Because most leases last no longer than a year, it was all too common for the mortgage to predate the lease and destroy it upon foreclosure. These rules changed dramatically on May 20, 2009, when President Obama signed the "Protecting Tenants at Foreclosure Act of 2009." This legislation provided that leases would survive a foreclosure -- meaning the tenant could stay at least until the end of the lease, and that month-to-month tenants would be entitled to 90 days' notice before having to move out (this notice period is longer than any state's non-foreclosure notice period, a real boon to tenants). . .

• Parenting Issues:  Obama’s “Safe Schools Czar” Is Promoting Child Porn in the Classroom– Kevin Jennings and the GLSEN Reading List   Gateway Pundit, By Jim Hoft, December 4, 2009
  
  Warning: The following material is very explicit.
  
  Safe Schools Czar Kevin Jennings was the founder, and for many years, Executive Director of an organization called the Gay, Lesbian and Straight Education Network (GLSEN). GLSEN started essentially as Jennings’ personal project and grew to become the culmination of his life’s work. And he was chosen by President Obama to be the nation’s Safe Schools Czar primarily because he had founded and led GLSEN (scroll for bio). GLSEN’s stated mission is to empower gay youth in the schools and to stop harassment by other students. It encourages the formation of Gay Student Alliances and condemns the use of hateful words. GLSEN also strives to influence the educational curriculum to include materials which the group believes will increase tolerance of gay students and decrease bullying. To that end, GLSEN maintains a recommended reading list of books that it claims “furthers our mission to ensure safe schools for all students.” In other words, these are the books that GLSEN’s directors think all kids should be reading: gay kids should read them to raise their self-esteem, and straight kids should read them in order to become more aware and tolerant and stop bullying gay kids. . . . . .The list is divided into three main categories: books recommended for grades K-6; books recommended for grades 7-12; and books for teachers. (The books on the list span all genres: fiction, nonfiction, memoirs, even poetry.) Out of curiosity to see exactly what kind of books Kevin Jennings and his organization think American students should be reading in school, our team chose a handful at random from the over 100 titles on GLSEN’s grades 7-12 list, and began reading through. What we discovered shocked us. We were flabbergasted. Rendered speechless. We were unprepared for what we encountered. Book after book after book contained stories and anecdotes that weren’t merely X-rated and pornographic, but which featured explicit descriptions of sex acts between pre-schoolers; stories that seemed to promote and recommend child-adult sexual relationships; stories of public masturbation, anal sex in restrooms, affairs between students and teachers, five-year-olds playing sex games, semen flying through the air. One memoir even praised becoming a prostitute as a way to increase one’s self-esteem. Above all, the books seemed to have less to do with promoting tolerance than with an unabashed attempt to indoctrinate students into a hyper-sexualized worldview. We knew that unless we carefully documented what we were reading, the public would have a hard time accepting it. Mere descriptions on our part could not convey the emotional gut reaction one gets when seeing what Kevin Jennings wants kids to read as school assignments. So we began scanning pages from each of the books, and then made exact transcriptions of the relevant passages on each page. Are we exaggerating, or misconstruing quotes that could be interpreted a different way? No: Read the passages below and judge for yourself. There’s no wiggle room. The language is explicit, the intent clear. . .
  
  
  
  RELATED ARTICLE:  Group wants Obama pick's resignation   OneNewsNow.com, By Pete Chagnon and Jody Brown, October 08, 2009
  A grassroots organization that is dedicated to preserving America's Judeo-Christian history and values is calling for the resignation of one of President Obama's appointees. Kevin Jennings is currently the head of the Office of Safe and Drug-Free Schools at the U.S. Department of Education, having been selected for that post by Barack Obama in May and taking office in early July. He is also the founder of the controversial and pro-homosexual Gay, Lesbian and Straight Education Network (GLSEN), as well as author of several books on homosexual rights and education. Bishop E.W. Jackson, president and founder of Staying True to America's National Destiny (STAND), has written a letter to President Obama calling for Jennings' resignation. Jackson says that Jennings, as head of GLSEN, was involved in a cover-up. . .
  
  
  RELATED ARTICLE: Commies, Fascists and Perverts, Oh My!  Townhall.com, By Matt Barber, October 06, 2009
  Obama’s inner-circle is shaping-up like the bar scene from Star Wars. It’s a swollen throng of unaccountable czars and policy advisors comprised of some of the most bizarre fringe leftists imaginable. As mom always said, you’re known by the company you keep and Obama keeps some downright creepy company. . . . . .But perhaps the creepiest of Obama’s advisers is “safe schools” chief Kevin Jennings. Jennings – an open homosexual activist – is former director of GLSEN (the Gay, Lesbian and Straight Education Network), a highly controversial group of adult homosexual activists who promote sexual anarchy and tacitly work to normalize the criminal practice of pederasty. GLSEN’s primary purpose is to push dangerous and even deadly homosexual and cross-dressing behaviors in our government schools on children as young as five. So bold is Jennings in his promotion of homosexual behavior among children that he even penned the foreword to a book entitled “Queering Elementary Education.” (I don’t know about you, but Jennings and his ilk will “queer” my elementary-age kids over my dead body.). . .
  
  
  RELATED ARTICLE:  The "Fistgate" incident: What homosexual activists in schools do with children. Students as young as 12 given graphic instruction in bizarre homosexual sex acts by state employees  MassResistance.org, June 15, 2009
  NOTE: Kevin Jennings, the founder of GLSEN, was recently appointed by the Obama administration to run the Office of Safe & Drug Free Schools in the US Department of Education!  GLSEN (Gay, Lesbian, and Straight Education Network) is a national homosexual organization that targets children in the public schools, and has formed "gay straight alliance" clubs in schools across the country. Jennings was the Executive Director of GLSEN at the time of this conference and defended it. . .
  
  
  

• New York State Senate Votes Down Gay Marriage Bill   NY Times, By Jeremy W. Peters, December 02, 2009
  The State Senate defeated a bill on Wednesday that would legalize same-sex marriage, after an emotional debate that touched on civil rights, family and history. The vote means that the bill, pushed by Gov. David A. Paterson, is effectively dead for the year and dashes the optimism of gay rights advocates, who have suffered setbacks recently in several key states. The bill was defeated by a decisive margin of 38 to 24. The Democrats, who have a bare, one-seat majority, did not have enough votes to pass the bill without some Republican support, but not a single Republican senator voted for the measure. Still, several key Democrats who were considered swing votes also opposed the bill. Mr. Paterson made an unusual trip to the Senate floor minutes after the last vote was cast, saying, “These victories come and so do the losses, but you keep on trying.” It was not an issue that broke down among racial lines, or even religious and agnostic divisions. In fact, nine of the Senate’s 11 black members voted in support of same-sex marriage. “When I walk thru these doors, my bible stays out,” said Senator Eric Adams, a Brooklyn Democrat who compared the law preventing same-sex marriage to laws that kept blacks and whites from marrying. “I believe there are certain moments here where we can benchmark our lives by the votes we took.” The debate was as personal as any to take place in the Senate chamber in years. Senators spoke of their experiences as Jews and Baptists, as blacks and women. They spoke of spending long nights contemplating their votes and the deceased gay friends and relatives who inspired their decision. . .
  
