First, he is dumbfounded (which I can understand if you only count the first syllable in that word) by the fact that Garden State Equality - a large organization whose purpose is to push for EQUAL treatment of same sex couples when it comes to civil (not religious) marriages - is refusing to give the hard earned and raised money of its members to those legislators who do not agree with their core principles (note, this basic misunderstanding is also shared by very prominent New Jersey Democrats, so Deo is far from alone in his "bewilderment").
Then, he talks about how marriage equality "proponents" - those who are so radical as to demand equal rights for civil (not religious) marriages between same sex couples - "fail to grasp" the will of the people, citing the New Jersey Constitution in stating "All political power is inherent in the people."
"Fail to grasp".
What Deo and his fellow bigots and homophobes fail to grasp is that marriage equality is neither a political matter that his supposed example applies to, nor is something subject to the "will of the people". Marriage equality is just that - equality. A basic human and civil right that shouldn't be voted away by a majority comprised of self-loathing bigoted homophobic fools who demonize entire groups to soothe their own fears.
This isn't something that should be put on a ballot. This isn't something that should be polled to see if it is a good idea "politically". This falls under one of the most basic tenets that this country was founded on - and later expanded upon as future generations came to see that past and precedent failed to satisfy that tenet:
Equality.
From "all men are created equal" to expanding the right to vote to those who were previously and unfairly denied this right to basic civil rights.
And now this.
There should be no "will of the people" - except if it is referring to the will of the people to look at themselves for what they are - either tolerant and in favor of equal rights or bigoted and homophobic - and in favor of oppression, unequal treatment, discrimination and "separate but equal".
Joey Novick put this status up on his facebook page comparing the MTV show Jersey Shore to the NJ State Senate and he comes up with this:
Ouch! Thurman Hart reminded us in the comments that thankfully we don't have to watch the Senators shake their money makers. When Babs questioned why Joey was demeaning neanderthals, he offered this clarification:
1-The only members of the State Senate who were actually referenced in the joke above were the 20 who voted to oppose ---6 Ds and 14 Rs. They were the only Neanderthals.
2- I apologize to any Neanderthals who felt demeaned by the comparison to members of the State Senate. I regret any harm done, which was unintended.
"I can only find solace in the fact that the next generation of Democrats, which overwhelmingly support marriage equality, will not balk at the opportunity to confer civil rights on their fellow citizens."
It's inspiring to know that our next generation of leaders understand what our leaders today can't seem to comprehend.
Thank you mconvente. Yes, you're right; far more than only gay people are disappointed in the NJ Senate. You say it well. - promoted by Rosi
Today's New Jersey State Senate vote against a bill that would legalize gay marriage is quite a hit to the cause of equality, the progressive community, and to me personally. To me, it is unconscionable that a legislative body could refuse their sworn oath to ensure that our laws uphold the Constitution, but that is exactly what happened this afternoon in the Senate chambers in Trenton.
While watching an online live stream of the debate, I was struck by the words of one particular Senator. Her name is Teresa Ruiz, and she represents District 29, which includes the very diverse city of Newark. Senator Ruiz is the first Latina state Senator in New Jersey's history, and her upraising clearly shined through with her words today.
While making her speech in favor of gay marriage, Senator Ruiz recalled her personal experience with being deemed "the other", concluding by stating she doesn't ever want to take a vote that says, "it's okay for me, but not for you."
Today is the day that the NJ Senate finally votes on marriage equality. This is hardly a news flash for regular readers of this blog, but it's still feels kinda surreal that it's finally show time.
If anyone reading has pics, video or updates to add, please feel free to share here. If you're on site in Trenton, grab a snack cuz it's gonna be a long day....... I estimate the marriage vote to go down sometime around 5:30pm.
Jay Lassiter planned all along to go down to the statehouse yesterday and blog for us. But then, something happened in his hometown, that made him stay there, to capture for you today what the people of Cherry Hill did when the fools came to town. Great job, Jay - promoted by Rosi
Today the NJ Senate Judiciary voted on gay marriage equality. And what a long strange trip it's been clearing the first hurdle.
A chill ran down my spine this week. I was watching Rachel Maddow, and she reported on a development far away that just made my blood run cold.
Uganda is about to pass a law that would either imprison homosexuals FOR LIFE or actually put them to death. What was so frightening about the story was what preceded this chilling turn of events - the sheer number of prominent elected US officials such as Sen Inhoefe and evangelical activists preaching that you can " Pray Away the Gay" from the US, who had made many a "humanitarian" trip over to Uganda to impose their religious views in that country. While we weren't paying attention. While we had our guard down. While we did nothing. These are the same folks pouring money and hate into NJ to make sure Marriage Equality doesn't pass.
