'MARRIAGE' In The NEWS- May 2008: The REAL Proposal For Marriage magazine

Obama's Irreconcilable Marriage Vows Townhall.com, By Janet M. LaRue, May 30 2008
“Marriage, it doesn’t mean anything.” That’s what Barack Obama told wife Michelle while they were dating, according to her recent interview in The New Yorker. But he’s telling voters that marriage is “something sanctified between a man and a woman,” and that he opposes same-sex “marriage.” Sanctified or meaningless, which is it? On the one hand, Obama says marriage should be between a man and a woman. . . . On the other hand, Obama wants to repeal the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), which protects one man-one woman marriage. . . In his Presidential campaign Obama has reaffirmed his vow to abandon DOMA, and is making it an election issue against Hillary Clinton. According to World Net Daily, “Obama has issued an open letter to the ‘LGBT community’ assuring them he believes in ‘full equality’ for homosexuals and stating that, unlike Sen. Hillary Clinton, he advocates the complete repeal of the Defense of Marriage Act.” . . . . . Obama wants to repeal both sections of DOMA. He doesn’t want federal law to limit marriage to a man and a woman, and he doesn’t want federal law to protect the right of the states to decide for themselves. Is this the position of a man who believes marriage is “sanctified?” Lest there be yet another “out of context” accusation from Obamaland, here’s Michelle’s full statement to The New Yorker about their marriage “debate”: Barack had a more bohemian attitude toward romance. “We would have this running debate throughout our relationship about whether marriage was necessary,” Obama told me. “It was sort of a bone of contention, because I was, like, ‘Look, buddy, I’m not one of these who’ll just hang out forever.’ . . .

RELATED ARTICLE: How to Pick a President: Why virtue trumps policy. Christianity Today, By Daniel Taylor & Mark McCloskey, June 6, 2008

RELATED ARTICLE: Married to Redefining Marriage: Obama is a soft-toned cultural warrior, wrapped in the blandishments of change and bipartisanship National Review, May 23, 2008
In a carefully hedged statement, Obama said he “respects the decision of the California Supreme Court.” He respects a decision that disregarded the will of the people in California, as expressed by a 2000 referendum that defined marriage as between a man and a woman; he respects a decision that excoriated his own position of support for civil unions and (theoretical) opposition to same-sex marriage; he respects a decision that rejects the sort of political compromise he extols. It’s like a professed abolitionist in 1857 saying he “respects” the Dred Scott ruling. . . .

RELATED ARTICLE: The Other Obama: Michelle Obama and the politics of candor The New Yorker, By Lauren Collins, March 10, 2008

RELATED ARTICLE: Obama lobbies 'gays' for edge over Hillary. Letter to 'LGBT community' affirms he'd dump Defense of Marriage Act World Net Daily, March 7, 2008
It's not easy to find on his campaign website, but Sen. Barack Obama has issued an open letter to the "LGBT community" assuring them he believes in "full equality" for homosexuals and stating that, unlike Sen. Hillary Clinton, he advocates the complete repeal of the Defense of Marriage Act. In the letter, published on a campaign blog, Obama says he's "running for president to build an America that lives up to our founding promise of equality for all – a promise that extends to our gay brothers and sisters.". . .

RELATED BLOG: OBAMA '08 Community Blogs: Equality is a Moral Imperative Posted By Alex Okrent, February 28, 2008

California Sets June 17 Date for Same-Sex Marriage Licenses

California Sets June Date for Same-Sex Marriage Licenses New York Times, By Carolyn Marshall, May 29, 2008
— Barring unexpected legal action, same-sex couples throughout California will be able to obtain marriage licenses from county clerks beginning June 17, state officials said Wednesday. In an e-mail message to the 58 county clerks, the Office of Vital Records offered guidance on amending existing marriage forms. Licenses will be changed to identify couples as Party A and Party B rather than bride and groom, a spokeswoman for the Public Health Department said. The spokeswoman, Suanne Buggy, said the change would set in motion procedures to comply with the 4-to-3 decision by the State Supreme Court on May 15 to overturn a ban on same-sex marriages. The ruling takes effect June 14. . . . After the Supreme Court’s decision, opponents promised to pursue a ballot measure seeking a constitutional amendment forbidding same-sex marriage. . . .

RELATED ARTICLE: New York to recognize gay marriages CNN.com, From Cheryl Robinson, May 29, 2008

RELATED ARTICLE: A Poll Finds Californians Still Oppose Gay Marriage New York Times, By Jesse McKinley, May 24, 2008

RELATED ARTICLE: Americans Still Reject Same-Sex Marriage Angus Reid Global Monitor, October 31, 2007

John McCain’s Disappointing Defense of Marriage Townhall.com, By Paul Edwards, May 28, 2008
Just how low do presidential candidates have to go to win votes? . . . . Rather than defend marriage on moral principle as the union of a man and a woman for the purpose of procreation, the establishment of the home as the basis of a civil society, and as a union entered “before God” in accordance with His laws, McCain offered a compromise, emphasizing that, “people should be able to enter into legal agreements” for the purpose of sharing insurance and decision-making. . . . . Ellen denies these fundamental principles of marriage, arguing for same-sex marriage on the basis of erotic love, grounding her argument in the mistaken idea that marriage is a civil right denied to gays and lesbians in the same way this country denied the freedom of slaves and the suffrage of blacks and women. . . .

RELATED ARTICLE: DeGeneres needles McCain on gay marriage AP- Google, May 22, 2008

RELATED ARTICLE: McCain's Marital Woes Townhall.com, By Kevin McCullough May 18, 2008
He like so many soft-spined Republicans grew weak-kneed and fearful that if they were to do the right thing, they might become the next Rick Santorum, target number one, and possibly lose their precious tenure in the United States Senate. On the Constitutional Amendment to Protect Marriage however his cowardice was particularly hurtful given the state of where the issue was at that time and how it was working it's way through court systems. . .

John McCain's disappointing defense of Marriage (Click for Related Video)

RELATED VIDEO: Ellen DeGeneres Vs. John McCain: Gay Marriage YouTube.com

RELATED ARTICLE: School’s in (especially for John McCain): A 'conservative' defense of Marriage The Real Proposal magazine, May 28, 2008

RELATED ARTICLE: Gay Marriage: Even Liberals Know It's Bad Townhall.com, By Frank Turek, Monday, May 26, 2008
Why not legalize same-sex marriage? Who could it possibly hurt? Children and the rest of society. That’s the conclusion of David Blankenhorn, who is anything but an anti-gay “bigot.” He is a life-long, pro-gay, liberal democrat who disagrees with the Bible’s prohibitions against homosexual behavior. Despite this, Blankenhorn makes a powerful case against Same-Sex marriage in his book, The Future of Marriage. . . . The law is a great teacher, and if same-sex marriage advocates have their way, children will be expelled from the lesson on marriage. This leads Blankenhorn to assert, “One can believe in same-sex marriage. One can believe that every child deserves a mother and a father. One cannot believe both.” . . .

RELATED ARTICLE: California Court's Judicial Activism Threatens the Institution of Marriage Heritage Foundation, By Jennifer A. Marshall, Daniel P Moloney, Ph.D. and Matthew Spalding, Ph.D., May 20, 2008
What is happening now is no minor adjustment, nor a slight change in degree that just extends benefits or rights to a larger class, but a substantive change in the essence of the institution. The court's decision does not expand marriage; it alters its core meaning. To redefine marriage so that it is not intrinsically related to the relationship between fathers, mothers, and children formally severs the institution from its nature and purpose, remaking the institution into a mere contract between any two individuals. . .

RELATED RESOURCE: FamilyFacts.org:
The Heritage Foundation's familyfacts.org catalogs social science findings on the family, society and religion gleaned from peer-reviewed journals, books and government surveys. Serving policymakers, journalists, scholars and the general public, familyfacts.org makes social science research easily accessible to the non-specialist.

So why HAS Jodie Foster left her lesbian lover of 15 years?

So why HAS Jodie Foster left her lesbian lover of 15 years? The Daily Mail- UK, By Alison Boshoff, May 27, 2008
As the news spread, the words "mid-life crisis" were heard being whispered over expensively whipped hot drinks and wholemeal muffins in fashionable coffee shops across Hollywood; it certainly left the entire lesbian community of Los Angeles thoroughly agog. For it was revealed that Jodie Foster, the charismatic and discreet movie star, had dramatically ditched Cydney Bernard - her lesbian lover of more than 15 years - for a flavour-of-the-month writer who could not be more different from her former girlfriend. Cynthia Mort, 33, who also goes by the name Cindy, is a highly intelligent, high-profile writer, who has made a name for herself by presenting America with the most explicit sex scenes ever screened as part of a sitcom. Bright, beautiful and with an infectious laugh, Cindy is a rising star of the pink mafia. She made her way in the business as a writer on the TV show Roseanne, where she worked for four years in the late 1990s, and later returned as the supervising producer. In the meantime she wrote Tell Me You Love Me, a show for HBO about couples in therapy, which garnered an enormous amount of publicity for its frank depiction of sex. She also served as the executive producer of the extremely successful show Will And Grace. . . . . . It must be said, also, that Jodie Foster is a thoroughly unusual woman. . . . She was raised in a household led by her ambitious mother, who was in a lesbian relationship with "Auntie" Jo. Her brother Buddy said that mum Brandy was a controlling woman . . .

A few tremors in Oprahland the result of the new 'Church' of Oprah, or her Obama endorsement?

A Few Tremors in Oprahland   New York Times, by Edward Wyatt, May 26, 2008
Oprah Winfrey is still the queen of all media, but her crown is beginning to look a bit tarnished. The average audience for “The Oprah Winfrey Show” has fallen nearly 7 percent this year, according to Nielsen Media Research — its third straight year of decline. “Oprah’s Big Give,” an ABC philanthropic reality show, beat every program on television except “American Idol” in its premiere week this winter, but steadily lost nearly one-third of its audience during the rest of its eight-week run, according to Nielsen. The circulation of O, The Oprah Magazine, has fallen by more than 10 percent in the last three years, according to the Audit Bureau of Circulations, and the magazine is now seeking a new editor in chief after the announced retirement of its longtime steward, Amy Gross. And while Ms. Winfrey still displays a Midas touch when it comes to the endorsement of books and products, some of her latest picks have attracted criticism from longtime fans as she has strayed into new-age spiritualism and, perhaps more dangerously, politics. . . .

RELATED ARTICLE: Is America losing interest in Oprah Winfrey? The Telegraph—UK, By Tom Leonard, June 2, 2008

RELATED ARTICLE: The 'Church' of Oprah   The Good News in South Florida—BP News, By James A. Smith Sr., May 1, 2008
. . . ACIM [A Course in Miracles] is full of heresy, often wrapped in confusing, contradictory, nonsensical rhetoric. Sometimes, however, ACIM is blatantly clear in its false doctrine. And, since Jesus was supposedly the voice heard by Schucman, these assertions are especially outrageous. . . . Contrary to the Bible’s clear teaching that our guilt is the result of the fact that we truly are sinners, separated from God by our sin and rightfully under God’s judgment for our sin, ACIM teaches that we must realize “all guilt is solely an invention of your mind” and in this realization is salvation. . . .

RELATED ARTICLE:   More than a 'gay gene' controlling the media: It's New Age heresy The Real Proposal magazine, April 12, 2008

RELATED ARTICLE: Women turn on ‘traitor’ Oprah Winfrey for backing Barack Obama: Oprah fans leave a barrage of negative messages on her official website in response to the talk show host's support of Obama The Sunday Times, By Tony Allen-Mills, January 20, 2008

How will the pregnant man's daughter thank him for this breathtakingly cynical - and profitable - foray into gay rights?

How will the pregnant man's daughter thank him for this breathtakingly cynical - and profitable - foray into gay rights? The Daily Mail- UK, By Natalie Clarke, May 24, 2008
With an eight-month bump and a beard, he claims to be the world's first pregnant man. This week, the Mail paid Thomas Beatie a visit and discovered a tale of greed, gay rights zealotry and breathtaking cynicism. . . . . So Beatie is really a man/woman hybrid. Call him a freak, if you like. According to Thomas and Nancy, however, this is a story of two people in love who want to have a baby together. What could be more natural? When I called upon the happy couple this week, Nancy peered around the door and whispered: 'This is all about a beautiful, healthy baby girl.' But is that really so? In fact, this sinister experiment in male pregnancy looks very much like something else entirely - a devastatingly cynical act to promote gay rights. And making lots of money to boot. Beatie's little foray with his grass trimmer this week was a rare outing, on account of not wishing to jeopardise his lucrative contract with a picture agency by being photographed by paparazzi (which conveniently happened when he was trimming the lawn - but served to stoke up public interest in his story). The blinds are drawn across every window of the house to stop anyone getting any sneaky dirtier pictures. Nancy and Thomas declined to be interviewed because, Nancy told me: 'We've got a book coming out in September and we want to have stuff left to say so people buy the book.'. . . . Further evidence of this couple's obsession with their sexuality is the name of their screen-printing business - Define Normal. Well, in this case, a child will be born of a bearded man and his lesbian wife from donor sperm taken from goodness knows who, conceived in a DIY operation at home using a syringe that vets use on animals. Just how do you define that?. . . .

RELATED ARTICLE:   More than a 'gay gene' controlling the media: It's New Age heresy The Real Proposal magazine, April 12, 2008

RELATED ARTICLE: The "Gay Gene" Controlling The Media The Real Proposal magazine, April 1, 2008

RELATED ARTICLE: A “Gay Man” Trapped in a Woman’s Body and Other Nonsense Townhall.com, By Matt Barber, December 26, 2007

RELATED ARTICLE: Surgical Sex   First Things.com, By Paul McHugh, November 2004
Mental health professionals like Paul McHugh at Johns Hopkins University believe that all the social, medical and psychiatric resources employed in turning men into women are “a misdirection of psychiatry.” and partly at the his urging, Johns Hopkins no longer performs sex reassignment surgery. He became convinced that to provide a surgical alteration to the body of these unfortunate people was to collaborate with a mental disorder rather than to treat it.

RELATED ARTICLE: Psychiatric Misadventures By Paul R. McHugh— Henry Phipps Professor and Director of the Department of Psychiatry and Behavioural Sciences at the Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine.