  
  
• New York state lawmakers vote against gay marriage  Reuters, December 02, 2009
   New York state lawmakers voted against legalizing gay marriage on Wednesday, dashing hopes of gay rights activists that it would become the sixth U.S. state to allow same-sex couples to wed. The New York state senate voted down the legislation 38 votes to 24. Gov. David Paterson, a Democrat who supports gay marriage, had said he would sign the bill into law if it were passed. Iowa, Connecticut, Massachusetts, New Hampshire and Vermont have legalized gay marriage, while 40 U.S. states have specific laws that ban gay marriage. Last month, voters in Maine chose to repeal a law that had legalized gay marriage. "This is an enormous victory," said Maggie Gallagher, the leader of the anti-gay marriage group, National Organization for Marriage. "What you saw was the will of the people. ... The culture really hasn't shifted on gay marriage." New York's Democratic-controlled state assembly has easily passed the bill legalizing same-sex marriage three times, but the legislation was never voted upon in the senate until now.  The Democrats hold a senate majority of 32 to 30, but several Democratic senators opposed legalizing gay marriage. New York is one of the most politically liberal states in the country. Recent polls showed a majority of New York voters favor allowing same-sex couples to marry, but one poll showed the public evenly split. . .
  

RELATED VIDEO:  Raw Video: New York Senate Rejects Gay Marriage  AP, December 02, 2009
By a 24-38 vote, the New York Senate rejected a bill that would have made the Empire State the sixth to make gay marriage legal.


RELATED ARTICLE: Gay marriage bill up for vote in NJ next week  AP, December 03, 2009
A bill to legalize gay marriage in New Jersey will be posted for a vote next week. Sen. Ray Lesniak, a member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, says the bill is scheduled to go before that committee on Monday and will be voted on by the full Senate next Thursday. . .

RELATED ARTICLE:  A Vote Against Gay Marriage is a Vote FOR Tolerance  Townhall.com, By Frank Turek, October 26, 2008
Twenty years ago, a group of prominent homosexuals got together in Warrentown, Virginia to map out their plan to get homosexuality accepted by the general public. In the book [After the Ball] that resulted from their meeting, they revealed a strategy that achieves its effect "without reference to facts, logic or proof . . . the person's beliefs can be altered whether he is conscious of the attack or not." In other words, their strategy was pure propaganda. That propaganda campaign has many people today believing that denying same-sex marriage involves denying rights to a victimized minority. That belief could not be further from the truth. In fact, let me suggest what the same-sex marriage debate is not about.

         It is not about equality or equal rights. 
         It is not about discrimination against a class of people. 
         It is not about denying homosexuals the ability to commit to one another. 
         It is not about love or private relationships. 
         It is not about bigotry or homophobia. 
         It is not about sexual orientation or being born a certain way.
         It is not about race or the civil rights struggle. 
         It is not about interracial marriage. 
         It is not about heterosexuals and divorce. 
         It is not about the separation of church and state.
         It is not even about religion.

“But that’s all I hear about,” you say.  Of course, that’s because the propaganda campaign continues to be successful. Those topics are all smokescreens designed to divert you. . . .  Greg Koukl puts this very well: “Same-sex marriage is not about civil rights. It is about validation and social respect. It is a radical attempt at civil engineering using government muscle to strong-arm the people into accommodating a lifestyle many find deeply offensive, contrary to nature, socially destructive, and morally repugnant.”. . .


RELATED ARTICLE:  Same-Sex Marriage — Challenges & Responses   Townhall.com, By Gregory Koukl, February 11, 2007
Unfortunately, addressing this issue requires refined distinctions and careful thinking that are easily overwhelmed by sound-byte rhetoric and broad, indiscriminate appeals to “rights.” What follows is a point-by-point reply to those who are demanding this revision of civilization.
Same-Sex Marriage and Civil Rights:
1. “We’re being denied the same rights as heterosexuals. This is unconstitutional discrimination.”
There are two complaints here. First, homosexuals don’t have the same legal liberties heterosexuals have. Second, homosexual couples don’t have the same legal benefits as married couples. The first charge is simply false. Any homosexual can marry in any state of the Union and receive every one of the privileges and benefits of state-sanctioned matrimony. He just cannot marry someone of the same sex. These are rights and restrictions all citizens share equally. I realize that for homosexuals this is a profoundly unsatisfying response, but it is a legitimate one, nonetheless. Let me illustrate. . .

RELATED ARTICLE:  Same-Sex 'Marriage' Is Not a Civil Right  Family Research Council, By Peter Sprigg, January 27, 2005
Individuals may choose to marry for all kinds of private reasons, but the reason marriage is a public institution is because it brings together men and women for the purpose of reproducing the human race and keeping a mother and father together to cooperate in raising to maturity the children they produce. The public interest in such behavior is great, because thousands of years of human experience and a vast body of contemporary social science research both demonstrate that married husbands and wives, and the children they conceive and raise, are happier, healthier, and more prosperous than people in any other living situation. In fact, I would suggest that the argument in favor of same-sex marriage can only be logically sustained if one argues that there is no difference between men and women--that is, if one argues not merely that men and women are equal in value and dignity, a proposition with which I'm sure we all agree, but that males and females are identical and thus able to serve as entirely interchangeable parts in the structure of marriage. The contention is absurd on its face. Thus, "same-sex marriage" is a contradiction in terms. . . .

• Parenting Issues:  More Dangerous Than Vampires
  True love is not about losing oneself in another  Kyria Blog, By Kelli B. Trujillo, December 02, 2009
  Golden-eyed vampires with bodies like marble and a (nearly) unquenchable thirst for blood. Shape-shifting werewolves that prowl through the night. Stuck in the middle: a love-struck 17-year-old girl. Yes, I’m talking about the Twilight saga that’s taken teen-girl-dom (and some of their mothers) by storm. Rather predictably, many Christians have been up in arms about Twilight since the first best-selling book was published in 2005. It is about vampires after all—those denizens of evil and death that have creeped out readers since Bram Stocker first wrote Dracula. Personally, I don’t see a problem with reading fiction about mythical creatures. But there is something very insidious in Twilight . . . something much more dangerous and threatening than werewolves and vampires. . . . . .But what’s really dangerous about Twilight is that it takes this teen version of love way too far. Bella doesn’t merely daydream about Edward;  Edward becomes her entire world. Within days of meeting him, nothing else in Bella’s life is really important to her anymore. She’s willing to leave her family forever. She even says she’s willing to be killed by Edward. Rather than enhancing Bella’s life, loving Edward diminishes who she is. This kind of love is dangerous . . . and it’s anything but true. I’ve seen this kind of love in action in the lives of grown women and the results aren’t pretty. . . . . What is God’s design for romantic love? Certainly there is an element of being enamored with the other—of thinking about the other a lot and of being emotionally dependent on that person to some degree. In marriage, God intends us to treasure our spouse above all others; in that sense, our lover is at the center of our life. But God-honoring romantic love should never diminish us. True love is not about losing oneself in another. Romantic love that honors God is a love in which we as women have a strong sense of ourselves, our interests, our gifts, and our passions. Rather than neglecting those things in our love for the other, our sense of identity should be enhanced, emboldened, and strengthened. Our lover helps us see and know and embrace who we are. We feel a confidence in who God made us to be and we offer that to our spouse just as he brings many things to us. . .
  
  
  RELATED SITE:  StephenieMeyer.com
  The Story Behind Twilight.

