Georgia governor sides with big business and gay rights lobby against religious liberty

Gay activist vandalizes pro-marriage sign
Gay activist vandalizes pro-marriage sign

The Republicans in the Georgia House and Senate authored and passed a bill which would protect the citizens of Georgia from being forced to affirm and participate in same-sex marriage ceremonies, as has happened in other states like Washington (florist), New Mexico (photographer), Oregon (baker) and New York (property owner).

The bill went to the governor’s desk, and he vetoed it – siding with the big corporations and the gay activists.

The Washington Times reports:

The influence of the entertainment and business lobbies were powerfully felt Monday when Georgia Gov. Nathan Deal knuckled under to a tidal wave of pressure by vetoing a religious liberty bill.

[…]He vetoed the bill after several major corporations, including Walt Disney Co., the National Football League and Intel, made clear that it would impair their ability to do business in Georgia.

A spokesman for Disney… said the company would “plan to take our business elsewhere should any legislation allowing discriminatory practices be signed into state law.”

The NFL hinted that the measure could threaten any Atlanta bid to host a Super Bowl. Other companies that urged Mr. Deal to veto the legislation included Apple, Time Warner and Salesforce.

The bill that was vetoed was re-written to remove almost all the religious protections in the original bill.

Just as an aside, big corporations are also threatening North Carolina for preventing men from using women’s washrooms, and vice versa:

North Carolina Gov. Pat McCrory, a Republican, has invited the censure of several blue-chip corporations by signing into law a bill that says sex-specific public restrooms and changing facilities must be used according to biological sex, not a person’s preferred gender identification.

The bill was passed in a single-day special session to strike down a Charlotte city ordinance to the contrary and prevent any other local government from following suit.

[…]Several companies based in North Carolina, such as PayPal, Bank of America and Dow Chemical have denounced the law, while the National Basketball Association is threatening to move the 2017 All-Star Game, now scheduled to be played in Charlotte, in the wake of the legislation.

This is the 4th time that a state has backed off of defending religious liberty against the gay rights activists who put the right of gay people not to be offended above the right of religious people not to violate their conscience by performing actions that they believe are immoral. It happened before in Indiana, Arizona and Arkansas, and now Georgia.

I found two great articles by two articulate defenders of religious liberty, David French and Ryan T. Anderson, to respond to Deal’s decision.

Ryan T. Anderson at the Daily Signal:

The bill that the Deal vetoed was the result of a series of compromises that significantly watered down the original version. It did not offer protections to bakers, florists and similar wedding professionals, and it adopted a very narrow definition of faith-based organizations, covering only churches, religious schools, and “integrated auxiliaries”—the same unacceptable definition used by the Obama administration to exclude the Little Sisters of the Poor.

Yet liberals demagogued these very limited protections—and got the governor to veto it.

David French at National Review:

The Georgia bill that Deal refused to defend was modest in scope, protecting the right of clergy to solemnize marriages consistent with their religious beliefs, protecting the right of faith-based institutions to use their property and resources to advance their religious mission, protecting their rights to hire and fire employees on grounds consistent with religious belief and practice, and protecting a person’s free exercise of religion from a “substantial burden” unless the protected person was engaged in “invidious discrimination on any grounds prohibited by federal or state law.”

In other words, the bill as drafted could not be used to “bring back Jim Crow,” nor could it offer any person, outside clergy and faith-based employers, any effective defense against the enforcement of state anti-discrimination laws. It wouldn’t block a single gay marriage. It wouldn’t deny a single gay person access to the marketplace. Instead, it would merely offer a bare minimum of legal protections to Georgia citizens who are already confronting anti-Christian bigotry and discrimination.

That small amount of protection was too much not only for Apple, Disney, Salesforce.com, and a host of multinational corporations who are quite comfortable doing business in places like the People’s Republic of China and Saudi Arabia.

French has a solution to the problem of Republican leaders siding with corporations over the people who elected them:

Donald Trump, of course, has probably given less than nine seconds of thought to religious liberty. He’s been too busying enjoying the full benefits of the sexual revolution to think even for a moment about the conflict between sexual hedonism and religious freedom. Ted Cruz, however, has been stalwart in defense of the faithful. He is the anti-establishment politician who actually understands the role of faith in our national history and culture and understands the direct threat from the “social justice” left. Cruz would call Disney’s bluff.