RELATED ARTICLE: Paul McHugh on transsexualism Transsexual Road Map

RELATED ARTICLE: Liberals Reveal 'Hidden Politics': The hidden politics of mental health associations are revealed in what some call "the most important book of the decade."  Family.org, By Aaron Atwood
In 1973, another major mental health group, the American Psychiatric Association removed homosexuality from its list of clinical disorders. Robert L. Spitzer of Columbia University, then a member of the Nomenclature Committee, argued for homosexuality's removal from the "Diagnostics and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM)." In "Destructive Trends in Mental Health: The well-intentioned path to harm," William T. O'Donohue and Christine E. Caselles explain that there is more to this removal than meets the eye. . . .

What would the world be like without men? The Daily Mail- UK, By A.N. Wilson, May 24, 2008
Human hybrids by the million. Clones bred in the lab. And men exterminated. In the week MPs voted to change what it means to be human, A.N. WILSON imagines a truly terrifying future. . . . Fifty years in the future, will there still be a human race, or simply a laboratory-bred race of disease-free hybrids? Will there even be different sexes, since fathers have become redundant? Will there be sex, as evidently it is perfectly possible to continue the species (or mixed species) in the much more hygienic conditions of the test-tube and the laboratory? These are strange questions, but the faster science advances, and the more arrogant scientists become, the more necessary it is to examine this so-called progress. In light of the debates this week in Parliament and elsewhere about embryology, about the very nature of life itself, it seems all too possible that by the time today's children are middle-aged they will be living in a Brave New World more horrible than Aldous Huxley imagined in 1932. Picture a world without disease. That is presumably the beautiful thought motivating some research scientists as they peer through their microscopes at human-animal hybrids. . . . . That is the dream. And those of us who interfere with this, who question these scientists, are seen by them as a block to progress. Ask whether this or that highly dubious meddling with Nature is in the best interests of society, and you are told you are obstructing clear, potential benefits to human health. You are labelled a die-hard who wants children to die of cancer or the elderly to become demented. If you question the necessity of vivisection or stem cell research, you are made to feel as though you are responsible for the horrible conditions of the human lot. Of course, there is no doubting the amazing ingenuity of scientists and the extraordinary contribution they have made to our welfare, particularly in medicine, over the years. But their achievements - and their wholly understandable determination to push forward the boundaries of research - must be set in the context of history. . . .

What would the world be like without men?

RELATED ARTICLE: Do families need fathers? The Guardian- UK, By Aida Edemariam, May 20, 2008
The first civil partnerships in 2005 were met with such enthusiasm that it seemed Britain had become a new, more tolerant place, accepting of non-traditional families. But today that tolerance will be tested as MPs decide whether the embryo bill should be amended to make it almost impossible for lesbians and single women to have children through IVF. . . . Single women and lesbians hoping to be able to conceive can be excused if they felt slightly betrayed by a report in the Times yesterday that in the protracted flushing-out of principles that is the human fertilisation and embryos bill Gordon Brown might consider ceding the ground that matters most to them: being eligible for IVF without necessarily having to produce a father figure. The bill currently being debated in parliament retains the requirement in the 1990 Human Fertilisation and Embryology Act that fertility clinics take account of the "welfare of the [potential] child", but replaces the requirement that they also consider a child's "need for a father" with the phrase "supportive parenting". . . .

RELATED ARTICLE: Homo erectus extinctus The Times Online, By Lois Rogers, December 16, 2007

RELATED ARTICLE: The prospect of all-female conception The Independent- UK, By Steve Connor, April 13, 2007

Court: Texas Had No Right to Keep Polygamist Kids: Appeals Court Overrules Decision Placing Sect Kids in State Custody

Who's Kids Are They Anyway?   Townhall.com, By Mike Gallagher, May 23, 2008
I'm not sure that I have ever been so relieved to see a headline. "Court Rules Removal of Children From FLDS Compound was Illegal." Halleluiah. A court finally got one right. The mass abduction of hundreds of children who lived at the "Yearning for Zion" ranch in Eldorado, Texas was just the beginning of predictably disgraceful behavior by the state's Child Protective Services agency. CPS is an agency that frequently runs amok in many states, an out-of-control organization that regularly tramples on the rights of adults accused of abusing children. The horror stories of parents humiliated by the storm trooper tactics of this bunch of state bureaucrats are lengthy. I certainly understand that CPS has an unenviable task. . . . . . There is obviously a peculiarity about the FLDS group. They have largely isolated themselves from the world, believing in bizarre concepts like men having numerous spiritual wives and following the teachings of the jailed "prophet" Warren Jeffs. But when the day comes that the government comes breaking down the doors and tries to make children permanent foster or adoptive children because of the peculiar religious beliefs of a particular group, our nation is in big, big trouble. . .

RELATED ARTICLE: Court: Texas Had No Right to Keep Polygamist Kids: Appeals Court Overrules Decision Placing Sect Kids in State Custody   ABC News, By Scott Michels, May 22, 2008

RELATED ARTICLE: Elissa Wall Speaks Out About Her 'Stolen Innocence': Forced Into Marriage at 14, She Testified Against Polygamous Prophet Warren Jeffs ABC News- 20/20, By Joseph Diaz, May 16, 2008
One of the darkest secrets of the Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints unfolds at a seedy roadside motel in the remote Nevada desert, where underage girls — some as young as 14 — are allegedly forced through hasty and secret wedding ceremonies. Elissa Wall says she was one such 14-year-old who was taken to the motel and plunged into wedlock with no choice but to accept and obey the command of Jeffs. . . .

RELATED BOOK EXCERPT: 'Stolen Innocence' Excerpt: Elissa Wall's Testimony Helped Convict Sect Leader Warren Jeffs   ABC News, May 16, 2008

RELATED ARTICLE: Polygamist objects to ex-child bride's book   CNN.com, May 15, 2008

Rebecca Walker, daughter of renowned author Alice Walker, says her mother's fanatical feminist views tore their relationship apart

How my mother's fanatical views tore us apart The Daily Mail- UK, By Rebecca Walker, May 23, 2008
She's revered as a trail-blazing feminist and author Alice Walker touched the lives of a generation of women. A champion of women's rights, she has always argued that motherhood is a form of servitude. But one woman didn't buy in to Alice's beliefs - her daughter, Rebecca, 38. Here the writer describes what it was like to grow up as the daughter of a cultural icon, and why she feels so blessed to be the sort of woman 64-year-old Alice despises - a mother. . . . My mother would always do what she wanted - for example taking off to Greece for two months in the summer, leaving me with relatives when I was a teenager. Is that independent, or just plain selfish? I was 16 when I found a now-famous poem she wrote comparing me to various calamities that struck and impeded the lives of other women writers. Virginia Woolf was mentally ill and the Brontes died prematurely. My mother had me - a 'delightful distraction', but a calamity nevertheless. I found that a huge shock and very upsetting. . . . Ironically, my mother regards herself as a hugely maternal woman. Believing that women are suppressed, she has campaigned for their rights around the world and set up organisations to aid women abandoned in Africa - offering herself up as a mother figure. But, while she has taken care of daughters all over the world and is hugely revered for her public work and service, my childhood tells a very different story. I came very low down in her priorities - after work, political integrity, self-fulfilment, friendships, spiritual life, fame and travel.

Daughter of Christian Music Star Killed AOL News, By Joe Edwards- AP, May 22, 2008
The 5-year-old daughter of Grammy-winning Christian music star Steven Curtis Chapman was struck and killed Wednesday by a sport utility vehicle driven by her brother, authorities said.The girl, Maria Sue, was hit in the driveway of the family's home Wednesday afternoon by a Toyota Land Cruiser driven by her teenage brother, said Laura McPherson, a spokeswoman for the Tennessee Highway Patrol. The brother, whose name and exact age weren't available, apparently did not see the girl, McPherson said. No charges are expected. "It looks like a tragic accident," she said. Several family members witnessed the accident, which happened in Williamson County just south of Nashville. The girl died later at Vanderbilt University Medical Center in Nashville, hospital spokeswoman Laurie Holloway said. In a statement, Velvet Kelm, a publicist for Chapman, said Maria was the Chapmans' youngest daughter. Chapman, who is originally from Paducah, Ky., and his wife have promoted international adoption and have three daughters from China, including Maria. They also have three biological children. . . . .The 45-year-old singer also has released a book about being a father titled "Cinderella: The Love of Daddy and his Princess." He has won five Grammy awards and 54 Dove awards from the Gospel Music Association, according to Kelm. . . .

Christian music star Steven Curtis Chapman's 5-year-old daughter, Maria Sue Chapman, seen sitting on his lap, was tragically killed when her brother was said to have accidentally run over her with a car (Click for Related Video)

RELATED VIDEO: Steven Curtis Chapman: Dishwashin Dad with 5 year-old daughter Maria

RELATED ARTICLE: Steven Curtis Chapman's Daughter Killed in Accident: 5-year-old daughter Maria Sue struck and killed Wednesday by a sport utility vehicle at home Christianity Today, By Andree Farias, May 22, 2008

RELATED SITE: Shaohannah's Hope: Mobilizing the body of Christ to care for orphans

RELATED ARTICLE: The Journey Through Sorrow: When a Child Dies-- Surviving the death of dreams. BeliefNet, By Carol Staudacher
How do you survive the death of your child? As a parent, you're supposed to be the provider, the nurturer, the protector, the mentor, the guide. You invest love and hope and certain beliefs in your son or daughter. But most of all, you do not outlive your child. When tragedy strikes and you do bury a child, you're faced with reconstructing a life that has been suddenly robbed of its parental responsibilities and joys.

RELATED ARTICLE: Surviving Loss: Living After the Death of a Child Adrr.com, By Stephen R. Marsh
Stephen R. Marsh and Winifred L. Marsh (Steve & Win Marsh to their friends) were married on January 26, 1985 in the Oakland Temple. They are the parents of five girls, Jessica, Heather, Courtney, Robin, and Rachel, 3 of whom have died in early childhood.

RELATED ARTICLE: Surviving the Death of a Child Menninger Clinic, By Donna Lamb, LSCSW
Numerous secondary losses accompany the death of a child, including loss of the family as it existed prior to the death. Surviving children lose the emotional, and perhaps physical, availability of their parents, grandparents “lose” their children to parental grief and spouses lose the support of each other–each whose emotional plate is so full that they cannot be there for the other. The impact of a child’s death on a marital relationship cannot be underestimated. Neither parent will be the same person as they were before the death.

Why a male libido pill is the last thing we women want!

Male libido pill is the last thing we ladies want!
Why the latest wonder drug for men might not be such good news for the ladies The Daily Mail- UK, By Amanda Platell, May 22, 2008
Four words guaranteed to warm a loving woman’s heart: ‘Hello, darling, I’m home.’ Add to that ‘And I’ve just taken my sex pill — time to party, baby’ and it’s enough to make a grown woman weep into her cocoa. Perhaps if you’re 25, this could be a welcome message, but then if you’re 25, your bloke probably wouldn’t need to take a sex pill. But for women in middle age, the prospect of a scientific invention - reported in the Daily Mail this week - which would spark not only the physical capability (as Viagra does) but also the emotional desire in a man to make love is little short of terrifying. Just when the children have grown up and are having lives of their own, when you thought you could have some loving time together, do the things you never had time for when the family was young - sleep in, go to the theatre, Sunday lunch at your local, curl up on the sofa with a Catherine Cookson novel, watch The Apprentice together - he wants you in a nurse’s uniform. You’re feeling like matron and he wants Zoe from Holby City. So, just when women of a certain age - and let’s be honest, with children, that’s anything over 40 - thought they were emerging relatively unscathed from the post-Viagra era, those dastardly scientists have gone and developed a new super sex drug.You’d think they’d have better things to do than spend their time trying to invent a way of enhancing the libido. . . .

Why DO clever women fall for second-rate men?
We all know the type: she's successful, bright and, oh yes, too often has a man who humiliates her. What on earth is the attraction? The Daily Mail-UK, By Helen Kirwan-Taylor, May 21, 2008
Logic would, or should, dictate that a high-flying woman who has everything going for her (looks, talent, drive) should, by definition, attract a man who is her equal, if not her superior, in terms of looks, intellect and wealth. Yet in my experience, this is simply not the case. The more accomplished the woman, the less accomplished the man is likely to be. In fact, smart women seem to have a knack for attracting the sort of men that most of us were raised to stay well clear of. . . . So it was with great interest that I read the findings of Dr Steve Stewart-Williams, one of the psychologists behind the study Why Do Men Insult Their Intimate Partners? Published in a recent issue of the Journal Of Personality And Individual Differences, Dr Stewart-Williams concluded that when it coms to women with high IQs, a form of meanness is actually programmed into male behaviour. 'Meanness is a form of "mate retention" in many men,' he says. 'Typically, men want lower status women because they feel they can control them. It can be threatening for a man if their partner has a higher IQ because they will often feel that makes the woman more desirable than they are themselves. 'That's when a man is likely to be unfaithful or aggressive as a means of asserting control over the woman. 'If a man demeans a woman, it makes her feel low, neglected and disrespected. And if a woman feels humiliated, they will eventually come to believe they can't do any better and stick around with that man.' It's a classic cycle of abuse, however subtle. The real surprise is that it appears to be happening to such brilliant women, and so many of them. . . .

Why do clever women fall for second-rate men?

California's Epic Battle for Marriage and Religious Liberty

California's Epic Battle for Marriage and Religious LIberty Townhall.com, By Maggie Gallagher , May 21, 2008
They say we are tired of culture wars. Tell that to the California Supreme Court, which didn't sound tired at all when it lobbed a big, fat hand grenade into the marriage debate. Ideas have consequences. And the California court endorsed two big, brand-new, very bad ideas. The first idea is that the internationally recognized human right to marry includes same-sex marriage. In U.S. constitutional law, fundamental human rights are those deeply rooted in our traditions. Not even in Massachussetts or in New Jersey could the courts quite stomach the idea that same-sex marriage is deeply rooted in those traditions. Not even the European Court of Human Rights or the United Nations Human Rights Committee has so ruled. . . . So the second big idea endorsed by the California court is even less promising: Sexual orientation should be treated just like race under the California equal protection amendment, subject to "strict scrutiny." This is another historic first for a U.S. court. This is a ruling which, if left undisturbed, means that Protestants, Catholics, Jews and Muslims who see marriage as the union of husband and wife, and view sexual activity as best confined to marriage so defined, are in the exact position as racists under California law. . . .There are religious liberty defenses under the U.S. Constitution for youth ministers, but not for Christian schools, physicians, social workers, teachers, attorneys, psychiatrists, counselors or tax-exempt charities. The First Amendment will not protect us if our own governments (through the courts) decide that, for example, my Catholic faith is in itself a form of bigotry. If gay rights advocates don't really mean this to happen, why don't they stop asking courts to rule in this way?. . . . .