In human history, in this age of cell phones and apps and gadgets and scientific enlightenment, it is easy to assume we will always go forward toward the light. That the motion of progress always goes in one direction. But we remember Sarajevo and Darfur, and Somalia, and other places of civilization that fell to the dark drives of the part of our humanity we haven't quite got control over yet. Our basic primitive need for trouble making, blame shifting, scapegoating, hatred, and violence.
In our own country - founded on religious freedom, no less, we witnessed the slaughter of the Native Americans on our own soil, and the slave trade AFTER we had fought "for freedom". So many things to apologize for, so little time.
My point is this. We Can Go Backward. But we don't HAVE to. We can fight the negative, frightened rhetoric we hear spouted every day by politicians who wish to curry favor with the crazy right wing.
On Monday, December 7, 2009, we can make this a day to celebrate in the future as the day we actually delivered civil rights to our brothers and sisters, family and friends, or the day we did nothing and let the world go backwards again. Show up in Trenton and let the Legislature know, that unlike in Uganda, we are vigilant and "fired up". We care about civilization and enlightenment. We are FOR progress.
If good men and women stand back and do nothing, you get ....Uganda.
Please help our dear friends in NJ get the rights they deserve. It's high time NJ took that next step FORWARD. We can either pass the Marriage Equality Act, or we can go backwards. Progress doesn't happen all on its own. It isn't a natural as the sun coming up tomorrow. It has to happen by the sweat and the tears of those who can actually imagine a better world, and who take the time to create that reality. We have a chance here. We have the good will. Now we need your boots on the ground. Be in Trenton on Monday for a historic vote on Marriage Equality and show our NJ Legislature that you want NJ to go FORWARD.
Allison looks at Mad Men and sees New Jersey. Hell-o? Then sews it all up with a shout out to her ACLU-NJ friends to join her Monday in Trenton for marriage equality. By the way, this is Allison's first-ever post at Blue Jersey. Beat that with a stick! Thanks, Allison - - promoted from the diaries by Rosi
"Maybe it's not the time for civil rights."
It was shocking when Betty Draper said that to her black housekeeper Carla upon hearing the now-infamous news that a bomb in a Birmingham church had killed four little girls in 1963 Alabama.
Mad Men has become an American pop-culture sweetheart partly because the anachronistic, chauvinistic, homophobic, racist, politically incorrect sentiments sound absurd today. Characters toss back bigotry as easily as a glass of Jameson at the beginning of their workday. It seems just as wrong, and there's about as much slurring in both.
If only the prejudice on the show were actually anachronistic. Earlier this week, New Jersey's Senate Majority Leader Steve Sweeney told the press that civil rights for New Jersey couples should wait. And we say to him, if not now, then when?
If New Jersey doesn't pass marriage legislation now, any possibility in the near future is as good as gone. We have just a few weeks until Governor Corzine, who supports the right for gay and lesbian couples to marry, officially hands over the reins to Governor-elect Chris Christie, who vocally does not.
We have a state whose majority supports equal rights for gay couples, we have a legislature whose majority supports equal rights for gay couples and we have a governor - for now - who also supports equal rights for gay couples.
But we don't have a leader in the state senate brave enough to say, "That's enough. New Jersey is going to do the right thing."
Instead of taking up the responsibility to do what they know is right, they're taking cover behind the economy. We have four years ahead of us to fix New Jersey's withering finances. We have less than two months to make sure that people aren't forced to live with the indignity of discrimination brought on by civil unions, affecting every corner of their lives, every day of their lives.
I wasn't shocked that Betty Draper wavered on civil rights in front of Carla. Coldness is Betty's signature characteristic; callousness isn't surprising. I was shocked because, from the vantage point of the 21st Century, after this country fought against the legacy of some of the darkest episodes of human history - the middle passage, hundreds of years of slavery, a brutal war that killed more Americans than any other, the failure of reconstruction, the nadir of American race relations, Jim Crow laws, unending injustices - I could not imagine what the world would look like if the leaders of the 60s had thrown their hands up and said, "You know, maybe it's not the time for civil rights."
