The Right To Life And Health Threatened In Rhode Island By A Massachusetts Judge

Here is an action from an activist state judge the said homosexual pseudo marriages are allowed in Massachusetts that involve Rhode Island couples as Rhode Island does not expressly prohibit gay pseudo marriages. First the judge does not have the right to rule what is legal and what is not legal in Rhode Island because it is not his jurisdiction. Second the question of course is not if Rhode Island prohibits them but whether or not Rhode Island recognizes them after all Rhode Island does not recognize a marriage between a women and her dog or between a man and his car either.

The judge is ignoring the intent of both the Rhode Island law which stresses marriage between a bride and a groom and Massachusetts law which is meant not to interfere with another states laws and put his own spin on both. That should be an impeachable offense as it is obviously a mark of bad behavior which you do not want in any official position especially the judicial branch.

The idea that Governor Romney has to enforce the court ruling as advocated by Michele Granda is contrary to the idea of separation of powers as proposed for the federal government. The question is if that same separation of powers in Massachusetts and it certainly appears it does from what I read as the governor is given supreme executive powers and judges are given judicial powers..

I also found this passage in Chapter III of the Massachusetts Constitution interesting.

Article V. All causes of marriage, divorce, and alimony, and all appeals from the judges of probate shall be heard and determined by the governor and council, until the legislature shall, by law, make other provision.

I am curious if the legislature made other provisions and what they are.

The idea that homosexuals love each other is an obvious deception as you do not engage in self destructive behavior with those you love and homosexuality is known to be self destructive. For instance HIV/Aid is a known and preventable disease that never the less is common in the homosexual population. Encouraging such self distructive behavior is a threat to to life and health of the people of Rhode Island.

Source 1 is the article about an activist Massachusetts Judge ruling on making homosexual marriage legal in Rhode Island.

Source 2 is the Massachusetts State Constitution.

Representative Mark Foley And How Politics Trumps Ethics

Republican U.S. Representative Mark Foley of Florida resigned after a male teen age page of another Congressman complained of receiving explicit email from him. Why Mark Foley targeted the boy as a victim I do not. The boy also believes that Foley may have targeted another boy.

The Republicans claim to have kept this under wraps at the behest of the parents and have no of it for 10-11 months. The emails were leaked and published Friday by ABC in what was obviously a political move by someone. The Republicans did a disservice to the constituents in Foley’s district as he ran for reelection this year with them knowing his action. Politics seemed to have trumped ethics once more in Washington DC.

Foley is a social liberal in that he supported genocide through abortion often referred to as abortion rights. One the other hand I heard that he said he would support a constitutional amendment to ban homosexual marriage. He does sit the Missing and Exploited Children's Caucus which makes him appear to be a hypocrite. I do not know if he is since I do not know if he believes he did evil by emailing the explicit comments to the teen page or pages.

I do know he should consider getting treatment either from a competent religious councilor or a competent psychologist. He might even attend meetings for sex/love addiction anonymous. Whatever choice he makes God has the power to overcome our evil desires and he willing to use it for those who are willing to follow his Son.

I do know Foley committed a crime according to natural law as homosexuality is abusive and thus destructive of the right to life and health and also because the boy is still his parents protection which rendered the action a violation of their parental rights. At the same time I do not know if he committed a crime according to the laws of the government jurisdiction he was in or if the people of that area have decided to tolerate such conduct for one reason or another.

An article about Republican U.S. Representative Mark Foley of Florida.

New York Act Against Trans Fats In Order To Secure The Right To Health And Life

New York City moves to ban trans fats. Which being a significant market will cause nationwide restaurants like McDonalds to reduce trans fats in their product nation wide in order not to loose the customers in New York City unless it is more economical to resolve the issue in another way. One cost to the consumer will be the taste of the product will change and so the choice of the consumer will be limited. The government’s concern in this area is the health or general welfare of the people and is well within their jurisdiction since it is part of their obligation to ensure the natural right to health and life of each person. The question though is whether or not trans fats are a significant risk to the general welfare of those people who eat the produce of restraints to overweigh other concerns such as limiting taste and loss of income.

Being overweight is most likely a significant risk factor but trans fats are only a fraction of why people are overweight and removing them from a persons diet may not significantly alter their life span or chance of continue good health. Portion control would seem to be a more effective method of ensuring the good health of the general populace.

I have seen the abstracts of two studies concluded what different things to me.

The First Concluded:

Interpreted in the light of experimental and clinical studies, the results of these cross-cultural analyses suggest that dietary saturated and trans fatty acids and dietary cholesterol are important determinants of differences in population rates of coronary heart disease death.

The Second Concluded:

Over a mean of 8.1 years, a dietary intervention that reduced total fat intake and increased intakes of vegetables, fruits, and grains did not significantly reduce the risk of coronary heart disease , stroke, or cardiovascular disease in postmenopausal women and achieved only modest effects on cardiovascular disease risk factors, suggesting that more focused diet and lifestyle interventions may be needed to improve risk factors and reduce cardiovascular disease risk.

