#christian court marriage process

[waitmyturtles]

This is INCREDIBLY EXCITING news, as South Korea lags behind many other Asian countries on public viewpoints about LGBTQ+ rights. Well done, South Korea’s Supreme Court, on equal public healthcare rights! Also note, at the end of the article, how fast attitudes are changing about same-sex marriage in South Korea over the last 24 years. Keep the upward trend going! (I’m calling for more South Korean BLs, obviously.)

Paywall-free paste below:

In a landmark ruling for gay rights in South Korea on Thursday, the country’s Supreme Court ruled that same-sex couples qualify for the national health insurance’s dependent coverage, a decision that rights activists hoped could pave the way for legalizing same-sex marriage in the country.

The decision would allow same-sex couples in the country to register their partners as dependents in national health insurance coverage, as married couples or couples in a common-law marriage can. Numerous other benefits are denied to same-sex and other couples living outside the traditional norms of family in South Korea.

In its ruling on Thursday, the country’s highest court ruled that denying a same-sex couple national health insurance dependent coverage “just because they are of the same sex” constitutes a serious discrimination that infringed upon citizens’ “dignity and values, their rights to pursue happiness, their freedom of privacy and their rights to be equally treated by the law.”

The plaintiff, So Seong-wook, filed the legal complaint in 2021. Mr. So wanted to register in the national health insurance program as a dependent of his partner, Kim Yong-min, arguing that their union should be treated as a common-law marriage. But South Korea’s health insurance service rejected his request and told him to pay a separate monthly insurance premium — a decision later affirmed by a district court.

But in February last year, an appeals court overturned the lower-court ruling. It said that although Mr. Kim and Mr. So’s union could not be considered a common-law marriage under South Korean laws, they should still qualify for the national health insurance’s dependent coverage.

In its final say on the case on Thursday, the Supreme Court endorsed the appeals court ruling. It said that same-sex couples formed an “economic cohabitation tantamount to” married and common-law couples.

“I hope today’s ruling will serve as a steppingstone toward enabling sexual minorities to gain equality in the system of marriage,” Mr. So said in a news conference on Thursday.

Mr. Kim said while he describes himself as Mr. So’s “husband” and “companion,” he has never been able to enjoy those titles legally in South Korea.

“I am so happy that the court recognized some of that today,” he said.

Borang Jang, an East Asia researcher at Amnesty International, the rights group, described the ruling as historic.

“The court has taken a significant step towards dismantling systemic discrimination and ensuring inclusivity for all,” she said in a statement. “The case itself is a sobering reminder of the lengthy judicial processes that same-sex couples must endure to secure basic rights that should be universally guaranteed.”

There is no official data on how many people live together in same-sex unions in the country. But between 2016 and 2022, the number of people who live together in “non-kin households” — people living together outside legal marriage — doubled to 1 million, according to government data.

Conservative Christians in South Korea have long campaigned against legalizing same-sex marriage or introducing an anti-discrimination law that protects people of any gender, age, sexual identity or physical ability. But attitudes are changing. At the turn of the century, only 17 percent of South Koreans were in favor of legalizing same-sex marriage, according to Gallup Korea, a survey company. By May of last year, that figure had grown to 40 percent.

By Choe Sang-Hun

[the-cimmerians]

Well, here it comes, a filing at the Republican-controlled Sixth US Circuit Court of Appeals that could lead to the overturn of the rights to same-sex marriage, birth control, even the right to have same-sexy-sextimes in the privacy of one’s own home, courtesy of Apostolic Christian Kentucky court clerk Kim Davis and her designated-hate-group law firm, Liberty Counsel.

Yes, it’s THAT lady again, the one the hair who’s been pitching one long legal fit since 2015, starting when she refused to sign marriage certificates for gay couples after Obergefell v. Hodges made same-sex marriage the law of the land, moaning that it would violate her right to religious expression to have her Godly Christian signature on such sinful paperwork.

The couples sued her for being a flagrant asshole who denied them their rights, and a jury agreed with them. Davis appealed to the Supreme Court, back in the saner days of old (2020 and before), they didn’t want to hear it.