RELATED SITE:  The Twilight Saga: New Moon - Official Movie Site

RELATED ARTICLE:  Twilight’s Hot Gleaming  Vanity Fair.com, By Evgenia Peretz, December 2009 Issue
Not since Titanic unleashed Leo-mania has an actor sparked the overnight adulation that greeted Robert Pattinson’s 2008 debut as Edward Cullen in Twilight. As the vampire saga’s next installment arrives, the author explores the frenzy, isolation, and sheer embarrassment of Pattinson’s past year, his instant connection with co-star Kristen Stewart, and the life he wants when this $10 million gig is over. . . . .None of this would have happened to Pattinson had it not been for Stephenie Meyer’s Twilight saga, the young-adult blockbuster, the four books of which have sold 70 million copies and been translated into 45 languages. In case you’ve been living in a remote forest, the series tells the story of Bella Swan, a shy newcomer to the town of Forks, Washington, who falls in love with Edward Cullen, a vampire since 1918, when he was bitten, who will be 17 years old for eternity. Though they are hopelessly in love, if they were to really fool around, Edward would lose control and bite her, turning Bella into a vampire as well—all of which puts the two in a permanent state of unquenchable lust, not to mention abstinence. This doubtless plays well with parents and bluenoses, like the author’s fellow Mormons. In fact, the whole setup could be seen as a metaphor for hanging on to your virginity. Still, no other writer in recent memory has quite tapped into female adolescent yearning and girlhood fantasies about being desired. Edward is the perfect hero: charming, cultured, dangerous, and “the most beautiful creature who has ever been born.” Girls fall so hard for him that even at Meyer’s readings—well before any Twilight movie had been made—they shrieked upon hearing the author simply utter his name: “That was the first night I dreamed of Edward Cullen.”. . .

RELATED ARTICLE:  The "Twilight" Phenomena  Caryl Productions, By Caryl Matrisciana and Paul Villanueva, December 2008
. . . In only a few short years I’ve watched the occult addiction mushroom amongst teens and develop aggressively into a yearning that they’d even sell their eternal souls for. Think of it, the love of a vampire, a being the Bible describes as demon possessed, musters the longing to remain lost for eternity - the very state Jesus Christ died to save sinners from. How diabolical is Satan’s message to our young innocents luring them, through a lust-filled romance, to spend eternity with him and away from the presence of our God of love? Twilight takes occult darkness, introduced in Potter, to deeper, decadent fathoms: overt vampirism, acceptable blood-sucking (in this movie its only animal blood – later? Wait and see!) and sexual lust for the possessed soul (made appealing in its fictionalized form!). The books, akin to the Potter’s series, promote and familiarize their audience with magick, Wicca, supernatural powers and demon possession. . .


RELATED ARTICLE:  What Girls Want: An Edward Cullen to Love Them  Townhall.com, By Dr. Miriam Grossman, M.D., December 8, 2008
American girls have a new heartthrob: a tall, gorgeous vampire who is in the eleventh grade. He thirsts for the blood of Bella, his human girlfriend, but learns to “just say no.” What is it about Edward Cullen, the male protagonist of the blockbuster Twilight series, that sends girls from Atlanta to Anchorage swooning? I asked three teen girls I know. 
Nava is 14. “He’s cute, and he’s really nice to Bella.”
Kayla is 16. “He’s caring, and genuine. He expresses his love, and risks his life to protect her. And he’s handsome.”
Tanya is 19. “Edward loves Bella and wants to be with her forever, so he controls himself. The self-discipline is very hard on him, but seeing her hurt would be even worse.”
Not bad, huh? Now if only the professionals running our country’s sex education could figure that out. Because that’s what the Twilight craze is about: a guy who adores his girl so much, he’ll do anything to protect her. A guy who won’t allow his girl to get hurt, even if it means saying “no” to himself. That’s what girls want. Contrast that with Planned Parenthood’s description of the “perfect partner”. . .

• Tiger Comments on Current Events   By Tiger Woods   December 02, 2009
  I have let my family down and I regret those transgressions with all of my heart. I have not been true to my values and the behavior my family deserves. I am not without faults and I am far short of perfect. I am dealing with my behavior and personal failings behind closed doors with my family. Those feelings should be shared by us alone. Although I am a well-known person and have made my career as a professional athlete, I have been dismayed to realize the full extent of what tabloid scrutiny really means. For the last week, my family and I have been hounded to expose intimate details of our personal lives. The stories in particular that physical violence played any role in the car accident were utterly false and malicious. Elin has always done more to support our family and shown more grace than anyone could possibly expect. But no matter how intense curiosity about public figures can be, there is an important and deep principle at stake which is the right to some simple, human measure of privacy. I realize there are some who don't share my view on that. But for me, the virtue of privacy is one that must be protected in matters that are intimate and within one's own family. Personal sins should not require press releases and problems within a family shouldn't have to mean public confessions. Whatever regrets I have about letting my family down have been shared with and felt by us alone. I have given this a lot of reflection and thought and I believe that there is a point at which I must stick to that principle even though it's difficult. I will strive to be a better person and the husband and father that my family deserves. For all of those who have supported me over the years, I offer my profound apology.
  
  
  
  ADDITIONAL STATEMENT:  Tiger Woods taking hiatus from golf  By Tger Woods, December 11, 2009
  I am deeply aware of the disappointment and hurt that my infidelity has caused to so many people, most of all my wife and children. I want to say again to everyone that I am profoundly sorry and that I ask forgiveness. It may not be possible to repair the damage I've done, but I want to do my best to try. I would like to ask everyone, including my fans, the good people at my foundation, business partners, the PGA Tour, and my fellow competitors, for their understanding. What's most important now is that my family has the time, privacy, and safe haven we will need for personal healing. After much soul searching, I have decided to take an indefinite break from professional golf. I need to focus my attention on being a better husband, father, and person. Again, I ask for privacy for my family and I am especially grateful for all those who have offered compassion and concern during this difficult period.
  
  
  
  RELATED ARTICLE: Tiger Woods: Divorce Looms for 'Athlete of the Decade'
  Associated Press Gives Huge Honor; ABC News Source Says Elin Plans on Divorce   ABC News, By Rich McHugh, Russell Goldman, Justin Weaver and Lee Ferran, December 17, 2009 (Update!)
  The good news for Tiger Woods is that the relentless reports about his marital infidelity did not stop him from being named the Athlete of the Decade by The Associated Press. The bad news is that they apparently have caused the golf superstar's wife to leave him. A source close to Woods' wife, Elin Nordegren, told ABC News.com Wednesday that a "divorce is 100 percent on." . . .
  
  
  RELATED ARTICLE:  Just How Much Was Tiger Swinging?  People magazine, By Michael Y. Park, December 07, 2009
  It seems like Tiger Woods's roster of rumored mistresses could practically fill a clubhouse. In fact, publications like the New York Post have noted that, if the reports are true, Woods, 33, may be linked with as many as nine women. So what's his reported scorecard look like so far?. . .
  
  
  RELATED ARTICLE:  Tiger's tale too tawdry ... to turn away from  CBS News, By Gregg Doyel, December 03, 2009
  The sex life of Tiger Woods matters to me. There. I said it. And you can believe it, because it's true. This isn't reverse psychology or sarcasm or anything else. This is an admission: I'm fascinated by Tiger Woods' sex life. Nobody else would write that, because it's not the proper thing to say. The proper thing to say, and I've seen it written all over the Internet -- here's one example, and here's another, and I like both guys very much -- is I don't care if Tiger Woods has been cheating on his wife. Not my business. Doesn't interest me. Part of that sentiment applies to me as well. Not my business? Well, duh. Of course it isn't. Apparently, Tiger Woods has been having sex outside of his marriage. Definitely, it's not my business. But if it's raining illicit information, what the hell. I'm going outside without an umbrella. Gonna get absolutely soaking wet. This stuff is fascinating, and to pretend otherwise is dishonest. . .
  

RELATED VIDEO:  Tiger Woods Admits Infidelity, Takes Golf Break   AP, December 11, 2009
Tiger Woods released a statement on his website Friday, admitting to infidelity and saying he was taking time off from his golf career to focus on dealing with his family situation.


RELATED VIDEO:  Agent on Woods' Sponsorships  CBS News Online, December 09, 2009
Harry Smith spoke with sports agent Leigh Steinberg about the possibility that Tiger Woods may lose endorsements.


