"MARRIAGE" In The News
 (May 2009)

The news articles and features presented below are simply an indication of how topical, controversial, and all-encompassing the issues surrounding marriage are throughout our society—and the world—today. Some of the views and opinions expressed, and their respective web sites, do NOT reflect the views or opinions of The Real Proposal™ magazine. Many are highlighted largely to reiterate that the alarming statistical trends on the chaotic state of "Marriage" and "Family"—outlined in "A Mere Glimpse"—will continue unabated without a fundamental grasp and purposeful dissemination of TRUTH on the issues.

• Defenders of marriage face an external foe
  A single-issue outsider from Colorado pours money into sleepy state races  StarTribune, By Katherine Kersten, May 31, 2009
  In 2006, State Sen. Mady Reiter -- a two-term Republican from Shoreview -- was defeated by DFLer Sandy Rummel in a tight race. Was it just another case of a Republican losing in a down year for the GOP? Perhaps. But if Senate District 53 voters had read through the list of Rummel's donors, they might have scratched their heads and asked if something more was going on. A substantial number of Rummel's donors hailed from glamorous, faraway places such as Hollywood, Boston, New York City and Coral Gables, Fla. In fact, out-of-state donors made up about 48 percent of Rummel's itemized individual contributions. Only a real political insider would have focused on one name -- Tim Gill -- and grasped what was afoot. Gill is a 55-year-old multimillionaire and political activist from Denver. He's the founder of Quark, a desktop publishing software company, with a fortune that Forbes has estimated at $425 million. Gill's interest in a small-potatoes Minnesota state Senate race is no coincidence. His target, Reiter, was a cosponsor of the Minnesota Marriage Amendment bill. And Gill -- whom the Atlantic magazine has called "the country's biggest gay donor" -- has built a highly sophisticated, below-the-radar assault operation precisely to take out people like her. Gill's network has been dubbed "the Gay Mafia that's redefining liberal politics" by Time magazine. He and his pals -- like-minded, mega-bucks donors -- hold that most decisions affecting gays are made at the state level. They believe they can get more bang for their buck in sleepy state races, where relatively small sums of money can turn the tide. This strategy allows them to "punish the wicked," in Gill's words. . . . .Gill and his allies do not announce the candidates they are gunning for before an election. "Revealing targets only after an election makes it impossible for them to fight back," explained the Atlantic. "You have to create an environment of fear and respect," Gill adviser Ted Trimpa told the Bay Area Reporter. As part of this stealth strategy, Gill's forces don't reveal their agenda or mention gay issues. Instead, they seize on any issue on which their targets are vulnerable -- from veterans' affairs to prescription-drug costs -- and do so with blistering negativity. Former U.S. Rep Marilyn Musgrave of Colorado -- a lead sponsor of the Federal Marriage Amendment -- can attest to that. . .

RELATED INFO:  Putting strategies to work: The homosexual propaganda campaign in America's media  MassResistance.org
Read below: The powerful, sophisticated psychological techniques that the homosexual movement has used to manipulate the public in the media. . .


RELATED SITE:  Meet Tim Gill   Gill Foundation

RELATED ARTICLE:  How Gay Activism Shapes U.S. Politics  CBN News, By Heather Sells-CBN News Reporter, April 22, 2008
 He's considered to be America's biggest gay donor. And his out-of-the-box political strategies are reshaping public policy in the areas of marriage, family and gay rights. You probably haven't heard the name Tim Gill. And that's just the way he wants it. . .


RELATED ARTICLE:  A big role in a fight to help gays wed: Activist Tim Gill and allies of his funded 38% of the opposition to same-sex marriage bans  Denver Post, By Karen E. Crummy, August 7, 2007
Gay-rights activist Tim Gill and a network of his political allies last year funded 38 percent of the opposition to same-sex marriage bans across the country, according to a recent analysis of campaign contributions conducted by a nonpartisan group. Yet, all but one of the bans were approved by voters. Don't expect to hear any second-guessing or regrets from Gill's camp, however. "We'd absolutely do it again," said Patrick Guerriero, director of the Gill Action Fund, which is entirely bankrolled by the software entrepreneur. "We are making investments. We know this is part of a longer conversation." Gill, 53, who founded Quark Inc. in 1981 and sold his interest seven years ago, has poured millions of dollars into state races over the past few years in an effort to strengthen gay rights. In 2004, he and three other wealthy Colorado Democrats - billionaire Pat Stryker, former state Board of Education member Jared Polis and software entrepreneur Rutt Bridges - funneled millions into independent political groups. The maneuver is largely credited with giving Democrats control of the statehouse for the first time in more than 44 years. Last year, Gill took his state strategy and exported it to the national stage. He got involved in not only state legislative races, but ballot issues. . .


RELATED ANALYSIS:  Follow the Money: The Money Behind the 2006 Marriage Amendments  (pdf doc.)   By Megan Moore, July 23, 2007


RELATED ARTICLE:  Tim Gill: Log Cabin’s Million Dollar Man?   GayPatriot,  April 26, 2006
I’ve repeatedly asked the folks at Log Cabin (Republicans) to account for where they got the money to fund the $1M ad campaign against President Bush in 2004 in key battleground states. This is a Federally-regulated organization (IRS and FEC rules apply!), but they have never documented where this money came from. *crickets still chirping* I always assumed that the money came from Tim “Deep Pockets” Gill. . .

• California:  Another same-sex marriage battle next year may be too soon  MercuryNews.com, By Mike Swift, May 29, 2009
  Despite painful consecutive losses at the ballot box and in the courts, advocates for gay marriage are gearing up for a fight they say they can win: a statewide vote on same-sex marriage in 2010. But there are signs next year could be too soon for another fight on this volatile and exhausting issue. For several reasons, the political climate in 2010 could be even less hospitable than in November, when 52 percent of the state's voters endorsed Proposition 8, restricting marriage to a man and a woman. Gay men and lesbians have since won the right to marry in several New England states and Iowa, but those victories came from legislative or judicial actions — not initiative elections. "The turn in 2010 is going to be markedly negative for them," said Frank Schubert, the Sacramento political consultant who ran the Yes on 8 campaign last year, and who would head a 2010 campaign to uphold Proposition 8. Schubert predicts at least a third of the 2008 electorate, particularly those young, first-time voters who turned out to vote for Barack Obama, won't show up at the polls in 2010. "They are not going to show up to vote for Gavin Newsom or Jerry Brown," he said of two potential Democratic gubernatorial nominees for 2010. Pointing to a new USA Today/Gallup poll that showed 57 percent of Americans oppose same-sex marriage, Schubert said California voters are fatigued with the issue. . . . . The 4-point margin of victory for Proposition 8 was 18 points narrower than the last time voters considered the issue in 2000, suggesting Californians are becoming less hostile to the idea over time. But the political climate in 2010 is not likely to be substantially more favorable to gay marriage than it was in November, when a popular young Democratic presidential nominee pulled large numbers of younger voters — a group more likely to support same-sex marriage than older voters — to the polls. And when same-sex marriage inevitably returns to the ballot, there will be new obstacles advocates did not face in 2008. . .
  
  
  
  RELATED ARTICLE:  Hundreds of gay marriage opponents rally in Fresno  The Press Enterprise- The Associated Press, May 31, 2009
  Hundreds of people waived signs and rallied at Fresno City Hall on Sunday to show support for the voter-approved ban on same-sex marriage in California, a day after thousands marched in the area against the ban. People attending the rally wore T-shirts and held signs that read "still standing in the middle for marriage," as area religious leaders and politicians spoke in support of Proposition 8, the voter-approved measure that restricts nuptials to a union between a man and a woman. Fresno Pastor Jim Franklin of Cornerstone Church, an organizer of the event, told the crowd that he believed Prop. 8 would likely survive any upcoming efforts to overturn it through initiatives on the 2010 or 2012 ballots. "They are losing ground. We are gaining ground," Franklin said. "When people say it's inevitable, they just don't understand. 'The Times They Are a Changing,' and they are changing to our side.". . .
  
  
  RELATED ARTICLE:  Proposition 8 defenders seek to intervene against Hollywood-backed lawsuit. ADF attorneys file motion to intervene in federal court on behalf of ProtectMarriage.com to defend Calif. marriage amendment  Alliance Defence Fund- Press Release, May 29, 2009,
  The official proponents and campaign committee for Proposition 8, ProtectMarriage.com, filed a motion to intervene Thursday in federal court against a new Hollywood-backed lawsuit designed to tear down California’s voter-approved marriage amendment, upheld by the California Supreme Court just three days ago. . . . .  A foundation led by a Hollywood-area public relations firm that frequently represents celebrities and their causes is backing the lawsuit, Perry v. Schwarzenegger, which attorneys for two men and two women in same-sex relationships filed with the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, on May 22. A federal judge has already granted the request of ADF attorneys to allow ProtectMarriage.com to intervene in a separate lawsuit that also challenges the constitutionality of California’s marriage amendment as well as the federal Defense of Marriage Act. . .

RELATED INFO:  Putting strategies to work: the homosexual propaganda campaign in America's media  MassResistance.org
Read below: The powerful, sophisticated psychological techniques that the homosexual movement has used to manipulate the public in the media. . .


