What was it that Mark Twain once said ?  Something like :
" America has no naturally born criminal class   --except for  Congress."
 
Seems that this is not a joke, it wasn't a joke then and it certainly isn't 
 one now.
Mr Clemens was being clinical.
 
Billy
 
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------
 
 
LifeSiteNews.com
 
 
Friday April 16, 2010

 
____________________________________

U.S. House Ethics Panel Seeks to Recognize Gay  'Marriages'



 


By : Kathleen Gilbert 
WASHINGTON, D.C., April 16, 2010 (_LifeSiteNews.com_ 
(http://www.lifesitenews.com/) ) - The House ethics  committee has drafted 
rules that for the 
first time would define gay married  couples as “spouses” for the purposes of 
filling out their annual Congressional  financial disclosure forms, Roll Call 
(RC) reported Thursday. 
While the changes would not directly affect any openly gay congressmen, as  
none have been legally "married" to a homosexual partner, the regulations 
could  affect any number of senior Congressional staff, who are also required 
to  complete the form, notes the news service. 
RC reports that the new rules were briefly posted on both the ethics  
committee web site and the web site of the Clerk of the House, before being  
removed after Roll Call's inquiry.  
Under the new heading “Same-Sex Marriages,” the draft rules reportedly 
state:  “In 2009, there were a total of four states which issued marriage 
licenses to  same-sex couples: Massachusetts, Connecticut, Iowa and Vermont. 
(New 
Hampshire  and the District of Columbia began issuing such licenses 
effective in 2010). If  you and your spouse were issued a marriage license by 
any 
of these states and  were subsequently legally married in that state, you 
must disclose all required  spousal information on your Financial Disclosure 
Statement.” 
Should they be adopted, the new rules would be the first time the U.S.  
Congress has recognized same-sex "marriage."  However, the changes have  been 
blasted by both sides of the debate: gay "marriage" activists are upset  that 
the forms convey obligations without all the benefits of the institution,  
while pro-family advocates have criticized another step by the federal  
government to undermine the traditional definition of marriage. 
“This is yet another example of the unequal treatment created by the  
discriminatory Defense of Marriage Act," complained Brian Moulton, chief  
legislative counsel for the gay rights advocacy group Human Rights Campaign,  
according to RC. "Married same-sex couples should be subject to the same  
obligations, and entitled to the same rights and benefits, as their 
heterosexual  
counterparts.” 
Wendy Wright of Concerned Women for America told LifeSiteNews.com (LSN)  
Friday that the rules are "an example of the arrogance in Congress and the  
overreach of a government that is too big." 
"These draft rules would violate the Defense of Marriage Act and work to  
undermine the law and that can't be allowed," said Wright. 
However, Wright said that the move was also "an acknowledgment that  
homosexual relations carry the potential for corruption and conflicts of  
interest": she cited the example of Barney Franks' defense of Freddie and 
Fannie  
Mac despite the enormous scandal, a move which seemed inexplicable until it 
was  discovered that Franks' boyfriend was a high-level executive at the 
latter  institution. 
Nonetheless, she said, "Ethicists must find other ways to protect the  
integrity of government than by ignoring the  law."
_______________________________________________
Centroids mailing list: [email protected]
http://radicalcentrism.com/mailman/listinfo/centroids_radicalcentrism.com
Archives at http://radicalcentrism.org/pipermail/centroids_radicalcentrism.com/

Reply via email to