On Aug 14, 2015, at 6:03 AM, Volokh, Eugene vol...@law.ucla.edu wrote:
2. The “single grocer in town” hypothetical may be relevant to the
compelling government interest inquiry – maybe one could argue that the
government has a compelling interest in making sure that everyone has access
There are moral/ethical dilemmas, and then there are legal ones; In the case
of the KKK and selling sheets, it could be argued that a shop owner could
refuse to sell sheets and pillow cases because a legal argument could be made
that the act would be complicit (not sure of the terminology
could be making
$3000-$5000 per wedding. But I choose not to because it goes against my
ethics.
Jean Dudley
___
To post, send message to Religionlaw@lists.ucla.edu
To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see
http
On Jul 2, 2014, at 7:45 AM, Steven Jamar stevenja...@gmail.com wrote:
How about owning stock in companies that make and sell contraceptives? They
had to sign a contract to do that.
Good question, Steve: Let’s narrow this down a bit—remember, HL only objects
to “morning-after”
On Jul 2, 2014, at 9:24 AM, Michael Peabody peabody...@gmail.com wrote:
(and indeed there's no
scientific consensus as to whether the contraception causes abortion)
Problem with this sentence on two levels: First, contraception is a pretty
broad term, and includes things like abstinence,
We’re dealing with some pretty icky stuff, here; zygotes, embryos, fetuses,
menstruation, uterine tissues…but if decisions that affect those icky things
are made, we really should be willing to speak about them.
Now what gets me is there’s an exemption for blood transfusions and
On Jul 2, 2014, at 10:33 AM, Tessa Dysart tdys...@regent.edu wrote:
But IUDs do change the uterine lining,
http://www.webmd.com/sex/birth-control/intrauterine-device-iud-for-birth-control,
raising the question for some people as to whether they can act to prevent
implantation, assuming
their marriage recognized until now by the state of Pennsylvania.
I’m glad I’ve lived to see these days.
Jean Dudley.
___
To post, send message to Religionlaw@lists.ucla.edu
To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see
http://lists.ucla.edu
On Feb 28, 2014, at Fri, Feb 28, 7:11 PM, Sisk, Gregory C.
gcs...@stthomas.edu wrote:
Now what these two evangelical Christians experienced was plainly
“discrimination.”
I’m not sure it was. While I’m not an attorney of any stripe or ilk, I’d say
that what those evangelists experienced
From: religionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edu [religionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edu]
on behalf of Jean Dudley [jean.dud...@gmail.com]
Sent: Saturday, March 01, 2014 7:05 AM
To: Law Religion issues for Law Academics
Subject: Definition of discrimination.
On Feb 28, 2014
Tznkai said: If we're going to avoid conscripting artists into doing art they
don't want to do, the artists themselves need to stop holding themselves out to
the public as a business serving the general public.
I can offer another perspective from beyond the ivory walls of academia. I am
an
On Aug 27, 2013, at Tue, Aug 27, 7:02 AM, GARDINER, Sara
sara.gardi...@oup.com wrote:
This message is confidential. You should not copy it or disclose its contents
to anyone.
Wow. Not sure what I find more disturbing; actual spam on this mailing list,
or the above section of the warning
Once again, I'm not a wedding photographer, nor an attorney of any stripe or
ilk. Regarding who retains copyright on images created of weddings: Old
school is that the photog retained the rights. This way they could use prints
to advertise their work. With the advent of affordable digital
On Aug 22, 2013, at Thu, Aug 22, 9:06 PM, Brad Pardee
bp51...@windstream.net wrote:
This is not correct. The issue is neither the customers' identity or the
free market. It is about the merchant being required to participate in
events that they cannot participate in by virtue of the
Again, as a photographer, once you put your unique artistic style on the
market, it is a business. If you can't provide your unique artistic style to
everyone, and insist on withholding it based on religious belief, then you need
to offer your unique artistic style free to friends and family;
] On Behalf Of Jean Dudley
Sent: Friday, August 23, 2013 2:28 AM
To: Law Religion issues for Law Academics
Subject: Re: New Mexico Supreme Court Rules Against Wedding Photographer Who
Discriminated Against Gays
On Aug 22, 2013, at Thu, Aug 22, 9:06 PM, Brad Pardee
bp51...@windstream.net
are talking about with regards to the
nature landscape or wildlife photographers or how that ties in to the subject
at hand.