RELATED ARTICLE: California gay marriage decision: The battle is on for our freedoms! The Real Proposal magazine, May 22, 2008

RELATED ARTICLE: Gay Marriage Recycles Bad Idea Townhall.com, By Michael Medved, May 21, 2008
Advocates for same-sex marriage should feel embarrassed by current efforts to recycle the three most discredited ideas of the “Free Love” Revolution of the 1960’s. Most Americans look back at the radical notions of that rebellious and drug-soaked era with skepticism and discomfort, if not outright regret. The sweeping changes in intimate relationships may have provoked excitement some forty years ago, but those alterations produced so many painful costs in terms of shattered families, degraded culture and proliferation of sexually transmitted diseases that even the most enthusiastic revolutionaries have come to reconsider the advisability of encouraging copulation without consequences or standards. . . .1. Separating Sex, Marriage and Procreation. . . . 2. Following – and Honoring – Your Deepest Urges. . . .3. Treating Male and Female as Interchangeable. . . .

RELATED ARTICLE: California Decision Will Radically Change Society Townhall.com, By Dennis Prager, May 20, 2008
Americans seem mesmerized by the word "change." And, by golly, they sure got it last week from the California Supreme Court. It is difficult to imagine a single social change greater than redefining marriage from opposite sex to include members of the same sex. . . .This lack of acknowledgment -- or even awareness -- of how society-changing is this redefinition of marriage is one reason the decision was made. To the four compassionate ones -- and their millions of compassionate supporters -- allowing same-sex marriage is nothing more than what courts did to end legal bans on interracial marriage. The justices and their supporters know not what they did. They think that all they did was extend a "right" that had been unfairly denied to gays. Another reason for this decision is arrogance. First, the arrogance of four individuals to impose their understanding of what is right and wrong on the rest of society. And second is the arrogance of the four compassionate ones in assuming that all thinkers, theologians, philosophers, religions and moral systems in history were wrong, while they and their supporters have seen a moral light never seen before. Not a single religion or moral philosophical system -- East or West -- since antiquity ever defined marriage as between members of the same sex. That is one reason the argument that this decision is the same as courts undoing legal bans on marriages between races is false. . .

Guess Who's Coming to Dinner: How the Californis same-sex marriage ruling will trample our religious liberties (Click for Related Video)

Guess Who's Coming to Dinner Townhall.com, By Harry R. Jackson, Jr. May 19, 2008
. . . I first learned that my church was scheduled for a visit by SoulForce last December. The PR campaign about the event was announced long before this group asked for an opportunity to have a discussion on this topic of gay inclusion in the Church. This tactic seems to be a continuation of a four-year strategy. They have continued with the following clear agenda:

1.) Label anti-gay ballot measures as divisive
2.) Equate pro-family values arguments with racism
3.) Enlist celebrity backing and endorsements
4.) Question traditional biblical prohibitions against homosexuality
5.) Seek to introduce primary school children to the gay life style

The other churches targeted for a visit are Pastor Joel Osteen’s Lakewood Church (May 11), T.D. Jakes’ Potter’s House (May 18), Bishop Eddie Long’s New Birth Missionary Baptist Church (June1), Bill Hybels’ Willow Creek Community Church (June 9), Rick Warren’s Saddleback Community Church (Father’s Day June 16), and my church, Hope Christian Church (May 25).

The mission statement of this organization was surprising to me. It reads as follows: “The mission of Soulforce is to cut off homophobia at its source --- religious bigotry. . . . . Since when is preaching gospel morality for all people a form of oppression? It seems to me that all six churches are being vilified and demonized in order to advance an overtly political gay agenda. . . .

RELATED VIDEO: Religious Liberty Under Fire YouTube.com- Air Maria
A special AIRMARIA report on the status of religious liberty in America, relative to the ongoing push on the part of the homosexual lobby for full same-sex marriage. . .

RELATED ARTICLE: The Meaning of Religious Liberty The Heritage Foundation, By Matthew Spalding, Ph.D., December 5, 2008

RELATED ARTICLE: The Mythical "Wall of Separation": How a Misused Metaphor Changed Church–State Law, Policy, and Discourse The Heritage Foundation, By Daniel L. Dreisbach, June 23, 2006
No metaphor in American letters has had a more profound influence on law and policy than Thomas Jefferson's "wall of separation between church and state." Today, this figure of speech is accepted by many Americans as a pithy description of the constitutionally prescribed church-state arrangement, and it has become the sacred icon of a strict separationist dogma that champions a secular polity in which religious influences are systematically and coercively stripped from public life. In our own time, the judiciary has embraced this figurative phrase as a virtual rule of constitutional law and as the organizing theme of church?state jurisprudence, even though the metaphor is nowhere to be found in the U.S. Constitution. . . .

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: California ruling hijacks middle ground on marriage Star Tribune, By Katherine Kersten, May 20, 2008
California citizens have tried hard to find a middle ground on same-sex marriage. In 2000, they approved a state initiative defining marriage as a one-man/one-woman institution with 61.4 percent of the popular vote. But voters also wanted to extend government benefits to gay couples. In 1999, the California Legislature had done just that by adopting the Domestic Partner Act. . . . . But when it tossed out California's one-man/one-woman voter initiative -- which the state's Legislature cannot overturn on its own -- the California majority showed how far arrogant, activist courts will go in disregarding the will of the people. Fallout from the California decision may create two perverse reactions that will haunt same-sex marriage supporters. . . .

RELATED ARTICLE: Wedded to Activism National Review— Editorial, By The Editors, May 16, 2008
As associate justice Marvin R. Baxter aptly stated in dissent, “Nothing in our Constitution, express or implicit, compels the majority’s startling conclusion that the age-old understanding of marriage — an understanding recently confirmed by an initiative law — is no longer valid. California statutes already recognize same-sex unions and grant them all the substantive legal rights this state can bestow. If there is to be a further sea change in the social and legal understanding of marriage itself, that evolution should occur by similar democratic means.”. . . . . Both John McCain and Barack Obama say they are opposed to same-sex marriage, but both oppose a constitutional amendment to codify that view. Such an amendment is the surest way to prevent judicial meddling. But there is nonetheless an important difference between these candidates. McCain, judging from his record and his recent speech against judicial activism, will try to appoint judges who will refrain from engaging in such meddling. About Obama we know no such thing, and have reason to suspect otherwise. . . .

As our universities go, so go our courts Townhall.com, By Star Parker, May 19, 2008
California's Supreme Court has made its contribution to the ongoing debasement of our law, our language, and our culture by legalizing same-sex marriage. California now has law in the tradition of Groucho Marx who said "Who are you going to believe, me or your own eyes." When the court says there is no difference between couples consisting of a man and a woman, a man and a man, or a woman and a woman, and that it's irrelevant that only one combination can produce children, who are you going to believe? The court or your own eyes? This decision shouldn't come as any surprise. The notion that words have meaning, that there is truth, and that we can approach that truth through investigation and integrity of thought is becoming passe in the United States of Fantasyland. . . . Crystal Dixon, a black woman, and now former associate vice president of Human Resources at the University of Toledo, wrote a counter-point opinion column in the Toledo Free Press addressing an earlier column about gay rights. In her piece, Dixon challenged equating gays to blacks ("I cannot wake up tomorrow morning and not be a Black woman"), produced income statistics for gay individuals and couples showing them in much better condition than black men, and questioned some allegations made about benefit plans at the University of Toledo. But perhaps most troubling to those bothered by her column, Dixon said there is a God, that there is an order, and that man has free choice and responsibility for what he chooses. Heresy in the United States of Fantasyland. . . . . As result of the column, she was suspended, then fired, from her position at the University. . . . . .The blatant hypocrisy of claiming diversity as a goal when clearly there are individuals and points of view that are not welcome goes without saying. . . .

RELATED ARTICLE: UT offered Dixon alternate position prior to termination Toledo Free Press, By Justin R. Kalmes, May 13, 2008
A former UT administrator who was fired for opinions she expressed on Toledo Free Press' Web site said the university offered her a demotion and pay cut prior to terminating her employment. Crystal Dixon, former associate vice president of human resources, said UT officials, at a May 5 pre-disciplinary hearing, offered to allow her to continue to be employed at the university if she agreed to accept a demotion and salary reduction. Dixon was paid an annual salary of $134,383. After declining the offer, Dixon was notified of her termination May 9 through her attorney, Tom Sobecki, she said, noting UT's offer was “unacceptable because I didn't do anything wrong.” Dixon was placed on paid administrative leave after a column she wrote that appeared on the newspaper's Web site April 18 created controversy because of her views on homosexuality. . . . .

Ellen announces she's getting married to girlfriend Portia De Rossi following the California Supreme Court landmark decision to overturn the ban on same-sex marriage (Click for Related Video)

More Than Just a Piece of Paper
California's Gay Couples Celebrate Right to Marry but Ballot Initiative Looms ABC News, By Marcus Baram, May 16, 2008
For all practical purposes, the only real change that yesterday's court decision means for California's gay couples is an official piece of paper and a legal ceremony. After all, under the state's domestic partnership laws, same-sex couples already enjoy all the legal rights and protections enjoyed by opposite-sex couples. But for hundreds of thousands of same-sex couples in the state, today's state Supreme Court decision to strike down the ban on gay marriage was a historic and transformative moment. . . . . Among those planning on wedding bells are talk show host Ellen DeGeneres and her companions Portia deRossi, of "Ally McBeal" and "Nip/Tuck" fame. DeGeneres announced their plans during the taping of her show Thursday after the court ruling was made public. The show is expected to air today. When she was visiting the state capital last week, Torrie Osborn had a good feeling about the impending decision after she ran into Chief Justice Ron George. "He said to me, "Oh, you wrote that beautiful piece in The New York Times," about her marriage to her former partner in San Francisco in 2004. It was compelling and thoughtful,'" said Osborn, the former director of the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force. "Based on that, I was cautiously optimistic," she said. . . . .

RELATED VIDEO: Ellen announces she's getting married! RedLasso.com

Governor backs same-sex marriage ruling San Francisco Chronicle, By Matthew Yi, May 16, 2008
A day after the state Supreme Court ruled that same-sex couples should have the right to marry in California, Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger said Friday that he supports the court's decision even though his personal view is that "marriage is between a man and a woman.". . . . "When the people vote, people are not legal experts, constitutional experts or any of that," he said. "I think that's why we have the courts. People may vote with good intentions, but then the court says, 'This is not constitutional.' "It's not that the court interferes with the will of the people," he added. "But the court says, 'You voted for something, but it's not constitutionally right, so let's rework this.' That's really the idea.". . . .

RELATED ARTICLE: Overturning California's Gay 'Marriage' Ban Townhall.com, By Chuck Colson, May 16, 2008
The only way the California Supreme Court could override the people is by saying that gay “marriage” is a natural right. But nowhere do we see this in the federal or state Constitutions. . . . I guess I am not surprised by what happened in California. I have seen judges out of control for years. What I cannot fathom is how they would do it under the guise of natural rights. If the democratic process means anything, it means the consent of the governed. We cannot let the courts do this, or we do not have a democracy. . . .

RELATED ARTICLE: California Supremes Order Homosexual ‘Marriage’ — Will Citizens Submit? Townhall.com, By Janet M. LaRue, May 16, 2008
I was a Californian for 40 years, so I have to ask my former fellow citizens: Are you going to sit by and do nothing while four black-robed despots take away your right to govern yourselves?. . . . California is now the second state after Massachusetts where homosexuals will be allowed to “marry.” But unlike Massachusetts, California has no law that prohibits homosexual couples living in states that don’t recognize same-sex “marriage” from marrying in the Golden State. The California Supreme Court has opened the door to a legal battle royal across the nation. . . .

RELATED ARTICLE: Gay marriage in California: Happy gays are here again. California legalises gay marriage, how will the rest of America respond? The Economist.com, May 16, 2008

RELATED ARTICLE: News Analysis: Ruling May Revive Gay Marriage as Issue New York Times, By Adam Nagourney, May 16, 2008

RELATED ARTICLE: A Different Time: Why gay marriage won't pack such a punch in Campaign 2008 Newsweek, By Karen Breslau, May 16, 2008

RELATED ARTICLE: Schwarzenegger—Shriver: Protecting the brand Los Angeles Times, By Joe Mathews, May 4, 2008 The California governor, like other politicians whose spouses are in the public eye, works a complicated calculus in balancing his political interests with those of his wife. . .

California ban on same-sex marriage struck down CNN.com, By Bill Mears, May 15, 2008
In a much-anticipated ruling issued Thursday, the California Supreme Court struck down the state's ban on same-sex marriage as unconstitutional. Several gay and lesbian couples, along with the city of San Francisco and gay rights groups, sued to overturn state laws allowing only marriages between a man and a woman. "There can be no doubt that extending the designation of marriage to same-sex couples, rather than denying it to all couples, is the equal protection remedy that is most consistent with our state's general legislative policy and preference," said the 120-page ruling. It said that the state law's language "limiting the designation of marriage to a 'union between a man and a woman' is unconstitutional, and that the remaining statutory language must be understood as making the designation of marriage available to both opposite-sex and same-sex couples." With the ruling, California becomes the second state to allow same-sex couples to legally wed. Massachusetts adopted the practice in 2004, and couples don't need to be state residents to wed there. Vermont, New Jersey, New Hampshire and Connecticut permit civil unions, while California has a domestic-partner registration law. More than a dozen other states give gay couples some legal rights. Seven other jurisdictions around the world have legalized same-sex marriage: Belgium, Netherlands, Spain, South Africa and the Canadian provinces of British Columbia, Ontario, and Quebec. . . .