RELATED VIDEO:  Hear Tiger Panic to Mistress: "My Wife May Be Calling You"  Us magazine, December 02, 2009
On Nov. 24 -- the day before reports of his alleged infidelity first surfaced -- Tiger Woods, 33, phoned his off-and-on girlfriend, 24 year-old Los Angeles cocktail waitress Jaimee Grubbs, and left a message in which he begged her to change her voicemail greeting. . .


RELATED VIDEO:  Into the Woods: Why Men Stray  AP, December 02, 2009


RELATED ARTICLE:  Five Things You Didn't Know About Elin Nordegren  People magazine, December 03, 2009
You know Elin Nordegren is married to Tiger Woods – especially after all the excitement over his recent early-morning one-car crash in Florida and reports of infidelity. But did you know ...

RELATED ARTICLE:  Tiger's Story Has Consequences for Us All  Townhall.com, By Sandy Rios, December 09, 2009
But what about Tiger Woods? While some have been appalled, others have crowed and preened. This is what real men do. Especially men of Tiger’s good looks and economic fortune. Powerful men need to conquer. It’s as natural as breathing. This is the way all men would be if only they had the opportunity. Many men privately envy him. Discussions of marriage have broken out all over the country. Why would a man like him ever want to marry? With all of his money, talent and prestige, why would he ever want commit to one woman? Has Tiger Woods personal behavior had an effect on our culture? You’d better believe it. But while the sports talkers and macho men among us secretly envy him and allow seeds of discontent to undermine their own marriages, we all pay the price. Women feel insecure and unloved … men feel restless and distracted … and children pick up on it all. . . . . .Which is the real man? The one who controls his passions and devotes himself in this way—or the one who indulges himself?  And for that matter … what kind of people do we all want to be? Do our private choices have an effect on society? Of course they do. The cycle of sexual dysfunction is deep, but it can be overcome. As difficult as sexual control is, the benefits are immeasurable. Ask Tiger today if his bank account can make up for the look of pain on his wife’s face or the potential of having his little children grow up not to honor but to model him. . .


RELATED ARTICLE:  Tiger Woods scandal prompts question: Why do men cheat?  USA Today, By Sharon Jayson, December 03, 2009
Tiger Woods is the latest celebrity caught up in a sex scandal, which makes people wonder — why do men cheat? And are the famous and powerful more prone to indiscretion, or are they just under the microscope more than your average Joe? The famous golfer's admitted "personal failings" have been unfolding ever since his car wreck the day after Thanksgiving. Those who study marriage and work with couples say men who cheat usually do so because they feel something is missing in their primary relationship. . .

RELATED ARTICLE:  You think you know Tiger Woods?  Tiger Woods's plea for privacy underscores the price of fame – and also our dangerous obsession with it.  Christian Science Monitor, By Jonathan Zimmerman, December 3, 2009
Do you know Tiger Woods? Of course you don't. But you think that you do. That's why you care so very much about Mr. Woods' apparent extramarital affairs, which have swirled around the golf star ever since his November 27 car crash near his Florida home. And that's also why Woods' plea for privacy – posted on his website yesterday – sounds so poignant, and also so preposterous. Modern celebrities are defined by their public personas, which give us an imagined entryway into their private lives. Once we're inside, they can't expect us to leave. Nobody knows that better than Woods, whose very request for privacy revealed just how public he has become. If this is really just a private matter between Woods and his family, why did he even release a statement about it? And why, most of all, does the statement start with Woods' confessions about – you guessed it – his private indiscretions? "I have let my family down and I regret those transgressions with all of my heart," the statement begins. Privacy, indeed!. . .


RELATED ARTICLE:  The Celebrity Mistress Look  The Daily Beast, By Janice Minn, December 03, 2009
Tiger Woods, Eliot Spitzer, et al.—Why do their "other women" appear so similar? Janice Min questions why powerful men always seek warm-blooded blow-up dolls. . . . . . .The occupations of the various mistresses du jour are revealing: club hostess, prostitute, and cocktail waitress-turned-reality-show star. They are the ultimate service-industry women for men accustomed to being served and serviced. It’s hard not to imagine these women existing merely as physical, pneumatic vessels meant to please and serve the sexual desires and egos of insatiable men; they are, in essence, warm-blooded blow-up dolls for men whose Madonna/whore complex remains more than a cliché. . .

RELATED ARTICLE:  Forget Tiger Woods. Is your marriage solid? In an age when Hollywood practically celebrates infidelity, we must dig deep to see marriage as a holy covenant.  Christian Science Monitor, By Angela Kays-Burden, December 3, 2009
Tabloids have pounced on Tiger Woods for his apparent failure to uphold family values. Their stories use traditional morals to define adultery as scandal and include words like "sin" and "confession." At the same time, the purveyors of our pop culture often portray marriage itself as an arcane institution that our progressive society should move beyond. In recent years, television shows and Hollywood movies have promoted our acceptance of – and even our appetite for – infidelity. Major networks are complicit in helping to erode the significance of life-long commitments and loving relationships between husbands and wives. The same adulterous affair that in real life becomes a threat to reputation, career, and endorsements, produces laughs and envy on prime time. Sex is sold as a need-based commodity rather than an expression of shared, committed intimacy. . .


RELATED ARTICLE:  Tiger Woods scandal may be news. But we don't have to gawk. Tiger Woods should take full responsibility for his actions. So should we.   Christian Science Monitor, By Courtney E. Martin, December 2, 2009
Golf's golden boy has fallen and many Americans are pointing and laughing. As soon as the headlines hit – Tiger Woods was in a car accident last week mired in mystery – the schadenfreude began: Was he cheating? Was he drinking? Did his wife beat him up? Is their marriage doomed?  Mr. Woods tried to reclaim some respect in an earnest message on his website. "No matter how intense curiosity about public figures can be," he explained, "there is an important and deep principle at stake which is the right to some simple, human measure of privacy." If only it were that simple. Woods is learning, as Bill Clinton and Eliot Spitzer and so many other famous men have before him, that there's a principle more pressing than privacy at times like these: With power comes responsibility. . .


RELATED ARTICLE:  Beware the BUMP in your relationship - why some men are unfaithful when their partner is pregnant  The Daily Mail- UK, By Anna Moore, October 24, 2009
While newly pregnant women are grappling with swirling hormones and a rapidly changing body shape, men have their own issues to fret over: responsibility, commitment and, realistically speaking, a lot less sex. An affair offers a refuge and, if need be, an exit. . . .Simon Jacobs, a psychotherapist who specialises in group counselling for men, certainly thinks that expectant fathers are affected. ‘Pregnancy – particularly when it’s your first – can be quite a lonely experience for men,’ he says. ‘There’s a lot of support for a woman – she slots into a community and has a high social status. There’s an excitement around her. People give her their seat on the train. She almost becomes public property. Her partner can soon start feeling like a spare part.’ At the same time, almost without exception, the man will be experiencing a whole range of emotions – from elation to pure panic. ‘There are fears around loss of control, loss of independence and feeling suddenly depended upon,’ says Jacobs. ‘The responsibility is a huge thing. A baby means a much bigger commitment than mere marriage.’ On top of this is a loss of identity. . .

RELATED RESOURCE:  How to Survive Infidelity  MarriageBuilders.com
The question I am most frequently asked by visitors to this web site is "how can I survive my spouse's affair?" After having counseled thousands of couples with hundreds of marital conflicts, I am completely convinced that a spouse's unfaithfulness is the most painful experience that can be inflicted in marriage. Those I've counseled who have had the tragic misfortune of having experienced rape, physical abuse, sexual abuse of their children, and infidelity have consistently reported to me that their spouse's unfaithfulness was their very worst experience. To be convinced of the devastating impact of infidelity, you only need to go through it once. And yet, more than 50% of all spouses are victims of infidelity, which means that one spouse in most marriages will suffer the greatest marital pain possible at some time during their lifetimes. It's no wonder that I receive so many letters from these victims of unfaithfulness. . .