Americans made it the time for civil rights. They didn't politely ask politicians to pencil them into their schedules - they left the politicians without a choice, and they changed the world. Segregation came to an end, miscegenation laws were repealed, American soldiers protected the rights of African Americans in America's schools and streets, and people across the country rode buses for days to march for miles in some of the most dangerous places in the world for a black person or a Jew. The equality they all hungered for eclipsed their fear of taking personal risks. And those sacrifices make politicians' political fears look like a farce.
Mr. Smith has never lived in Washington, and he certainly doesn't go to Trenton. It usually takes an extraordinary leader to take bold action, even to do the right thing - with one exception. Politicians take bold action when the chorus of Americans together becomes too loud to ignore.
Can you imagine what the world would look like if the people concerned about civil rights in 1963 decided that it wasn't the time for civil rights? Would Loving v. Virginia be a 2009 case instead of one from 1967? Even if we're constantly fighting against backslides in our voting rights, at least we have the Voting Rights Act to hold our government to. We don't have poll-tax free-for-alls.
"But gay rights. That's so new and radical."
It's not, though. We've been in the same place for decades. The Stonewall raids, the assassination of Harvey Milk, the panicked response to AIDS. It was never the time for civil rights back then. So why not now?
January Jones, the actress behind the Betty Draper mask, lampooned her character's cheerful bigotry in a Saturday Night Live sketch that told housewives how to host the perfect party. "Homosexuals should be addressed by Ms. or Mrs., depending on their age. If a black person arrives ... just kidding. A black person won't arrive. That's an example of party humor."
It's tongue in cheek, sure, but it's still the same mindset that declared, "Now isn't the time for civil rights." It's a mindset of exclusion, and it's rooted in the belief that only some people deserve to have their constitutional promises kept. That's not who we are as Americans, and that's not who we want to be in New Jersey.
We've come too far to retreat. The "economy" excuse is a red herring, a false dichotomy, an easy way out, and just plainly and simply wrong. Marriage would bring money into New Jersey, and it would solve the financial straits of gay couples who struggle because their civil unions deprive them of health benefits.
It is the time for civil rights, because our momentum as a country pulls us toward the expansion of rights, not their restriction. I want to be shocked in 40 years because a character on a retro TV show about the early 21st century suggests that now isn't the time for marriage equality. I don't want to live in a world in 40 years where I have to tell myself, "Well, maybe this time we'll succeed."
It's up to New Jersey legislators, who know that marriage equality is the right thing, to secure the civil rights of our state's gay and lesbian families. But it's up to us, the rest of New Jersey, to pressure our state's legislators into not having a choice.
If you live in New Jersey, there are ways you can take immediate action. We need you to e-mail your state senator, call the senate majority leader at 856-251-9801 -- urge him to take up marriage legislation -- and rally with the ACLU-NJ in Trenton Monday, November 23.
We're meeting at: Garden State Equality's New Jersey Office
110 W. State Street, Trenton
Monday, November 23, 2009
8:30 a.m.
If there's a day to take off work for a cause, it's Monday. Your day off could mean a lifetime of equality for families in New Jersey.
If you live in another state, just promise to help us raise hell, deal? If we win, we'll celebrate at the Atlantic City boardwalk. If we lose, we'll go to the casinos and take bets on what we'll see first: civil rights for New Jersey's gay families or a lesbian Miss America.
Majority of N.J. voters support gay marriage, poll shows
by The Associated Press
Thursday April 23, 2009, 5:39 AM
A poll found New Jersey voters support allowing gay couples to marry.
The Quinnipiac University Poll results are similar to a Monmouth University poll in February.
This poll found 49 percent supporting gay marriage, while 43 percent are opposed. Women and whites tend to favor a gay marriage law, while blacks, men and those who attend religious services weekly are more likely to oppose it.
Obviously, there will be a struggle to pass this. But clearly it's a matter of demographic inevitability. With each passing year more people become educated/informed and enlightened as to the truth/facts of this issue....and more older folks with irrevocably fixed ideas die off and are replaced by younger more tolerant less bigoted individuals.
It's not a matter of if there will be ME; but of when.
Please join us on Friday April 10th from 1-3 pm for a prayer service in solidarity with immigrants & protest of Amtrak and Greyhound's cooperation with DHS's racial profiling. We will gather at the park outside of Newark Penn Station at the corner of Market St. and Raymond Plaza East.
Amtrak has agreed to cooperate with border inspections on a random basis within 75 miles of the border. Despite being provided with
Last year the New York Times published a shocking story of the neglect of a tailor from Guinea who died as a result of severe medical neglect after a fall left him with a head injury. Congressional hearings followed and it was learned that over 85 immigrant detainees had died in custody. However, there was no way of knowing precisely how many had died since none of the county jails or for profit prisons housing immigrants were required to keep records nor were any inquiries mandated as a result of a death while in custody.