READ COURT'S DECISION (PDF): Read the 4-3 decision Findlaw.com, May 15, 2008

California ban on same-sex marriage struck down by the state's highest court (Click for Related Video)

RELATED VIDEO: Strong Emotions Surround Gay Marriage Decision You Tube— KCRATV

RELATED ARTICLE: Calif. high court overturns ban on gay marriage USA Today- On deadline, May 15, 2008

RELATED ARTICLE: Chronology of major legal actions involving gay rights USA Today- On Deadline blog, By Joan Biskupic, May 15, 2008

RELATED ARTICLE: State policies on gay marriage Associated Press, May 15, 2008

RELATED ARTICLE (PDF): American Courts On Marriage: Is Marriage Discriminatory? 1998-2008 Institute for Marriage and Public Policy, By Joshua Baker- Legal Analyst, May 15, 2008
On May 15, 2008 the California Supreme Court overruled Proposition 22 which defines marriage as the union of one man and one woman. California thus joins Massachusetts as the only other court to hold that marriage constitutes discrimination in the U.S. This new policy brief surveys court decisions on marriage from the past ten years, finding that nine state and federal courts, as well as three international courts, have upheld marriage laws against claims of discrimination, while courts in Massachusetts and California have struck down the marriage laws. . .

RELATED ARTICLE: Gay "Marriage" Townhall.com, By Thomas Sowell, August 15, 2006
Now that a number of state courts have refused to redefine marriage to include same-sex unions, cries of "discrimination" are being heard. The "equal protection of the laws" provided by the Constitution of the United States applies to people, not actions. Laws exist precisely in order to discriminate between different kinds of actions. . . . Analogies with bans against interracial marriage are bogus. Race is not part of the definition of marriage. A ban on interracial marriage is a ban on the same actions otherwise permitted because of the race of the particular people involved. It is a discrimination against people, not actions. . . .

RELATED ARTICLE: Same-Sex marriage: Hijacking the Civil Rights Legacy The Weekly Standard- By Eugene F. Rivers & Kenneth D. Johnson, June 1, 2006
The definition of marriage as the union of a man and a woman does not establish a sexual caste system or relegate one sex to conditions of social and economic inferiority. It does, to be sure, deny the recognition as lawful "marriages" to some forms of sexual combining--including polygyny, polyandry, polyamory, and same-sex relationships. But there is nothing invidious or discriminatory about laws that decline to treat all sexual wants or proclivities as equal. People are equal in worth and dignity, but sexual choices and lifestyles are not. . . .

Lesbian lovers, 'Sex in the City' star Cynthia Nixon (R) and Christine Marinoni do their best not to look like a couple as they step out in London

The lesbian love affair you WON'T see in Sex and the City The Daily Mail - UK, By Alison Boshoff and Richard Simpson, May 15, 2008
Zero hour was approaching, and in the rather splendid Linley Suite at Claridges (£2,500 a night) the question being asked was: Is this dress too much? Cynthia Nixon, her hair falling in soft caramel layers and her skin dewily made-up, had a last-moment flutter of nerves: the sequinned Calvin Klein sheath was, indeed, a revealing choice for the premiere of Sex And The City: The Movie. All the more so as, two years ago, she had undergone a lumpectomy and radiotherapy following the diagnosis of breast cancer. Could she get away with it? Or would she, at 42, look ridiculous? she fretted. Her companion, burly in a beige jacket, assured her that it was just beautiful on her, that she looked gorgeous and would shine. And so, reassured, she put on her Bulgari diamond drop earrings and headed for the red carpet. Her partner was speaking from experience: a little more than 20 years ago Christine Marinoni was a homecoming queen herself, a curvy feminine redhead who was the belle of the ball on prom night. One who was there remembers that she was as pretty as a picture in her dress. Now, though, Marinoni works as a civil rights activist and has been described, rather bluntly, as "a great big lesbian in a lumberjack shirt". It is true that they are nothing alike, on the surface at least. Where Cynthia is slender and graceful, Christine - the love of her life, who Cynthia simply describes as 'Mrs Fantastic' - is short and dumpy. Cynthia likes to dress up and wear make-up; Christine sticks to a jacket and tie for formal occasions, and jeans and shirts at other times. It appears that she makes a point of being as unladylike as possible. But one who met them while they were in London for the premiere says they made a "delightful couple". . .

RELATED ARTICLE: Cynthia Nixon happy to find more to life than 'Sex' New York Daily News, By Nicole Lyn Pesce, May 15, 2008

RELATED ARTICLE: 'Sex and the City' star Cynthia Nixon wants to marry her girlfriend New York Daily News, By Korin Miller, May 12, 2008

RELATED ARTICLE: Marriage, infidelity and making love in sushi: The Sex And The City girls on what happens in their new film The Daily Mail- UK, By Lina Das, May 8, 2008

Where's My Tax Rebate Check? AOL News, May 14, 2008
Still Not 'Stimulated'? You've heard about it. You're expecting it. But you still have questions about the economic stimulus payments? We've got answers. More than 130 million households will receive non-taxable rebate checks which began mailing earlier than expected, on April 28. Click through our gallery to see if you're eligible, how much you'll get, when to expect it and more.

First: Who Gets What?
-- Most single taxpayers will get a rebate of $600.
-- Most married couples who file jointly will get $1,200.
-- You'll get an extra $300 for each child under age 17 for whom you claim a child credit on your 2007 return.
-- Low income seniors and disabled veterans (and their widows) who don't owe enough income tax to qualify for the full rebate can qualify for checks of $300, or $600 if they filed joint returns. . .

Timetable for Mailing Checks:
If the last two digits in your Social Security number fall within the following ranges, you can expect your rebate check by the following dates. . .

Bachelor's Matt Grant and Shayne Lamas: We're going to get married

'Bachelor's Matt Grant and Shayne Lamas: We're going to get married Reality TV World, By Christopher Rocchio, May 13, 2008
Any jaded The Bachelor viewers doubting Matt Grant and Shayne Lamas' engagement will end with an actual wedding better think again, according to Lamas. "We've already been together for three months and they are not in our relationship and they have nothing to do with our relationship," Lamas told Reality TV World during a Tuesday conference call with the happy couple. "We're madly in love and we're not going to put any pressure on ourselves. We're in it until the end. We're engaged and we're going to get married and it's forever." The 27-year-old British financier presented his final rose and a marriage proposal to the 22-year-old actress from Malibu, CA -- and she accepted both during last night's pre-taped The Bachelor: London Calling finale broadcast. Grant's proposal marked only the second time in The Bachelor's last six seasons and just the third time in its last nine editions that the show -- which despite airing twelve editions, has produced zero weddings so far -- ended a season with a bachelor proposing to his final bachelorette. . . . Grant told reporters that he and Lamas have only "briefly" touched upon their eventual wedding. "I never said I wanted to get married straight away," he clarified. "The reason why I chose to do this is because I was genuinely ready to settle down -- settling down and getting married straight away are two different things. But this is what I wanted. It's incredible that I've meant someone like Shayne." In addition, Lamas said the fact that her parents are divorced gave her pause about jumping into a marriage with Grant. "I think that's exactly why we're taking some time. . . . .

Beware the rules of modern engagement The Telegraph- UK, By Karen Krizanovich, May 14, 2008
Mariah Carey's engagement ring could sink a battleship. The singer's platinum and pink diamond ring, valued at £1.5 million, was bestowed on her by her new husband Nick Cannon within weeks of the pair meeting. But there's trouble: Carey has discovered that her fabulous ring appears not to have been "exclusive" to her. Cannon gave a strikingly similar ring last year to his then fiancée, Victoria's Secret model Selita Ebanks. Although the jewellers Jacob & Co say it is not the same ring, most women hearing this story yelped with disgust. However, many men don't understand why. After all, Nicolas Sarkozy gave a £15,000 Dior "Cupidon" ring to Carla Bruni to mark their engagement, even though it was the same model he gave his former wife Cecilia towards the end of their marriage. Cannon and Sarkozy were lambasted for their behaviour, and rightly so. The engagement ring carries more significance than the wedding band. It costs more and means more. . . . . By tradition, men pay for the ring. According to De Beers, a man should spend one to two months' salary; in Britain, the average spend is £1,500. One socialite, who wishes to remain anonymous, succinctly sums up the situation. "Words are cheap and you can only truly judge how important you are to another person by the amount of money they are willing to spend on you. Sad but true." She adds that under no circumstances is the woman to contribute. "After their first row, she will resent him for it and harbour resentment ad infinitum.". .

RELATED ARTICLE: Wedding guide: A-Z of weddiquette The Telegraph- UK, By Judith Woods, May 14, 2008

RELATED ARTICLE: Nick & Mariah's Wedding Bling: A Closer Look People magazine, By Danielle Dubin, May 10, 2008

End the Welfare Marriage Penalty Wall Street Journal, By Sam Brownback and David Blankenhorn, May 13, 2008
What if the federal government forced couples to pay 20% of their annual income just to get or stay married? And suppose a couple could avoid this tax if they either got a divorce or never got married in the first place? Does it sound like good public policy to force a couple earning, say, $60,000 a year to pay $12,000 just for being married? That's more or less what we demand of millions of low-income Americans who receive government welfare benefits. For most couples on welfare, getting married is among the more expensive decisions they will face as newlyweds, because saying "I do" will reduce the benefits they receive, on average, by 10% to 20% of their total income. We shudder to think what would happen to marriage in America if all of us, and not just the poor, faced such a pernicious incentive system. Knowledge of the marriage penalty in poor neighborhoods is typically spread by word of mouth. This informal learning might actually increase the antimarriage impact of the penalty, by convincing nearly all poor couples that they will lose income if they marry, even though some (due to the complexity of the regulations) would not. In recent years, Congress has made substantial progress in reducing the marriage penalties paid by middle and upper income couples because of the tax system. But lawmakers have done little to address marriage penalties facing the poor through the benefit system. Why should we care about this issue? For starters, consider the children. . . . .

RELATED ARTICLE: The Real Marriage Penalty New York Times, By Annie Murphy Paul, November 19, 2006

RELATED ARTICLE: The Collapse of Marriage and the Rise of Welfare Dependence The Heritage Foundation, By Jennifer A. Marshall, Robert Lerman, Ph.D., Barbara Dafoe Whitehead, Ph.D., Hon. Wade Horn, Ph.D., Robert Rector- Heritage Lecture #959, August 15, 2006 (Delivered May 22, 2006)

RELATED ARTICLE: Defining Marriage Down: We need to protect marriage. National Review, By Senator Sam Brownback, July 9, 2004

RELATED ARTICLE: Can Government Strengthen Marriage? Evidence from the Social Sciences Institute for American Values, February 2004

RELATED ARTICLE: Welfare 'reform' threatens to leave dads behind USA Today, April 24, 2002

Bishop Thomas Weeks says his estranged wife, Juanita Bynum, used their notorious fight to revive her ministry

Bishop Weeks Says Estranged Wife Used Fight to Revive Her Ministry
Claims against Juanita Bynum made in new book 'What Love Taught Me.' EURweb.com, May 12, 2008
Reports from the Associated Press say that Bishop Thomas Weeks, estranged husband of Evangelist Juanita Bynum, wrote in his new book that she has tried to use their highly publicized physical altercation to revive her own flagging ministry. Weeks made the same admission to EUR last December. The self-published book includes chapters with titles such as “I Would Rather Push You Now Than Punch You Later” and “She Wanted to Be Oprah at Any Cost” and says it was him who suffered physical and emotional abuse in the relationship. In the 153-page book, “What Love Taught Me,” Weeks says the August 21, 2007 dispute was nothing more than a continuation of the “heated fellowship” the two ministers engaged in during their marriage. The scuffle between the two in a hotel parking lot landed Weeks in jail on charges he pushed, choked and beat Bynum, and he ultimately pleaded guilty to assaulting her. He is serving three years of probation. Bishop Weeks claims his wife instigated the parking lot incident and used it to paint herself as a poster girl for domestic violence and to boost her ministry. “Ultimately, she had to have …a plan to destroy my credibility, to leak issues that were in the process of being resolved…so that she could get out of the marriage almost blameless,” he wrote. Weeks said he wrote the book in the wake of his arrest. Within days, Bynum announced her intentions to become “the new face of domestic violence” and last week, she appeared in a two-part episode of “Divorce Court” offering advice to a couple dealing with alleged abuse in their marriage – moves Weeks said were indicative of her desire for more secular fame. . .

RELATED ARTICLE: Bynum discusses marriage on 'Divorce Court': Judge 'had never heard of her before' appearance. The Atlanta Journal-Constitution, April 22, 2008

RELATED PHOTOS: BYNUM-WEEKS SAGA The Atlanta Journal-Constitution

RELATED ARTICLE: Tragically Widening the Grounds of Legitimate Divorce DesiringGod.org, By John Piper, October 17, 2007

RELATED ARTICLE: What God Has Joined: What does the Bible really teach about divorce? Christianity Today, By David Instone-Brewer, October 5, 2007

RELATED ARTICLE: 10 Ways to Lift Yourself Up When a Spiritual Leader Lets You Down Beliefnet.com- NY, By Valerie Reiss, Nov 9, 2006

RELATED ARTICLE: Signs of a Restorable Spirit: What are the tangible evidences of repentance? Christianity Today, Posted by Marshall Shelley, Nov 8, 2006

The Real Meaning of Mother's Day Townhall.com, By Linda Chavez, May 9, 2008
Remember when Mother's Day was a simple affair? The kids woke Mom up with breakfast in bed -- Froot Loops floating on a sea of slightly pink milk -- and handmade cards. Everyone was especially nice to one another so Mom could enjoy some "peace and quiet," commodities in short supply in most mothers' lives. Maybe Dad cooked dinner or everyone went out to a restaurant, the kind with endless supplies of soft, warm rolls that filled everybody up before the overcooked roast beef soaked in brown gravy arrived. All mothers were "Queen for a Day" in those less-harried times. Maybe it's just me, but Mother's Day seems to have become a much more complicated affair these days. First, there's the choice of deciding whose mother we're celebrating. . . . I've been fretting about this all week, when suddenly I realized: Mother's Day isn't really for moms at all; it's for children. When the kids are young, they're eager to show Mom they can take care of her, just as she takes care of them every other day of the year. When they get older, even when they become mothers (or their wives do), the phone calls, cards, or visits are a way to say, "I still remember all you did for me." . . . .