RELATED VIDEO:  The Marriage Battles Continue   CitizenLink.org, June 04, 2009
Kim Trobee and Tom Minnery discuss the federal lawsuit challenging  the constitutionality of Proposition 8, and same-sex "marriage" in New Hampshire. . .

RELATED STATEMENT:  Statement on New Federal Lawsuit  ProtectMarriage.com, May 27, 2009
 “Just one day after the California Supreme Court upheld Prop 8, the will of the voters is under attack once again.  This new federal lawsuit, brought by a pair of prominent but socially liberal lawyers, has very little chance of succeeding.  But we will take it seriously and take action to provide a vigorous defense of Prop 8, just as we did in the California courts.”  - Andrew Pugno, General Counsel of ProtectMarriage.com-Yes on 8


RELATED ARTICLE:  Catholic Obama Campaign Adviser Wants to Replace All Legal ‘Marriages’ with ‘Civil Licenses'    CNS News.com, By Pete Winn, May 27, 2009
– A top constitutional law professor who served as a surrogate for then-presidential candidate Barack Obama told CNSNews.com that he would like to see “marriage” replaced in the legal sense with a neutral “civil license.”. . . . .But Princeton University law professor Robert George, who is also a top constitutional scholar--and a Catholic academic--said that Kmiec’s idea would do away with the public role of marriage--and banish it to the religious “ghetto.” “That is a terrible idea,” George said. “The idea that the state would abandon its concern for the institution of marriage, that it would treat marriage as a purely religious matter, is I think a very bad one.” Marriage is more than merely a religious institution, George told CNSNews.com. "It’s not like baptisms and bar mitzvahs,” he said. “It has profound social significance, public significance; it’s a pre-political institution. It exists even apart from religion, even apart from polities. It’s the coming together of a husband and wife, creating the institution of family in which children are nurtured.” “The family is the original and best Department of Health, Education and Welfare,” George said. . .

Pictured en banc in the Supreme Court Courtroom in Sacramento are the court’s seven justices, from left to right: Associate Justice Carlos R. Moreno, Associate Justice Joyce L. Kennard, Associate Justice Kathryn Mickle Werdegar, Chief Justice Ronald M. George, Associate Justice Ming W. Chin, Associate Justice Marvin R. Baxter, and Associate Justice Carol A. Corrigan. (Photo: Sirlin Photographers)

• N.H. Gov. to Pass Gay Marriage Bill with Revisions   Christian Post, By Nathan Black, May. 15 2009
  New Hampshire is expected to become the sixth state to legalize same-sex marriage after the legislature makes revisions to a bill to increase legal protections for religious institutions. Gov. John Lynch said Thursday that he will sign the bill, which has already been approved by the House and Senate, if the language is revised to better protect churches and religious groups against lawsuits if they do not perform marriages for gay and lesbian couples. He will veto it if the provisions are not passed in the legislature, he said. "We can and must treat both same-sex couples and people of certain religious traditions with respect and dignity," Lynch stressed. "I believe this proposed language will accomplish both of these goals and I urge the Legislature to pass it." Legislative leaders immediately said they would adopt the changes. Advocates of same-sex marriage also backed Lynch's proposal. "This is language we can support," said Mo Baxley, executive director of New Hampshire Freedom to Marry Coalition, according to The Boston Globe. Traditional marriage supporters, however, are disappointed in Lynch. Kevin Smith, director of Cornerstone Policy Research, called the governor's proposal a "smoke screen-religious-liberty-amendment cover to change his mind," according to the Concord Monitor. "There are people with very deeply held convictions on this issue who are now going to have their conscience violated," Smith said, as reported by the Monitor. Lynch's qualification "seems like a rather disingenuous attempt on the part of the governor to try and couch his actions today and say it's some sort of compromise. It isn't." While a supporter of traditional marriage, Lynch said he decided to view the issue "through a broader lens," as reported by The Associated Press. A recent poll by Cornerstone Policy Research, a statewide conservative pro-family organization, showed 64 percent of New Hampshire residents in favor of keeping the legal definition of marriage as between a man and a woman. . .
  
  
  
  
  RELATED ARTICLE:  NH governor backs gay marriage   Associated Press, By Norma Love, May 14, 2009
  

RELATED ARTICLE & VIDEO:  Some Say Changes In Same-Sex Marriage Bill Won't Be Enough: Opponents Say Those Who Refuse To Take Part Could Face Penalties WMUR.com,  May 15, 2009
A day after Gov. John Lynch said he would sign a same-sex marriage bill into law if certain changes are made, some are saying the changes don't go far enough. Lynch introduced new language for the bill that he said would strengthen protections for religious institutions and related associations that refuse to perform or take part in same-sex marriages. Bedford Town clerk Lori Radke said she supports same-sex marriage, but as a justice of the peace, she said she wondered would happen if her religious beliefs conflicted with her job. . .

RELATED ARTICLE:  NEW YORK:  State Assembly says okay to gay marriage; fate rests with Senate    New York Daily News, By Glen Blain, ‎May 12, 2009
The state Assembly gave its approval to same-sex marriage Tuesday night but the issue's fate in New York remains uncertain. What we are doing is legislating civil, and I do mean civil rights," said Assemblyman Matthew Tittone, a Staten Island Democrat who is gay. "I am not looking for the right to force the Pope to preside over my big fat gay wedding." Critics charged that the legislation, which was introduced by Gov. Paterson last month, would undermine traditional marriage and force religious institutions that run public facilities - such as dormitories and catering halls - to accept gay couples. "The issue to me is the bible, the Torah," said Assemblyman Dov Hikind, D-Brooklyn. "It is about God. It is about what I believe God wants." State Senate Majority Leader Malcolm Smith (D-Queens) supports same-sex marriage but has said he won't bring the measure to the floor unless there's enough votes for it to pass. . .


 

• 'Gay' gene claim suddenly vanishes
  American Psychological Association revises statement on homosexuality  WorldNetDaily, By Bob Unruh, May 12, 2009
  A publication from the American Psychological Association includes an admission that there is no "gay" gene, according to a doctor who has written about the issue on the website of National Association for Research & Therapy of Homosexuality. A. Dean Byrd, the past president of NARTH, confirmed that the statement from the American Psychological Association came in a brochure that updates what the APA has advocated for years. Specifically, in a brochure that first came out about 1998, the APA stated: "There is considerable recent evidence to suggest that biology, including genetic or inborn hormonal factors, play a significant role in a person's sexuality." However, in the update: a brochure now called, "Answers to Your Questions for a Better Understanding of Sexual Orientation & Homosexuality," the APA's position changed. The new statement says:
  
  "There is no consensus among scientists about the exact reasons that an individual develops a heterosexual, bisexual, gay or lesbian orientation. Although much research has examined the possible genetic, hormonal, developmental, social, and cultural influences on sexual orientation, no findings have emerged that permit scientists to conclude that sexual orientation is determined by any particular factor or factors. Many think that nature and nurture both play complex roles. ..."
   
  "Although there is no mention of the research that influenced this new position statement, it is clear that efforts to 'prove' that homosexuality is simply a biological fait accompli have failed," Byrd wrote. "The activist researchers themselves have reluctantly reached that conclusion. There is no gay gene. There is no simple biological pathway to homosexuality." Byrd said the APA's documents both new and old "have strong activist overtones," but the newer document "is more reflective of science and more consistent with the ethicality of psychological care." "On the question of whether or not therapy can change sexual orientation, the former document offered a resounding 'no,'" Byrd wrote. "However, the current document is much more nuanced and contains the following statement: 'To date, there has been no scientifically adequate research to show that therapy (sometimes called reparative or conversion therapy) is safe or effective.'" A spokesman for NARTH said the change in statements, although not new, is considered significant for the organization. The APA declined to return a WND call requesting comment. Byrd questioned whether the APA now plans to study the effectiveness of a variety of therapies for homosexuality. . .

RELATED ARTICLE: Answers to Your Questions For a Better Understanding of Sexual Orientation & Homosexuality  American Psychological Association


RELATED ARTICLE:  Born or Bred? Science Does Not Support the Claim That Homosexuality Is Genetic. Homosexual activists love to insist that     CWA, By Robert H. Knight, December 21, 2005

RELATED ARTICLE:  APA revises 'gay gene' theory  OneNewsNow, By Charlie Butts, May 14, 2009
The attempt to prove that homosexuality is determined biologically has been dealt a knockout punch. An American Psychological Association publication includes an admission that there's no homosexual "gene" -- meaning it's not likely that homosexuals are born that way. For decades, the APA has not considered homosexuality a psychological disorder, while other professionals in the field consider it to be a "gender-identity" problem. But the new statement, which appears in a brochure called "Answers to Your Questions for a Better Understanding of Sexual Orientation & Homosexuality," states the following: "There is no consensus among scientists about the exact reasons that an individual develops a heterosexual, bisexual, gay or lesbian orientation. Although much research has examined the possible genetic, hormonal, developmental, social, and cultural influences on sexual orientation, no findings have emerged that permit scientists to conclude that sexual orientation is determined by any particular factor or factors. Many think that nature and nurture both play complex roles...." That contrasts with the APA's statement in 1998: "There is considerable recent evidence to suggest that biology, including genetic or inborn hormonal factors, play a significant role in a person's sexuality." Peter LaBarbera, who heads Americans for Truth About Homosexuality, believes the more recent statement is an important admission because it undermines a popular theory. . .