RELATED ARTICLE:  Husbands, love your wives – build hedges   OneNewsNow, By Randy Sharp, July 15, 2009
Shortly after I married his daughter, my father-in-law gave me one of the most treasured gifts I have ever received -- a book titled Hedges: Loving Your Marriage Enough to Protect It. From the precepts found in the book, I learned how building “hedges” is important to a marriage. Just as in Scripture, hedges are a protection and direction against infidelity, a leading cause of marriage failure in America. . . . . . My marriage hedges are nothing more than a few simple rules, cultivated over 23 years of marriage. They are designed to protect me, my wife, and my children from a lifetime of suspicion, hurt, and mistrust. They’re all based on one simple premise, “If I take care of the way things look, I take care of the way things are.”. . .


RELATED ARTICLE:  Is There Hope for the American Marriage?   Time magazine, By Caitlin Flanagan, July 02, 2009
Around the time of my parents' 50th wedding anniversary, I turned to my father at the dinner table one night and said, "It's amazing, Dad — 50 years, and you never once had an affair. How do you account for that?" He replied simply, "I can't drive." Watching the governor of South Carolina cry like a little girl because his sexy e-mails got forwarded to his local newspaper, the State, made me wonder whether the real secret to a lasting marriage lies in limiting your means of escape. Whether you're putting the Buick Regal in reverse or hitting Send on a love note, you're busting out of your marriage, however temporarily, and soon enough there will be hell to pay. . . . . When a married man begins a secret, solicitous correspondence with a beautiful and emotionally needy single woman, he has already begun to cheat on his wife. . .


RELATED ARTICLE:  Adultery Is Killing the American Family    Renew America.org, By Nathan Tabor, September 22, 2005
We hear a lot of talk these days about the need to protect and strengthen the traditional American family. Certainly, it is true that the institution of marriage is under attack from every side. But the real threat comes from the multitudes of couples that fail to honor their marriage vows. . . . . Americans have a schizophrenic attitude toward adultery. While 90 percent admit that adultery is morally wrong, according to a Time-CNN poll, 50 percent say that President Bill Clinton's morals are "about the same as the average married man." While 35 percent think that adultery should be a crime, 61 percent think it shouldn't. Having an affair simply doesn't carry the social stigma that it once did. . .

• Gay Marriage Gets Thumbs Up in Nation's Capital
  D.C. Council Votes 11-2 for Same-Sex Marriage, But Hurdles Remain   ABC News, By Teddy Davis, December 01, 2009
  The D.C. Council voted in favor of same-sex marriage on Tuesday, moving Washington, D.C., a big step closer to becoming the first jurisdiction below the Mason-Dixon Line to allow full civil equality for gays and lesbians. The D.C. measure, which passed by a wide 11-2 margin, reinforces the nationwide trend towards gay marriage in legislatures and at the courthouse even though advocates of same-sex marriage are continuing to falter whenever the issue is put directly to a public vote. . . . Although today's D.C. vote is a milestone for gay marriage advocates, there are still several more steps in the process before gay and lesbian couples can start marrying in the nation's capital. To ensure that the D.C. Council -- a unicameral body -- does not act in haste, its full membership votes on all bills twice before any legislation becomes law. As a result, the gay-marriage bill will come up for a second vote of the full Council on Dec. 15. If, as expected, it is approved a second time, it will then go to Washington Mayor Adrian Fenty, who supports the legislation, for his signature. From the time the mayor signs the gay-marriage bill, Congress will have 30 legislative days to enact a joint resolution of disapproval. President Obama would have to sign that resolution for the city law to be blocked. Even if such a resolution is not passed, members of Congress can try to attach an anti-gay marriage rider to another piece of legislation. The top Republican on the House subcommittee which oversees the district is considering a variety of legislative methods for blocking gay marriage there, including the appropriations process. "Some people legitimately and often ask: 'Why is it that a congressman from Utah, or anyplace else, is sticking their nose in this?'' asked Rep. Jason Chaffetz, R-Utah. "Article I, Section 8 of our Constitution says that in all cases, the Congress shall oversee the laws of Washington, D.C., and that is what we're trying to do.". . . .Beyond the efforts taking place in Congress, an additional anti-gay marriage effort is being made in D.C. Superior Court. A group called Stand4MarriageDC wants a ballot measure which says that "only marriage between man and woman" should be "valid or recognized" in the city. Last month, the D.C. Board of Elections and Ethics ruled that allowing residents to vote on a gay marriage ban would violate Washington's 1977 Human Rights Act, which prohibits discrimination. The Stand4MarriageDC group is now suing in Superior Court on the theory that if the Council has the right to change the law in order to allow same-sex couples to marry, then the people have the right to make laws on the same subject. . .

RELATED ARTICLE:  D.C.'s gay marriage dilemma  Washington Examiner, By Barbara Hollingsworth, November 24, 2009
D.C. is urging Congress to eliminate congressional review. A relic from the old Control Board days, congressional review requires that the city's budget and any new laws first be approved on Capitol Hill before they go into effect, an undemocratic process that often takes months. But while District officials are rightly demanding more local autonomy for themselves, they are denying the same privilege to their own residents. . .

RELATED ARTICLE:  Sodom in the nation's capital  Townhall.com, By Star Parker, November 23, 2009
At a time when our country is sick, it shouldn't surprise that one our sickest places is our nation's capital. The poverty rate of Washington, DC, almost 20 percent, is one of the highest in the nation. Its child poverty rate is the nation's highest.. DC's public school system, with a graduation rate of less than 50 percent, is one of the worst in the country. According to DC's HIV/AIDS office, three percent of the local population has HIV or AIDS. The Administrator of this office notes that this HIV/AIDS incidence is "...higher than West Africa...on par with Uganda and some parts of Kenya." And the principal way that HIV is transmitted continues to be through male homosexual activity. Amidst this dismal picture, the DC City Council, perhaps on the theory that serving up another glass of wine is the way to help a drunk, is scheduled to vote on December 1 to legalize same sex marriage in America's capital city. . .


RELATED ARTICLE:  The Tyranny of the Minority: How the Forced Recognition of Same-Sex "Marriage" Undermines a Free Society  Salvo magazine, By S. T. Karnick, Autumn 2008- Salvo 6 Issue
From the beginning, the debate over "same-sex marriage" has been one of those topsy-turvy issues in which the side that is truly tolerant and fair has been characterized as narrow-minded and oppressive, while the side that is intolerant and blatantly coercive has been depicted as open-minded and sympathetic. Favoring government-enforced recognition of same-sex "marriage" is not, as the media invariably characterize it, a kindly, liberal-minded position, but instead a fierce, coercive, intolerant one. Despite their agonized complaints about the refusal of the majority of Americans to give in on the subject, those who advocate government recognition of same-sex "marriage" want to use coercion to deny other people their fundamental rights. . .


RELATED ARTICLE:  Why same-sex 'marriage' matters   OneNewsNow.com, By Marcia Segelstein, November 18, 2008
Despite the fact that Americans just elected one of the most liberal presidents in history, they also voted to uphold traditional marriage in every state where it was on the ballot. Gay activists (and a few Episcopal bishops) would have you believe that votes against gay "marriage" are a result of bigotry, the equivalent of racism or sexism.  After all, they argue, what's wrong with two people loving each other and wanting to publicly proclaim it?  Doesn't the world need more committed love, not less?. . . . .No law prevents these religious organizations from conducting such rituals, nor would most Americans expect or want the government to dictate doctrine to churches.  But if and when same-sex "marriage" becomes law, it becomes against the law not to follow it.  And that could indeed result in the government not only dictating doctrine to churches, but to religious schools, and to individuals. . .