Two mommies means half the Mother's Day bliss San Francisco Chronicle, Erika Milvy, Special to The Chronicle, May 9, 2008
I don't particularly want to share Mother's Day. "Ra Ra" though I'm supposed to be about the right-on awesomeness of lesbian parenting, I ever so selfishly want to be the be-all and end-all in the maternal universe of my child. (And not just on Mother's Day.). . .

RELATED ARTICLE: Dads DO matter: Why children brought up by BOTH parents are happier and more successful The Daily Mail- UK, By Jenny Hope, February 13, 2008

RELATED ARTICLE: The Incontrovertible Facts About Fathers Townhall.com, By Janice Shaw Crouse, February 27, 2008

RELATED ARTICLE: Children need both a mother and a father Rocky Mountain News, By James C. Dobson, Focus on the Family, February 28, 2007

RELATED ARTICLE: Two Mommies Is One Too Many. Mary Cheney is starting a family. Let's hope she doesn't start a trend Time magazine, By James C. Dobson, December 10, 2006

Fuller house: Arkansas mom pregnant with 18th child
Michelle Duggar gives her kids a Mother’s Day surprise: ‘We’re expecting!’ MSNBC.com- TODAY, By Bob Considine, May 9, 2008
The Duggar kids planned a big Mother's Day surprise for their mom this year. But the surprise was on them when Michelle Duggar announced on the TODAY Show that they were soon to welcome an 18th sibling. We’re expecting!” the happy mother told TODAY co-host Meredith Vieira and the entire Arkansas clan. “Number 18! “They didn’t know. My girls watch the calendar like a hawk. We just found out on Monday night.”. . . . .To date, the Duggars’ 17 natural children range in age from 20 years to 9 months. Included in the mix are 10 boys and seven girls — Joshua, twins Jana and John-David, Jill, Jessa, Jinger, Joseph, Josiah, Joy-Anna, twins Jedidiah and Jeremiah, Jason, James, Justin, Jackson, Johannah and baby Jennifer, who arrived last Aug. 2. With two sets of twins, Michelle, 41, has gone through 15 pregnancies that ended in 13 natural deliveries and two Caesarean sections. Both Michelle and Jim Bob — a former state legislator who served in the Arkansas House of Representatives — are real estate agents. They claim their family is debt-free, with the entire bunch helping to build their 7,000-square-foot home in Tontitown. And they are enriched by a devout faith in their religion. The Duggars are followers of the evangelical Christian movement called Quiverful, which teaches that children are God’s blessing and that husbands and wives should happily welcome every child they are given. In fact, the Duggars' Web site, duggarfamily.com, quotes “Children are a heritage of the Lord” from verse 3 of the 123rd Psalm. . . .

Fuller House: Arkansas mom, Michelle Duggar, pregnant with 18th child (Click for Related Video)

RELATED VIDEO: And baby makes 20 MSNBC.com- TODAY

RELATED SLIDE SHOW: Images: The Duggar bunch: The more the merrier! Meet the members of one (really) big, happy family. MSNBC.com- TODAY

RELATED SITE: The Jim Bob and Michelle Duggar Family Website!

RELATED SITE: Meet the Duggars Discovery Health Features, The Discovery Channel

TV SCHEDULE: Episode Guide: The Duggars on Discovery Health Channel

RELATED ARTICLE: Is Angelina Driven to Be a Compulsive Mother? Need for Babies Can Signal Depression or Even Manipulation, Experts Say ABC News, By Susan Donaldson James, February 27, 2008

RELATED ARTICLE: The Fertility Gap: More Christians on the Way TownHall.com, By Chuck Colson, September 12, 2007
Clearly, the candidates are appealing to America's religious voters—and they are smart to do so. As one social scientist recently noted, they are going to need religious voters for the long term—because Christians are having far more children than their secular neighbors. . . .

Danielle with her mum Carolyn and sperm donor father Peter, whom she found after acting upon an incredible hunch

The incredible hunch that told me I'd met my sperm donor father The Daily Mail- UK, By Rachel Murphy, May 9, 2008
My hands were shaking so much that I could barely hold the letter containing the results of my DNA test. I knew this could be the moment when two years of increasingly desperate searching for my father came to an end. I'd braced myself for yet more bad news, so when I read the words "99.9 per cent probability" in among the medical jargon, I could hardly believe my eyes. "Does this mean Peter Browne is actually my father?" I stuttered, my throat tightening with emotion, to the social worker who was sitting with me. When she nodded, I started crying uncontrollably. I rushed home, still feeling like an emotional wreck, but utterly euphoric and determined to phone all my friends to tell them that at last I knew who I was, and where I came from. Finally, I felt the missing part of my personal jigsaw had fallen into place. At last I felt like a complete person, able to face the future with confidence instead of uncertainty and anxiety. As a child, I always believed a man called Darrell was my real dad. His name was on my birth certificate, just as it was on my older brother Adam's and my sister Kristy's. . . . Now, I could see that my childhood was a lie, and there was a gaping hole in my identity - not to mention the fact that 50 per cent of my medical history was missing. The only reason I looked like the man I'd thought was my father was because the hospital made an effort to match his physical traits with those of the sperm donor. In the days following that first anguished confession on the phone, my mum told me that every time she wanted to tell me the truth, she just couldn't bring herself to do it. When, after a few weeks, my shock slowly subsided, I started to see the glimmering of a silver lining. Perhaps I had a father out there who would want to know me, who could fill in the missing pieces of my life, and with whom I could have a meaningful relationship? . . .

RELATED ARTICLE: Children of Sperm Donors Have Rights, Too Townhall.com, By Maggie Gallagher, February 20, 2008

RELATED ARTICLE: I was the daughter of a sperm donor - shame no-one told me The Daily Mail- UK, By Alison Smith-Squire, January 30, 2008

RELATED ARTICLE: Who's Your Daddy? My Father Was an Anonymous Sperm Donor The Washington Post, By Katrina Clark, December 17, 2006

RELATED ARTICLE: The Revolution in Parenthood: The Emerging Global Clash Between Adult Rights and Children's Needs AmericanValues.org

The real curse of Hello! It's jinxed the marriages of the famous for 20 years and it helped fuel today's warped celebrity culture

The real curse of Hello!
It's jinxed the marriages of the famous for 20 years and it helped fuel today's warped celebrity culture The Daily Mail- UK, By David Thomas, May 9, 2008
When Hello! first appeared, in May 1988, the reaction of London's hip, young media professionals was instantaneous. They all laughed derisively. Here was a magazine that looked like something from another age: its name was stuck inside a little red box; there were four pictures on the cover; and the contents sounded as dull as ditchwater. Its main attraction was an interview with Princess Anne, despite the fact Diana and Fergie were the Eighties media darlings. Second billing went to Burt Reynolds' wedding. No one, surely, could be interested in a has-been Seventies movie star. It promised Princess Caroline of Monaco and a yellow rose named after her. What kind of story was that? And finally, Ivan Lendl, a robotic, Czech tennis player, "reveals another side of his life". One side was more than enough. Everyone agreed Hello! would fold in weeks. How wrong they were. The magazine was an instant phenomenon. Twenty years on, it still sells 400,000 copies a week in Britain and eight million around the world. To look back at its covers and photographs, now on display at London's Getty Images Gallery, is to see the history of our culture over the past two decades. . . . The enthusiasm with which Hello! covered celebrity weddings made the failed marriages that followed all the more ironic. It became known as the Curse Of Hello! Wherever the magazine's photographers went, divorce lawyers often followed. Hello!'s classic covers are a catalogue of marital disaster. . .

RELATED ARTICLE: Peter Phillips's Hello! wedding to Autumn was grasping, vulgar and so damaging to the Queen The Daily Mail- UK, By Geoffrey Wheatcroft, May 22, 2008
One can forgive the traditional Royal qualities of hauteur and arrogance, which aren't surprising, and by no means necessarily bad for "the Royal idea". But greed and vulgarity are simply fatal. Last Saturday, Peter Phillips, son of the Princess Royal and 11th in line to the throne, married his Canadian bride, Autumn Kelly, at St George's Chapel in Windsor. "The Firm", as our monarch likes to say, turned out mob-handed, led by the Queen herself and Prince Philip. Did they know that 60 pages of photographs of the wedding would immediately appear in Hello! magazine? They can scarcely have failed to notice the cameras inside the chapel and then at the reception at Frogmore House, all for a reported £500,000 as a nice little wedding present. No sooner had the magazine appeared than Buckingham Palace let it be known that it was seen as "a serious error of judgment" - which is right royal understatement. . . .

RELATED ARTICLE: I'm no picture pimp — Usher New York Post- Page Six, May 2, 2008
Finally, there's one celebrity who refuses to cash in on parenthood by selling baby pictures to a magazine. "In no way would I ever pimp out my child for money," Usher told Page Six. The pop singer - upset by rumors he was trying to sell photos of his infant son, Usher Raymond V, and eager to defend his wife, Tameka, and his upcoming album, "Here I Stand" - wants to set the record straight. . .

RELATED ARTICLE: The Star Economy: The Most Expensive Celebrity Baby Photos Forbes.com, By Lacey Rose, April 10, 2008

RELATED ARTICLE: Jolie Baby Pix 'Worth $10M' New York Post, March 27, 2008

RELATED ARTICLE: How Much for That Baby on the Cover? How About $6 Million? People Latest Mag Set to Shell Out Big for First Snaps of Celeb Spawn Advertising Age, By Nat Ives, February 18, 2008
People magazine is poised to pay Jennifer Lopez and Marc Anthony between $4 million and $6 million for exclusive U.S. rights to the first photos of their expected twins, people familiar with the negotiations said last week. . .

RELATED ARTICLE: Lights, camera, nuptials! Celebrity weddings are big business for magazines - just ask Tom Cruise and Katie Holmes The Sydney Morning Herald, By Andrew Stephens, Nov 26, 2006

RELATED ARTICLE: AMERICA’S IDOLS Why the Obsession With the Rich and Famous? The Real Truth magazine, By Justin T. Palm, Nov-Dec 2006 Issue

RELATED ARTICLE: People who need People- Sucking up to celebs builds mag as TW money machine Variety magazine, By Jill Goldsmith, July 9, 2006

One-third of married moms have cheated! Parentdish, by Sandy Maple, May 8th 2008
Cookie Magazine and the AOL Body Website conducted a poll of 30,000 mothers to find out just what is going on in their bedrooms and in their minds. The survey, called Sex and the American Mom, asked some interesting questions and got some surprising answers. Most surprising - at least to me - was the fact that 34 percent of married moms said they had cheated on their spouses after having children. Why all the sneaking around? The answer may lie in another statistic: only 36 percent said they are as attracted to their husbands now as when they first married. And according to the survey results, even those who haven't cheated are thinking about it. More than half admitted considering an affair since having children. . . . Clearly, most of us are not looking for love outside our marriages. And whatever the reasons for unhappiness in the bedroom, the survey shows that many wives are at least trying to work it out. . . .

TAKE THE SURVEY: Sex and The American Mom Survey AOL Body and Cookie magazine

RELATED ARTICLE: A Child's Effect On Marriage KSFY.com- ABC, April 7, 2008

RELATED ARTICLE: Why Are So Many Women Depressed? Part I Townhall.com, By Dennis Prager, March 11, 2008

RELATED ARTICLE: How parenthood changes marriage: A wife on how she had to manage her anger once children were born MSNBC- TODAY, July 6, 2007

RELATED SITE: Blindsided by a Diaper: Over 30 Men and Women Reveal How Parenthood Changes a Relationship

Want to Avoid Drama at Any Costs, Brothers? Then Grow Up, and Just Say No to Strip Clubs BlackAmericaWeb.com, By Gregory Kane, May 8, 2008
Consider this column an open letter to the brothers, but you sisters should still read it. If you’re involved with a guy who’s a bit slow on the uptake, you might have to interpret this for your boo. The same week that New York Police Department officers were found not guilty of all charges stemming from the fatal shooting of Sean Bell, Norman Stamp was being buried in Baltimore. You may not have heard of Stamp. While there are major differences between what happened in the Bell and Stamp cases, there are also striking similarities. . . . .Stamp was part of a motorcycle club in Baltimore whose members, according to news stories, often frequented a “gentleman’s club.” In other words, another strip joint. About a week before his funeral, Stamp tried to break up a fight outside the club. Baltimore police say that cops had also been called to the scene. One saw Stamp brandishing some brass knuckles and tasered him. Stamp fell to the ground and, according to police, pulled out a gun when he got up. One officer then fired a shot at Stamp and fatally wounded him. Bell was black. Stamp was white. But that’s not the most glaring difference between the two cases. Stamp was a cop. . . . . . So much for the differences. Now for the similarities, which is the reason this column is an open letter to the brothers. The similarities should be obvious. They boil down to a simple math question: What do half-naked women + booze + guys + strip club usually equal? A mess of trouble. . . .

Want to Avoid Drama at Any Costs, Brothers? Then Grow Up, and Just Say No to Strip Clubs

RELATED ARTICLE: Paterson Meets With Bell’s Family and Sharpton New York Times, By Sewell Chan, May 8, 2008

RELATED ARTICLE: Bell Protesters Block Traffic Across City The New York Times- City Room Blog, By Thomas J. Lueck, May 7, 2008

RELATED ARTICLE: Canada: One dead, one injured following shooting outside Vancouver strip club The Canadian Press, May 7, 2008

RELATED ARTICLE & VIDEO: Beer, a fight, fatal gunfire: Off-duty city police officer dies at hands of colleague Baltimore Sun, By Annie Linskey and Gus G. Sentementes- Sun reporters, April 25, 2008

RELATED ARTICLE: Groom killed on eve of his wedding: Was police shooting justified? 7Online.com, NY, By Lucy Yang, November 26, 2006
According to autopsy, 23-year-old Sean Bell was hit four times on the right side of his neck, his right shoulder, right hip, and right arm. He died of perforation to larynx, lungs and liver. The young father of two was just wrapping up the bachelor's party at the topless club in Queens, and was hours away from walking down the aisle with his high school sweetheart Saturday when tragically he got caught in a police operation. . . .