RELATED ARTICLE:  "Homosexuality Is Not Hardwired," Concludes Head of The Human Genome Project  By A. Dean Byrd, Ph.D, MBA, MPH  LifeSiteNews.com, March 20, 2007
Dr. Collins succinctly reviewed the research on homosexuality and offers the following:

"An area of particularly strong public interest is the genetic basis of homosexuality. Evidence from twin studies does in fact support the conclusion that heritable factors play a role in male homosexuality. However, the likelihood that the identical twin of a homosexual male will also be gay is about 20% (compared with 2-4 percent of males in the general population), indicating that sexual orientation is genetically influenced but not hardwired by DNA, and that whatever genes are involved represent predispositions, not predeterminations [emphasis added]."

The heritability estimates for homosexuality is substantially lower than General Cognitive Ability, Extroversion, Agreeableness, Conscientiousness, Neuroticism, Openness, Aggression and Traditionalism!

Dr. Collins noted that environment--particularly childhood experiences--as well as the role of free will and choice affect us all in profound ways. . .


RELATED ARTICLE:  How America Went Gay   Leadership U, by Charles W. Socarides, M.D.
. .  . Gays said they could "reinvent human nature, reinvent themselves." To do this, these reinventors had to clear away one major obstacle. No, they didn't go after the nation's clergy. They targeted the members of a worldly priesthood, the psychiatric community, and neutralized them with a radical redefinition of homosexuality itself. In 1972 and 1973 they co-opted the leadership of the American Psychiatric Association and, through a series of political maneuvers, lies and outright flim-flams, they "cured" homosexuality overnight-by fiat. They got the A.P.A. to say that same-sex sex was "not a disorder." It was merely "a condition"-as neutral as lefthandedness. This amounted to a full approval of homosexuality. Those of us who did not go along with the political redefinition were soon silenced at our own professional meetings. Our lectures were canceled inside academe and our research papers turned down in the learned journals. Worse things followed in the culture at large. Television and movie producers began to do stories promoting homosexuality as a legitimate lifestyle. A gay review board told Hollywood how it should deal or not deal with homosexuality. Mainstream publishers turned down books that objected to the gay revolution. Gays and lesbians influenced sex education in our nation's schools, and gay and lesbian libbers seized wide control of faculty committees in our nations' colleges. State legislatures nullified laws against sodomy.  If the print media paid any attention at all, they tended to hail the gay revolution, possibly because many of the reporters on gay issues were themselves gay and open advocates for the movement. And those reporters who were not gay seemed too intimidated by groupthink to expose what was going on in their own newsrooms. . .

• Wanda Sykes Becomes Mom of Twins!  People magazine, By Julie Jordan, May 13, 2009
  Wanda Sykes and her wife, Alex, welcomed twins on April 27, her rep tells PEOPLE exclusively. Daughter Olivia Lou weighed in at 6 lbs., 7 oz., and was 19-inches long. Son Lucas Claude debuted at 7 lbs., 9 oz., and was 20-inches long. The comedian's wife gave birth to the babies. "All are happy and healthy and at home," says Sykes's rep Danica Smith. The actress, who stars on New Adventures of Old Christine, and her wife were married on Oct. 25, 2008. The twins are the first children for the couple. . .
  
  
  
  RELATED ARTICLE:  Wanda Sykes Out And Proud To Be Gay   Huliq.com, November 16, 2008
  Comedian Wanda Sykes says she is out and proud to be gay. In light of the ban on same sex marriage in California, the comedian is now taking a stand for the gay rights she believes in. . . . . Wanda Sykes came out of the closet—and admitted that she married her partner Oct. 25—during a Nov. 15 anti-Prop 8 rally at the GLBT Community Center in Las Vegas, Nev. . .
  
  
  RELATED ARTICLE:  Why Women Are Leaving Men for Other Women   O magazine— Oprah.com, By Mary A. Fischer, April 2009 Issue
  Cynthia Nixon did it. Lindsay Lohan's doing it. TV shows are based on it. Is it our imaginations, or are wives and girlfriends ditching their men and falling in love with other women? New science says that sexuality is more fluid than we thought. . . .  . . .Feminist philosopher Susan Bordo, PhD, a professor of English and gender and women's studies at the University of Kentucky and author of Unbearable Weight: Feminism, Western Culture, and the Body, also agrees that in the current environment, more women may be stepping out of the conventional gender box. "When a taboo is lifted or diminished, it's going to leave people freer to pursue things," she says. "So it makes sense that we would see women, for all sorts of reasons, walking through that door now that the culture has cracked it open. . .

RELATED VIDEO: Wanda Sykes Comes Out YouTube.com



RELATED ARTICLE:  Who are some famous gay celebrities? WikiAnswers.com

RELATED ARTICLE:  That's No Man, That's My Wife  Townhall.com, By Burt Prelutsky , June 30, 2008
It’s strange from our vantage point to realize there was a time before same-sex marriages and gay pride parades when homosexuality was the love that dared not speak its name. These days, it’s the love that never shuts up.


RELATED ARTICLE:  College taught her not to be a heterosexual    Townhall.com, By Dennis Prager, April 19, 2008
Perhaps the most important argument against same-sex marriage is that once society honors same-sex sex as it does man-woman sex, there will inevitably be a major increase in same-sex sex. People do sexually (as in other areas) what society allows and especially what it honors. . .


RELATED ARTICLE: Two Mommies Is One Too Many   Time magazine, By JAMES C. DOBSON, December 10, 2006
With all due respect to Cheney and her partner, Heather Poe, the majority of more than 30 years of social-science evidence indicates that children do best on every measure of well-being when raised by their married mother and father. That is not to say Cheney and Poe will not love their child. But love alone is not enough to guarantee healthy growth and development. The two most loving women in the world cannot provide a daddy for a little boy--any more than the two most loving men can be complete role models for a little girl. The voices that argue otherwise tell us more about our politically correct culture than they do about what children really need. . . .


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

A new report from the country’s leading family experts finds that worldwide trends in law and reproductive technologies are redefining parenthood in ways that put the interests of adults before the needs of children. “The two-person mother-father model of parenthood is being changed to meet adults’ rights to children rather than children’s needs to know and be raised, whenever possible, by their mother and father,” according to the report, "The Revolution in Parenthood: The Emerging Global Clash Between Adult Rights and Children’s Needs.". . .   


RELATED  ARTICLE (PDF):  Female Homosexual Development   NARTH.com
It is often claimed that sexual orientation is an innate and normal variation of sexuality and therefore immutable or unchangeable aspect of a person's core self or identity. But there is no conclusive evidence that female homosexuality is innate or solely genetic or biologically based. Most respected scientists agree that homosexuality is due to a combination of social, psychological, and biological factors. . .


RELATED ARTICLE:  Legalizing Same-Sex Marriage Will Increase Prevalence of Homosexuality: Research Provides Significant Evidence   NARTH.com, By Trayce Hansen, Ph.D.
An accumulation of research from around the world finds that societies which endorse homosexual behavior increase the prevalence of homosexuality in those societies. The legalization of same-sex marriage--which is being considered by voters in several U.S. states--is the ultimate in societal endorsement and will result in more individuals living a homosexual lifestyle. Extensive research from Sweden, Finland, Denmark, and the United States reveals that homosexuality is primarily environmentally induced. Specifically, social and/or family factors, as well as permissive environments which affirm homosexuality, play major environmental roles in the development of homosexual behavior. A closer look at the research:. . .

• Priest In Racy Photos: I Had Sex With Her
  Father Alberto Cutié Tells Maggie Rodgiruez Breaking His Vows Was Wrong; Celibacy Should Be Optional; He May Marry The Woman
  CBS News- Early Show, May 11, 2009
  The celebrity priest at the center of a storm sparked by photos of him in a romantic embrace with a woman on the sands of Miami Beach admits he's had sex with her. Father Alberto Cutié sat down for his first television interview since the scandal began on The Early Show Monday. The photos -- 25 in all -- have almost single-handely reignited the debate over the celibacy required of priests by the Catholic Church and the Church's refusal to allow priests to marry. In the exclusive interview, Cutié -- who wasn't wearing his priest's clothes -- told co-anchor Maggie Rodriguez a longtime friendship with the woman became romantic about two years ago, adding that they're in love. He says he's mulling his next move, which he says could range from breaking up with her to marrying her. The woman, he indicated, wants to marry him. Conceding he's become "kind of a poster boy" for the debate over priests being celibate, Cutié said priestly celibacy is good, but should be optional. Overall, he said he's "deeply sorry" about all that's happened. Rodriguez disclosed last week that her family in Miami Beach has known Cutié well for many years. Cutié, a handsome, charismatic TV talk show host, radio personality, newspaper columnist and author known to many as "Father Oprah" is seen in images in the Spanish-language magazine TV NOTAS caressing and kissing a woman. Both were in bathing suits. Sources tell CBS station WFOR-TV in Miami the photos were taken in February. The Archdiocese of Miami has relieved Cutié of his duties at his church and taken him off the air, but many of his parishioners turned out at an emotional rally in Miami Beach on Thursday backing him. He candidly conceded to Rodriguez Monday, ""I don't support the breaking of the celibacy promise. I understand fully that this is wrong.  "I don't want to be the anti-celibacy priest. I think that's unfortunate. I think it's a debate that's going on in our society, and now I've become kind of a poster boy for it. But I don't want to be that. I believe that celibacy is good, and that it's a good commitment to God. This is something I've struggled with. And something that I never expected to become a public debate. " ... What many say is that maybe it should be optional. And that I do believe: I do believe that people should be given the option to marry or not to marry in order to serve God. But the Church, see, has tradition and practices that are part of wanting to do what is right. I think we've all have ideals, and we have ways of living, and we want to do things right. But the truth is, sometimes we fall short. And I fell short." Cutié said the woman in ths photos "is someone that I love. ... I entered the seminary 22 years ago. And in 22 years I've never had a sexual relationship with anyone. I committed myself fully to my vows. I've never been sexually inappropriate with anyone. I've never had any type of scandal. This is the only person that I've had sexual contact with. . . .
  