Brad
From: religionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edu
[mailto:religionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edu] On Behalf Of Jean Dudley
Sent: Friday, August 23, 2013 2:28 AM
To: Law
Wait a second: For whatever reason the NYT exists, whether an altruistic free
expression of news, or as a greed capitalist oppressive tool of The Man, it's
still illegal to refuse to sell papers to someone because they are
gay/straight/black/white/Catholic/Jewish/Iranian(whoa, are there any
If I'm reading the arguments correctly, what they boil down to is Perry et al
got what *they* (and they alone) wanted, so every other same-sex couple has to
appeal to the circuit court and SCOTUS to be able to marry in the state of
California. I'm not a lawyer, so I could be WAY wrong here.
On Jul 15, 2013, at Mon, Jul 15, 5:39 PM, Steven Jamar stevenja...@gmail.com
wrote:
On Jul 15, 2013, at 8:10 PM, Jean Dudley jean.dud...@gmail.com wrote:
In other news, how 'bout Indiana? They just reduced the penalty for
same-sex couples applying for a marriage license from 3
I'm with Eduardo; I can't believe this. Mr. Esenberg, it's not simply a matter
of disagreement, it's a matter of said arguments simply do not hold water
without a religious premise. Put another way, yes, I disagree with the
arguments, but that's because they're fallacious to the point of
lifestyle who want us to be tolerant of homosexuality become very intolerant
if you dare to disagree with them. We are living in a Joseph McCarthy era in
reverse. Now it’s the left who is intolerant. Sincerely, David W. New, Esq.
Member Maryland and DC Bars.
- Original Message -
From: Jean
Would you kindly provide one argument that isn't irrational? Understand that
it will indeed be scrutinized for basis in scientific fact, and that it if
fails, it will have to be deemed irrational.
On Jul 1, 2013, at Mon, Jul 1, 6:35 PM, Esenberg, Richard
richard.esenb...@marquette.edu
of homosexuality become very intolerant
if you dare to disagree with them. We are living in a Joseph McCarthy era in
reverse. Now it’s the left who is intolerant. Sincerely, David W. New, Esq.
Member Maryland and DC Bars.
- Original Message -
From: Jean Dudley
To: Law Religion issues
...@lists.ucla.edu] On Behalf Of Jean Dudley
Sent: Monday, July 01, 2013 11:00 PM
To: Law Religion issues for Law Academics
Subject: Re: Marriage -- the Alito dissent
Would you kindly provide one argument that isn't irrational? Understand that
it will indeed be scrutinized for basis in scientific fact
-boun...@lists.ucla.edu
[mailto:religionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edu] On Behalf Of Jean Dudley
Sent: Monday, July 01, 2013 9:32 PM
To: Law Religion issues for Law Academics
Subject: Re: Marriage -- the Alito dissent
Add my intellectual curiousity to Dr. Finkelman's. Homosexuality isn't
.
Brad Pardee
From: religionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edu
[mailto:religionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edu] On Behalf Of Jean Dudley
Sent: Monday, July 01, 2013 11:00 PM
To: Law Religion issues for Law Academics
Subject: Re: Marriage -- the Alito dissent
Would you kindly provide one argument
[mailto:religionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edu] On Behalf Of Jean Dudley
Sent: Monday, July 01, 2013 9:00 PM
To: Law Religion issues for Law Academics
Subject: Re: Marriage -- the Alito dissent
Would you kindly provide one argument that isn't irrational? Understand that
it will indeed be scrutinized
Seventh day Adventists keep Saturday sabbath like Jews do, sundown to sundown.
Or did when I counted myself among their numbers 35 years ago.