Nevertheless, Justice Clarence “RV” Thomas took the opportunity to write a whole unsolicited statement about how the victim here wasn’t nice couples in love trying to get married like they were legally allowed to do, but poor Kim Davis, because now everybody thinks she’s a bigot instead of decent, good, and honorable, and that makes her sad. How dare Obergefell have not considered the right of Christian moral scolds to butt into everybody’s private life and make scenes, the way God intended?

[ ]

So now Davis and Liberty Counsel have an in, using Thomas’s statement to take their legal spanking to the 6th Circuit as being UGH SO UNFAIR to Davis as an oppressed bigot-American. Also while the 6th Circuit is at it, Davis thinks they should “reconsider all of th[e] Court’s substantive due process precedents, including Griswold [v. Connecticut], Lawrence [v. Texas], and Obergefell”, maybe the 6th Circuit could have a talk with the manager?

[ ]

But guffaw, Liberty Counsel is never happy! Not for nothing the Southern Poverty Law Center designates them as a hate group! Their lawyers Mat (one ‘T’) Staver and Matt Barber have opined many times that gay sex is so ew yuck icky that we should all have an entire civil war about it. In 2019 Liberty Counsel was publicly mad that gay people were included in the federal Justice for Victims of Lynching Act, lest you think they aren’t deadly serious about wanting to kill people.

That’s a goal that also tops on Project 2025’s wish list, that plus labeling content with LGBTQ people in it as pornography, making “pornographers” register as sex offenders, and that sex offenders should get the death penalty. And like Davis, Project 2025 would also like to throw out the Comstock Act and have the FBI spend their time searching people’s mail for suspected “abortifacients.”

[mariacallous]

For a decade, the husband of Michelle Bulang, a 44-year-old mother of four, made her life hell. He drank and gambled, failing to provide for her or their four children, even as he forbade her to work. He was also regularly abusive “physically, emotionally, verbally, and sexually,” Bulang said, choking back tears. Once, he poured boiling water all over her—her back and legs still bear the scars.

Bulang has since escaped the relationship and not seen her abuser in years, but on paper she is still married to him. The overwhelming power of the Catholic Church in the Philippines means divorce is not legal. That might be about to change. A divorce bill has passed the House of Representatives and faces the Senate, as the power of the church wanes.

“There are two policies which are seen as a litmus test of Catholic influence. The first is abortion, which is forbidden in the Constitution. And the second is divorce,” said Manolo Quezon III, a former speechwriter for Philippine President Benigno “Ninoy” Aquino Jr. There are only two countries in the world where divorce is still not legal—the Vatican City and the Philippines. Other heavily Catholic nations legalized the practice long ago, such as Ireland in 1995 and Spain in 1981. But the lingering influence of the church in a country where nearly 80 percent of the population is Catholic is proverbial.

Yet, from 1917 to 1949, divorce was legal in the Philippines. The right was only abolished in 1949 as U.S. control ended and the anti-clerical legacies of the Philippine Revolution faded. Under the dictatorship of Ferdinand Marcos Sr., the church became a locus for democratic opposition—even as the president was rumored to keep a divorce bill in his desk to brandish at bishops during meetings when he wanted to keep them in line.

The 1986 People Power Revolution that saw the end of Marcos also saw the peak of church authority. The revered Cardinal Jaime Sin, archbishop of Manila, called people to the streets to protest a rigged election. The Philippines faced a potential Tiananmen moment as tanks rolled. But they stopped as nuns praying the rosary knelt in front of the troops and crowds linked their arms behind them. Marcos fell and fled into exile. The new President Corazon “Cory” Aquino, known for her devotion, inaugurated a new constitution that enshrined democracy, banned abortion, and committed to preserving the family.

Those days are fading. “There is a realization that the Philippines is a secular state, and it should not be subscribing to church principles or doctrines, which we respect but not must not control the policymaking processes,” said Rep. Edcel Lagman, who has helped spearhead the divorce bill. On May 22, the bill narrowly passed the House of Representatives with 131 votes in favor, 109 against, and 20 abstaining.

Under the current system, Muslims, who make up about 5 percent of the country’s population, are allowed to divorce. For Christians, their options are to either having their marriage annulled through a civil court, modeled on the Catholic process—reasons including bigamy, psychological incapacity at time of marriage, or use of fraud or threats—or filing for separation—reasons including physical abuse, adultery, abandonment, homosexuality, and drug addiction and alcoholism. The new bill would allow people who currently seek separation for these reasons to now simply seek divorce.