  
  RELATED VIDEO:  The JesusTV - Should Catholic Priests Be Allowed To Marry?

RELATED VIDEO:  Father Alberto Cutie's Confession  CBS News- YouTube, May 11, 2009
Father Cutie, a popular Miami priest known as "Father Oprah" explains racy photos of himself with a woman in an exclusive interview with Maggie Rodriguez.


RELATED ARTICLES & VIDEO: Latest Updates: Racy photos surface of popular Miami priest 'Padre Alberto'   Sun Sentinel, May 2009
Rev. Alberto Cutié was stripped of his parish after photos purporting to show him frolicking on the beach with an unidentified woman surfaced.

RELATED ARTICLE:  The Father Cutie Scandal: Sex and the Single Priest  Time magazine, By Tim Padgett / Miami, May 07, 2009
If only it were the worst thing that a Roman Catholic priest has been caught doing. The Mexican celebrity magazine TVnotas recently published 25 paparazzi photos of the Rev. Alberto Cutié, the popular Miami Beach priest famous for his Spanish-language television and radio talk shows, cavorting amorously on a Florida beach with an attractive woman. Over a three-day period, the pictures also captured him kissing her in a bar. In one of TVnotas's "in fragranti" shots [Note to TVnotas copy editors: it's "in flagrante"] the woman wraps her legs around Cutié; in another, Cutié has a hand down her swimsuit, fondling her rear end. Because of the scandal, the Archdiocese of Miami says Cutié, 40, is no longer the administrator of his Miami Beach parish, and it has barred him from leading Sunday mass there. His media work seems up in the air now, and the popular website padrealberto.net has only a blue screen with a message from Cutié asking forgiveness. Most Catholics probably don't approve of Cutié's affair. Still, will they back the archdiocese? Cutié's punishment is understandable at first glance, at least for his hypocrisy if not for the betrayal of his oath of celibacy. To the Catholic Church, priestly ordination means a marriage vow to the church — the "bride of Christ." In a statement, Miami Archbishop John Favalora said Cutié's actions "cannot be condoned despite the good work he's done as a priest." But Cutie's penalty might elicit more than a few snickers from Catholics who have spent the past few decades watching the priestly perdition parade of sexual abuse, parish embezzlement and doctrinal intolerance. . .

 
RELATED ARTICLE:  "Sin Happens": Church Moves Against Celeb Priest Seen In Steamy Pics Defended, But So Is The Priest  CBS News-Early Show, May 7, 2009
[Y]ou can't attribute an act of unfaithfulness to the institution itself. It would be kind of like saying that adultery is caused by marriage. It doesn't really make sense. Or malpractice is caused by medicine. In the sense that we all make commitments, sometimes we fail at those commitments. It doesn't mean the commitments in themselves are bad; it just means that we are human and, to paraphrase a bumper sticker, 'Sin happens.' It happens in all of our lives. It’s something we know. We try to repent. We try to get back on our feet again, we ask God's forgiveness, and we try to keep going.". . .


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


RELATED ARTICLE:  Signs of a Restorable Spirit: What are the tangible evidences of repentance?  Christianity Today, Posted by Marshall Shelley, November 8, 2006
In the wake of serious moral failure, church leaders are quickly asked about “restoration.” What does a person have to do to be deemed worthy of reinstatement as a church leader?. . .

• Donald Trump to Decide Miss California's Fate   FOX News, May 10, 2009
  The final decision over whether Miss California Carrie Prejean can keep her crown will be reached by Tuesday, Miss USA contest owner Donald Trump told FOX News. Trump said there are "things to look at," but, "hopefully it will be a positive decision." A news conference will be held Tuesday to announce Prejean's fate, Trump told FOX and Friends. Prejean was named first runner-up in the April 19 Miss USA pageant during which she responded to a judge's question by saying she favored limiting marriage to a man and a woman. Since then, the state pageant has been investigating whether the 21-year-old violated her contestant contract by making public appearances with groups opposed to same-sex marriage and by failing to reveal that she had posed in her underwear as a teenager. Trump skirted around questions as to whether Prejan's photos violated any pageant rules. . .
  
  
  RELATED VIDEO:  Still Hired   Fox News, May 12, 2009  (Update) 
  
  
  RELATED ARTICLE:  Obama and Miss California aligned on same-sex marriage?  Christian Science Monitor, By Jimmy Orr, May 12, 2009  (Update)
  If President Obama’s position on gay marriage is shifting, someone better tell White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs. During the afternoon press briefing, ABC’s Jake Tapper remarked that President Obama “opposed same-sex marriage but supports giving same-sex couples the same rights as married couples.” “With benefits,” Gibbs said without objecting to Tapper’s statement. Many say Obama’s position on same-sex marriage is the same as the one Miss California, Carrie Prejean, took a lot of heat for. “I think that I believe that a marriage should be between a man and a woman. No offense to anybody out there but that’s how I was raised and that’s how I think it should be between a man and a woman,” she said at the Miss USA pageant last month. What’s the difference between her statement and the president’s? Nothing according to Prejean and impressario Donald Trump. . .
  
  
  RELATED ARTICLE:  Trump: Miss California, President Share Opposition to Same Sex Marriage   ABC News, By Jake Tapper and Karen Travers, May 12, 2009 (Update)
  Miss California USA Carrie Prejean, Donald Trump said today, "gave a very, very honest answer when asked a very tough question at the recent pageant. It’s the same answer that the President of the United States gave. It’s the same answer that many people gave and at the same time, it was a controversial question. It was a tough question. It was probably a fair question because it’s asked of many people." Prejean, as the world knows, said she opposed same sex marriage, an answer that likely cost her the Miss USA crown because one of the judges, Perez Hilton, found it objectionable. Trump said Prejean "gave an honorable answer. She gave an answer from heart and I think for that, she has to be commended." One of the complaints many gay and lesbian activists have with President Obama's opposition to same sex marriage is that it gives cover for the Carrie Prejeans of the world. Even though the president may support civil unions and other rights for same sex couples, it's his insistence that marriage is between a man and a woman that allows opponents of what gay rights groups call "marriage equality" to paint themselves as mainstream and reasonable. . .

RELATED ARTICLE: DEMANDING TO BE SERVED: Gay Activists and Religious Freedom   Breakpoint.org, By Chuck Colson, May 13, 2009
[W]e’ve seen this scenario over and over again. Christians or Orthodox Jews open up a business, ministry, or school, and sooner or later, a same-sex couple shows up demanding services that conflict with the sincerely held religious convictions of those they confront. When the same-sex couple is turned down, they promptly sue—even if others offer to accommodate them for the same services. And too often, they are winning their cases. It’s as if the First Amendment no longer exists. I can’t help but suspect that radical gays deliberately target outfits run by religious believers in order to force them to accommodate their political agenda—or go out of business. So what can we do about this? How can we protect our First Amendment rights—and marriage itself? First, if you are victimized by a gay activist group or same-sex couple demanding that you throw out your religious beliefs, contact the Alliance Defense Fund . . .



RELATED ARTICLE:  Same-Sex 'Marriage' and Religious Liberty:
Why They Can't Coexist   Breakpoint.org, By Chuck Colson, May 12, 2009
Could same-sex "marriage" spell the end of religious liberty as we know it? Here is the chilling answer. As more states—like Iowa—approve same-sex “marriage,” conservatives are claiming that freedom of religion is in peril. Same-sex “marriage” supporters accuse them of engaging in hysterical gay-bating. Who’s telling the truth? Let me share some stories with you from an excellent news broadcast produced by National Public Radio. Then you decide.



RELATED ARTICLE:  Miss CA's Mom: She's Being "Persecuted"  Mom Logic, May 12, 2009
Francine Coppola, the mother of embattled Miss California Carrie Prejean, speaks exclusively to momlogic about what she says is the persecution of her daughter for "speaking her opinion.". . . . . "As a mother ... I'm proud of her, that I raised a daughter that has morals, values, and integrity to speak the TRUTH. She had the courage that evening to face an evil man in front of millions of viewers ... and not be afraid to speak what was in her heart! I know God is going to protect her from this evil man and all the others that are trying to attack her for voicing her opinion.". . .