Indeed, and I wrote about Cruz’s strength on the religious liberty issue. If this is your issue, then Cruz is your candidate.

 

There is supposedly a First Amendment right in this country that protects religious liberty and conscience from coercion and threats. There is no such protection in Constitution from being “offended” when someone disagrees with you on a moral question.

So what do we learn from this? What I learned is that I need to start thinking about states to live in where I can find a way to work and earn money without having to have my conscience violated by people who think that their views on moral issues are so correct that they need to force me to agree with them using fines and imprisonment. And it’s clear from the past that the correct state will be a state where there is a conservative governor, a conservative House and Senate, and no big multinational corporations who cave in to the demands of gay rights lobbying groups like the Human Rights Campaign. Indiana, Georgia, Arizona and Arkansas are off my list. Especially Georgia.

 

New study: regular churchgoers and married people most satisfied with their love life

Marriage and family
Marriage and family

This article from Science Daily.

Excerpt:

Regular churchgoers, married people or those who enjoy harmonious social ties are most satisfied with their love life. This also goes for people who are currently in love or who experience the commitment and sexual desire of their partners, says Félix Neto and Maria da Conceição Pinto of the Universidade do Porto in Portugal. Their findings, published in an article in Springer’s journal Applied Research in Quality of Life, look at the influences on love life satisfaction throughout one’s adult life.

The researchers associate love with the desire to enter into, maintain, or expand a close, connected, and ongoing relationship with another person. In turn, love life satisfaction is a purely subjective, overall measurement of someone’s actual enjoyment of love. To investigate the factors that influence this across various age groups, 1,284 adult Portuguese women and men ranging between 18 and 90 years old were asked to evaluate and weigh specific facets of their own love lives by using the Satisfaction With Love Life Scale.

[…]While education does not impact a person’s love life satisfaction, religious involvement does. The finding that believers and regular churchgoers are positive about their love lives is in line with previous studies that associate religious involvement with better mental health and greater satisfaction with life and sexual relationships in general.

Previously, I blogged about a study reported in USA Today, which showed that people who attend church have lower divorce rates than those who don’t attend church.

Excerpt:

It’s been proclaimed from pulpits and blogs for years — Christians divorce as much as everyone else in America.

But some scholars and family activists are questioning the oft-cited statistics, saying Christians who attend church regularly are more likely to remain wed.

[…]The various findings on religion and divorce hinge on what kind of Christians are being discussed.

Wright combed through the General Social Survey, a vast demographic study conducted by the National Opinion Research Center at the University of Chicago, and found that Christians, like adherents of other religions, have a divorce rate of about 42%. The rate among religiously unaffiliated Americans is 50%.

When Wright examined the statistics on evangelicals, he found worship attendance has a big influence on the numbers. Six in 10 evangelicals who never attend had been divorced or separated, compared to just 38% of weekly attendees.

[…]Brad Wilcox, director of the National Marriage Project at the University of Virginia, agrees there’s been some confusion.

“You do hear, both in Christian and non-Christian circles, that Christians are no different from anyone else when it comes to divorce and that is not true if you are focusing on Christians who are regular church attendees,” he said.

Wilcox’s analysis of the National Survey of Families and Households has found that Americans who attend religious services several times a month were about 35% less likely to divorce than those with no religious affiliation.

Nominal conservative Protestants, on the other hand, were 20% more likely to divorce than the religiously unaffiliated.

“There’s something about being a nominal ‘Christian’ that is linked to a lot of negative outcomes when it comes to family life,” Wilcox said.

Whenever I talk to atheists about marital satisfaction and marital stability, they always tell me these myths about how atheists divorce less and are happier in their marriages than religious people. But when I ask them for studies, they don’t have any, or they start to talk about the Discovery Channel or Star Trek or something. It’s like they believe things without any evidence at all. Meanwhile, one also has to note that atheists have much lower rates of marriage than church-attending believers.

Now clearly, there are going to be atheists with great marriages that never break up. But individual cases do not overturn peer-reviewed research studies. The fact is that marriage is an institution that is soaked through with moral values and moral obligations. If you think that morality is just arbitrary customs and conventions that vary by time and place, as is logically consistent with atheism, then the odds are that you won’t be able to stay married for long – if you even get married at all.