• Rachel Uchitel: The night I met Tiger Woods & my life spun out of control  NY Post, By Emily Smith, December 01, 2009
  In an explosive, exclusive interview with The Post, Tiger Woods' alleged mistress reveals how she innocently came to meet the golf superstar -- and dishes sensational details about the rumors behind their reputed extramarital hookup. 'THIS is ridiculous. Not a word of it is true," Rachel Uchitel told The Post. "I told the Enquirer and Star that it wasn't true. I told them not only did I have information to disprove the story, but I offered to take a lie-detector test. . . . .
  
  "It's the most ridiculous story. It's like they are asking me to comment if there are aliens on Earth. I found out who their sources were [Uchitel says she understands there were two sources to the story], which girls were blabbing. "The worst thing is that everybody in New York is talking about me and Tiger Woods now because their reporters have been calling up everyone I know or have ever worked with, asking what they know about the supposed affair. "It's just dumb stuff. I was happy to answer any of their [the National Enquirer's] questions, but they didn't want to listen to me when I denied it. I look like a home wrecker and an a- -hole. "And its horrible to Tiger's family. His wife must feel horrible. The worst part of it, it's not true. . . . .  "I don't want people like that around me. In my business, I am around celebrities and very rich people all the time. People look into it badly. People say all the time: 'Rachel only hangs out with celebrities and rich people.' It's my job. I work in the nightclub industry. those are the people that come there, and the clients are my job. "I've always been the director of VIP services, that's my job -- to know these people, to have a relationship with them, to hang out with them. It doesn't mean I am having sex with them or an affair with them. These are people I hang out with and become friends with. . . . . "I don't want people to think I am having an affair with Tiger Woods, or that I am trying to leak some story that I'm having an affair with Tiger Woods. But that's less hurtful to me than them saying I am some pill-popping sex addict. Because a nice, normal guy that I would like to end up with -- hopefully they don't read Star and Enquirer -- they are going to have a tainted view of me, and that's not OK." "I have never spoken on the phone with Tiger Woods, or texted him, ever. I get this stuff all the time. I see celebrities all the time. I was just in Vegas for a week, having dinner with celebrities. I hear this all the time. I don't want to comment on the David Boreanaz stuff. That one is a different ballgame than the Tiger Woods thing."My statement is: I work in clubs and I am a businesswoman. I do not have sex with celebrities, and I have not had an affair with Tiger Woods."
  
  
  
  RELATED STATEMENT:  Statement from Tiger Woods   TigerWoods.com, By Tiger Woods, November 29, 2009
  As you all know, I had a single-car accident earlier this week, and sustained some injuries. I have some cuts, bruising and right now I'm pretty sore. This situation is my fault, and it's obviously embarrassing to my family and me. I'm human and I'm not perfect. I will certainly make sure this doesn't happen again. This is a private matter and I want to keep it that way. Although I understand there is curiosity, the many false, unfounded and malicious rumors that are currently circulating about my family and me are irresponsible. . .

RELATED VIDEO:  Police: Woods at Fault in Crash, Will Get Citation  Associated Press, December 01, 2009


RELATED VIDEO: How to Spot a Tall Tale  MSNBC.com
How, then, can we best detect whether we are being misled? There is no foolproof way, but there are often clues you can see in behavior that should make you suspicious. . .

RELATED ARTICLE:  Exclusive: New Woman Claims Affair With Golfer Tiger Woods  US Weekly magazine, December 01, 2009
A Los Angeles cocktail waitress tells the new Us Weekly (on newsstands Wednesday) that she had a steamy 31-month fling with Tiger Woods and has a voicemail recording and text messages to prove it. Jaimee Grubbs, now 24, tells Us Weekly she began having an affair with Woods, 33, in April 2007. She tells Us Weekly they went on to have 20 sexual encounters. Grubbs, who recently appeared on VH1's Tool Academy, also tells Us Weekly she has more than 300 racy texts from Woods, who wed model Elin Nordegren in 2004. . .



RELATED ARTICLE:  Some aren’t surprised by Tiger Woods mess  ABC News- The Scoop, By Courtney Hazlett, November 30, 2009
As it turns out, when you run into a fire hydrant in the manner that Woods did last week, you stand to spring a lot of leaks. Multiple sources who have known the golfer in either a personal or professional capacity have now come forward saying that news of trouble at home comes as no surprise. “He’s a pro athlete. He’s been in a lot of situations with women that would not look good,” said one source who knows Woods. “Most athletes of his stature fall under the same category, it doesn’t mean he doesn’t love his family.” Another source who has covered Woods said that there are plenty of times that Woods was “in the company of women in public places” when he was on the road. “Whether he crossed lines — that’s not something anyone talks about openly, but I can tell you there are times things look that way,” the source said. “Tiger’s private, but it doesn’t always mean he’s smart. That’s the case with a lot of pro athletes.”. . .


RELATED ARTICLE:  When people lie about you  Revolution Health, By Mira Kirshenbaum, June 16, 2008
Has anyone ever gone around saying things about you that were hurtful and false?  You can't believe it could ever happen, until it does. We're all used to people getting mad at us (that starts when we're about 2!), but it's hard to believe that someone would actually make up lies about us.  Some of us have our first experience of this is high school, but much as it hurts then, it's still kid stuff. But imagine a situation like this. Joan had confided in a friend of hers about some problems she was having in her marriage.  Nothing earth shaking: her husband was working long hours, they were drifting apart, she sometimes wondered if she'd be better off getting a divorce.  The next thing Joan knew, people were calling her to tell her that this "friend" was saying that Joan's husband was cheating on her, that he'd gotten tired of her, and that Joan was "desperate." Joan confronted this "friend" and she simply denied it. Again, unbelievable until it's happened to you. . .


RELATED ARTICLE:  Why people lie — and how to tell if they are. There are liars, and then there are LIARS. Dr. Gail Saltz explains why they do it and how to spot one  MSNBC.com, By Gail Saltz, January 31, 2004 
Everybody lies.  It may only be “white” lies, but everyone tells lies or “omits the truth” sometimes. We start lying at around age 4 to 5 when children gain an awareness of the use and power of language.  This first lying is not malicious, but rather to find out, or test, what can manipulated in a child’s environment.  Eventually children begin to use lying to get out of trouble or get something they want. White lies, those concocted to protect someone’s feelings, are not a big deal at all.  The person, however, who seems to feel compelled to lie about both the small and large stuff has a problem. We often call these folks pathological liars (which is a description, not a diagnosis).  They lie to protect themselves, look good, gain financially or socially and avoid punishment.  Quite often the person who has been deceived knows that this type of liar has to a certain extent deluded him or herself and is therefore to be somewhat pitied.A much more troubling group is those who lie a lot — and knowingly — for personal gain. These people may have a diagnosis called antisocial personality disorder, also known as being a sociopath, and often get into scrapes with the law. Lying often gets worse with the passage of time. . .