The inadequacies of this system are well understood. It is both extremely expensive and very slow-moving, leaving victims, usually women, trapped in marriages to monsters. Stella Sibonga, a 47-year-old mother of three, has had nothing to do with her husband for decades. Dug out of hiding and marched to the altar after he got an 18-year-old Sibonga pregnant, he took his vows drunk and proceeded to abuse Sibonga and the children she bore. Out of despair, she twice attempted suicide. Later, he tried to kill her and her children with a machete.

In 2005, at age 27, Sibonga left him, and in 2012 she initiated legal proceedings to have her marriage declared null on the grounds of her husband’s “psychological incapacity.” In 2017, a judge ruled in her favor, but the Office of the Solicitor General, charged by the government with upholding marriage, appealed and won in 2019. The case is still ongoing. Sibonga estimates that it has cost her around 300,000 pesos—over $5,000—to pursue the case. This more than most Filipinos will earn in a year. Her experience of the court system is not unusual.

Those who would reform this system smell victory but are treading carefully, keen to reassure the potentially uncertain. “We sympathize with the concern of some of the conservatives as some states have given divorce a bad name. So they don’t want us to have a Las Vegas type of divorce,” said Paul Roxas, an activist with the Divorce Pilipinas Coalition. A recent poll showed that that exactly 50 percent of Filipinos supported divorce among irreconcilably separated couples, with 31 percent opposed and 17 percent undecided.

Navigating the Senate will be tricky. A divorce bill previously passed the House in 2018 but languished in the Senate. So far, at least seven of the Philippines’s 24 senators have are thought to be in favor of the bill. But four have voiced opposition to the bill, and another 8 have previously made statements against divorce. Still, Roxas is optimistic: “A significant proportion of the senators are sort of fence-sitting.” The Divorce Pilipinas Coalition is lobbying hard those they feel are persuadable and has staked out fall back concessions like only allowing people to divorce once in their lifetimes.

Should the bill pass, it will be the fourth big defeat the Catholic Church has faced in 12 years. In 2012, the Philippine government legalized contraception in the face of furious opposition from the church. In 2016, the presidency was won by Rodrigo Duterte, a man who cursed the pope during his campaign. Church condemnations of the man and the extrajudicial killings that took place in his “war on drugs” failed to dent his enormous popular support. And in 2022, the church all but openly opposed the candidacy of Ferdinand “Bongbong” Marcos Jr., son of the former dictator. Nonetheless, backed by Duterte, he romped home to victory.

With each defeat, wariness of church power seems to have faded. “In the Philippines, there is no Catholic vote—in other words, we should not be afraid of any reprisal from the Church during the elections,” Lagman said. Indeed, he claims that private polling shows that congresspeople who endorse the divorce bill actually stand to receive a bump in support.

Father Jerome Secilliano, rector of the EDSA Shrine built to commemorate the People Power protests, says things very different from 1986. “People were already exasperated with the government” when cardinal sin made the call, he says. Now, according to Seciliano, people are “exasperated” with a church they don’t feel is doing enough for them. “Let’s admit it we don’t have the resources to provide for the people,” he said. “We are a poor country, there are so many poor people, and poor people expect too much from you.” Instead, they turn to politicians who can offer patronage, cash, and practical solutions. “And people have more practical needs than the Mass.”

Cultural change is also part of the story. Gone are the days of Seciliano’s boyhood when he would press his forehead to the hand of elders and all heard the Angelus toll at 6 o’clock every evening. “When we talk about LGBT in the 1980s, perhaps people will still believe us. But now it’s 2024—because of the many different opinions offered, it’s now very politically incorrect to even call him homo or gay.” Indeed, the Philippines is already strikingly accepting of homosexuality for a Catholic country, and polling shows that young Filipinos are among the most likely to support the divorce bill.

