Thursday, February 3, 2011

[Peckers_Pics] Re:Model Wars, PICS; Feb 2, 2011 / David Kato - Rest In Peace!



 
 
Its in this thread, go to the bottom to the part that says: "House advances constitutional amendment on gay marriage by 62-37 vote".
 
 
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Thursday, February 03, 2011 1:55 PM
Subject: Re: [Peckers_Pics] Re: Model Wars, PICS; Feb 2, 2011 / David Kato - Rest In Peace!

Yes the Jews had restrictions: They couldn't practise any profession unless they only served other Jews to name one, they couldn't marry non-Jews,
their children could not go to school, and many others.
Look up the Nuremburg Laws 1934.
 
What have the idiots in Iowa done?
I missed this issue.
Please let me know.
Thanks,
Butch

From: Greg <gasolty@comcast.net>
To: Peckers_Pics@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Wed, February 2, 2011 12:39:48 AM
Subject: [Peckers_Pics] Re: Model Wars, PICS; Feb 2, 2011 / David Kato - Rest In Peace!

 

This is just another depressing setback for Iowa and the nation. 
 
I just got so mad reading this. Especially the Republican who said: "Iowa should join the states which have passed similar restrictions."
 
Why should you? Is that the moral majority talking again?
 
Restrictions. Kind of sounds like flashbacks from Nazi concentration camps. I am sure the Jews there had "restrictions", too.
 
I just wish so bad that these Republicans, and others who vote against gay rights for anything, would be cursed and become gay themselves.
 
And I am also sick of having my basic human rights as a gay person be put up to a vote.
 
But this must be what God, or Allah, or Jesus, or whoever these people follow want ....
 
*greg
 
 
 
----- Original Message -----
From: Jake
Sent: Tuesday, February 01, 2011 11:15 PM
Subject: [Peckers_Pics] Model Wars, PICS; Feb 2, 2011 / David Kato - Rest In Peace!

Model Wars, PICS; Feb 2, 2011
Safe PICS For All Ages, Rated  G / "We Support Keith Olbermann"

Please be advised that I may not post as much for a few days - as i am out of town! 

Updates on Keith Olbermann  @ ObamaBiden2008

Updates on slain gay activist - David Kato of Uganada @ ObamaBiden2008

Consider joining:

Diet & Fitness:

  • Reminder: Did you complete your Diet Journal today?
  • Did you do any physical activity?  If not, make a point of it by tomorrow! 
  • Perhaps our male fitness photos shall inspire you to get Fit!
Health - Wellness - Exercise - Reflections:
Anti-Health Care Republicans Officially Receive Taxpayer-Funded Coverage

Huffington Post; Feb 1, 2011; by Rep. Joe Courtney.

Today, Republican Members of Congress who ran on a platform of repealing health care and patients' rights for millions of Americans officially began receiving their own Congressional health insurance. Just two weeks after their party voted unanimously to strip patient protections and affordable coverage for all Americans, all but 15 new Republican members of the 112th Congress are enrolled in a comprehensive insurance plan. Their plan is paid for with generous subsidies courtesy of the American taxpayer, and has no waiting period for pre-existing illness or disability.

Beginning today, a new Republican Member of Congress with high blood pressure, diabetes, or any chronic condition is immediately covered at the same premium cost as 8 million other federal employees. The same is true for his or her spouse and dependent children, regardless of age, gender or prior illness.

That would not be the case for millions of Americans if the GOP health care repeal bill becomes law. For 129 million men and women under the age of 65 who have pre-existing conditions, repeal of the Affordable Care Act would spell the end of protection from price and coverage discrimination that newly-covered Republican Members of Congress now enjoy.

If the Republican repeal bill were to become law, 1.2 million young Americans between ages 22 and 26 who just became eligible to stay on their parents' insurance plans will be cut loose again and sent back to the ranks of the uninsured.

But my new Republican colleagues would keep theirs.