RELATED BOOK REVIEW: HEDGES: Loving Your Marriage Enough to Protect It (Hardcover)  Wittenberg Gate, Posted by Dory, May 30, 2005
Hedges: Loving Your Marriage Enough To Protect It by Jerry B. Jenkins has a lot of attributes you would expect from the co-author of the Left Behind series. It is very readable and chock full of stories that are helpful in illustrating the author's point. It is not a theological book, but it does not pretend to be. In fact, other than the theme verse of II Timothy 2:22, in which Paul admonishes the young pastor to, "Flee also youthful lusts;..." there is really very little Scripture in it, which leaves the book with a feel not much unlike a secular self-help book. The author is brutally honest about a man's weakness toward lust in a way that is probably very helpful to young men who may be harboring this secret, thinking they must be a social deviant for having the thoughts they have. (In fact this is a message I wish we more effectively communicated to our young women, most of whom would be shocked to know how their daddies and elders and other respectable men are thinking when a woman is immodestly dressed.) Rather than deny an appreciation for the female form--a form designed by God to attract men--and attempt to pass through life averting one's eyes, Jenkins suggests that men learn to appreciate without lust. He suggests that men construct what he calls hedges ahead of time to prevent those situations in which lustful thoughts can develop and adulterous actions take place. Jenkins' story-telling skills are helpful in communicating how good men (humanly speaking), with no ill intentions, can fall into an adulterous trap slowly and subtly by first developing a warm friendship, then engaging in what seems like harmless flirtation and touching, and then find themselves in a situation in which they are tempted beyond what they can bear. . . .

• Parenting Issues:  The child whisperer?    OneNewsNow, By Marcia Segelstein, December 01, 2009
  Am I crazy, or is this a really tough time to be raising children?  Was it this hard for our parents?  Does every generation feel this way? I guess all I really know is that is sure feels hard.  It feels as though the world works against so much of what we try to instill in our children.  Sometimes it feels impossible to protect them from the distorted worldview that permeates our culture. Education reformers have worked (all too successfully) to disparage and discourage "teacher-directed" learning, and substitute instead "student-centered" learning.  Heaven forbid that adults in the form of teachers should attempt to instill knowledge – even actual facts! – in still-developing brains.  No, of course, children's (childish) opinions must be taken into account.  As I heard one elementary school principal explain it: children should be asked what they want to learn.  Uh, no.  Not only is it silly and a waste of time, it puts children on the same level as adults.  It undermines adult authority.  And that's bad. Under the guise of anti-bullying programs, kids are taught that to make judgments about almost anything from same-sex marriage to cross-dressing is wrong and evidence of intolerance, the supreme sin.  Forget what you might have learned at home or in church.  We know better. . . . . Children are given a distorted, inflated view of themselves as mini-adults.  And anyone out to make a buck off this trend adds fuel to the fire.  Thong underwear for ten-year-olds, "threesomes" as a theme on TV shows aimed at teens, books with wildly inappropriate material written expressly for teenagers.  Add to that mix easy access, via the Internet, to almost any subject under the sun, including bizarre, degraded notions of sexuality courtesy of pornographers. Even parents ahead of the curve on Internet safety, and diligently keeping track of what their children are watching and reading, might not do so well when it comes to getting respect.  Because to some degree, it's pulled out from beneath them quietly and subtly, whether they know it or not. But it can't all be blamed on "them."  It's us, too. . .
  
  
  RELATED ARTICLE:  Self-Esteem for Your Child  FOTF.org, By James Dobson, Ph.D.
  John McKay, the great football coach of the University of Southern California and the Tampa Bay Buccaneers, was being interviewed on television when the subject of his son's athletic talent was raised. That year John McKay Jr. was a successful player on his dad's college team. Coach McKay was asked to comment on the pride he must feel over his son's accomplishments on the field. His answer was most impressive: "Yes, I'm pleased that John had a good season last year. He does a fine job and I am proud of him. But I would be just as proud if he had never played the game at all." Coach McKay was saying, in effect, that John's football talent is recognized and appreciated, but his human worth does not depend on his ability to play football. Thus, his son would not lose respect if the next season brought failure and disappointment. John's place in his dad's heart was secure, independent of his performance. I wish every child could say the same. . .
  
  
  
  

• 'The Blind Side' writes a new playbook:
  Unlike most other blockbusters, a small-town blitz has driven it to box-office success.  LA Times- Entertainment blog, By John Horn and Ben Fritz , December 01, 2009
  Hollywood blockbusters aren't usually born in movie theaters in Dallas, Birmingham or Nashville. But that's exactly where “The Blind Side” has taken off -- a show-business phenomenon driven by audiences in the South and Midwest storming to a movie about Christian charity and football that stars Sandra Bullock. In one of the more extraordinary box-office stories of the year, writer-director John Lee Hancock’s movie about Baltimore Ravens lineman Michael Oher -- who as a homeless black teen was taken in and nurtured by a well-off, churchgoing white couple -- nearly toppled the smash sequel "The Twilight Saga: New Moon" at multiplexes in both films' second weekend of release. Its ticket sales grew by 18% -- the first time this year that a movie in wide release saw its domestic gross grow on its second weekend -- while those for the teen vampire drama plummeted by 70%. "The Blind Side" has surpassed $100 million in domestic sales, with $200 million- plus now considered a certainty by executives at distributor Warner Bros. Independent studio Alcon Entertainment financed the movie at a cost of just $35 million. Runaway hits usually generate their highest grosses in cities such as Los Angeles, New York, Chicago and San Francisco, but "The Blind Side" is performing exceptionally well miles from those urban hubs: The film's five highest-grossing theaters this weekend were in Sacramento, Dallas, Birmingham, Ala. and Nashville. . . . . Terry Mattingly, a religion columnist for Scripps Howard News Service and the director of the Christian-oriented Washington Journalism Center, believes that "The Blind Side" is working with audiences because the film's Christian back story is neither gratuitous nor didactic. "What makes a movie like this important to me is that it doesn't slap people in the face with religion," Mattingly said. "Most films from Hollywood that involve faith take out all the details -- it's just vague and mushy or it's negative religious stereotypes. "But 'The Blind Side' is a real movie. And then it has another factor: showing respect for religious motivations and emotions. So you have people lining up." It's the second hit of the year for the 45-year-old Bullock, who not long ago was starring in quickly forgotten works such as "Premonition," "Murder by Numbers" and "Miss Congeniality 2: Armed & Fabulous." With "The Proposal" (domestic gross: $164 million) and "The Blind Side," Bullock has now emerged as one of the town's most reliable box-office stars (though this summer's "All About Steve" was a dud). There's even talk among some in Hollywood about possible awards recognition for Bullock. Tuohy, who on Monday night was putting up Christmas decorations in Oher's Baltimore home, said she can't really explain why the movie is doing as well as it is. "We never thought any of this was ever going to happen," she said. But she has her suspicions about the film's appeal. "It's a word-of-mouth thing. People tell other people and they want to experience something good and happy. I think that's really appealing to the masses," she said. And at a time when so many people are struggling, Tuohy added, the movie tells people that putting faith into action has never been more important. "There are a lot of people in this country who do nice things for others," she said. "If you love the Lord, you do what you need to do. Talk is cheap."

RELATED VIDEO:  The Blind Side- Official Trailer [HD]


RELATED SITE:  Sandra Bullock- The Blind Side Movie
Based on an extraordinary true story...

RELATED ARTICLE:  The Blind Side Should Trouble As Well As Inspire  Townhall.com, By Star Parker, November 30, 2009
"The Blind Side" is a beautiful new film based on a magnificent and heartwarming true story. But I hope that the many who see it do not simply walk out all aglow. It should also produce concern. This story about hopelessness transformed into achievement should be a typically American story. We should be concerned that, increasingly, this is not the case. That this is the exception that should be the rule. . . Our wake-up call should be that the factors that saved and transformed Michael Oher's life stand in stark contrast to the government solutions we hear from Washington about dealing with our problems relating to poverty and education. Oher's story is about private individuals, about personal choices and responsibility, and about Christians. And it's not just about white Christians. The decision that started the chain of events that changed Oher's life came from a black Christian woman. . .