RELATED ARTICLE: 12-year-old stripper prompts Dallas to reconsider rules for sex businesses: City Council to weigh ordinance change The Dallas Morning News, By Tanya Eiserer, March 28, 2008

Why women are to blame for killing off real men (Pictured: Sean Bean, playing Sharpe, the rugged-looking soldier who bravely battled through the 19th century Napeleonic Wars)

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: A Real Man's Responsibilities Townhall.com, By John Hawkins, May 16, 2008

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

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: Not "Only a Housewife" Townhall.com, By Ashley Herzog, May 7, 2008
Feminists can’t stand the fact that a woman can reject their ideology and still be a highly accomplished, influential, intelligent individual.

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

RELATED ARTICLE: What child-men need is some tradition   The Dallas Morning News, By Rod Dreher, January 27, 2008

RELATED ARTICLE: Girly Men: The Media's Attack on Masculinity Salvo Magazine 4, By S. T. Karnick

A marriage to regret? The Sydney Morning Herald, By Samantha Brett, May 7, 2008
It amazes me to see the fact that the doyenne of curves Scarlett Johansson is engaged to the doyen of romantic comedies Ryan Reynolds is so newsworthy that it takes up space on the front page of every Aussie newspaper (and no doubt those around the world). Add to the soppy state of affairs the fact that ScarJo (as gossip columnists like to call her) is apparently "thrilled" about the announcement, and it all leads me to believe that perhaps she hasn't yet heard of the funny little saying which goes like this: Marriage is a three-ring circus: engagement ring, wedding ring, and suffering. . . . . It makes me wonder what these women were thinking when they signed the wedding certificates and the home loan applications? In an age where we can write our wedding vows people most often exclude the lines 'in sickness and health, in good and bad, til death do us part'. But when these things occur it is this commitment to building something special together that should kick in. Are these women really committing to the man or to the fairytale? Are they so focused on the fairytale that they can ignore financial and emotional reality? And more interestingly to me does this change with age or is this a personality trait that some people have and others don't? I want a relationship and have no trouble committing but in my experience the girls have trouble in 'walking the commitment walk'.". .

RELATED ARTICLE: Pals Congratulate Scarlett & Ryan on Engagement People magazine, By Jessica Herndon and Charlotte Triggs, May 6, 2008

A marriage to regret? (Click for Related Video)

RELATED VIDEO: Marriage Myths Dispelled MSNBC.com- TODAY

RELATED ARTICLE: Go to bed angry! 5 new marriage rules: Fall in love all over again by heeding this unexpected advice   MSNBC.com- TODAY, By Sarah Mahoney— Good Housekeeping, May 12, 2008

RELATED ARTICLE: ‘Don’t go to bed angry’ and other marriage myths: Dale Atkins shares smart, practical advice on separating fact from fiction MSNBC.cm- TODAY, By Dr. Dale Atkins, January 8, 2008
For most people, the picture of a perfect marriage is a white picket fence and eternal happiness. But just how to achieve that bliss is subject to wide debate: Do babies really bring you closer? Should you be concerned if you’re not having much sex? How much should you tell your spouse? Psychologist Dale Atkins, author of “Sanity Savers,” helps separate the marriage myths from reality. . . .

RELATED ARTICLE: 7 secrets to a long — and happy marriage: Two bachelors share wisdom from couples who have been married decades   MSNBC.com TODAY, June 5, 2007

RELATED ARTICLE: Questions Couples Should Ask (Or Wish They Had) Before Marrying The New York Times (Free Subscription), December 17, 2006

RELATED ARTICLE: The Biggest Lies About Marriage   ABC News.com, May 24, 2006

RELATED BOOK EXCERPT: 'Lies At The Altar'   By Dr. Robin L. Smith (Courtesy Good Morning America- ABC News.com)

RELATED ARTICLE: 8 Things No One Tells You About Marriage: The surprising, enlightening, and sometimes hard truths we all face after we walk down the aisle — and how they teach us about what love really means. MSN-Lifestyle- Relationships, By Ylonda Gault Caviness

Poppy Harris (left) hacked into her ex's website; Laura Milnes (centre) says 'E-venge is instant therapy'; and for Natalie Lue (right), 'settling scores was great'

Don't get mad, get E-venge! The Daily Mail- UK, By Laura Topham, May 6, 2008
Natalie Lue would be the first to agree that hell hath no fury like a woman scorned. When she discovered that her fiancé Tom had been sleeping with other women behind her back - one of her friends caught him on a date with someone else - the rage she felt wouldn't go away. "I felt a terrible anger, which began eating away at me, bubbling away in my mind," is how she describes it. In the past, Natalie might have taken revenge by cutting up her faithless fiancé's clothes, or perhaps even trashing his beloved car. Thanks to the internet, though, a far more lethal form of vengeance is now at hand. Natalie, like a growing number of other betrayed and deceived women, decided to take her revenge online. . . . . When 25-year-old Poppy Harris discovered her boyfriend was looking for other women on an internet dating website, her tears didn't last for long. A few clicks of the mouse here and a spot of typing there and the advertising executive from Walton-on-Thames had transformed the man in question from a good-looking, affluent sports coach searching for a pretty young woman to date into an unemployed layabout seeking an older woman in her 50s or 60s. . . . The devastating power of the internet as a tool of revenge was revealed in January by actress Jane Slavin who took 'e-venge' on her lover, world-famous composer Michael Nyman, after he spurned her with no explanation. Posing as a beautiful woman called 'Lucia', she began a flirtatious online relationship with Nyman, who began bombarding 'Lucia' with explicit e-mails. The crowning moment of her revenge came when 'Lucia' agreed to meet Nyman in a café in North London. At the appointed time, it was Jane, of course, who walked in. . . . . The irony is, of course, that it is the internet itself that has made infidelity easier. . .

First Daughter Jenna Bush to wed Henry Hager on Saturday, May 10, 2008

Jenna Bush to Wed Saturday AOL News- AP, May 6, 2008
- Talk about hush-hush wedding planning. First daughter Jenna Bush was the last in the family to know she was getting married. Months ago, her fiance, Henry Hager, told Jenna's twin sister that he wanted to propose. Then at the Camp David presidential retreat, Hager asked President Bush and first lady Laura Bush for their daughter's hand in marriage. For weeks, the president and Mrs. Bush kept their lips zipped. Then on Aug. 15, 2007, Hager rousted Jenna at 4 a.m. to go hiking on Cadillac Mountain in Acadia National Park in Maine. "It was freezing," Jenna recalled. "But we got up, and we hiked in the dark for an hour and a half, and then when we got towards the top - with the sunrise - he asked me." Officially, the wedding is a private, family affair. The White House has issued no press releases, but the president and first lady have gradually dribbled out details about the nuptials Saturday at their 1,600-acre ranch in Crawford, Texas. . . . On Monday, the president disclosed that Jenna will say "I do" near a lake at the ranch - in front of a giant cross made of Texas limestone. The cross, built for the wedding, will serve as a landmark at the ranch for years to come. The president said that was his contribution to the wedding that the Bushes are trying to keep a low-key affair. . .

RELATED ARTICLE: Jenna Bush's Wedding Album People magazine, May 12, 2008
See photos – from family portraits to the cake cutting – from the ultra-private Crawford, Texas ceremony

RELATED ARTICLE: White House weddings: Photos of the first brides from Doug Wead's 'All the Presidents' Children' MSNBC.com

Mildred Loving followed her heart and made history when she married her husband Richard

Mildred Loving Followed Her Heart and Made History Washington Post, By Neely Tucker, May 6, 2008
Sometimes people just do things because they think they are the right things to do. Or, because they just want bothersome people to leave them alone. Not everyone wants to be on "Oprah" and write their memoirs, not even when they change history. Consider Oliver L. Brown, a black pastor and railroad worker who joined a lawsuit in Kansas for his daughter to be able to go to a white school. Thus he became part of Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka, the 1954 case that ended legalized segregation in America. When he died in 1961, the local paper mentioned his church, that he became ill during a trip to his in-laws' 50th wedding anniversary, that he was 42 -- and not a word about perhaps the most famous court case in the 20th century. So we don't really know what to say about the passing on Friday of Mildred Loving (nee Jeter), she of Loving v. Commonwealth of Virginia fame. She and her husband, Richard, challenged for the right to marry interracially, won it in the famous U.S. Supreme Court case in 1967 that overturned miscegenation laws across the land and never wanted to be noticed again. They didn't even attend the hearing on their case. . . .

RELATED ARTICLE: Pioneer of Interracial Marriage Dies AOL News- AP, By Dione Walker- AP, May 5, 2008

RELATED ARTICLE: 40 years after landmark ruling, interracial marriage flourishing in U.S. SignOn San Diego- AP, By David Crary. April 13, 2007

RELATED ARTICLE: Interracial Marriages Surge Across U.S. Breitbart.com- AP, By David Crary, April 12, 2007
Since that landmark Loving v. Virginia ruling, the number of interracial marriages has soared; for example, black-white marriages increased from 65,000 in 1970 to 422,000 in 2005, according to Census Bureau figures. Factoring in all racial combinations, Stanford University sociologist Michael Rosenfeld calculates that more than 7 percent of America's 59 million married couples in 2005 were interracial, compared to less than 2 percent in 1970.

RELATED ARTICLE: Gay "Marriage" Townhall.com, By Thomas Sowell, August 15, 2006
Now that a number of state courts have refused to redefine marriage to include same-sex unions, cries of "discrimination" are being heard. The "equal protection of the laws" provided by the Constitution of the United States applies to people, not actions. Laws exist precisely in order to discriminate between different kinds of actions. . . . Analogies with bans against interracial marriage are bogus. Race is not part of the definition of marriage. A ban on interracial marriage is a ban on the same actions otherwise permitted because of the race of the particular people involved. It is a discrimination against people, not actions. . . .

Two Perspectives on Gay Marriage Pew Research Center, Interview by David Masci, Senior Research Fellow, May 5, 2008
The debate over same-sex marriage in the United States is a contentious one, with vocal advocates on both sides. To explore the issues raised by gay marriage, the Pew Forum interviewed the authors of two books on the subject: former Sen. Rick Santorum, who opposes gay marriage and, in a following interview, journalist Jonathan Rauch, who argues in its favor.

Santorum:. . . . They have no studies. They have no information whatsoever about what it would do to the moral ecology of the country, what it would do to religious liberty, what it would do to the mental and physical health of children -- nothing. They've made no case. Basically the case they've made is, "We want what you want, and therefore you should give it to us.". . .

Rauch:. . . . For gays and lesbians, I see only an upside. I see an opportunity to join in the most healthgiving, beneficial social institution that's ever been invented by humanity. I see the prospect for young people to grow up assuming that they will have families and connections to their community that have been denied to gay people for thousands of years. I see no downside at all for gay people. . . .

RELATED VIDEO DISCUSSION: "We now pronounce them. . . Family Scholars Blog, By Elizabeth Marquardt, September 13th, 2007
"WE NOW PRONOUNCE THEM...commendably civil to one another." Thus spake bloggingheads.tv , a unique web-based effort to get the blogging, talking heads talking to one another. The production values are low, yes, but in a refreshing, this-is-for-real kind of way. The civil discussion in question is between Jonathan Rauch and David Blankenhorn. View the online discussion (and stick around to the end when the name calling begins!). . . .

Former Sen. Rick Santorum opposes gay marriage

Journalist Jonathan Rauch argues in its favor of same-sex marriage

Husband Michael Buday takes his wife Diana's last name, Bijon, after a lengthy legal dispute (Click for Related Video)

Husband Takes Wife's Last Name On Driver's License KNBC, May 5, 2008
-- A Marina del Rey man picked up a new driver's license Monday, ending a nearly three-year battle to take his wife's last name. Michael Buday had promised his wife, Diana Bijon, that he would take on her last name so her father's family name would carry on, since there were no sons in the family. The couple were married on Aug. 20, 2005. But that promise turned out to be tough one to keep, since state agencies had no simple process for a man to take the name of his bride when they are married. For Buday to make the change to Bijon, he would have had to pay court fees of more than $300, advertise his plans in newspaper for four weeks and get judicial approval. The traditional method of Bijon taking on Buday's name would have cost somewhere between about $50 and $90. With help from the American Civil Liberties Union, the couple filed a federal lawsuit in 2006 alleging sex-based discrimination in the issuance of marriage and driver's licenses. In settlement agreements, changes have been made in state Department of Motor Vehicle and Department of Health Services policies and forms allowing Buday to become Michael Bijon. . . . .The dispute also led to the passage of a state law -- the Name Equality Act -- that will take effect next year and gives married couples and registered domestic partners the right to choose their names. Similar laws are already in effect in six other states: Georgia, Hawaii, Iowa, Massachusetts, New York and North Dakota. . . .

RELATED VIDEO: Husband Takes Wife's Last Name KNBC.com, May 5, 2008

RELATED ARTICLE: More women happy to put on a new name along with the ring Canada.com, By Shelley Fralic- Vancouver Sun, May 7, 2008
That's right: More and more brides today are taking their groom's surname after marriage, thus turning one of the great hallmarks of feminism on its ear. . . . Recent studies by Harvard University, the University of Florida and the wedding planning website theknot.com, among other organizations polling newlyweds, have found a growing majority of brides plan to take their husband's name after marriage. For instance, the Conde Nast Bridal Group, which publishes three big U.S. bridal magazines, found in its most recent American Wedding Study that 81 per cent of brides opted for their husband's surname. Even the venerable New York Times society page has reported a drop in the number of women keeping their maiden name. It's no different north of the border. . . .