I find apparent contradiction interesting as it indicates that other factors as well as an increased consumption of trans fats are most likely found in the higher incidence of coronary heart disease death in the first study that were not controlled for. Two possible factors are age and sex. The first study did mention dietary cholesterol as a risk factor and it may have been calculated with the level of trans fats and so may be more responsible for the findings than the trans fats were.

The bottom line though is that whether trans fats is a significant risk to the health of the people is something that needs to be decided by the legislative process.

If the law is passed and McDonalds can prove their costs significantly increased because of it in more than New York City then McDonalds or any other restaurant that stretches over two states can petition the federal government to intervene as the clause in Article 1 Section 8 which grants the federal government jurisdiction over interstate trade gives the federal government the authority to do so. If we actually went according to the U.S. Constitution the interstate organization, otherwise known as an artificial person, could not take the case to court as the Eleventh Amendment took away the federal judicial power to try suits in law or equity between citizens of another state or foreign citizens and according to Article 3 Section 2 it never gave the authority to settle a case between a state and a citizen of that same state. The sad thing is the federal courts choose to ignore the Constitution and make up legal fictions to steal the power from the people, the states, and the local governments. On the other hand at the state level McDonalds may be allowed to sue for much the same reasons unless state law forbids it. McDonalds can also petition the state government to hear their complaint.

The citizens are limited to using there choice of where to purchase their food and what to buy to influence McDonalds. The also have free speech, free press, freedom to assemble and petition, and as a last option the power of the vote.

Source 1 is article about New York City banning trans fats.

Source 2 is the study of dietary trans fats and dietary cholesterol.

Source 3 is the study of trans fats in postmenopausal women.

The Law Of Unitended Consequences In Action

China experience an unintended consequence when they passed a law to aid single parents. The people saw a chance to improve their economical status and started divorcing. The mass divorce was noticed by officials who then abolished the law and persuaded 39 of the 41 teachers to remarry their former spouse.

We do the same thing in the U.S. but we do not seem to be wise enough to catch on. Aids to dependent families to single mothers because they are single then they will remain single or get a divorce in at least some cases while cohabitating. This causes a dilemma that may be solved by considering each individual separate without rewarding or penalize them for any other adult in the house. This may lease a stay at home individual with a well paid mate to receive Aid but it seems to be better than encouraging divorce or cohabitation which are both known to damage our society.

Source is about the unintended consequence of China passing a law to aid single parents.

Since When Are Words More Important Than Actions

Politics is a dirty game and just because an accusation is not true does not mean it does not harm the target. Lets take Senator George Allen who is supposedly beloved by Christians, which is 80% of the U.S. population and so tells us nothing. A left leaning political commentator accused him of racism during his early years and claims he has two anonymous sources to back him up. Others that were associated with him at the time deny that he made any such comments. It seems that some of the evidence against him is he used a confederate flag and a hangman’s noose as decoration at the time. These are symbols and no smoking gun because we do not know what he associated them with at the time and the same symbol can mean different things to different people. The third piece of evidence against him is his denial of his Jewish heritage. Mind you Jew mean race as well as religion and his answer of that his mother was “raised a Christian” was obvious a reference to religion and not race. His mother states that just the month before she had told him she was raised a Jew. Was he embarrassed with that revelation or did he just forget it during the stress of an interview? The last evidence against him is that he used the word “macaca” which is a racial slur in French speaking North Africa and is derived from monkey. He says he did not know what it meant but his mother probably did coming from the right region.

In my book Senator Allen is a RINO as he is only pro life from the point of viability on. Still I was taught that actions were more important than words and he has showed by his actions that he supported Black universities.

I also find Democrats to be highly hypocritical as they support legalized abortion that kills three times as many blacks and two times as many Hispanics as whites. The also support cohabitation and no fault divorce which have hurt White society but demolished Black society and is probably a factor in the higher rate of Blacks being in prison than Whites. There is also the fact that they have Robert Byrd an ex member of the Klu Klux Klan is in their Senatorial ranks.

My source is a persuasive article pretending to be an informative one about the accusations of racism against Senator Allen.

The Right Action, The Wrong Government In A State V Federal Government

The Federal government proposes mandatory testing for HIV/Aids in hopes of slowing down the disease and prolonging the life’s of those who have it. 4000 individuals die from Aids in the United States every year and the rest are kept alive by high cost medicine that is sometime picked up at the taxpayers expense. Since 40,000 new cases are reported annually it is a net of 36000 or +.012% of the total U.S. population.