RELATED ARTICLE:  Sandra Bullock: A blessing to meet, portray a real Christian  OneNewsNow, December 01, 2009
Actress Sandra Bullock says meeting Leigh Anne Tuohy, who she portrays in The Blind Side, showed her there really are some Christians who "walk the walk." The film, which opened the week before Thanksgiving, presents the true story of the Tuohys -- a well-off white family in Tennessee -- who welcome a homeless black youth into their home and then adopt him as their son. That young man, Michael Oher, became an All-American selection for Ole Miss and a first-round draft pick. He now plays for the NFL's Baltimore Ravens. Bullock says thanks to the Tuohys, who attend Grace Evangelical Church in Memphis, she now has "faith in those who say they represent a faith." Getting to know Leigh Anne Tuohy, says the actress, showed her that religious faith can be authentic. . . . . Leigh Anne Tuohy says she hopes The Blind Side inspires more people to help others. "You don't have to go out and bring a child into your home -- that's not what's required," says Tuohy. "But you can do something -- everybody is capable of doing something. So whatever your something is, do it well. Make a difference." Oher's mom says she enforces a behavior code when she watches her adopted son play for the Baltimore Ravens. "I had to have a little 'come to Jesus' talk with my section at [the] Ravens' stadium," she says. "I had to explain to everyone that, okay, we're going to have a change of attitude. There is a two-drink limit, there is no cussing in this [section]. You don't know who you're sitting next to -- I'm a player's mom." . .

• Married (Happily) With Issues
  By trying to make their good marriage better, Elizabeth Weil and Daniel Duane tested it.  NY Times, By Elizabeth Weil, December 1, 2009
  I have a pretty good marriage. It could be better. There are things about my husband that drive me crazy. Last spring he cut apart a frozen pig’s head with his compound miter saw in our basement. He needed the head to fit into a pot so that he could make pork stock. I’m no saint of a spouse, either. I hate French kissing, compulsively disagree and fake sleep when Dan vomits in the middle of the night. Dan also once threatened to punch my brother at a family reunion at a lodge in Maine. But in general we do O.K. The idea of trying to improve our union came to me one night in bed. I’ve never really believed that you just marry one day at the altar or before a justice of the peace. I believe that you become married — truly married — slowly, over time, through all the road-rage incidents and precolonoscopy enemas, all the small and large moments that you never expected to happen and certainly didn’t plan to endure. But then you do: you endure. And as I lay there, I started wondering why I wasn’t applying myself to the project of being a spouse. My marriage was good, utterly central to my existence, yet in no other important aspect of my life was I so laissez-faire. Like most of my peers, I applied myself to school, friendship, work, health and, ad nauseam, raising my children. But in this critical area, marriage, we had all turned away. I wanted to understand why. I wanted not to accept this. Dan, too, had worked tirelessly — some might say obsessively — at skill acquisition. Over the nine years of our marriage, he taught himself to be a master carpenter and a master chef. He was now reading Soviet-era weight-training manuals in order to transform his 41-year-old body into that of a Marine. Yet he shared the seemingly widespread aversion to the very idea of marriage improvement. Why such passivity? What did we all fear?  . . . . .Still, Dan was not 100 percent enthusiastic, at least at first. He feared — not mistakenly, it turns out — that marriage is not great terrain for overachievers. He met my ocean analogy with the veiled threat of California ranch-hand wisdom: if you’re going to poke around the bushes, you’d best be prepared to scare out some snakes. . .
  
  
  

• 'With this doubt, I thee wed': Some know marriage will fail   USA Today, By Sharon Jayson, December 01, 2009
  Tracie Donahue had some doubts before the wedding, but she got married, anyway. So did Crystal Neumann and Cherrie Rasmussen, who say they also ignored the red flags and tied the knot, only to sever it later. "I think it happens a lot," says Donahue, 39, a documentary filmmaker who works in public relations in Sacramento. "Once they start down that process of being engaged – even if they are feeling an inkling 'this isn't right' – we all have this fantasy of what marriage is all about. It helps drive people to think love will overcome all this." But it didn't – for her and many others who marry despite lingering doubts. Counselors and those who study dating, marriage and divorce say plenty of couples get married when they shouldn't. And their numbers may be increasing, because more couples are casually living together, which can complicate decisions about whether to marry, says Scott Stanley, co-director of the Center for Marital and Family Studies at the University of Denver.  Stanley says his research on couples who cohabit before marriage has found that "some of those wouldn't have married if they hadn't been living together.". . . . . Stories of people entering marriages they felt were doomed from the start intrigued Carl Weisman of Torrance, Calif., whose book, So Why Have You Never Been Married? 10 Insights Into Why He Hasn't Wed, arrived last year. He says a divorced woman he knows said something he thought was quite profound: "I didn't listen to my inner voice. I knew I was going to divorce him before I even married him." That led Weisman to thinking about others who went into a marriage knowing it wouldn't last. But he couldn't find any academic research on the subject. So Weisman, 50, who recently married for the first time, surveyed 1,036 people across the country and conducted in-depth interviews with dozens more for his new book, Serious Doubts: Why People Marry When They Know It Won't Last. Those surveyed had one thing in common: "They all ignored their inner voice," he says. "They knew it wasn't going to last." About half said they started thinking about getting divorced less than six months after the wedding, he adds. But that's not to confuse the kind of serious doubts Weisman analyzed with the common premarital jitters that many people feel before taking the leap. . .

RELATED ARTICLE:  If You're Thinking of Marrying- Part II  Townhall.com, By Dennis Prager, December 13, 2005
It is exceptionally difficult to find the right person to marry. This is especially true for first marriages. That is why it is so important to think through your decision by asking and answering critical questions. In Part I, I offered five. Here are seven more:

6. What problems do the two of you now have? And what inner voice of doubt, if any, are you suppressing? Here is a rule that is rarely broken: Whatever problems you have before the wedding day, you will have during your marriage. Do not think that marrying will solve any problem you have with the person. You therefore have three choices: Make peace with the problem, see if it can be solved before deciding to marry, or don't marry the person. It is imperative that you be ruthlessly honest with yourself. And that is very hard. Nothing in life is easier than denying problems when you are in love. That is why it is important to pay attention to inner doubts.

7. How often do you fight? . . .

RELATED ARTICLE: If You're Thinking of Marrying Part I  Townhall.com, By Dennis Prager, December 6, 2005
Decades of radio counseling, personal experience, and public and private discussions about marriage prompt me to write this list of questions for anyone contemplating marriage. . .

More "Marriage" News: November 2009

Get 2 Free Preview Issues!

Home  I  Subscribe  I  About Us  I  Editorial  I  'MARRIAGE' In The News  I  Enter Our Blog Spot  I  'Something New' 


2010 'MARRIAGE' News Archives:  August 2010  |  July 2010  |  June 2010  |  May 2010  |  April 2010  |  March 2010  |  February 2010  |  January 2010 

2009:  December 2009  |  November 2009  |  October 2009  |  September 2009  |  August 2009  |  July 2009  |  June 2009  |  May 2009  |  April 2009  |  March 2009  | February 2009  |  January 2009

2008:  December 2008  |  November 2008  |  October 2008  |  September 2008  |  August 2008  |  July 2008  |  June 2008  |  May 2008  |  April 2008  |  March 2008  |  February 2008  I  January 2008

2007:  December 2007  I  November 2007  I  October 2007  I  September 2007  I  August 2007  I  July 2007  I  June 2007  I  May 2007  I  April 2007  I  March 2007  I  February 2007  I  January 2007

2006:  December 2006  I  November 2006  I  October 2006  I  September 2006  I  August 2006  I  July 2006  I  June 2006  I  May 2006  I  April 2006  I  March 2006  I  February 2006  I  January 2006

2005:  December 2005  I  November 2005  I  October 2005  I  September 2005  I  August 2005  I  July 2005  I  June 2005  I  May 2005