RELATED ARTICLE: Men as the Head of the Household Doesn’t Mean Relegating Women to Second-Class Citizenship BlackAmericaWeb.com, By: Joseph C. Phillips, March 11, 2008

RELATED ARTICLE: Study: Power in marriage unrelated to who is breadwinner Jerusalem Post, By Ruth Eglash, March 5, 2008

Skater in Date-Rape Drug Case Speaks Out People magazine, By Lorenzo Benet, May 04, 2008
A two-time Olympic champion figure skater who police believe was likely drugged with the date-rape drug GHB is going public with what she calls a terrifying experience. Oksana Grishuk, who skated for Russia and won Olympic gold in 1994 and 1998 with ice dance partner Evgeny Platov, tells PEOPLE she was having a dinner meeting last month with a business acquaintance she had known for two years at the St. Regis Resort, Monarch Beach, in Dana Point, Calif., to discuss developing a vitamin and nutrition line. She says she started feeling lightheaded over dinner after drinking from the second of two glasses of alcohol that police investigators later told her had been laced with "a common date-rape drug." "I felt my body having the shakes, I was feeling cold and my lips felt numb and there was a burning sensation in my chest," she says. Paramedics were called to the scene and rushed her to a nearby hospital where Grishuk, 36, was treated and released. Grishuk declined to identify the acquaintance, described by investigators as "a person of interest." He had left the hotel before Grishuk went to the hospital. . . . . "I was very lucky," she says. "I was in a public bar and restaurant and never left my drink," she says, thinking she must have been drugged while looking away from the table. "That's very scary. Always keep an eye on your glass." . . .

Olympic Skater, Oksana Grishuk, Speaks Out in Date-Rape Drug Case

Schwarzenegger-Shriver: Protecting the brand Los Angeles Times, By Joe Mathews, May 4, 2008
The California governor, like other politicians whose spouses are in the public eye, works a complicated calculus in balancing his political interests with those of his wife. . . . We've seen more than a few examples lately of how that can happen. The Clintons, the Obamas, the Bushes, the Spitzers: They've all been navigating --some better than others--the tricky new reality in which political couples are expected to make their positions separate but not combative, their public identities close but not too close. The need for this distinct branding evolved for reasons directly related to the massive expansion of one American institution--celebrity culture--and the shrinking of another: marriage. Today's political spouses are turned into celebrities on a scale that would have overwhelmed Bess Truman or Mamie Eisenhower. And they exist in a new social paradigm. Because married couples represent a minority in the U.S.--and many who are married don't define themselves by their unions--we expect political spouses to be more than mere extensions of the politician. Thus, the modern political spouse: a wife or husband with a separate persona that's larger and broadcast farther than ever before. . . .Take the recent "brand clash" that arose in the case of New York's former prosecutor-governor, Eliot Spitzer, and the tableau he created at a news conference called to apologize for his "private failings" after reports that he'd patronized expensive prostitutes. Spitzer's wife, Silda, was next to her husband at a podium while he spoke, following the stand-by-your-man precedent of political couples with infidelity trouble that dates back to Gary and Lee Hart. The traditional idea is that the wife should be up there with him, to show the public that the family is still together and that someone can still stand the jerk. But this time, the performance was panned. The public just didn't see the couple as one entity. . . .

Austria: Chilling Details Emerge in Incest Case AOL News- AP, By Bradley S. Klapper, May 4, 2008
- The sister-in-law of an Austrian man accused of imprisoning his daughter for 24 years in a dingy dungeon and fathering seven children with her said he treated his family like a "tyrant." In an exclusive television interview with The Associated Press, a woman who identified herself as Josef Fritzl's sister-in-law provided intimate details of the oppression inside the Fritzl home. The woman, who has pictures of herself with the family, asked only to be identified as Christine R. to avoid public attention and throngs of journalists seeking interviews. She said Fritzl's daughter Elisabeth ran away from home as a 17-year-old, about six months before police say she was locked into the soundproofed, windowless cellar beneath their apartment. Christine R. also painted the most complete picture to date of her sister Rosemarie: a woman who against all odds fought to hold together a troubled family, yet never suspected that the cause of so much pain was in her own home. "She never believed him capable of it," the woman said of her 68-year-old sister. . . . . . Still, Christine R. said there were no warning signs that something was disturbing about the relationship between the father and Elisabeth, whom police say may have been sexually abused when she was as young as 12. "He was just as strict with her as he was to every other child," Christine R. said. "There was nothing in particular that could lead you to say he was more intimate with her. From the child as well it never came out. She never confided in anyone." . . . .

Chilling details emerge in Austrian incest case, in which Josef Fritzl has confessed to imprisoning his daughter Elizabeth in a dungeon beneath the family home for 24 years (Click for Related Video)

RELATED VIDEO: Josef Fritzl served time for rape, says sister-in-law The Telegraph- UK

RELATED ARTICLE: Josef Fritzl kept daughter in cellar because 'I wanted a big family' The Times Online- UK, By Roger Boyes and Bojan Pancevski, May 9, 2008

RELATED ARTICLE: Josef Fritzl started building dungeon when Elisabeth was 12 The Telegraph- UK, By Andreas Sam in Amstetten, May 5, 2008
Josef Fritzl started building the cellar in which he imprisoned his daughter Elisabeth, and the six surviving children she bore him, in 1978 when she was only 12 years old.

RELATED ARTICLE: Human rights and motherhood    Cebu Daily News, By Gloria Ramos, May 5, 2008
The tragedy that has befallen the Fritzl family was made possible because of a lopsided relationship, in which the mother is not looked upon as a human being deserving of respect, dignity and a voice in the family. She is treated more as an appendage to cater exclusively to the needs of the man, bereft of choice and control over her own life – a classic example of battered wife syndrome. What sheer waste of talent and capability as a human being, so deprived of the liberty and freedom to be one. How many women in this country and the world are silently sharing the sad fate of Rosemarie and Elizabeth, we can only surmise. . .

RELATED ARTICLE: A brave new world for Joseph Fritzl's children The Telegraph- UK, By Jenny McCartney, May 4, 2008
All last week, pitch-black secrets slowly trickled out of the underground cellar in Austria where 73-year-old Josef Fritzl had so long held captive his daughter Elisabeth and her three children sired by him.

RELATED ARTICLE: The horror below us The Age- Austrailia, By Guy Rundle, May 4, 2008
What fresh horrors can the underworld produce?

RELATED ARTICLE: Australian man fathers child with daughter Times Online- UK, By Alexi Mostrous, April 7, 2008

RELATED ARTICLE: Lawful incest may be on its way The Boston Globe, By Jeff Jacoby, May 2, 2007

RELATED ARTICLE: Should Incest Be Legal?   Time magazine, By Michael Lindenberger, April 5, 2007

RELATED ARTICLE: Incest: an age-old taboo BBC News, March 12, 2007

RELATED ARTICLE: Hypocrisy on adult consent The Boston Globe, By Jeff Jacoby- Globe Columnist, August 28, 2005

RELATED ARTICLE: Of human bonding Psychology Today, By Joan Ullman, May/June 1993
Discusses the child custody battle currently being waged in the courts by actor/director Woody Allen and actress Mia Farrow. Assertion that Mia Farrow looked like Murphy Brown incarnate; Other paternity cases involving famous people; Women who now depend on the law to compel the bonding that is no longer forthcoming in today's new family structures; Additional observations.

RELATED ARTICLE: "Incest / Sexual Abuse of Children" Clinical Social Work.com, By Patricia D. McClendon, MSSW candidate, November 23, 1991

RELATED ARTICLE: Oedipus Wrecked: Was Freud wrong about boys and their mothers? Psychology Today, August 2004
. . . "The typical story line in poems, novels, and plays in which incest is a theme is one of separation in infancy with later incestuous reunion.". . .

RELATED RESOURCE:   Incest or Sexual Abuse   Office For Victims Of Crime- US Department of Justice

Gay marriage does not work - men are just too predatory, says Pete Burns, seen here (left) on his wedding day 10 months ago to Michael Simpson

Gay marriage does not work - men are just too predatory, says Pete Burns The Daily Mail- UK, By James Tapper, May 3, 2008
When he flashed his engagement ring on the sofa with Richard and Judy, pop star Pete Burns told of his happiness at the prospect of becoming the latest celebrity to marry his male partner. But now, just ten months after the big day, the singer has split from Michael Simpson, saying civil partnerships do not work and that he was happier being married to a woman. Burns, 49, who was wed to stylist Lynne Corlett for 28 years, said gay relationships were a "commercial break" compared with the "full movie" of marriage. He also claimed there were too much "promiscuity" in the gay community for civil partnerships to thrive. Burns followed in the footsteps of Sir Elton John and Little Britain star Matt Lucas in using the new civil partnership laws to announce his public devotion to his lover. . . . .Burns said: "I view marriage as a sacred institution. I think two men naturally are predators. Gay relationships are a commercial break, not a whole movie. "The relationships I'm aware of, apart from one ... it's as though there's some kind of emotional inadequacy or narcissism, where they feel emotionally inadequate and need more validation, from either a father figure or a mirror image of themselves. "I'm not condemning it, I think it needs researching and help.". . . .

RELATED ARTICLE: Liberals Reveal 'Hidden Politics': The hidden politics of mental health associations are revealed in what some call "the most important book of the decade." Family.org, By Aaron Atwood
In 1973, another major mental health group, the American Psychiatric Association removed homosexuality from its list of clinical disorders. Robert L. Spitzer of Columbia University, then a member of the Nomenclature Committee, argued for homosexuality's removal from the "Diagnostics and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM)." In "Destructive Trends in Mental Health: The well-intentioned path to harm," William T. O'Donohue and Christine E. Caselles explain that there is more to this removal than meets the eye. . . .

RELATED RESOURCE: National Association for Research and Therapy of Homosexuality (NARTH)

RELATED RESOURCE: Exodus International- The largest information and referral ministry in the world addressing homosexual issues

Secret to a happy marriage: Be annoying The Toronto Star, By Jerry Zezima- Stamford Advocate, May 3, 2008
Now that my wife and I have been married for 30 years, family and friends have suggested that, for putting up with me for so long, Sue deserves to be the first living person canonized by the Catholic Church. I, they add, deserve to be shot from a cannon. What is the secret of our long and happy marriage? The answer, according to researchers at the University of Michigan, is that we get on each other's nerves. In a recent study, the researchers found that, as a couple ages, a lifetime of closeness rubs up a rash of irritations. Participants in the study, which was presented at the Gerontological Society of America, were asked who in their lives – spouse, children or friends – "gets on my nerves" or "makes too many demands on me." The older the couple, the more likely the answer was "spouse." Strangely enough, rubbing each other the wrong way might be the right way to conduct a marriage. One of the reasons couples quarrel is that they are closer and more comfortable with each other. As we age, the researchers concluded, "It could be that we're more able to express ourselves to each other." Sue and I seldom quarrel, not only because I know I will lose but also because I am almost always wrong. Even Sue will concede that I am right about this. . . . . . Then I asked Sue if I have any good points. She didn't respond immediately. Finally, she said. . . .

Clause 27(a) I do, except … Sydney Morning Herald, By Tim Dick, May 3, 2008
For every half-kilo the wife gains during the marriage, she shall pay her husband $500. Each time the husband is rude to his in-laws, he shall pay $10,000. If the marriage ends, the husband keeps the gardener; the wife gets the pool boy. Pre-nuptial agreements, which lawyers report are increasingly used by Australian couples, may cover anything the couple wishes, from a sensible allocation of assets to bizarre "lifestyle clauses", regulating behaviour rather than money. Enforcing them is another matter, but they have a life of their own among the wealthy, famous and odd. By a shrewd pre-nup, the troubled pop star Britney Spears limited her payout to Kevin Federline (known as K-Fed before the divorce, and Fed-Ex after it). Catherine Zeta-Jones, who has one with Michael Douglas, thinks them brilliant. The Danish monarchy had the world's most famous Tasmanian sign one before marrying her prince; Sir Paul McCartney didn't bother with one for Heather Mills. In the United States, questionable lifestyle clauses have turned pre-nups into the stuff of legal folklore. Lawyers' websites list the most bizarre. They ban adultery and drug-taking, roster child-minding and football-watching, and force grooms to help in the kitchen. A Beverly Hills lawyer proudly told CNN he once drafted a clause requiring the couple to copulate at least five times a week. . . .

RELATED ARTICLE: With this contract, I thee wed Seattle Times, By Eileen Ambrose, March 26, 2006

RELATED ARTICLE: Sealing a contract after the marriage: Couples spell out duties, finances The Boston lobe, By Patricia Wen- Globe Staff, December 19, 2005
Weary of marriage counseling but loath to divorce, a small but growing number of couples are trying a drastic approach to keep relationships intact, say lawyers, mediators, and therapists. They draft a contract known as a postnuptial agreement, which is similar to a prenuptial contract, except that it is negotiated after the wedding vows. The postnuptial accord spells out what happens if the couple's relationship goes downward, but its focus is on keeping the marriage together.

RELATED ARTICLE: All You Need is Love (and a Prenup) CBN.com, By Chuck Colson, June 30, 2005
“Love is all you need—unless the marriage ends in divorce,” wrote Washingtonian editor Kim Eisler. “Then a prenuptial agreement is the best defense.” He called the prenup “a divorce insurance policy.” Well, that’s probably true—but wouldn’t it be better for couples to have a marriage insurance policy?. . .

Nick Cannon and Mariah Carey married after whirlwind courtship! (Click for Related Video)

Mariah Obtained Marriage License in Caribbean People magazine, By Danielle Dubin, Charlotte Triggs and Siobhan Morrissey, May 2, 2008
Mariah Carey and Nick Cannon's whirlwind romance took an official turn when the singer obtained a marriage license on the Caribbean island of Eleuthera, a source confirms to PEOPLE. According to marriage requirements for the Bahamas, a couple must be in the country for at least 48 hours, be over the age of 16 and have obtained a valid marriage license within 90 days, explains Monique Gomez, a Bahamian attorney in Nassau who specializes in family law. The source says that Carey did obtain a license in Eleuthera within that time period. And clarifies Gomez, "The minister would make sure [the license] goes into the registry. It's still a valid marriage even if it's not filed. Anywhere in the world." The New York Post reported that the nuptials took place at Carey's private estate off Eleuthera. Carey owns an estate on Windermere Island, which is an exclusive Bahamian island where the British royals vacation. . . .