RELATED ARTICLE:  Beauty Queens Sound Off On Miss Calif.: Miss Rhode Island And A Former Miss USA On Real Reasons Her Crown Is In Jeopardy  CBS News, May 11, 2009
On The Early Show Monday, Miss Rhode Island, Alysha Castonguay, said she sees the remarks opposing same sex marriage as the main factor that could cost Prejean her crown. Prejean finished as runner-up in the Miss USA competition. Castonguay -- who herself had semi-nude photos published in Maxim magazine --- photos she says were even racier than the ones helping to land Prejean in hot water -- says the one issue is "definitely" more equal than all the others hanging over Prejean. "I think it's from the (anti-same-sex marriage) answer she gave that night onstage," Castonguay told co-anchor Maggie Rodriguez. "And, you know, I think everybody needs to be prepared to hear both ways that that question could have been answered. It was her opinion. And you have 51 individuals that compete for Mss USA. It's not Miss Robot USA. It's Miss USA. So, you have to be expected, if you ask that question, to get that answer both ways.". . .

RELATED ARTICLE:  The Destruction of Miss California    Townhall.com, By Bill O'Reilly, May 09, 2009
Checked on your freedom of speech lately? If not, consider the plight of 21-year-old Carrie Prejean, a student at San Diego Christian College who was selected first runner-up in the Miss USA pageant last month. . . . . . Most polls show that the majority of Americans agree with Prejean, including the president of the United States. Yet since she made that statement as Miss California, the woman has been persecuted in the media. . . . . .Gay marriage has been defined by some of its supporters as a civil rights issue. Isn't freedom of speech a civil rights issue? Therefore, let's call this Miss California deal exactly what it is -- a gross violation of the spirit of America. If a 21-year-old pageant contestant can be persecuted for uttering an opinion based upon a sincere belief, then all of us are at risk, as well.


RELATED ARTICLE:  Refuse to Be Bullied  Townhall.com, By Harry R. Jackson, Jr., April 27, 2009
To add insult to injury Keith Lewis, co-director of the Miss California USA and who runs the Miss California competition, attempted to moralize about the “right to marry.” I found it ironic that a man who runs a competition that parades women around in scanty clothing could attempt to speak out about gender prejudice and stereotypes. Both Perez and Lewis believe that their opinions would not be challenged. They were wrong. In fact, they overplayed their hands this time. Their remarks were just like the intimidation I faced as a child from bullies in the schoolyard. In my experience, the only way to make bullies be quiet is to stand up to them. Just one brave person on the playground can stand down the school bully and break free from their tyranny. In our adult world, however, we need the strength of numbers. When one person stands alone, he can feel overwhelmed. In contrast, when thousands of people stand up for what they believe, they become a force to be reckoned with. Gay marriage is not an inevitability in our nation. It can still be halted and turned around. The institution of marriage can be protected, but we need the collective voice. Let me remind you that marriage is worth fighting for. Those of us in the biblical marriage movement are not fighting because we dislike gays. We are fighting for marriage because we realize that whoever’s values shape this law will shape the practices of the next few generations. . .


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

• Nia Vardalos on Becoming a Mom – Overnight   People magazine, By Nia Vardalos, May 09, 2009
  Talk about your big fat surprises: With one phone call, Nia Vardalos had a daughter. In this exclusive Mother's Day essay for PEOPLE, the star of My Big Fat Greek Wedding talks in detail for the first time about the shock, chaos and "peaceful gratefulness" that came after she and husband Ian Gomez adopted a 3-year-old girl. . . . . . . The Ritual: My daughter is a preschooler but I have only known her for a while. She is adopted. After years of wanting to be parents, my husband and I were given 14 hours notice ... then a little girl walked into our house. Trying to adopt had been a long and frustrating process. But, when we connected with an American Foster Family Agency, it happened very quickly. One night, the phone rang – the social worker told me we'd been "matched" with a 3-year-old girl. I hung up the phone and stood still for a second. Then, I had to sit down. Within a minute, I was lying on the floor. Yeah, this was real: A little girl was coming to our home. Tomorrow. There wasn't a baby shower, there wasn't time to discuss with family and friends, there was no way to really prepare for her arrival. She arrived without an instruction manual. I didn't know if she had a sleep schedule, food allergies – there wasn't even a note pinned to her shirt. She just walked in and looked up at me, like "got lunch?" There isn't a word for the elation I felt. I grinned like a maniac and jumped into parenthood. . . . 

RELATED RESOURCE: American Foster Care
 

RELATED RESOURCE:  Find your local FFA

Joke of the Day: "Just a Mom?"   (Thanks to Colleen S.)
A woman, renewing her driver's license at the County Clerk's office, was asked by the woman recorder to state her occupation. She hesitated, uncertain how to classify herself.
"What I mean is, " explained the recorder, "do you have a job or are you just a ..?"
"Of course I have a job," snapped the woman. "I'm a Mom."
"We don't list 'Mom' as an occupation, 'housewife' covers it," said the recorder emphatically.

I forgot all about her story until one day I found myself in the same situation, this time at our own Town Hall. The Clerk was obviously a career woman, poised, efficient, and possessed of a high sounding title like, "Official Interrogator" or "Town Registrar."
What is your occupation?" she probed.
What made me say it? I do not know. The words simply popped out.
"I'm a Research Associate in the field of Child Development and Human Relations."

The clerk paused, ball-point pen frozen in midair and looked up as though she had not heard right.. I repeated the title slowly emphasizing the most significant words. Then I stared with wonder as my pronouncement was written, in bold, black ink on the official questionnaire.

"Might I ask," said the clerk with new interest, "just what you do in your field?"
Coolly, without any trace of fluster in my voice, I heard myself reply, "I have a continuing program of research, (what mother doesn't) in the laboratory and in the field, (normally I would have said indoors and out). I'm working for my Masters, (first the Lord and then the whole family) and already have four credits (all daughters). Of course, the job is one of the most demanding in the humanities, (any mother care to disagree?) and I often work 14 hours a day, (24 is more like it). But the job is more challenging than most run-of-the-mill careers and the rewards are more of a satisfaction rather than just money."

There was an increasing note of respect in the clerk's voice as she completed the form, stood up, and personally ushered me to the door. As I drove into our driveway, buoyed up by my glamorous new career, I was greeted by my lab assistants -- ages 13, 7, and 3. Upstairs I could hear our new experimental model, (a 6 month old baby) in the child development program, testing out a new vocal pattern. I felt I had scored a beat on bureaucracy! And I had gone on the official records as someone more distinguished and indispensable to mankind than "just another Mom."

Motherhood! What a glorious career! Especially when there's a title on the door.

Editor's Note: Does this make grandmothers "Senior Research associates in the field of Child Development and Human Relations" And great grandmothers "Executive Senior Research Associates?" I think so! I also think it makes Aunts "Associate Research Assistants."

Happy Mother’s Day! May your troubles be less, your blessing be more, and nothing but happiness come through your door!

• Ryan O'Neal's Heartbreak over Critically Ill Farrah   People magazine, By Champ Clark, May 07, 2009
  In an exclusive interview with PEOPLE, an emotional and often teary-eyed Ryan O'Neal spoke for the first time about the devastating illness of his longtime partner, Farrah Fawcett, who has battled cancer for the past two and a half years. "It's a love story. I just don't know how to play this one. I won't know this world without her," O'Neal, 68, says of his current role as caretaker. "Cancer is an insidious enemy." Revealing for the first time how the anal cancer long ago spread to other parts of Fawcett's body, including her liver, O'Neal says, "She stays in bed now. The doctors see that she is comfortable. Farrah is on IVs, but some of that is for nourishment. The treatment has pretty much ended." Fawcett, 62, herself tells of her journey through illness in Farrah's Story a two-hour NBC documentary the onetime Charlie's Angels icon shot with pal Alana Stewart that airs Friday, May 15. . . . . . Fawcett now spends her days at home, often asleep. "She stays in bed," says O'Neal. "It's a nice bed." She receives visits from a few close friends – including fellow Charlie's Angels stars Jaclyn Smith and Kate Jackson and, when able, likes to watch TV, especially Dominick Dunne's cable program Power, Privilege and Justice. Another visitor has been Fawcett and O'Neal's son Redmond, who, behind bars for a drug-related probation violation, on April 25 was allowed three hours at home with his mother to say what might be his final goodbye. In his jail-issued jumpsuit and in shackles, Redmond is seen in the NBC documentary climbing into his sleeping mother's bed and crying. "Oh my gosh, my gosh," he says as he hugs the frail figure next to him. "Oh, my gosh." "Farrah doesn't know Redmond's in trouble," says O'Neal. "And Redmond is terrified for his mother. 'I don't want to be in jail and have some guard tell me she is gone,' he said to me. I told him, 'She's rebounding.' I lied to him. I lie to her. It's the best thing." Redmond, meanwhile, is awaiting transfer to a lockdown rehab facility. . .
  