Not all the cultural change is necessarily inimical to the church. Pentecostal and born-again Christians are making big inroads among the Philippines. Theological differences between Catholics and these groups that once caused bloody wars now fade as these churches make common cause on promoting socially conservative Christian values. One prominent opponent of the divorce bill, Sen. Emmanuel Villanueva, is the son of Eddie Villanueva, a former politician who founded The Jesus Is Lord evangelical megachurch.

Still, it’s not always so simple as that says Joseph Bonifacio, a former pastor with Victory Church, another evangelical megachurch. These non-Catholic churches are less monolithic in their attitudes. “This allows for other voices, including more liberal ones.” A recent statement by the Philippine Council of Evangelical Churches expressed opposition to the divorce bill, stating a preference instead for expanding grounds for annulment to dissolve the marriage. Given that the grounds for annulment are, with some caveats, close the grounds on which the current bill would grant divorce, the differences seem largely cosmetic.

The Catholic Church is trying to regroup. “The church needs to become a church of the poor,” Father Tito Caluag said. As the man who gives the evening Mass on ABS-CBN, the Philippines’s largest media conglomerate, he is perhaps the closest the Catholic Church has to a celebrity priest. Caluag is trying to take on this task himself reorganizing the church’s charitable efforts talking about professionalization, data analysis, and new fundraising that reduces reliance on single ultrawealthy donors. Notably past polls suggest the working poor are among those most likely to support divorce. Yet it is hard not to notice that the interview is taking place in the Village, one of Manila’s ultraexclusive gated neighborhoods. Caluag explains it was donated by a pious socialite, now deceased, and wryly accepts the irony.

Other tensions will be hard to solve, too. The church must also be a listening church, Caluag says, invoking the words of Pope Francis. “And we must genuinely listen. Because I’ve heard young people say we’ve talked our so-and-so, and he listened, but at the end of it all, he said was the same thing like nothing had happened.”

But he remains opposed to divorce—as doctrine requires all Catholic priests must be. For stories like Sibonga’s and Bulang’s, however, the church seems to have few answers.

[drbased]

men on the right pride themselves on how they're the ones who are truly 'respectful' of women - but also, far-right misogynists despise 'white knights' for being respectful of women. this is because men intrinsically understand that how they treat women needs to be transactional; there are rules and structures for how you're supposed to treat women. conservatives believe that their way of treating women is honest: there is an honest transaction at play of the man 'courting' a woman, who refuses to give up sex until marriage thereby proving she is pure, at which point she gives herself wholeheartedly to him, and with her trapped into marriage and birthing children, both cruelty (rape) and kindness (affection) blur into one singular cultural institution representing righteousness itself. this becomes 'true masculinity', 'true femininity' and 'men and women having different roles'. this is how conservatives get away with presenting themselves as kinder to women that the left wing - with clear boundaries between public and private, and rigid structures that reduce paranoia and sexual jealousy of the woman cheating or leaving him, conservatives can freely present an image of themselves being respectful of women in public. additionally, they can claim that simply following the 'natural order of things' is being kind to women in and of itself - after all, all the romance propaganda has sold to women an idealised idea of marriage, so a culture where men are seeking marriage gets to lay claim to the idea of it being more in line with what women want.