There were many allegations of cover-ups from the immigrant?s rights advocacy community which may have sounded a bit like wild conspiracy theories until today.
Civil unions are an inadequate substitute for marriage. Creating a separate, new legal structure to confer some benefits on same-sex couples neither honors American ideals of fairness, nor does it grant true equality. The results are clearly visible in New Jersey, which continues to deny same-sex couples some of the tangible civil benefits that come with marriage.
Gov. Jon Corzine of New Jersey has long said that he would sign a measure granting the right to marry to couples of the same sex. We are heartened that he has declared that that should happen sooner rather than later.
The NYT is a bastion of the establishment of this nation. Their editorial board would only be called "left wing loonies" by the likes of Rush Limbaugh and Sean Hannity etc.
I understand the reality that homophobia is/has been part of the general cultural conditioning to which most (if not all) of us have been subjected.
I understand that this issue is a "hot potato" and is one of the "big three" that Republicans have often exploited (guns, gays and "god"......btw, "god" is in quotes and not capitalized because I don't believe in a God that condones bigotry....that's a human failing)
I do understand, however, that many socially conservative Democrats just "don't think we're ready" for this kind of change "right now".
I disagree.
Perhaps, if a poll were taken right now, the majority of New Jerseyans (in general and of those likely to vote) would be uneasy with ME. The operative phrase there is "perhaps". Here's one poll that is actually quite encouraging. (done by Zogby for GSE....it will bring up a PDF)
This is one of those issues that can touch the Conscience of people in such a way that, once they "get it"; they become Graced with an ability to abandon their prejudices and fears.
Just as many non-Blacks were key components of the civil rights movement of the 50's and 60's it will take many thousands of us from the so-called "straight" community (some of whom I dare say may be far "kinkier" than is obvious) to inform, reassure and inspire our fellow "straights".
This isn't just about abstract idealism. It's about overturning unjust and hurtful laws that harm the lives of our friends, neighbors and family members.
We can do this.
This is a winnable issue; if/when the proponents succeed in touching the hearts, minds and Spirits of the bulk of the opposition.
Most people are not hard core bigots; those people won't be convinced without some kind of severely shocking incident in their own lives lighting the path; but we can reach the bulk of people who have real fears about what such a change would mean in their own lives.
We need to address the propaganda and the lies and the hateful vitriol that the opposition puts forth on this issue, all too often under the guise of religion or Godliness.
I could go on at far greater length making the case; but perhaps those point will emerge in the comments.
Here's a bit more from today's Times.....
We regret that the leaders of the state?s Democratic-controlled Legislature do not view this issue with the same urgency. Senate President Richard Codey, for instance, said recently that progress in civil rights areas ?is typically achieved in incremental steps.? We suspect that political expedience is clouding Mr. Codey?s sense of fairness. Next year in New Jersey, the governorship and all seats in the Assembly are up for grabs in an election. Some Republicans already are talking about making their opposition to same-sex marriage a campaign issue.
Governor Corzine typically takes the right side on important issues, but he has been known to retreat in the face of opposition. We hope that?s not the case here. It?s past time for him and for the Democrats in Trenton to find the political courage to extend the right to marry to gay couples.
The bottom line is that marriage is a civil right. It's a civil procedure in law which requires a civil license....and allowing ME is no threat to anyone's freedom to limit/restrict the kinds of marriage they recognize in their own religious ceremonies/beliefs.
Again, I could go on "bottom lining" at great length; but let's see if anyone out there has anything to say on this....
PS
The progressive agenda is like a rope ladder made of many strands. Success and energy directed in one strand reinforces all the "fibers" of our struggle at each step towards "a more perfect union"
In defiance of a cowardly act of ignorance and intimidation a community comes together to march for peace and form a circle of hope.
On the evening of the 2008 U.S. Presidential elections, an eight-year-old girl created a banner which read "President Obama - Victory '08!" With a little help from her parents the banner was hung in their front yard. The next night the banner was stolen. Later it was returned, wrapped around a cross and on fire. On Saturday November 15th, a march and rally, organized by a group of concerned citizens and supported by the Warren/Sussex County branch of the NAACP, took place.
Speakers included Elaine Koplow, Gary Grewal, Kevin Duffy, Talia Young, and Melvin Warren.