If the Republican repeal bill were to become law, patients with costly chronic conditions like, cancer, hemophilia and ALS would again be subject to lifetime and yearly limits on coverage. Millions of Americans struck by catastrophic illness or injury would again find themselves exposed to loss of home or bankruptcy. For our family, friends and neighbors, peace of mind would be gone.

But again, my new Republican colleagues would keep theirs.

If the GOP repeal bill were to become law, 4 million small business owners would see their 2010 taxes increase by thousands of dollars each year. The Affordable Care Act included tax credits starting this year to provide relief to small employers who pay much higher premiums than large firms.

Despite the blatant cost increase repeal would force on job-creating small businesses across the country, my new Republican colleagues themselves would not pay a penny more.

When I first ran for Congress in 2006, I promised the voters in my district that I would not take the Congressional health insurance plan until all Americans have access to the same coverage and protections as Members of Congress. My wife and I have kept that pledge even though our benefits cost more and provide less choice than the federal plan.

When the Affordable Care Act is fully implemented, there will be parity between elected officials and their constituents - all Americans will have the same coverage protections as the men and women they send to Washington. Indeed the Act requires Members and their staff to obtain coverage through the Act's purchasing exchange when it goes online in 2014.

For Republicans vehemently opposed to health care reform, taking generous taxpayer-funded insurance benefits just days after voting to strip protections from their constituents is outrageous. Not only did they vote to deny benefits to the people they represent, but they also voted unanimously to keep the details of their health benefits exempt from Freedom of Information laws - effectively blocking their constituents from knowing whether they accepted taxpayer-funded benefits. The hypocrisy is breathtaking.

No one begrudges principled opposition to enacted laws, and even the strongest proponents of health care reform would concede that the legislation we passed was not perfect. However, as former-Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist (R-Tenn.) publicly stated, repeal was not a serious way to address the bill's flaws.

Of course, if my new Republican colleagues were serious about repealing the Affordable Care Act and not just scoring political points, they would do what they are asking of millions of Americans by purchasing insurance on the open market and forfeiting their taxpayer-funded coverage.
Take Action:

And Now, Model Wars!

This group is called "Peckers Pics."  The English -  slang definition of "pecker" is to pluck at the truth. Therefore, we peck at items such as Gay Men's Health, Male Fitness, Gay (LGBT) Politics & Issues.  In this section you may peck at each photo in order to decide the winner of the "war of the fittest!"  Whereas, who is the model that may inspire you to exercise and "get fit?"  Warning: This may stoke you!
 
Your participation in discussion of health / news articles - appearing in this message is greatly appreciated.
William Levy
 
VS
Raúl Olivo
 
You Decide!
2011 Edinburgh Rugby Calendar
Official Edinburgh 2011 calendar, manufactured by Scottish Rugby.
All profits from this calendar will be donated to Maggie's cancer caring centres.
Stoked?
2011 Edinburgh Rugby Calendar
Official Edinburgh 2011 calendar, manufactured by Scottish Rugby.
All profits from this calendar will be donated to Maggie's cancer caring centres.
House advances constitutional amendment on gay marriage by 62-37 vote
Feb 1, 2011 / by O. Kay Henderson / Radio Iowa
 
Three Democrats joined with 59 Republicans in the Iowa House this afternoon to pass a resolution on gay marriage. The proposed constitutional amendment would ban same-sex marriages, as well as civil unions and domestic partnerships.
 
Representative Dwayne Alons, a Republican from Hull, said Iowa should join the states which have passed similar restrictions.
 

"We are not stepping off a cliff into a deep, dark hole and doing something that's totally unusual or odd or strange compared to a number of other states that have done this exact same thing where the people of their states have amendment their constitution," Alons said at the conclusion of today's debate. "In fact, to the number of 30 have done that already."

Representative Beth Wessel-Kroeschell, a Democrat from Ames, said only two other states have passed amendment as restrictive as the one proposed.