white knights, meanwhile, are men who are seen as kind and respectful to women with no boundaries or social structure. it's especially noteworthy that the kind of respect they supposedly give women is exactly the kind of respect that a conservative would disagree with - that is, agreeing with her opinions, especially the political ones and especially the feminist ones. conservatives believe that a man should lead and the woman follow - so a man listening to a woman is a complete betrayal of nature. this is all a smokescreen, of course - as with all right wing politics, it's all just made up shit to justify the fact that they don't like women having power. but still, an ideology is constructed around this, and exploring its apparent contradictions is a valuable exercise in deconstructing it. left-wing men do not hold to the rigid societal structure that right-wing men do, so both their cruelty and kindness to women tends to be more public by default. right wing men despise this, because tradition and social convention disguise morality; calling something 'normal', 'natural' or 'how we've always done things' is a form of social rohypnol that disrupts people's empathy process - morality becomes something divorced from the very basic context of causing someone harm and instead reflects some external and nebulous concept of righteousness. religion is a perfect example of this; it is infamous how christianity allows for pedophilia but calls homosexuality evil, and this is achievable because what is 'good' and 'bad' is determined not by real-world harm but by an invented concept of spiritual harm, allowing for a very effective form of social control and the preservation of power structures. so, then, do conservative men despise left-wing men for how the disollution of power structures makes the actual harm caused by misogyny much more recogniseable. here, right-wing men are engaging in what I call the 'hypocrisy fallacy' whereby if someone has a politics or morality system that primarily signals to being a kinder person in some way, they are expected to 'go the whole hog' and any failure to do so will result in accusations that they are hypocrites, and this is always presented as being worse than being honestly bad. An example is of meat-eaters making 'gotcha' arguments at vegans not caring about exploited farmers. So too do red-pilled men see 'white knights' as hypocrites for not being truly honest about their intentions. but there's an irony in all this - conservativism is fundamentally dishonest in its treatment of women, but the honesty between conservative men is much more about recognition of the transactional nature of respect and kindness. they're not claiming that women deserve respect for being human; whereas a 'white knight' is giving her respect they believe she has demonstrably not earned. therefore they despise what this signals to other men; they find it unchivalrous. and on top of that, they are fearful of what it signals to other women; these men are planting the idea in women's heads that if men are capable of at least seeming to respect us outside of our relationship towards purity and marriage, then we might actually deserve respect as human beings. patriarchy 'hurts men too' because men put a lot of work into these convoluted societal conventions in order to have both a functional society and a foundation of misogynistic cruelty. right-wing men are obsessed with the idea of societal collapse caused by the dissolution of social roles and women gaining more rights, and the more far right you go the more you see that fear take centre stage.

interestingly, though, this paranoia provides a valid societal function for men in preserving patriarchy. left-wing men form a useful scapegoat for the right-wing. men as a class need to 'pass the buck' on rape - we all know rape happens, so to disguise male-pattern violence, men require an alternate form of masculinity. racism, classism and ableism have always been useful ways of achieving this - accusing other men of being more bestial, less civilised and less evolved have always allowed for rape to be seen as something 'less human' males do. but also, the right-wing beliefs of tradition, a clear separation of public and private, and strong social roles means they like to stake a claim on their version of masculinity being 'real, healthy masculinity', with the left-wing dissolution of social roles and power structures scapegoated as the actual source of rape. within this there is a tacit admission that without societal structure, men will rape with impunity, but this is treated less as a moral confession and more of a threat - after all, right-wing men are consider themselves much more honest in their belief about rape being 'natural' for men, which is why it must been contained within the privacy of marriage, where it can be successfully disguised as righteous and natural - this is reflected in how rape has been allowed in marriage according to law until very recently. if you think about how men see rape - as a destruction of their property, it makes sense that conservatives see raping with impunity as something causing the downfall of society, just as mass rioting and looting would. left-wing ideology is presented as more bestial, not-so-coincidentally in line with how lower class men and men of colour are believes to be bestial and their interests broadly considered to be left wing. and of course, let's not forget how the left wing engage in the exact same thing - the rhetoric of right wingers is so much more obviously patriarchal and also right wing men tend to be associated with higher class white men, so the reverse situation gets to be used for the benefits of left-wing rhetoric and its interest in power structures and their dissolution. There's an interesting mirroring effect here, a delicate balance on both sides that is mutually beneficial.

the more I've engaged with this kind of theory, the more I've come to these sort of tinfoil hat conclusions whereby certain social paranoias stay around because they're actively benefit the class of people who have them. Just how individual people will hold beliefs that are harmful to them because deep down it benefits them to have them in some way, so do societies reflect that; and male class solidarity is so intrinsic and powerful that men will hold these catastrophic beliefs about other men being so useless and evil that they will cause society to collapse just so they can say to other women 'stick with us and accept our version of rape, or society will collapse'. so too, then, do right wing women do the same (still looking forward to when I can get a physical copy of dworkin's right wing women because I can't engage with ebooks).

[dreaminginthedeepsouth]

GOP Convention:: Mike Luckovich

* * * *

LETTERS FROM AN AMERICAN

July 16, 2024

HEATHER COX RICHARDSON

JUL 17, 2024

The Republican National Convention is a moment to reintroduce Trump and MAGA Republicans to voters who have not seen them up close since at least 2021. So far, the convention has proved that the Republican Party is now the MAGA Party. It has not been a smooth unveiling. 