On Mar 4, 2012, at 4:55 AM, Saperstein, David dsaperst...@rac.org wrote:
H…… Take off for the Jewish Sabbath and see what you miss – even on the
/women_riding_the_b110_bus_in_brookl.php
Jean Dudley
___
To post, send message to Religionlaw@lists.ucla.edu
To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see
http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/religionlaw
Please note that messages sent
OK: The definition of phobia (to my understanding) includes irrational
fear. Wanting to throw up (which I take to mean vomit) meets my definition of
unreasonable fear. To be blunt, even if it means being off-topic, wanting to
vomit at the thought of same sex marriage disqualifies him from
, and it was his full intent to do so.
The only outrageous thing about the settlement of this case is the man
only got 2 years of probation, and not several years in prison.
In science and facts,
Jean Dudley.
On Nov 8, 2010, at Mon, Nov 8, 11:43 PM, Gordon James Klingenschmitt
wrote:
Curious
nominate Celtic war and death goddess The
Morrigan. The war-dead are her offerings, and her worship is war.
We've got a head start with her, at least.
Just say'in.
Jean Dudley.
On Dec 3, 2008, at Wed, Dec 3, 5:43 AM, Paul Finkelman wrote:
The really interesting aspect of this is the way
http://blog.wired.com/27bstroke6/2008/11/bush-administra.html
From the Wired article: The Amish farmers claim Michigan
regulations requiring them to use radio frequency identification
devices on their cattle constitutes some form of a 'mark of the
beast' and/or represents an infringement
Academics
Subject: Re: Mark of the beast lawsuit by Amish
Complaint:
http://blog.wired.com/27bstroke6/files/satanfiling.pdf
DOJ Brief:
http://blog.wired.com/27bstroke6/files/beast.pdf
On Fri, Nov 14, 2008 at 11:34 AM, Jean Dudley
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
http://blog.wired.com/27bstroke6/2008
of the beast lawsuit by Amish
Complaint:
http://blog.wired.com/27bstroke6/files/satanfiling.pdf
DOJ Brief:
http://blog.wired.com/27bstroke6/files/beast.pdf
On Fri, Nov 14, 2008 at 11:34 AM, Jean Dudley
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
http://blog.wired.com/27bstroke6/2008/11/bush-administra.html
On Aug 5, 2008, at Tue, Aug 5, 9:02 AM, Engelken, Sheri wrote:
Religious beliefs can serve as justifications for many types of
conduct that we condemn, e.g., slavery, wife-beating, concubinage,
genocide. Discrimination, be it based on race, ethnicity, gender,
sexual preference, or
or on their foreheads, and that no one may buy or sell except one who
has the mark or the name of the beast, or the number of his name.”
Revelation 13:16-17
Just askin'.
Jean Dudley
On Jul 31, 2008, at Thu, Jul 31, 12:46 PM, Volokh, Eugene wrote:
Sherrod v. Tenn. Dep't of Human Servs
]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jean Dudley
Sent: Thursday, July 31, 2008 1:14 PM
To: Law Religion issues for Law Academics
Subject: Re: Religious freedom and 42 USC 666
*blink*
OK, this guy wins the Most Creative Deadbeat Dad of the Year award.
Forgive me, Eugene
That's a perfectly plausible conclusion -- in fact it is the
conclusion the Court reached in Smith. But federal and state
RFRAs, and
state constitutional provisions that have been interpreted as
implementing a Sherbert-like regime, expressly assume the
opposite. So
the
Another thought occurs to me; If the law were to be renumbered, that
would constitute an endorsement of religion. The angle here is to
present the law as simply sequential according to the rules of
mathematics, in order to avoid an establishment of religion. Do they
skip the number 13
not
*your* religion.
Perhaps, Mr. Klingenschmitt, your question should be should
governments pray?. To which I would answer a resounding, emphatic,
Not just no, but HELL NO!
Jean Dudley
___
To post, send message to Religionlaw@lists.ucla.edu
On Jul 24, 2008, at Thu, Jul 24, 7:37 PM, Gordon James
Klingenschmitt wrote:
Ms. Jean Dudley exactly makes my point! (Albeit in more colorful
language :).