The song "Heal the World With Me" was written by Andy Rajeckas and sung by Gwynne Michaels.
I plead ignorance on the status of gay marriage and civil unions in New Jersey. Who knows the current status? As important, is anyone familiar with bills floated in State legislature regarding gay marriage/unions?
Personally, I find the passage of Prop 8 offensive and a clear violation of civil rights. By my logic, the only defensible reason for preventing gay marriage is religious beliefs...and religious beliefs have no place in state or Federal laws or constitutions. Gay Americans are at a severe disadvantage in fighting such discrimination due to their limited numbers. Gay Americans remain a relatively small minority group in the USA, with, as I see it, relatively little power. They don't have the funding, PACs, caucuses, or other power mechanisms that other minority groups enjoy (e.g., blacks, women, immigrants).
I believe that progressive Americans need to help Gay Americans carry the flag for this fight. Its not just a gay rights issue, its a personal freedom and civil rights issue. If Judeo-Christian values dictate the definition of legal marriage in this country, what's next? Ban's on marriage between atheists and agnostics? Prop 8 is a slippery slope, and its in the interest of progressives to not only stop the tide, but also turn it back the other direction.
The Hillsborough School Board voted to implement a mandatory random drug testing program for kids who have a parking permit or participate in extracurricular school activities.
That means if you want to be on the chess club, drive to school, play football, act in a play or any other normal activity of being a student you are consenting to have your civil liberties revoked.
Jeez, but this pisses me off. This country is founded partially on a presumption of innocence, not on the presumption of guilt. I don't have to prove there is nothing illegal in my home OR my bloodstream to the government UNLESS the government can prove to a court of law that there is a reasonable chance that something hinky is going on.
That's what makes us free! The government can't just force us to pee in a cup because they saw us walking our dog on the wrong street.
It is under Hitler, Stalin, Musollini, Ayatollah Khomenni, Castro, Saddam Hussein and the other dictators from the right and the left that people are forced to defend themselves against every suspicion even without evidence.
This is the United States of America. We are a free people. We have the right to the protection of our home, properties and bodies.
Unless, of course, you are a high school football player from Hillsborough, NJ.
Let's extend this out to the adult world. How about if we take the, "if you're not doing anything wrong then you shouldn't object" and adding it to your home.
If you are not making meth in your basement, then you should simply open your doors to any police officer who wants to come in and go through your cupboards and cabinets. After all you have nothing to hide!
Or how about if you want to drive a car in addition to getting a license to do so you also have to enter into a random drug testing program. Everyone has to piss in a cup, and one in 10 will be tested for drugs and alcohol. That way we can stop driving under the influence.
Or if you want access to the Internet, you have to agree to being tracked and letting every keystroke be reviewed by the government. After all, if you aren't doing anything wrong then why would you care? Unless we can watch everything going on out there we won't be able to stop child porn and rapes!
This is the way things are going. The President and Congress are trying to make it OK for the government to eavesdrop on our personal calls and e-mails without any justification or court review. They even want us to give retroactive immunity to the telecoms who broke the law in spying on us over the past five years!
All it takes is good people to give up their rights for us to wind up in a police state. It starts with the kids and the phone, and winds up with color coded symbols on your shirt.
Without political courage from our leaders, cohesion within the progressives and (most importantly) support from straight allies, gays and lesbians will be relegated to the back (or middle) of the bus for a long time.
I was seventeen years old when Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. was killed. April 4, 1968 is one of those too-many days from that period that are seared into my memory.
As a young man, I of course knew what King had done to help our country restore its soul and to move us closer to reaching its destiny to be one nation, united and indivisible.
But it was not until later that I understood the depth and breadth of Dr. King?s sweeping vision for our country and for ourselves as a people. It was not until later that I understood Dr. King?s central message to all of us, irrespective of race or religion: that we are better than this, that we can do better, that our problems, no matter how intractable they may seem, no matter how enmeshed with our history, are solvable.
On this, the observance of what should have been Dr. King?s 79th birthday, I thank Dr. King and the many who fought for justice at his side, for having the courage and the wisdom to be our inspiration and our guide.
His time may have been too short, but his message is eternal.
I'm sure that (almost) everyone has heard of Thomas Jefferson's famous "wall of separation" statement to the Danbury Baptists. I'm also sure that almost no one actually knows the wherefore and the why about that statement. It's much easier to twist such a statement to mean just about anything than it is to actually do a bit of historical study and try to get inside of Jefferson's head. I'm not going to get into all the details (you can follow the links if you want to get started on that), but I am going to say that it was clear that Jefferson did not want the President to be our national clergyman and that he looked only as far as both England and France to see examples of how the excessive entanglement between politics and religion worked to the disservice of both (Jefferson took a dim view of clergy in general, as even a cursory reading of his letters will show).