Yesterday, just after House speaker Mike Johnson (R-LA) announced that delegates were formally nominating Trump as the Republican Party’s presidential candidate, the teleprompter failed. Unable to continue without it, Johnson quickly left the stage. This was awkward, since two weeks ago, Johnson said on the Fox News Channel of President Joe Biden: “Unless the president is reading off the teleprompter, I don’t think he’s capable of making these big decisions and that is something that should alarm all of us….” 

The teleprompter having been fixed, Johnson returned forty-five minutes later to introduce Iowa’s attorney general, Brenna Bird, who in turn began the process of nominating Ohio senator J. D. Vance for vice president. The last time a Republican vice presidential nominee has been named so late was 1988, and while announcing at the convention has the benefit of generating enthusiasm for the novel story, it has the downside of bringing an avalanche of opposition. Vance brought the latter.

He is very young—just 39—and has held an elected office for just 18 months, making him notably inexperienced for someone in contention for the vice presidential slot, especially behind a 78-year-old presidential nominee. In the past, he was a never-Trumper, saying that Trump “might be America’s Hitler,” “might be a cynical a**hole,” and is “cultural heroin,” “noxious,” and “reprehensible,” but he came around to embrace the Big Lie that the 2020 election was stolen and to say that if he had been vice president on January 6, 2021, he would have done what former vice president Mike Pence would not: he would have refused to count the certified electoral ballots for President Joe Biden. 

Former Wyoming representative Liz Cheney, who was drummed out of the party for standing against Trump’s attempt to overturn the results of the 2020 presidential election, wrote: “JD Vance has pledged he would do what Mike Pence wouldn’t—overturn an election and illegally seize power. He says the president can ignore the rulings of our courts. He would capitulate to Russia and sacrifice the freedom of our allies in Ukraine. The Trump GOP is no longer the party of Lincoln, Reagan or the Constitution.”

Both ends of the Republican spectrum have also expressed concerns about Vance. The far right has been vocal today about their disdain for Vance’s wife, who is the American-born daughter of Indian immigrants. “Do we really expect that the guy who has an Indian wife and named their kid Vivek is going to support white identity?” Nick Fuentes asked. 

On the other side of the Republican spectrum, those who opposed Trump because of his extremism, especially on abortion, are unlikely to have their fears relieved by Vance, who has advocated no-exceptions abortion bans, that people stay in violent marriages, and said: “We are effectively run in this country…by a bunch of childless cat ladies who are miserable at their own lives and the choices that they’ve made. And so they want to make the rest of the country miserable too.”

But for all the talk of unifying the country since last weekend’s shooting, Trump did not pick Vance to bring Republicans together. His selection of Vance reinforces that the MAGAs have taken over the Republican Party with an ideology that rejects democracy in favor of Christian nationalism. Vance has repeatedly elevated Hungarian prime minister Viktor Orbán’s destruction of democracy in favor of a strong leader imposing Christian family structures, ending abortion rights, enforcing anti-LGBTQ+ policies and encouraging attacks on immigrants, and seizing universities. Heritage Foundation president Kevin Roberts, who is also aligned with Orbán and was key to the production of Project 2025, which echoes Orbán’s co-called “illiberal democracy,” cheered Vance’s selection. 

On Monday the convention approved a platform, the document that outlines the party’s position for the administration they hope to put into power. The evolution of Republican platforms since 2016 shows the evolution of the Republican Party. The 2016 platform fell pretty much within the norms of the genre, celebrating the nation and attacking the opposition before calling first for tax cuts—standard fare for Republicans since 1980—open markets, and deregulation of business and finance, as well as a smaller government. It called as well for an end to gay marriage, protection of gun ownership, and opposition to abortion. 

In 2020 the Republican Party did not write a platform, simply saying “[t]hat the Republican Party has and will continue to enthusiastically support the President's America-first agenda.”

In 2024 the Republican Party platform reiterates the points of a Trump rally. Its capitalization is erratic, as his is, and it is full of sweeping and often incorrect statements. Rather than celebrating the country, it warns that “we are a Nation in SERIOUS DECLINE. Our future, our identity, and our very way of life are under threat like never before.” It promises that, under Trump, “We will be a Nation based on Truth, Justice, and Common Sense.”