RELATED ARTICLE:  Coping when a partner has a terminal illness: Confronting a fatal illness in a partner can put intolerable strain on a couple. But society expects saint-like behaviour  Times Online- UK, August 28, 2009

RELATED ARTICLE:  Farrah Fawcett Fought for Privacy While Battling Cancer: Actress Wanted to Know If Hospital Employees Were Leaking Information to Tabloids About Her Health   ABC News-GMA, By Sharyn Alsonfi, Anna Wild, Kelly Hagan and Imaeyen Ibanga, May 12, 2009
As Farrah Fawcett publicly battles terminal anal cancer, tabloids continue to clamor for the latest information about the 62-year-old's condition as the television icon fights to protect her privacy and patient rights. In a move reminiscent of her famed show "Charlie's Angels," the '70s cover girl carried out her own sting operation to stop leaks about her condition. And she gave the details of her sleuth skills to the Los Angeles Times in an exclusive interview that took place in August 2008 but wasn't published until Monday. . .


RELATED VIDEO:  Man Given Months to Live -- 10 Years Ago  ABC News-GMA, May 11, 2009
More than 10 years ago, Brian Monaghan was diagnosed with stage 4 melanoma that spread to his brain. Doctors gave him six months to live, but he's still alive today. He credits his wife, Gerri, for his survival and said on Good Morning America that she was his biggest advocate for beating his cancer. .  . . . Immediately after her husband was diagnosed with cancer, Gerri made a list of how to fight the illness and put it into a folder called "To the War." That list and subsequent writings were the basis for the couple's new book, 'The Power of Two: Surviving Serious Illness with an Attitude and an Advocate.' In it, the Monaghans lay out 50 tips on how to survive a serious illness with the help of an advocate. . .


RELATED ARTICLE:  Taking Their Lives into Their Own Hands  Gainesville Sun, By Lauren Levy- Newsies Contributing Writer, April 17, 2009
When my father was diagnosed with colorectal cancer four years ago, I was not aware of the journey this would take my family on. He underwent all the traditional routes for treatment - chemotherapy, radiation and surgery - and was pronounced cancer-free. Yet, when his cancer returned and metastasized, spreading rapidly to the liver and pelvic region last May, he was told that there were no further options as he was not a candidate for traditional surgery. Although many patients in such situations feel they are without a place to turn, he and my mother took it upon themselves to do their own homework and began to research alternative treatments and procedures via the Internet. Their findings were astounding. Not only were there state-of-the-art alternatives available to him at other institutions but also within the very facility at which he was being treated. Why were such options never presented? What would have happened if he, the patient, had not inquired? Throughout this process, it has become evident that patients, especially when dealing with multidisciplinary diseases like cancer, need to be thoroughly proactive when it comes to their health care treatments; simply relying on the diagnoses of their doctors without doing their own research can cost them their lives. . .


RELATED ARTICLE:  Once-fatal cancers now treated as a chronic disease  International Herald Tribune, By Jane E. Brody, June 17, 2008
Fisch calls the new therapy for advanced cancer "the hitchhiker model." Time is bought by going from point A, the first-line therapy, to point B, the second-line therapy, to point C, the third line of therapy, and so on. The approach can continue indefinitely, as long as new therapies become available and patients remain well enough to withstand the rigors of treatment. But Fisch noted that adding meaningful years to the lives of patients with advanced cancer depends in part on avoiding the attitude, prevalent among some physicians, that cancer is hopeless after it has metastasized. . .

RELATED ARTICLE:  Fear is a waste of time  Townhall.com- Free Republic.com, By Tony Snow, September 16, 2005
There's nothing quite like a pep talk from a cancer survivor, especially one who by normal calculations ought to have died long ago. Here is the most important thing she said: "When I was sick, my husband and I would sit in a group with other women who had the same thing. We sat in a circle, the same people each week.  "Some looked strong and vigorous; others were pale and weak. But none of that mattered. We discovered that we could figure out who was going to live and who would die just by looking into their eyes. . . . . Still, the last few months -- my time of surgery and chemo -- have been the happiest and most thrilling of my life. They have confirmed lessons that seem at once too good to be true, and too important and vital not to be.  Here is a short inventory:  Faith matters. Prayers heal. Love overcomes.  People want to do good for others; they just need excuses.  Fear is a waste of time. The worst that can happen is that we'll die -- which happens to everybody, anyway. Until the Grim Reaper comes knocking, we're alive. . .


RELATED ARTICLE: A diagnosis of cancer is trying for any marriage   Boston Globe, By Judy Foreman, August 22, 2005
Obviously, when cancer strikes, there's no easy role in any marriage, whether you're the patient or the spouse. What makes some marriages fall apart under the strain of cancer and others get stronger? That's a tough one, but researchers are finding some clues. . .

• Jennifer Hudson's Encore Wedding Proposal   People magazine, By Elizabeth Leonard, May 07, 2009
  Five months after boyfriend David Otunga proposed to Jennifer Hudson on her 27th birthday, she returned the gesture with a surprise of her own: a proposal on Otunga's birthday. The Grammy-winning singer did it last month with style, presenting Otunga – a Harvard-educated-lawyer-turned-pro-wrestler – with a personally designed Neil Lane engagement ring rocking out at 5 carats. "Jennifer wanted to give him something really special when she asked David to marry her," says Lane, who worked with Hudson for months to design the ring. "It was very sentimental and romantic. ... They are really in love.". . . .Hudson has been mum on the date of the nuptials, but has said that she plans to include her three dogs in the ceremony, perhaps using one as a ring bearer. . .
  
  
  RELATED ARTICLE:  Jennifer Hudson's baby shower confirms the news  Chicago Tribune, May 31, 2009  (Update)
  A weekend baby shower in downtown Chicago confirmed what has long been rumored: Jennifer Hudson is pregnant.  “It was a baby shower, a quiet gathering of friends and mostly family,” singer/actress Felicia Fields, a longtime Hudson friend, said of Saturday’s get-together in a relative’s home. “They’re really trying to keep it kind of quiet.”. . . . "It was a nice time that we had," Fields said of the shower. She didn’t want to get into when the baby is due, but speculation is that Hudson is many months along—an impression bolstered by her appearance of late. . .

RELATED ARTICLE:  Say Yes. What Are You Waiting For?  Washington Post, By Mark Regnerus, April 26, 2009
Spring is here, that glorious season when young men's fancies lightly turn to thoughts of love, as the poet Tennyson once suggested. "Lightly" is right. The average age of American men marrying for the first time is now 28. That's up five full years since 1970 and the oldest average since the Census Bureau started keeping track. If men weren't pulling women along with them on this upward swing, I wouldn't be complaining. But women are now taking that first plunge into matrimony at an older age as well. The age gap between spouses is narrowing: Marrying men and women were separated by an average of more than four years in 1890 and about 2.5 years in 1960. Now that figure stands at less than two years. I used to think that only young men -- and a minority at that -- lamented marriage as the death of youth, freedom and their ability to do as they pleased. Now this idea is attracting women, too. In my research on young adults' romantic relationships, many women report feeling peer pressure to avoid giving serious thought to marriage until they're at least in their late 20s. If you're seeking a mate in college, you're considered a pariah, someone after her "MRS degree." Actively considering marriage when you're 20 or 21 seems so sappy, so unsexy, so anachronistic. Those who do fear to admit it -- it's that scandalous. How did we get here? . . .


RELATED ARTICLE:  Rebuttal: Real Wedding Bell Woes  Washington Post, By Andrew Cherlin, April 27, 2009
Mark Regnerus, writing for The Post's Outlook section, laments today's older ages at marriage -- but curiously puts the burden primarily on women. He is distressed that wives in first marriages are only two years younger, on average, than their husbands, compared with four years younger in 1890. He urges women to marry earlier. But there is a good reason why the age gap between wives and husbands is narrowing: It's a relic of the pre-industrial era. In our urban, postindustrial world, the gap no longer makes sense. As more young adults realize that, they are marrying spouses closer to their own ages. . .

• White House Memo: As Gay Issues Arise, Obama Is Pressed to Engage  New York Times, By Sheryl Gay Stolberg, May 6, 2009 
  President Obama was noticeably silent last month when the Iowa Supreme Court overturned the state’s ban on same-sex marriage. But now Mr. Obama — who has said he opposes same-sex marriage as a Christian but describes himself as a “fierce advocate of equality” for gay men and lesbians — is under pressure to engage on a variety of gay issues that are coming to the fore amid a dizzying pace of social, political, legal and legislative change. Two of Mr. Obama’s potential Supreme Court nominees are openly gay; some advocates, irked that there are no gay men or lesbians in his cabinet, are mounting a campaign to influence his choice to replace Justice David H. Souter, who is retiring. Same-sex marriage is advancing in states — the latest to allow it is Maine — and a new flare-up in the District of Columbia could ultimately put the controversy in the lap of the president. Mr. Obama’s new global health initiative has infuriated activists who say he is not financing AIDS programs generously enough. And while the president has urged Congress to pass a hate crimes bill, a high priority for gay groups, he has delayed action on one of his key campaign promises, repealing the military’s “don’t ask, don’t tell” rule. . . . . . The White House, aware of the discontent, invited leaders of some prominent gay rights organizations to meet Monday with top officials, including Jim Messina, Mr. Obama’s deputy chief of staff, to plot legislative strategy on the hate crimes bill as well as “don’t ask, don’t tell.” Among those attending was Joe Solmonese, president of the Human Rights Campaign, who said afterward that while the gay rights agenda might not be “unfolding exactly as we thought,” he was pleased. “They have a vision,” Mr. Solmonese said. “They have a plan.”. . .
  