"In a representative democracy we must not only vote the will of our constituents, but we must also do our homework -- and sometimes we need to ignore the polls and do the right thing," she said. "This is one of those cases. We need to be on the right side of history."

Representative Greg Forristall, a Republican from Macedonia, said since the legislature and the Supreme Court disagree on the proper definition of marriage, Iowa voters should decide the matter.

"This is not a debate about taking a right away from anyone," Forristall said. "This is a debate about whether a right exists."

Two black legislators, both Democrats, spoke against the proposed constitutional amendment.  Representative Ako Abdul-Samad, a Democrat from Des Moines, spoke near the beginning of the nearly three-hour-long debate.

"The issue is: do we have the right to discriminate against anybody? That's what we're really voting on here," Abdul-Samad said. "We're voting on people's rights. What right do we have to be in people's bedrooms?"

Representative Phyllis Thede, a Democrat from Bettendorf, spoke next to last.

"And whether you mean to or not, this decision will spur hatred and that hurts," Thede said. "I have been a victim of hatred and, let me tell you, it bothers me."

Representative Richard Anderson, a Republican from Clarinda, said if the line isn't drawn at traditional marriage, then what happens when brothers and sisters or polygamists ask to marry?

"It's the people who determine the constitution…and giving them the right to vote on this issue demonstrates devotion to democracy, not bias, not prejudice and not discrimination," he said. "It puts in the hands of the everyday people the power, the authority to determine what the definition of marriage ought to be."

House Democratic Leader Kevin McCarthy of Des Moines spoke briefly during debate.

"This vote today may be politically costly for some members.  It might be politically-advantageous for others -- don't know," McCarthy said.  "But what I'm fairly convinced of is that we will look back on this vote…many, many years from today and we will regret it." 

Representative Alons, the proposal's lead sponsor, urged Iowans to pressure the Democratic leader in the state senate who has vowed to block the proposal from advancing.

"The people of the state will have the opportunity to have their voice be heard again and again and again," Alons said. 

After the House vote, Senate Democratic Leader Mike Gronstal of Council Bluffs indicated he won't change his mind.

"This isn't about me.  This is about a great couple I know in Council Bluffs.  They have a beautiful, curly-headed little boy -- just the cutest kid you would ever see and it's about their family and their rights," Gronstal told reporters. "And these people want to take away their rights." 

Three House Democrats -- Dan Muhlbauer of Manilla; Brian Quirk of New Hampton and Kurt Swaim of Bloomfield -- joined with 59 House Republicans to pass the resolution calling for the constitutional amendment on gay marriage.  One House Republican -- Representative Betty De Boef -- was ill and not present for Tuesday's vote.  Thirty-seven Democrats in the House voted against the proposed constitutional amendment.

"Every gay and lesbian person who has been lucky enough to survive the turmoil of growing up is a survivor. Survivors always have an obligation to those who will face the same challenges."

 
....Jake



__._,_.___


All members of "Peckers PICS" are requested to join our "Obama Biden 2008" group as it runs in conjunction to this group.  Both groups shall not repeat articles from one group to another.  However, to gain full knowledge of Gay rights, members must belong to the Obama group as well as this group.  Therefore, please accept your invitation to join. 

To join the Obama group please click (or copy and paste the link into your browser) @  http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ObamaBiden2008/join

Thank you!
 

�Every gay and lesbian person who has been lucky enough to survive the turmoil of growing up is a survivor. Survivors always have an obligation to those who will face the same challenges.�

...Jake (Moderator)



Your email settings: Individual Email|Traditional
Change settings via the Web (Yahoo! ID required)
Change settings via email: Switch delivery to Daily Digest | Switch to Fully Featured
Visit Your Group | Yahoo! Groups Terms of Use | Unsubscribe

__,_._,___
Posted by at

No comments:

Post a Comment

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)