The only real sign of the old party is the platform’s promise to make the Trump tax cuts, which have already added $2.5 trillion to the national debt, permanent. Otherwise, the platform is a MAGA document. It portrays a world that reflects Trump’s dystopian vision rather than reality, then promises to fix that dystopia either with vague promises or with culture war victories. In odd passages, it promises to do what Biden has already done: conquer inflation, bring supply chains home, revive manufacturing, and save the auto industry. 

The speakers at the convention have largely been MAGA extremists, and the picture they painted of the United States echoed Trump’s. They portrayed a country in decline from the heady days of the Trump presidency, but their image was not based in reality. Virginia governor Glenn Youngkin, for example, claimed that “Women, Black Americans, Hispanic Americans, Asian Americans all saw record low employment under Donald J. Trump,” when in fact those record lows have come under Biden. Former CEO of Yammer, South African David Sacks, echoed Russian talking points when he blamed Biden for provoking Russia to invade Ukraine. Tennessee senator Marsha Blackburn attacked “racist DEI requirements.”

CNN fact checker Daniel Dale has been kept busy correcting the Republicans’ repeated lie that there is a violent crime wave in the U.S. under Biden; the opposite is true. Both violent crimes and property crimes have plummeted since the Trump administration. Republicans are also saying that Democrats “have eroded the American energy dominance that President Trump delivered.” In reality, while Biden is trying to shift the U.S. to renewables, Dale noted that “the U.S. under Biden is producing more crude oil than any country ever has… the U.S. is setting fossil fuel world records under this administration. The U.S. produced a global record 12.9 million barrels of crude oil per day in 2023, easily beating the Trump-era high of 12.3 million barrels.”  

Today’s speakers included Nikki Haley, a last-minute addition to the program after the events of the weekend in an apparent attempt to create a sense of unity. She made a good pitch but didn’t convince everyone: there were scattered boos at her appearance. Her speech was the high-water mark of the unity effort tonight; the rest of the speakers hammered the idea that the country is divided in two and that Trump’s opponents are persecuting him. They singled out the media as a key enemy.  

The bitter rift between establishment and MAGA Republicans has been evident in other ways, as well. Attendees booed Senate minority leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) when he pledged Kentucky’s votes to Trump, from whom he has kept his distance. MAGA congressman Matt Gaetz (R-FL) interrupted CNN journalist Kaitlan Collins when she was interviewing former House speaker Kevin McCarthy (R-CA) to taunt McCarthy by pointing out that he had not been asked to speak, adding that if he had been, “You would get booed off the stage.” Gaetz was behind the move to throw McCarthy out of his office, and he resigned from Congress shortly thereafter. McCarthy reacted by noting that there is an ethics complaint against Gaetz for sleeping with a minor.   

Trump has appeared at the convention with a large bandage on the ear he says was pierced by a bullet on Saturday. Journalists have begun to note that there has been no medical report of Trump’s injuries, an odd omission after the intense recent scrutiny of President Biden’s health. 

Trump seemed oddly subdued on Monday and appeared to fall asleep during the proceedings. His wife Melania has not yet appeared at the convention. 

Today, presidential candidate Robert F. Kennedy Jr.’s son Bobby Kennedy III posted a video of a call Trump made to his father in which Trump appeared to try to win Kennedy’s support first by appearing to support Kennedy’s opposition to vaccines and then by suggesting that he could get Kennedy a job. “I would love you to do something,” Trump said. “And I think it’ll be so good for you and so big for you. And we’re going to win.” He also noted that Biden had called him after the shooting, saying “it was very nice, actually,” and that the cause of the injury he sustained on Saturday felt like “the world’s largest mosquito.” 

LETTERS FROM AN AMERICAN

HEATHER COX RICHARDSON

[leannan-sithe]

I’m wondering where I can learn about like, godspouse courtship processes, marriage rituals, what might be required of each sides in a marriage/relationship, etcetera. Details like that. I get its individual to each Deity or spirit/entity and each relationship, but like, I’m trying to find specific examples.