Governments should not pray as governments, nor establish non-
sectarian religion as the government's favored religion
that with the incredibly high instance of unprosecuted rape in
prison, and it's easy to see why Amnesty International has listed the
US prison system major violators of human rights.
Just my two cents worth.
Jean.
On Jan 18, 2008, at Fri, Jan 18, 3:48 PM, Volokh, Eugene wrote:
Jean Dudley writes:
I'd
I'd say that yes, the courts would have to uphold conjugal visits.
Let's take it one step further: What if a woman is incarcerated, and
it was her husband who was filing suit saying that his religious duty
was being infringed upon?
On Jan 18, 2008, at Fri, Jan 18, 3:19 PM, Volokh,
On Dec 20, 2007, at Thu, Dec 20, 8:47 AM, Esenberg, Richard wrote:
“My evangelistic brethren confuse an objection to compulsion with
an objection to religion. It is possible to hold a faith with
enough confidence to believe that what should be rendered to God
does not need to be decided
The only way I can view this is as satire. Come on; impalement? He
can't be serious. As for the wall of religious beliefs, it's going
to have to be a very long wall. I personally can think of several
issues that need the money more desperately. But I'll give him a A
for inclusive
On Dec 16, 2007, at Sun, Dec 16, 3:19 PM, James Manning wrote:
As for the actual resolution, which
(3) acknowledges the international religious and historical
importance of Christmas and the Christian faith;
(4) acknowledges and supports the role played by Christian and
Christianity in
It's not a law, it's a non-binding resolution. Legally, it's
pabulum. Still, it's a waste of the House's time, IMO. What effects
it has on society at large is up for speculation. I see it as
indicative of a wider mindset that Christians are persecuted here
and the world over. Of
On Dec 16, 2007, at Sun, Dec 16, 5:40 AM, Richard Dougherty wrote:
Well, maybe you will; see below. Congress does this sort of thing
regularly. (Haven't seen one for atheists yet, but I can't keep up.)
Marty: Do you think the whereas you cited that was left out was
omitted because it
On Dec 15, 2007, at Sat, Dec 15, 9:36 PM, Gordon James
Klingenschmitt wrote:
Actually, Jean and Susan, you've already lived long enough to see
a House resolution like this passed honoring other
religionsincluding Islamunanimously this year.
I stand corrected, Mr.
I've seen several comments, here and in cited materials, that this
isn't the first resolution regarding Christmas; I've found one other
one after a quick Google search, resolving to protect the symbols
and traditions of Christmas in 2005. Can anyone here cite some
other ones for me?
,
psychopathic, or homeless.
Jean Dudley.
___
To post, send message to Religionlaw@lists.ucla.edu
To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see
http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/religionlaw
Please note that messages sent
no law against malicious bad manners in this country.
Jean Dudley
You can't get blood from a turnip.
P. S. Would someone kindly clue me in on what IIED stands for, please?
___
To post, send message to Religionlaw@lists.ucla.edu
To subscribe, unsubscribe
her prescription of
HIV medications and contraceptives.
Jean Dudley
I still think Mr. Phelps is lucky he wasn't attacked by the grieving
relatives of the soldier. There's a clear case of Yer honor, he
needed killin' if I ever saw one
On May 16, 2007, at 7:39 PM, Paul Finkelman wrote:
much of Falwell's life was dedicated to undermining the establishment
clause, and indeed quite openly working for the establishment of his
faith as the official faith of America; it seems to me that any
discussion of his career is in the end a
On May 16, 2007, at 8:28 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
...God knows, as does Imus, there is almost nothing so fearful as
to be subject to characterization as a hater in the current construct.
Wanna bet? Try being the object of such hate.
Jean
Yes, this is the voice of experience.
I've been watching the reports all over the web--and am amazed at the
restraint most liberal Democrat bloggers have taken; I think the
worst so far has been I hope he has asbestos underwear. One
reffered to him as a radical cleric.
On May 15, 2007, at 12:32 PM, Friedman, Howard M. wrote:
, but the In God We Trust plates
don't carry the extra fees that all the others do. Why should those
who identify with religion do so at taxpayer's expense?