50% of the known cases are homosexuals and 87% of the confirmed cases are in males. This sticks with the transmission factor I heard of that sodomy, intervenes drug use, blood transfusion, and birth to a HIV/Aids infected mother. Researchers claim that there is an increase in infections by vaginal intercourse but I have my doubts because almost all cases I hear of are of a bisexual male infecting a heterosexual female and there is male female sodomy as well as vaginal intercourse. If vaginal intercourse is a large factor then HIV/Aids has increased in threat level.

According to the CIA fact book 6% of the population has HIV/Aids and half of those with HIV/Aids are homosexuals. If this is correct and the 2-4% estimate of the percent of our population who is actively homosexual is also correct then the vast majority of homosexuals have HIV/Aids and it does not have much further to spread.

It is a myth that condoms stop HIV/Aids as they do not stop pregnancies. Going by their success at stopping pregnancy you would have a 1/5th to 1/6th of the chance of catching HIV/Aids that you would have with out them. Every time you have sex you are gambling with your life and your health.

Our government should have acted against HIV/Aids long ago by setting up colonies for infected individuals and segregating jails. Their failure to do this because of political correctness has allowed the disease to spread to a point where colonies are no longer a viable option. The segregation of jails should be done in every state.

This lack of segregation explains why HIV/Aids is spreading in the Black community. Many individuals practice sodomy in jail and a higher percentage of Blacks are imprisoned than whites. When these men exit jail have sex with women of their own choice and mixed racial couples seem to be rare in our society.

Abstinence until marriage and faithfulness in marriage are the best ways to avoid any kind of sexually transmitted disease providing you do not marry a person that is STD positive or a person who is unfaithful to you.

By the Ninth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution the federal government does not have the authority to actually legislate mandatory tests within the jurisdiction of the states. They will of course ignore that detail as they have for many years. The states are quite capable of acting to protect the general welfare of their own people but the federal government likes the unconstitutional power rush.

Source 1 is article about mandatory HIV testing and has a story where a bisexual male infected a heterosexual female.

Source 2 is abstract about heterosexual transmission of HIV-1 where a bisexual male infected a heterosexual female.

I am posting a correction to this blog. The HIV/Aids rate is .6% or 950 thousand individuals and the deaths each year from Aids is 14,000 individuals. I am sorry for my errors. I am not sure how the CIA factbook got these figures but I did notice that the 950,000 and .6% did not match with the 298 million population. Maybe it is another failure of intelligence from the CIA.

Building A Border Fence Is One Step Of Providing For The Common Defense

The House has pushed through a bill on securing our border by building 700 miles of border fence and it has irritated a number of groups and individuals. One of these groups is Action For World Liberation Everyday(AFWLE) who’s spokeswomen is in Washington DC to join with other protestations in chaining themselves to a half ton 28 ton wall they set up in a Senate park where plan to fast for a length of time in attempt to influence the public sentiment and the Senate. The reporter for Christian Science Monitor whose article I used as my source did not feel that her relationship to the AFWLE was important information.

Her objections that those willing to break the law will find a way around such a border are legitimate but we employ border control agents to prevent them from doing just that. The question is if we have enough agents and if the ones we have are efficiently organized.

This brings me to the National Border Patrol Council which is a union and may not be completely trustworthy in this case because they are a member of the AFL-CIO and what they said agrees with that organizations stance. The AFL-CIO came out for amnesty for illegal aliens in 2000 but are against Bush’s proposal which sounds like amnesty to me. Nine illegal immigrants that were fired after being part of a unionization effort won a case before the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission and the National Labor Relations Board in January of 2000 which set a precedent that the AFL-CIO probably found advantageous. Self interest may encourage the National Border Patrol Council to favor more border control agents on the border as a partial solution but their connection to the AFL-CIO compromises their loyalty to their mission.

Maureen Torrey a business owner who benefits from illegal immigration says she is paying $16-$17 dollars an hour in upstate New York and can not attract enough workers. She should advertise as Wal-Mart or other retail outlets as they pay Americans a whole lot less. I know the people work through temporary agencies at light industrial jobs for a fraction of what she states she is paying.

Senator Larry Craig (R) of Idaho and Dianne Feinstein (D) of California are out of touch with the bureaucracy as they want to tell it to speed up without actually finding out why it can not handle the present load. My opinion is they are playing politics and not really looking for solutions.

Speaker of the House Dennis Hastert (R) is the only one in this article that speaks for two thirds of the American people when he states the border fence is about the national and economic security of the United States.

Source 1 is the Christian Science article about the bill to build a border fence.

Source 2 shows that Azul-Cristian Caravaggio is the Tennessee contact person for AFWLE

Source 3 shows the National Border Control Council is affiliated with the AFL-CIO

Source 4 is about AFL-CIO’s stance on amnesty for illegal immigrants

Source 5 mentions case illegal immigrants won in Minnesota.

Source 6 Is 2004 statement by AFL-CIO president on President Bush’s immigration principles.