Trump has strong links to National Enquirer and David Pecker #TrumpLovesPecker

Donald Trump with some of his supporters
Donald Trump with some of his supporters

I’m just going to go through a few links so that we get the complete picture of the connection between Donald Trump and his good friend David Pecker, and Pecker’s trashy tabloid publication.

This article from the New York Daily News is from August 2015.

It says:

Former Donald Trump allies like Fox News and NBC have been taking shots at the presidential hopeful since his bid began — but he has at least one staunch media ally.

Industry insiders tell us Trump is “very close” with David Pecker, head of The National Enquirer and CEO and chairman of American Media, which means the outlet is unlikely to dig too deeply into his personal life as he campaigns.

[…]“Trump is a big friend of Pecker,” says our insider.

[…]Our source says that with Trump “protected” by the tabloid, “Some of the staff are furious. Trump’s such fertile ground, and it drives them crazy to not only be staying away from it, but running puff pieces for him.”

Trump and Pecker have certainly been known to scratch each other’s backs.

This week’s Enquirer features a piece under the screaming red banner: “Charismatic billionaire Donald Trump writes exclusively for the Enquirer.” In the column, entitled “America is being laughed at … and things must change!” Trump outlines his qualifications for the White House, including the fact that in his view, wife Melania “would make a terrific first lady!”

In 2010, Trump tweeted, “David Pecker would be a brilliant choice as CEO of TIME Magazine — nobody could bring it back like David!”

New York Magazine also notes the connection between Trump and David Pecker of the National Enquirer, in an article from October 2015, when Carson and Trump were fighting for the lead i the GOP primary.

Excerpt:

[…][A]s Carson overtakes Trump as the GOP front-runner, it appears Trump is getting help from a media outlet known for ending presidential candidacies: the National Enquirer. Earlier this month, the Enquirer published a cover story on Carson headlined “Bungling Surgeon Ben Carson Left Sponge in Patient’s Brain!” The article called Carson a “White House wannabe” and claimed he “brandished a scalpel like a meat cleaver!” It went on to quote angry former patients saying he botched surgeries that left them disfigured and in pain; one patient who sued Carson said he forgot to remove a surgical sponge from her brain after a procedure. “His presidential campaign should be dead on arrival!” Enquirer reporter Sharon Churcher wrote.

[…][Their source] also said that Trump’s campaign was a source for the article: “His campaign provided information that was used,” he explained. A Trump friend said that in the days leading up to the article’s publication Trump was telling people that Carson “had a lot of medical malpractice suits” and “almost killed a guy.”

[…]Whether or not Trump has been a source for the Enquirer, his friendship with Pecker has paid dividends. At key moments during the GOP primary the Enquirer has helped boost Trump’s campaign by attacking his rivals and fawning over him. Two weeks after Trump launched his campaign in mid-June, the Enquirer reported that Jeb Bush was “involved in the drug trade in Florida” in the ’80s and that, as governor, he was plagued by “sleazy cheating scandals … [with a] Playboy Bunny turned lawyer.” In September, the Enquirer published an unflattering photograph of Bush’s adult daughter apparently taking cigarette breaks at her office. The article hit just days after Jeb told Americans they needed to work longer hours.

Carly Fiorina has also been slimed. After the former Hewlett-Packard CEO bested Trump at the second GOP debate last month, the Enquirer ran an article headlined “Homewrecker Carly Fiorina Lied About Druggie Daughter.” The article attacked one of Fiorina’s best moments at the debate: her emotional account of her daughter’s struggle with drug addiction. “The National Enquirer has exclusively learned that Lori Ann Fiorina, who died in October 2009, was in fact Carly’s stepdaughter,” the tabloid reported. “She was brought up not by Carly but by her biological mom, Patricia Fiorina, whose marriage allegedly was wrecked by the 61-year-old White House hopeful who is determined to knock Donald Trump from his superior front-runner status!”

[…]Meanwhile, Trump has been exclusively celebrated in the Enquirer’s pages. As talk of a Trump candidacy heated up last winter, the tabloid published an article headlined “Trump’s the One!” that reported him leading in the polls. In September, the Enquirer published a three-part series by Trump himself under the headline “The Man Behind the Legend!”