It smacks of establishment of religion, to me.
Jean Dudley
___
To post, send message to Religionlaw
On Sep 1, 2006, at 8:47 PM, Stephen R. Prescott, Esq. wrote:Biblical law of course allows polygamy. I have two objections. Professor Finkleman’s statement quoted (cut and pasted, my typing is not good enough for me to type quotes) is at best, an overstatement. There simply is no Biblical law that
, if you please.
Jean Dudley
___
To post, send message to Religionlaw@lists.ucla.edu
To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see
http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/religionlaw
Please note that messages sent to this large
. Give back to the
community that is supporting their child.
If that parent's right to strict scrutiny is being denied, by all
means, that needs to be rectified.
Jean Dudley.
And thank you for educating me so far.
___
To post, send message
On Aug 14, 2006, at 1:28 PM, Alan Brownstein wrote:
Jean makes an important point here when she states,
I'm thinking that should a parent choose to take a vow of poverty,
they
should be required to perform community service in lieu of child
support. Give back to the community that is
that has
been forced on those not of Christian religious affiliation, to the
point of fear of persecution.
Freedom of religious expression and spirit of liberty, my lilly-white...
*fume*
Jean Dudley.
___
To post, send message to Religionlaw
, this is a
resolution, not a law.
Jean Dudley
http://jeansvoice.blogspot.com
Future Law Student
___
To post, send message to Religionlaw@lists.ucla.edu
To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see
http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo
.
With tongue firmly planted in cheek, it makes about as much difference
as Texas resolving to make pi equal to 3.
Jean Dudley
http://jeansvoice.blogspot.com
Future Law Student
___
To post, send message to Religionlaw@lists.ucla.edu
To subscribe
On Apr 7, 2006, at 7:19 AM, Will Linden wrote:
I am irked enough when some private ideologue claims to be speaking
for New York (or some denominational bureaucrat claims to be
speaking for Swedenborgians), but officials are elected to run
municipal administration, not to be my (alleged)
wrong.
Jean Dudley
http://jeansvoice.blogspot.com
Future Law Student
___
To post, send message to Religionlaw@lists.ucla.edu
To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see
http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/religionlaw
On Mar 27, 2006, at 5:41 PM, Will Linden wrote:
TAKE THAT WOMAN OUT AND *GAFIATE* HER!
Gods, I love Google:
http://www.worldwidewords.org/weirdwords/ww-gaf1.htm
OK, ok, not really on topic, I know. But *he* (points at Will) started
it!
Jean Dudley
http://jeansvoice.blogspot.com
the phone. KMOV
also contacted Gov. Matt Blunt's office to see where he stands on the
resolution, but he has yet to respond.
Jean Dudley
http://jeansvoice.blogspot.com
Future Law Student
___
To post, send message to Religionlaw@lists.ucla.edu
:
Is it that Missouri declares Christianity its
official
religion, or just that some legislators have
proposed such a resolution?
(Either are worth condemning, I think, but it's
important to have a
sense of what exactly is happening.)
Jean Dudley
http://jeansvoice.blogspot.com
Future Law Student
that are
posted; people can read the Web archives; and list members can
(rightly or wrongly) forward the messages to others.
Jean Dudley
http://jeansvoice.blogspot.com
Future Law Student
___
To post, send message to Religionlaw@lists.ucla.edu
To subscribe
cannot be viewed as
private. Anyone can subscribe to the list and read messages that are
posted; people can read the Web archives; and list members can
(rightly or wrongly) forward the messages to others.
Jean Dudley
http://jeansvoice.blogspot.com
Future Law Student
On Jan 27, 2006, at 11:30 AM, Will Linden wrote:
At 07:56 PM 1/26/06 -0800, you wrote:
Being gay is not about sex. A person can be gay
and celibate (and indeed many are).
But this assumes the this-year's-politically-correct doctrine that
every boy and every gel who's born into this
that such things
will not be tolerated by putting up rainbow flags, pink triangles and
lambda sigil, then teachers REGARDLESS of their religious affiliation
are duty bound to uphold it.