  
  
  RELATED ARTICLE:  Perspectives: Change we never imagined    OneNewsNow, By Matt Barber, January 23, 2009
  Well, the high-sheen veneer and cult-of-personality euphoria surrounding America's new oratory endowed president looks to be dissolving rather quickly. While millions had hoped for a political "messiah," it's fast becoming evident that, instead, we've stuck ourselves with an extreme leftist ideologue whose brand of "change we can believe in" is, in fact, "change we never imagined." (Sorry to burst the Barack bandwagon bubble, but I say it like I see it.) The examples are piling up in terms of the radical pro-abortion polices he's planning to implement, the many-times-failed Marxist fiscal policies he's promised to test yet again, and – relative to his national security goals – the noxiously naive peacenik policies that have Mahmoud and Osama giggling themselves to sleep at night. But on issues involving marriage, family and sexual morality, Obama's been even more brazen than some of his most ardent detractors could have expected. (See related article) Literally within minutes after he took the oath of office, the official White House webpage was updated – under the heading of "The Agenda: Civil Rights" – to detail his wholesale "support for the LGBT (homosexual activist) community."  His stated plans include the following:. . . . . . The gravity of this situation cannot be overstated. Right out of the chute, Obama has told the world that he is signing off, without exception, on every demand of the extremist homosexual and transsexual lobbies. The radical homosexual agenda and religious/free-speech liberties cannot occupy the same space.  It's a zero-sum game.  When 1-2 percent of the population is granted exclusive rights based on the aforementioned deviant sexual proclivities and changeable sexual behaviors – to the detriment of everyone else – that's called tyranny of the minority. . .
  
  
  RELATED ARTICLE:  White House outlines Obama's pro-homosexual agenda    OneNewsNow, By Fred Jackson, January 21, 2009
  The Barack Obama administration has wasted no time in announcing what his pro-homosexual agenda will include. Just hours after becoming president, the Whitehouse.gov website has laid out Barack Obama's agenda. Under a section of that agenda titled Civil Rights is a very detailed outline of what Obama plans to do for the homosexual community. . .
  
  
  RELATED ARTICLE:  Yes, we did. But we're not ready to throw confetti    Editorial: The Real Proposal magazine, November 08, 2008
  The people of America have spoken. And who among us could not feel pride at this transcendental moment in American history when we, the people, elected the first African-American president of the United States of America? To not acknowledge and savor this historic moment in a nation that once considered blacks property would be churlish. Indeed, Mr. Obama is to be sincerely congratulated. It is a historic accomplishment for him to become the first African-American to be elected to the highest office in the land, and we can understand the nation's pride and jubilance in this achievement. Many of us desired to vote for Mr. Obama not just because of its historical significance but because, to be sure, on several other levels he is qualified for the office of the presidency. But we couldn’t. And, instead, many of us find ourselves in a grieving process of sorts, not because of Mr. Obama's victory but because his advent represents a potential threat to what many in this country revere as core foundational principles that have been the cornerstones upon which our great nation has been built, and upon which we have thrived to become, certainly, one of the wealthiest and most powerful nations on this planet. . . . . .We have no interest in deciphering Mr. Obama's "nuances" such as when he states his belief that marriage is "between a man and a woman," and that he is "not in favor of gay marriage," while, at the same time, reiterating his clear opposition to Proposition 8 — the California ballot measure which has, at least for now, restored to the state of California the traditional definition of marriage that was usurped by a renegade State Supreme Court to include same-sex couples. Let's just look at the facts. . .
  
  
  RELATED SITE:  The White House- The Agenda- Civil Rights
  
  
  RELATED RESOURCE:  The Obameter: Tracking Obama's Campaign Promises   Politifact.com
  PolitiFact has compiled about 500 promises that Barack Obama made during the campaign and is tracking their progress on our Obameter. We rate their status as No Action, In the Works or Stalled. Once we find action is completed, we rate them Promise Kept, Compromise or Promise Broken. . .
  
  
  
  

• Uproar in D.C. as Same-Sex Marriage Gains  Washington Post, By Tim Craig, May 6, 2009
  The D.C. Council overwhelmingly approved a bill yesterday to recognize same-sex marriages performed elsewhere, in a vote that followed a sharp exchange between an openly gay member and a civil rights champion and set off shouts of reproach from local ministers. The council passed the measure by a vote of 12 to 1. During the debate, council member David A. Catania (I-At Large) accused Marion Barry (D-Ward 8), who cast the dissenting vote, of having taken a "bigoted" position. After the vote, enraged African American ministers stormed the hallway outside the council chambers and vowed that they will work to oust the members who supported the bill, which was sponsored by Phil Mendelson (D-At Large). They caused such an uproar that security officers and D.C. police were called in to clear the hallway. Yesterday's action could be a precursor to a debate later this year over whether to legalize same-sex marriage in the city. "There is no turning back," said Catania, who plans to introduce a broader gay marriage bill in a few months. Barry, who said he supports gay rights and civil unions, warned after the vote that the District could erupt if the council does not proceed slowly on same-sex marriage. . .
  
  
  
  RELATED ARTICLE: Barry Warns of "Civil War" Over Gay Marriage  Washington Post, May 6, 2009
  D.C. Council member Marion Barry (D-Ward 8), the only council member to vote against the bill today to legalize same-sex marriages performed elsewhere, predicted today there could be a "civil war" in the District if the Council decides to take up a broader gay marriage bill later this year. "All hell is going to break lose," Barry said while speaking to reporters. "We may have a civil war. The black community is just adamant against this." Barry made his remarks a few hours after a group of same-sex marriage opponents, led by black ministers, caused uproar in the Wilson Building after the Council voted 12 to 1 to recognize same-sex marriages performed elsewhere. They caused such a ruckus that security guards and police had to clear the hallway. The protesters shouted that council members who voted for the bill will face retribution at the polls. Although he has been a longtime supporter of gay rights, Barry said he voted against the bill to satisfy his constituents in Southeast Washington. . .

RELATED VIDEO:  D.C. Votes to Rcognize Gay Marriage  Washington Post, May 6, 2009
While gay activists applaud the D.C. Council for passing the Domestic Partner Bill by a vote of 12 to 1, local ministers say the battle is not over. . .

RELATED VIDEO: Congress Could Undo DC Pro-gay Marriage Vote The Associated Press, May 05, 2009 
The D.C. Council gave final approval to legislation that recognizes same-sex marriages performed elsewhere. Congress will get 30 days to review the bill assuming Democratic Mayor Adrian Fenty, a supporter, signs it. . .

RELATED ARTICLE:  The Battle For Marriage Continues   Townhall.com, By Harry R. Jackson, Jr. , May 04, 2009
Last Tuesday my organization, the High Impact Leadership Coalition, held an open-air rally in DC to oppose a same-sex marriage reciprocity bill, which is being pushed through the DC City Council. Several hundred concerned citizens (including over 100 pastors) attended because they felt that their opinions were not being heard. Most informed citizens also felt that the bill had been surreptitiously advanced. Last week’s rally was the beginning of what may become the ultimate battle for marriage in the nation. By the end of the week four major events had happened. . . . . .The most effective blocking mechanism to foil the advances of gay marriage has been informed grassroots voters, especially when they threaten to throw politicians out of office. There have been 29 votes in states across the country as to whether gay marriage should be legalized. In every vote, the people have reaffirmed their support for traditional marriage, rejecting the prospect of legalizing gay marriage. The important reasons why a majority of voters oppose same-sex marriage often do not get fully reported and discussed during a contentious campaign, where the news reports tend to be of the “he said/she said” variety. . .


RELATED ARTICLE:  Reasons to Oppose Gay Marriage   Short Report.com
This whole debate has been recast as gays demanding their civil rights. I find this wrong-headed and I couldn't disagree more with their thinking on two levels. First, our "rights" are given to us by God and only "secured" by our government. As is stated in the Declaration of Independence. We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. - That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men. . . . . Our rights do not come from government -- they come from God. Government should look to God to define those basic human rights that He has granted to us. It is important to recognize that God would never grant us a "right" to do what is wrong! When a government grants rights not given to us by God, it inevitably will infringe on the rights of others. . .



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:  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. . .

