The steps of the Supreme Court were alive with celebration of equality and love. All around me were hugs and kisses; tears and fist-bumps; energy, ent...
The Green News Report is also available via... ...
Civil marriage is a civil function, not a religious one. That's why when government employees in our country have had religious objections to divorce and remarriage, they have still had to do their jobs.
Missed in Scalia's childish histrionics was his so-called 'originalist' approach for interpreting the Constitution.
What change does social network activism really evoke? There's no doubt that awareness is brought to these situations that need to be brought to light, but often that awareness substitutes action.
One of the many hidden stories of how we got to today involves how some Dems got "turned" on the issue. It wasn't through polite lobbying. Or reasoned argument. It was power politics.
Ya gotta hand it to Donald Trump. Whenever he does something, he does it big. Huge...the biggest and the best!, as the self-aggrandizing Donald himself would say.
Responses to the flag controversy, and the new constitutional right to same-sex marriage and upholding Obamacare are dividing the GOP family.
My 13-year-old daughter turned to me at one point and said, "One day I will tell my kids that I remember when gays and lesbians won the right to be married." I glowed. It was one of those moments when I could pat myself on the back, knowing I was a good parent.
Rather than portend a new dark era for religion, as my debating opponent on Fox News warned on Friday, the decision reminds us of why religious life flourishes in America.
Gay marriage and the Obamacare victory will get all the coverage, but I predict that Texas Department of Housing is the ruling that America will most come to regret.
How did these three disparate couples spark a change to a culture thousands of years old? Fittingly, it was an act of a mean spirited Republican-led Congress that was the Fort Sumter moment in the Same-Sex Marriage Revolution. The message? Be careful what you wish for.
In King v. Burwell, decided last Thursday, the Supreme Court has once again (no doubt inadvertently) given us a lesson in the philosophy of language. The dispute in the case is over the meaning of the phrase "exchange established by the state." Chief Justice John Roberts, writing for the majority, argues that the phrase can and should be read to include an exchange established by the federal government. He explains that "exchange established by the state" is ambiguous because when read in context (as he proceeds to do) it means something different than it does when read in isolation. Justice Scalia retorts that by the logic of such a reading, "everything is ambiguous." That's both right and not right.
Who are you to act as spokesperson for all people of faith in this country? For that matter, who do you think you are to speak for the Han Chinese, the Carthaginians, the Kalahari Bushmen and the Aztecs?
The lead lawyer urging the Supreme Court to overturn this important public safety rule was Michigan Solicitor General Aaron Lindstrom, representing a group of conservative-dominated states. But many private lawyers were paid by coal, oil, and gas interests to block the rule. Who are they?
Before we'd gone more than a few steps, people were asking to take photos of us. Okay, mostly they were asking to take photos of my cute kid. Of his semi-toothless grin, blue fedora, pride flag and "My Two Daddies" t-shirt. He obliged politely, a bit overwhelmed.