But, like most of our higher ideas, this wall of separation has always been more of an idea than a truth to which we held ourselves. Case in point, the overlap of marriage jurisdictions. Marriage has, at the same time, both secular legal functions and religious functions. As New Jersey slowly stumbles forward to address the issue of marriage equality, I believe that unravelling these intertwined purposes can help our society to move forward without having the state enforce its ideas upon those communities of faith that reject the idea of equality for gay Americans.
As reported in The Observer this week, the Kearny Board of Education issued a press release in regards to the ongoing "Church and State" issue.
Intertwined with the usual expected rhetoric of:
the district fully supports and complies with the requirements of the U.S. Constitution with regard to personal religious beliefs of teachers in the classroom.
(as if they had a "choice" in the matter), and cover your ass statements like:
The memo clearly says the district took appropriate action when they were informed of the situation involving teacher David Paszkiewicz and student Matt LaClair.
(is allowing this to fester until it is clear that it will not just "go away" really appropriate action?), what you find is that "going forward steps" appears to be either a Settlement with the LaClair family or an effort to block a lawsuit.
First, every teacher in the Kearny school district will be required to take part in in-service training on Constitutional parameters.
A professional, qualified to teach such a "course," will be brought in by the district to train teachers and staff
It is sad that this step needs to be taken, but based on his letter to the editor, this is a necessary step, if not for all teachers, but at least for Paszkiewicz who in a letter to the editor still exposed to the world that he just doesn't get it.
What confuses me most is the next part. Unless of course it is part of some sort of settlement:
Next, the district will adopt a formal policy "expressing its strong commitment to the principle that personal religious beliefs of our institutional staff have no place in our classrooms."
Why do they need to "adopt a formal policy" for this? It is the Law! Do they need policies that tell them they are supposed to follow the law? I mean, it is even spelled out for them by the Secretary of Education:
"The Supreme Court has repeatedly held that the First Amendment requires public school officials to be neutral in their treatment of religion, showing neither favoritism toward nor hostility against religious expression such as prayer. [ 1 ] Accordingly, the First Amendment forbids religious activity that is sponsored by the government but protects religious activity that is initiated by private individuals, and the line between government-sponsored and privately initiated religious expression is vital to a proper understanding of the First Amendment's scope. As the Court has explained in several cases, "there is a crucial difference between government speech endorsing religion, which the Establishment Clause forbids, and private speech endorsing religion, which the Free Speech and Free Exercise Clauses protect." [ 2]
Such conduct is "attributable to the State" and thus violates the Establishment Clause. [ 3 ]
It is fortunate in this case that the student's father is an attorney, I am not so sure, the BoE would have drawn these same conclusions if a lawsuit wasn't hanging over their heads. Either way I am very happy that it has been resolved properly.
[ 1 ] See, e.g., Everson, 330 U.S. at 18 (the First Amendment "requires the state to be a neutral in its relations with groups of religious believers and non-believers; it does not require the state to be their adversary. State power is no more to be used so as to handicap religions than it is to favor them"); Good News Club v. Milford Cent. Sch., 533 U.S. 98 (2001).
[ 2 ] Santa Fe Indep. Sch. Dist. v. Doe, 530 U.S. 290, 302 (2000) (quoting Board of Educ. v. Mergens, 496 U.S. 226, 250 (1990) (plurality opinion)); accord Rosenberger v. Rector of Univ. of Virginia, 515 U.S. 819, 841 (1995).
(Keep us posted on your campaign. - promoted by jmelli)
Everybody has their own threshold of what calls them to action. Over my lifetime that has taken various forms and levels of commitment.
From 18 I was always proud to vote. In my 20's I started donating some to worthwhile causes, and continued to vote. My 30's saw me actually get more involved in understanding the issues at hand, reading and being informed, and at times sharing that knowledge with others where possible.
Along comes George W. Bush, and I find myself now starting to fight for Democracy and our way of life. Donating to PACs and time to candidates that support Progressive values, I no longer sit back and just wait for the next election to come around. I learn we can't wait that long.
But through all of this, I have for the most part stayed on the sidelines. Being a supporter of the cause of saving our world from the wingnuts and neocons. That is until, David Paszkiewicz, opened his mouth.