RELATED RESOURCE: Requirements for Marriage in the Bahamas Eleuthera.com

RELATED SITE: The Islands of the Bahamas- Eleuthera- Harbour Island Bahamas.com

RELATED VIDEO: Did Mariah Carey Marry Too Soon? CNN.com

Why blab Babs? Newsie feels compelled to tell us of her 1970s affair with then married, black U.S. Senator Edward Brooke

Why blab, Babs?
Newsie feels compelled to tells us of affair The Boston Herald, By Margery Eagan, May 2, 2008
TV legend Barbara Walters had a long affair in the 1970s with then-married U.S. Senator Edward Brooke of Massachusetts, the first black senator since Reconstruction. She called him “exciting” and “brilliant,” and while she wasn’t in love, she says, “I was certainly infatuated.” So the Associated Press reports, based on a transcript in which Walters tells this, and more, to Oprah on her show this coming Tuesday. My first reaction: Can’t anybody shut up anymore? Keep private lives private? Is there no more honor among adulterers pushing books - in this case Walters’ new memoir, “Audition.” But then Emily Rooney of “Greater Boston,” who knows TV glitterati, reminded me that Ed Brooke’s own memoir, released last year, contained “a lot of braggadocio” about his own sexual exploits. “He was a real gadabout and he admitted he wasn’t faithful,” says Rooney, who interviewed Brooke on her WGBH show. “He probably knew she was going to mention him.” He may even be thrilled. He is, after all, 88. Walters is 76. I suppose, at this late stage, why not come clean? . . .

RELATED ARTICLE: Barbara Walters Made Whoopee! Townhall.com, By Burt Prelutsky , May 26, 2008
It’s an odd thing about the way in which the two genders deal with their sexual experiences. Early on, it’s most often males who do all the bragging, even if they have to lie about it. However, as the years go by, it tends to be the female of the species who does most of the boasting. I’m not sure whether that’s because as women age, they’re anxious to remind everyone that once upon a time they were hot stuff or whether it’s just that women have better memories and are far more likely to keep diaries. . . .

RELATED ARTICLE: Barbara Walters opens up to King CNN.com, May 13, 2008

RELATED ARTICLE: EXCLUSIVE: Star Jones Responds to Barbara Walters' Memoir US Weekly, May 7, 2008

RELATED ARTICLE: An Affair to Remember: Barbara Walters & Sen. Ed Brooke The Washington Post, By Amy Argetsinger and Roxanne Roberts, May 2, 2008
So the press is in bed with politicians! Barbara Walters has revealed that she had an affair with then-Sen. Ed Brooke in the 1970s. Promoting her memoir, "Audition," the legendary television journalist dished about her long-running relationship with the Massachusetts Republican to Oprah Winfrey, according to a transcript of next week's broadcast leaked to the Associated Press yesterday. . . .

RELATED ARTICLE & PHOTOS: Former Sen. Brooke mum on reported Barbara Walters affair The Washington Post- AP, May 2, 2008

RELATED ARTICLE: Barbara Walters On Reasoner, Safer, Money MediaBistro.com, May 1, 2008

RELATED ARTICLE: Geraldo on Walters: "Once You Go Black, You Don't Go Back" Radar Online: The Idiot Box: Fresh Intelligence, May 2, 2008

Anne Davis says that finding out her husband Philip had lied about his sexuality not only destroyed her future but also her past

'How I found out my husband is gay and why I begged him to stay' The Daily Mail- UK, By Sadie Nicholas, May 2, 2008
To the outside world, Anne and Philip Davis seemed like any other middle-aged, middle-class couple. Home was a detached four-bedroom property in Kent (they'd downsized from a 'country pile' when their son, now 29, left home) and each had a successful career. Philip was a member of the Rotary Club and they holidayed at their second home in Tuscany. But this picture of an almost idyllic Home Counties life belied a shameful secret. In 2003, after 25 years of marriage, Philip, 61, confessed he was bisexual - admitting to dalliances with both men and women throughout the marriage. But far from throwing her husband out, Anne, 60, begged him to stay. In fact, they remained together in the marital home for another three years before she finally conceded that she could maintain the façade no longer. "At the time, I couldn't bear for us to part because my life with Philip was all I'd known," says Anne, who now runs an internet beauty company from her home near Maidstone, Kent. . . . It was to be the home computer that led Anne to an altogether more alarming discovery. "We each had our own computers," she says, "but our financial information was stored on Philip's, and I needed to access it one day when he was out."I clicked on the toolbar that listed all the websites my husband had been looking at and could barely catch my breath when I saw a gay porn site listed." Anne insists she had never previously had any doubts about her husband's sexuality. . . . . Confronted with such duplicity and sexual misadventure, why then did Anne, an intelligent, independent and financially secure woman, not throw her husband out of the marital home? . . .

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: UT offered Dixon alternate position prior to termination   Toledo Free Press, By Justin R. Kalmes, May 13, 2008
A former UT administrator who was fired for opinions she expressed on Toledo Free Press' Web site said the university offered her a demotion and pay cut prior to terminating her employment. Crystal Dixon, former associate vice president of human resources, said UT officials, at a May 5 pre-disciplinary hearing, offered to allow her to continue to be employed at the university if she agreed to accept a demotion and salary reduction. Dixon was paid an annual salary of $134,383. After declining the offer, Dixon was notified of her termination May 9 through her attorney, Tom Sobecki, she said, noting UT's offer was “unacceptable because I didn't do anything wrong.” Dixon was placed on paid administrative leave after a column she wrote that appeared on the newspaper's Web site April 18 created controversy because of her views on homosexuality. . . . .

RELATED ARTICLE: Student to appeal ban on criticizing homosexuality Family Research Council Blog, May 2, 2008

RELATED ARTICLE: Teen’s lawsuit on his anti-gay opinions tossed: School already changed policy, so 'case should be over,' court says   MSNBC.com- AP, April. 9, 2008

RELATED ARTICLE:   More than a 'gay gene' controlling the media: It's New Age heresy The Real Proposal magazine, April 12, 2008

RELATED ARTICLE: The "Gay Gene" Controlling The Media The Real Proposal magazine, April 1, 2008

RELATED ARTICLE: Responding to Homosexuality & Gay Marriage: “Love the Sinner. Hate the Sin”   The Real Proposal magazine, March 21, 2008

RELATED ARTICLE: On homosexuality, can we at least talk about it? Associated Baptist Press, By David Gushee, March 27, 2008

RELATED ARTICLE: Banned in Boston: The Coming Conflict Between Same Sex Marriage and Religious Liberty Cover Story- The Weekly Standard, By Maggie Gallagher, May 15, 2006 Issue

RELATED ARTICLE: Same-Sex “Marriage,” “Hate Crimes,” and the New Totalitarianism LifeSiteNews.com, By Michael D. O’Brien, February 28, 2005
The recent passage of Canada’s Bill C-250, which amended the hate crimes law to include sexual orientation, is a case in point, and the looming “same-sex marriage” bill is another. A number of aspects of the new hate crimes law are especially disturbing. For one thing, previous to the passage of this law there already existed in Canadian law abundant protection of human rights, including protection against discrimination on grounds of “sexual orientation.” What is distinctive about the new law is its criminalization of negative criticism of homosexuality as such. . . .

RELATED ARTICLE (PDF): Fairness, Accuracy and Honesty in Discussing Homosexuality and Marriage Regent University School of Law, By Lynne Marie Kohm & Mark A. Yarhouse

Police: Woman believed to be 'D.C. madam' commits suicide USA Today, May 1, 2008
— Police have confirmed that a woman convicted of running a high-end prostitution ring in Washington has committed suicide in a Florida Gulf Coast town. Tarpon Springs police say the body of 52-year-old Deborah Jeane Palfrey was found hanged in a shed near her mother's manufactured home Thursday morning. She left a suicide note but police did not disclose its contents. Police say Palfrey's mother found the body. Palfrey was convicted April 15 by a federal jury of running a prostitution service that catered to members of Washington's political elite, including Sen. David Vitter, a Louisiana Republican. She had denied her escort service engaged in prostitution, saying that if any of the women engaged in sex acts for money, they did so without her knowledge. She was convicted of money laundering, using the mail for illegal purposes and racketeering. Palfrey faced a maximum of 55 years in prison and was free pending her sentencing July 24. . . .

Sex and Politics: It's the Adultery, Stupid

Sex and Politics: It’s the Adultery, Stupid Vanity Fair.com, By Michael Wolff, June 2008 Issue
The private follies of middle-aged male politicians are treated as weakness, perversion, corruption—anything but the real issue: human desire. The author, currently writing a book on Rupert Murdoch, offers an immodest proposal. . . .Politics is now about sex. Not just scandalous sex, not just who is having what kind of sex, but what we think about the sex each politician is having, or not having. Sex (sex, not gender) in politics is as significant a subtext as race. It has the power to alter elections, undermine parties, and, possibly, change history. Barack Obama is running for president today because the ex-wife of his favored opponent in the 2004 Senate campaign in Illinois, Jack Ryan, said her husband took her to swingers’ clubs, handing the election to Obama. Arguably, the Republican Party began its descent into possible oblivion when it lost its majority in 2006 not most of all because of George Bush’s serial failures but, more concretely, because Mark Foley, a Republican representative from Florida, groped or wanted to grope congressional pages—that seemed to sum up the G.O.P.’s vulnerabilities, hypocrisies, and grossness more than anything, even the war. Eliot Spitzer represents not just an especially louche scandal but a shame-on-us moment because we didn’t see that Mr. Clean was Mr. Dirty. That’s a lesson for us: Don’t be snowed; assume the extreme. And that’s a lesson for politicians: Your official self can’t be so at odds with your sexual self—that’s what gives scandal its bite. Getting Spitzer wrong means we have to be more tenacious in our analysis. . . .

RELATED ARTICLE: Congressman Comes Clean on Love Child: N.Y. Representative Arrested Last Week in Possible DWI Admits to Out-of-Wedlock Child ABC News, By David Schoetz, May 8, 2008
A congressman from New York has admitted to fathering a child in an extramarital affair three years ago. Under mounting scrutiny, Staten Island Rep. Vito Fossella, who has three children with his wife, released a statement this morning naming the child's mother and confirming the existence of their 3-year-old daughter. . .

RELATED ARTICLE & PHOTO GALLERY: Ohio AG Admits Affair With Employee AOL News- AP, By Julie Carr Smyth, May 2, 2008
- Ohio's attorney general admitted an extramarital affair with an employee Friday, soon after three of his aides were fired or forced out after an investigation found evidence of sexual harassment and other misconduct. . . .

RELATED ARTICLE: Eliot Spitzer Sex Scandal: A Public And A Private Betrayal   The Real Proposal magazine Blog Spot, March 11, 2008

RELATED ARTICLE: Should a Candidate's Private Indiscretions Matter as He Seeks the Public Trust? Absolutely. BlackAmericaWeb.com, By Joseph C. Phillips, October 16, 2007

RELATED ARTICLE: My Genes Made Me Do It!

RELATED ARTICLE:   My genes made me do it! ‘Infidelity genes’ discovered?   Answersingenesis.org, By Carl Wieland- AiG- Austrailia, December 6, 2004

RELATED ARTICLE: Infidelity--It may be in our genes. Our Cheating Hearts: Devotion and betrayal, marriage and divorce: how evolution shaped human love   Time Magazine, By Robert Wright, August 15, 1994

RELATED RESOURCE: HOPE & HEALING: Helping Couples Recover from Adultery

Parenting Issues: Miley Knows Best Vanity Fair, By Bruce Handy, June 2008 Issue
Between sold-out concerts, multi-platinum records, and a hit TV series, Hannah Montana star Miley Cyrus has some serious business riding on her 15-year-old shoulders—not to mention paparazzi on her tail and tabloid editors praying for her to pull a Britney. So how’d she get so (relatively) normal? Bruce Handy journeys to deepest Toluca Lake to find out. Photographs by Annie Leibovitz. . . . It’s my favorite show! I love it!” says 15-year-old Miley Cyrus, speaking of Sex and the City over spinach-artichoke dip in a dingy Toluca Lake restaurant that for some reason, possibly native to the San Fernando Valley, is divided between cheerful families enjoying Saturday lunches and a glum row of barflies passing time by watching I-don’t-know-what on ESPN Classic. The restaurant was Cyrus’s choice. She loves the dip and the turkey-melt sandwich. She’s here with her mother, Tish, her eight-year-old sister, Noah, and somewhere between a dozen and two dozen paparazzi, who followed the Cyruses from their nearby home and are now waiting for Miley in the restaurant’s parking lot. Noah, curiously, looks like Dakota Fanning. But back to Sex and the City. Miley says her Disney Channel sitcom, Hannah Montana, in which she plays a schoolgirl with a secret life as a rock star, is patterned in part after the former HBO series about women looking for love and hookups in Manhattan. “Obviously not the scenarios,” she explains quickly. “But if you watch Sex and the City, like the way the friends are, the way that it’s dry and they all have distinct characters—that’s a thing we try to do on our show.”. . . .

RELATED COMMENTS: The Magazine | Video: Annie Leibovitz and Miley Cyrus Vanity Fair.com, April 28, 2008

RELATED VIDEO: Behind the Scenes: The Miley Cyrus Photo Shoot Vanity Fair.com

RELATED SLIDE SHOW: Behind the Scenes: Tween Angel Vanity Fair.com-Web Exclusive

RELATED ARTICLE: Paparazzi have their lenses on Miley Cyrus Los Angeles Times, By Rachel Abramowitz, May 28, 2008
"I think one of the reasons she's so popular is after all the train wreck girls, the Britneys, there's a move toward all-American clean living," says Gary Morgan, CEO of Splash News, another paparazzi behemoth. "Everyone is looking for a moral teenager, someone they can look up to.". . . .

RELATED ARTICLE: Miley Watches 'Sanitized' Version of Sex and the City People magazine, May 1, 2008

RELATED ARTICLE: Revealing Photo Threatens a Major Disney Franchise New York Times, By Brooks Barnes, April 28, 2008
— Fifteen years old and suggestively wrapped in what appears to be a satin bedsheet in the June issue of Vanity Fair. Did Miley Cyrus, with the help of a controversy-courting magazine, just deliver a blow to the Walt Disney Company’s billion-dollar “Hannah Montana” franchise?. . . .

RELATED ARTICLE: Topless on TV: The Miley Cyrus / Vanity Fair Saga Huffington Post, By Jamie Lee Curtis, April 28, 2008

"Marriage In The News" is not a representation of The Real Proposal magazine...