Trump’s scandal-filled personal life would be yuge! for the supermarket tabloid, but to the Enquirer, it seems, friendship is forever.

They certainly are very good friends.

National Enquirer: "Trump Must Be President", and Rubio has sex and drug secrets
National Enquirer: “Trump Must Be President!”, and Rubio has sex & drug secrets

 The Daily Beast notes that Trump has also been endorsed by the National Enquirer.

Excerpt:

The full endorsement… includes a list of “10 reasons The Donald is the ONLY choice for the White House.”

[…]Along with conservative website Breitbart, the Enquirer often reads like a political ally of Team Trump. And if it sounds like that endorsement was authored by Trump’s friends, that is because, well, it sort of was.

[…]Meanwhile, Trump’s other political enemies, such as Carly Fiorina, Marco Rubio, Ted Cruz (called “Boozin’ Ted” by the tabloid), and Jeb Bush have been absolutely savaged in the pages of the Enquirer. The supermarket tabloid reported that Bush, as governor of Florida, was embroiled in “sleazy cheating scandals…[with a] Playboy Bunny turned lawyer,” a rumor Bush had publicly denied over a decade ago.

[…]The unvarnished look at, say, Rubio has consisted of the Florida senator’s alleged past attendance at “gay [foam] parties” (the “Rubio is gay!” conspiracy theory is emerging asthe next big meme within certain pro-Trump and far-right communities), and a story on “NERDY” Marco Rubio’s “SEX & DRUG SECRETS.” The latter ran directly to the right of the publication’s recent endorsement of The Donald (pictured above).

[…]Trump became a National Enquirer contributor in August, writing an op-ed on his greatness. (It would not be the last time the Enquirer would bear his byline.)

Trump writes articles for the National Enquirer? Hmmmn. I wonder if he writes anonymous articles for the National Enquirer that insinuate nasty things about Ted Cruz, but have no evidence or statements from witnesses.

And along came a smear

I ask that because there is a National Enquirer story out now that smears Ted Cruz.

Here is Ted Cruz’s response to the National Enquirer story:

Everyone has to decide who to believe on their own.

Ron Fournier and Chuck Todd

I was surprised to see this tweet from Ron Fournier, who is a person on the far left who gets respect from conservatives like me:

Ron Fournier of National Journal re-tweets Chuch Todd and says "Bravo"
Ron Fournier of National Journal re-tweets Chuch Todd and says “Bravo”

Here is the link to Chuck Todd’s comments: (link has the video)

Yesterday on Meet The Press Chuck Todd pointed out that Trump used an LBJ tactic of suggesting he hoped the National Enquirer story wasn’t true while trying to fan the flames of the smear.

But Todd says there’s simply more evidence that ties Trump to planting the story in the National Enquirer than there is to the story itself tying anything to Cruz…

Andrea Mitchell emphasized how close Trump’s relationship is with the National Enquirer, pointing out that they’ve even endorsed him.

When you have MSNBC saying that the story’s claims are less credible than the claim that Donald Trump deliberately planted the story in the National Enquierer, thanks to his good friend David Pecker, then you know the story is suspect. No one in the mainstream media has confirmed it, because there is no confirmation for it.

Michael Savage

The National Enquirer story so ridiculous that one of Trump’s biggest supporters – national radio show host Michael Savage – has threatened to yank his endorsement of Trump.

The Right Scoop has the transcript and audio.

Transcript:

Michael Savage said today on his radio show that the National Enquirer story smearing Ted Cruz is completely false, and he knows this based on a source he says he would trust with his life. Savage points out that Cruz is rightly offended over this utter garbage.

But even more so, Savage says that he abhors these attempts of assassination by innuendo, as it has been done to him, and while he doesn’t blame Trump for the story, he threatens to withdraw his support of Trump if he doesn’t completely disavow the story and the man who owns the National Enquirer, David Pecker.

Now that Ted Cruz is gaining in the polls, I have to wonder about any National Enquirer articles that attempt to smear Cruz the same way that previous articles smeared Rubio, Bush, Carson, Fiorina, etc. Seems to me that Trump might be able to recover his lead if he could convince his good friend David Pecker to let him write an article about Ted Cruz – one with no evidence and no named witnesses. It might work to convince Trump’s supporters to return to him so that he doesn’t lose the primary to a surging Ted Cruz.