Jean Dudley
___
To post, send message to Religionlaw
as
mine, and you have no right to impose them on me against my will. I am
more important than the contents of my womb, and FYI, it is not a child,
it is a fetus.
Jean Dudley.
___
To post, send message to Religionlaw@lists.ucla.edu
To subscribe
,
Jean Dudley
___
To post, send message to Religionlaw@lists.ucla.edu
To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see
http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/religionlaw
Please note that messages sent to this large list cannot
of the Democrat*ic*
Party. That would make me a Democrat, (an individual member of the
Democratic Party) wouldn't it?
Obviously you aren't talking about my political affiliation, and so no
skin off my nose if
you wish to refer to a non-existant party. Knock yourself out, J.
Jean Dudley
Somewhere
What about the Pale Mint folk?
Samuel V wrote:
And to the Libertars and Socials as well.
On 7/20/05, Rick Duncan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I don't understand what all this food-fighting is about. I am a proud member
of the Republic Party and I am not offended when others call it the
Scarberry, Mark wrote:
Thus the Democratic Party seems to want special
treatment, claiming the right to have its members known as Democrats rather
than Democratics. :-)
That's 'cause we're special*. *Noddle*
Jean
*For an unspecified value of "special"
viewed as having religious significance by individuals. Hence the
addition of So help me God.
I'd lean toward the explaination that such oaths were individual
peccadillos, and not something required by the office.
Jean Dudley
Somewhere in the wilds of Yosemite Valley
ignorance on display, but I wasn't aware that
there was a constitutional right to the aquisition of information. Can
you give me more info?
Jean Dudley
___
To post, send message to Religionlaw@lists.ucla.edu
To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get
Paging Mr. Finkelman!
Would you kindly email me off list? I've neglected to transfer my
address book to my laptop!
Sincerely,
Jean Dudley
___
To post, send message to Religionlaw@lists.ucla.edu
To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get
and in worn-out clothes as a result, that's a matter for child welfare
services.
Jean Dudley
___
To post, send message to Religionlaw@lists.ucla.edu
To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see
http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman
abusive, oppressive and
exploitive. And they were until death. Considering that, I think a
crash rate of 50% is pretty good. Especially when you consider not
all divorces are traumatic.
Jean Dudley
http://jeansvoice.blogspot.com
On Thu, 17 Mar 2005 16:40:02 -0500, James Maule [EMAIL PROTECTED
I'm of the mind that the recent decision from Judge Robert Kramer in
California regarding gay marriage in that state is another step in the
march towards the eventual breaking down of the societal prohibition on
same-sex marriage. One of the arguments I've heard against it is that
the guvmint
, anecdotally, there is a couple in Rhode
Island who began as male and female, and one of them went through
gender reassignment after a legal marriage. They are probably the only
same-sex, legally married couple recognized in Rhode Island.
Jean Dudley
http://jeansvoice.blogspot.com
Future Law
. If they do, I'd be willing to bet they don't extend
federal marriage rights to gay couples who have joined civilly.
Jean Dudley
http://jeansvoice.blogspot.com
Future Law Student
___
To post, send message to Religionlaw@lists.ucla.edu
To subscribe, unsubscribe
, but it seems that
if the Catholic Church can bend the rule of celibacy for male priests,
surely they can bend the rules about women lacking that wee bit of
proud flesh, but who uphold the authority of the pope and are willing
to abide by the rule of celibacy.
Jean Dudley
http://jeansvoice.blogspot.com
.
There is no entanglement. There already exists the option of marriage
by non-religious officiants. It had its origins in the first settlers
own religious beliefs.
Jean Dudley
http://jeansvoice.blogspot.com
Future Law Student
___
To post, send message to Religionlaw
Christian demonination that uses the term) is a calling, and
not a profession. I could be *way* wrong on that, and will bow to
greater knowledge.
Jean Dudley
http://jeansvoice.blogspot.com
Future Law Student.
___
To post, send message to Religionlaw
91 matches
Mail list logo