•  Lawmakers approve same-sex marriage in N.H., Maine  CNN.com, May 6, 2009
  Story Highlights
  *  Maine lawmakers passed bill Wednesday, and governor signed it
  *  New Hampshire lawmakers passed bill,unclear if governor will sign
  *  Three states currently allow same-sex marriage
  *  Poll says 54 percent of Americans are against such measures
  
  Lawmakers voted in favor of same-sex marriage in New Hampshire and Maine on Wednesday, leaving Rhode Island as the only other New England state without legislation in favor of the issue. Maine Gov. John Baldacci signed his state's same-sex marriage bill less than an hour after the legislature approved it. "I have come to believe that this is a question of fairness and of equal protection under the law, and that a civil union is not equal to civil marriage," Baldacci, a Democrat, said in a statement released as he signed the bill. But he raised the possibility that the citizens of the state would overturn the law, saying: "Just as the Maine Constitution demands that all people are treated equally under the law, it also guarantees that the ultimate political power in the state belongs to the people." It was not immediately clear whether New Hampshire Gov. John Lynch, a Democrat who has questioned the need for such legislation, would sign the bill passed Wednesday by the legislature in his state. Lynch said last week he did not think the law is necessary because the state already recognizes civil unions. If he does sign, his state will join New England neighbors Maine, Vermont, Connecticut and Massachusetts, which all have laws approving same-sex marriages. That would leave Rhode Island, which has same-sex marriage bills pending in its general assembly. Iowa is the only other state that allows same-sex marriages, after the Iowa state Supreme Court ruled unanimously on April 3 that it is illegal to discriminate against same-sex couples by denying them the right to marry. The first gay marriages in the state took place April 27. . . .

RELATED ARTICLE:  Opponents challenging new Maine gay marriage law  Associated Press, By Glenn Adams, May 7, 2009 (Update)
Couples anxious to wed under Maine's new gay marriage law may have a long wait. A formal challenge to it has been filed, setting into motion plans for a possible public vote that could be months or more than a year away. . .

RELATED ARTICLE:  Maine, Fifth State to Allow Gay Marriage  MSNBC.com, By Domenico Montanaro, May 06, 2009
Maine's Gov. John Baldacci signed a bill into law allowing same-sex marriage in his state. Maine becomes the fifth state to do so. The other four: Connecticut, Iowa, Massachusetts and Vermont. "In the past, I opposed gay marriage while supporting the idea of civil unions," Baldacci said in a statement. "I have come to believe that this is a question of fairness and of equal protection under the law, and that a civil union is not equal to civil marriage." There is serious legislative activity to approve gay marriage in DC (where last night the city council voted to recognize same-sex marriages performed elsewhere), New Jersey, New Hampshire and New York.  Also, in California, there’s a state Supreme Court challenge to Prop. 8. As we wrote this morning, it's example #457 that we’re long removed from 2004. Here's Baldacci's full statement:. . .


RELATED ARTICLE:  The Institution Formerly Known As "Marriage"   Catholic Online, By Jennifer Roback Morse, April 30, 2009
The Iowa Supreme Court recently proved we are not being urged to make marriage more inclusive, but to radically redefine the nature of marriage itself. The Iowa court’s recent decision does not simply broaden marriage, it radically changes its nature. While marriage previously served public purposes of attaching mothers and fathers to their children and one another, now marriage merely serves as affirmation of adult feelings. . . . . The Court had to come up with a very limited understanding of the purposes of marriage in order to maintain that opposite-sex and same-sex couples are in fact similarly situated. The Court enumerated several purposes directly. Marriage provides an institutional basis for defining relational rights and responsibilities; marriage allows people to pool their resources; marriage recognizes people’s commitments; marriage provides comfort and happiness; marriage is a status, not a contract. But these reasons do not explain why we need marriage in particular. . .


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


RELATED ARTICLE:  The Deceit of Gay "Marriage"  -Round Two  Boundless.org, By David Orland
On reflection, it’s amazing that supporters of gay marriage have gotten this far. Set aside the hype with which the issue is usually presented and one is left with a surprisingly feeble argument for an imaginary right. The standard argument for gay marriage goes something like this: Heterosexual marriage is legal (true). In most states, homosexual marriage is not (also true). Therefore, gay marriage advocates conclude, the civil rights of gay Americans are being violated (false!). Where to start? In the first place, homosexuals are not denied the right to marry — they are denied a right to marry other homosexuals, which is something else altogether. Next, the argument trades on the idea — superficially appealing but practically empty — that discrimination is by definition a bad and evil thing. Denying legal status to gay marriage does indeed involve discrimination — but it is discrimination of a perfectly legitimate kind. Finally and most crucially, the argument assumes what it is meant to prove: the rights of gays are being violated only if you already agree that one of their rights is to get married to a person of the same sex as themselves. But that, of course, is precisely what is at issue. It’s as if proponents of gay marriage believe that saying you have a right, loud enough and often enough, gives you one. While this tactic may succeed in silencing some of their opponents, it falls miserably short of making the sort of case that needs to be made if a specifically “gay right” to marriage is to be recognized. If gays hope to show that they have a right to marry one another, they will have to prove that they meet the same conditions that give heterosexual couples this right. There’s no way around it: any discussion of gay marriage must begin with a discussion of marriage in general. So why is heterosexual marriage recognized as a right?. . .


 

• The Jessica Question   Vanity Fair, By Rich Cohen, June 2009 Issue
  After a tough few years—two movie duds, a risky foray into country music, and tabloid headlines about her weight—Jessica Simpson is at the crossroads of Obscurity and Re-invention. What brought the 28-year-old pop star, now also the controversial girlfriend of Dallas Cowboys quarterback Tony Romo, to this moment? Talking to Simpson about her life and loves, the author charts the inevitable rise of a preacher’s daughter from Abilene, Texas, the pervasive influence of her manager father, and the radiant quality that, through thick and thin, has made her a woman to watch. . . . .Simpson, 28, who flashed like a jet through the pop-star sky, with her first Top 10 hit coming at age 19 (“I Wanna Love You Forever”), followed by other hit records, the MTV reality show that made her a household name (Newlyweds: Nick & Jessica), and several films, is currently surrounded by handlers—publicist, father and mother, pop-star sister (Ashlee), quarterback boyfriend (Tony Romo, of the Dallas Cowboys)—who together, like a high-altitude rescue team, try to get her down the sunny side of the slope. “I think she absolutely needs to re-invent herself,” said Tommy Mottola, who, as the head of Sony Music, signed Simpson to her first major-label record deal in 1997. There have been danger signs. First, the sudden weight gain, as evidenced by pictures that turned up in the tabloids earlier this year showing the starlet, onstage, looking less than slender, holding the microphone like a turkey leg, and wearing what were described everywhere as “mom jeans.”. . .
  
  
  
  RELATED ARTICLE:  Source: Tony Romo Had a Wandering Eye at End of Relationship    People magazine, By Liz McNeil, July 31, 2009
  Jessica Simpson is "bummed" about her split from quarterback Tony Romo, but "it's the best thing for her," according to a source close to the singer. "[Tony] wanted her to be a house mom and be in Dallas, and he wants to go out and play – and not just football," says the source. Additionally, the source says Simpson and Romo's relationship started to deteriorate toward the end of their time together. "It's been tough for her. Tony had his eyes on everyone but her towards the end," the source tells PEOPLE. "But let's not forget they lasted for a long time and he stuck with her even though the fans didn't like her.". . . . . For Simpson, the breakup has meant letting go of her hopes for a future with the handsome football star. "I think when Jessica gets into a relationship, she thinks she is going to marry him and have babies," the source says. "Every time she ends up with a boy, she is in the zone that it's leading to marriage and babies. That's how she's programmed." And these feelings were not exclusive to Romo, says the source. "I guarantee when she was with John [Mayer] she thought she was going to marry John," adds the source. "She's in love with love.". . . 
  

RELATED PHOTOS:  Don’t Mess with Jessica  Vanity Fair.com
Jessica Simpson, the preacher’s daughter from Abilene, Texas, is fighting back against unflattering tabloid portrayals and accusations that she “jinxed” her Dallas Cowboys quarterback boyfriend, Tony Romo. . .

RELATED ARTICLE:  Jessica Simpson's washed up? Perfect Vanity Fair cover girl  Los Angeles Times Blog, By Elizabeth Snead, May 04, 2009
Vanity Fair put Jessica Simpson ("You Call This Fat?") on the cover of its June issue.  Why? Because she's washed up, that's why. Which means there's hope for Lindsay Lohan yet. She doesn't say anything even vaguely interesting or introspective or intelligent for the duration of the lengthy profile. But here's the funniest part of the piece written by Rich Cohen. And yes, it's about her weight. Sorry. "Jessica seemed nervous. Her hands trembled. She ordered a glass of Pinot Grigio. It seemed to calm her. She didn’t want to talk about her weight, so, of course, that’s all I could think of — it gilded each question in my mind: What are you working on now [that you’re fat]? Do you see yourself as part of a class, with Christina and Britney [or are you too fat]? Do you feel that your relationship with Tony Romo has affected his performance as a quarterback [because you are fat]?" By the way, during the interview she had two glasses of Pinot Grigio, apparently her Drink of Choice. Keep reading for her fascinating response to all those mean fat jokes. . . . . .COMMENTS:  Wow! I detect a little jealousy!! Why don't we have a picture of the author of this hateful little piece. I guess with a name like Snead, we don't need one. Posted by: Kris | May 05, 2009 at 03:33 AM. . .

More 'Marriage" News: April 2009

Get 2 Free Preview Issues!

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


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

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

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

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

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

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