To be clear, I get that this is a very personal thing, I don’t blame the sources I’ve found for not going in depth. I’m not currently trying to get into a relationship with a Deity or other entity, and I don’t think I’m receiving interest. I just keep getting fixated on this. For some reason I keep ending up down rabbit holes searching, wanting concrete examples, as if I do have a relationship to figure out, even though I don’t. Sorry, if that’s weird. I was just wondering if you had resources that could help.

Yeah! I understand the drive to learn more. If you ever find yourself wanting to engage with the practice with a specific entity, send me a DM and we'll chat.

(You can also DM me to talk in general, I don't mind that, and I don't post callout posts unless it's like the person who dated the ghosts of serial killers and was super racist. Community-level threats get @'d, not randoms with opinions I don't agree with.)

I hate to be the bearer of bad news but there aren't godspouse courting processes or specific rituals, nor are there requirements. I can give specific examples (and I will) but there's not... anything set in stone. Sorry.

I'm going to fictionalize and slightly dramatize some stories of people I know, with changed names and details.

You worshipped Cernunnos for years, getting into the practice because they reminded you of your childhood fascination with the woods and wilderness and learning about how to build shelters and traps and stuff. It started when you were 17 and were a "baby pagan," just learning about how worship and spirituality might look to you. You grew up in a Christian household, so you just don't know what to think or do. You make a habit of talking at Cernunnos over time, then when you get into spirit work, you start to get communication back (in signs, divination, dreams, etc). You joke and laugh and do things with Cernunnos, having fun with your godly buddy. One day, you're chatting with a friend who brings up godspousing, talking about specific things like dating or flirting. You make a joke about how "if that's godspousing, then you've been godspousing for at least a year." Your friend internet-looks at you blankly. Oh, shit. You've been doing godspousing for at least a year. The next divination you do is effectively a smug look from Cernunnos and a request for a "real date". Have you been dense enough to not notice they were FLIRTING flirting with you?

You're a Hellenic polytheist and you have a broad group of deities you work with in various capacities. You're fond of Hera and Aphrodite in particular, but you leave out offerings and whatnot when you want to appreciate the other deities. Or ask for their help in matters. You've been doing this for 10 years, it seems like. Since you were a preteen, and now you're an adult. You've been seeing a lot of things lately, the same sort of symbols. Lets say it's a specific fruit or color. That symbol has been popping up everywhere. What's going on? You mull on it for a few months until someone gifts you one of those fruits out of nowhere. Confused, befuddled, you leave the fruit on your altar for Hera to have. Over the next week you get these feelings that something is wrong, and you ask a friend to do divination for you -- your cards aren't doing shit for answers. The friend says there's a goddess that wants your attention. What? The friend also says that Hera is annoyed at you. You spend the next week pulling cards, looking into mirrors, analyzing your dreams before realizing she didn't like something on the altar. The fruit, maybe? The mystery goddess comes to mind randomly. You look the fruit up and-- of course it's Persephone, why wouldn't it be Persephone. You spend the next two years adding her to your roster of godly friends, until she starts dropping signs in your lap like mad. Daily, even. It takes another 6 months to figure out that she wants to *date* you. What. Why. How. You're wracked with worry about hubris and guilt, before you finally give in and join a godspousing group at your friend's recommendation. It takes you another 3 months to actually ask Persephone on a date. You do dates, shift her to central in your worship schedule, and.... just in case, you double check with Hades via divination that it's cool. (It is. He gives his blessing.) After a year of dating her, you start getting ring imagery everywhere. Repeatedly. She's proposing. You panic for another few months before writing out marriage oaths -- no one in the GSing community ever gives their vows/oaths verbiage in full as examples to others, it's a personal, sometimes sacred thing that we're all a little embarrassed about, you just gotta wing it -- and while you're practicing, Persephone pops in your mind and says "I do". Wait, no, that was. That wasn't the real one. She sends you mental images of putting rings on fingers. You spend a few weeks discussing it with her (and panicking) because you don't quite understand if it was legitimate or not, and it hurts your feelings a little that she just did it while you were practicing, but you come to the decision that you actually do like the idea of being formally married to her. So you decide it's the for real one.

You're in your early twenties, you decide your life is a bit boring so you decide to get into divination, specifically tarot. One of your dumbass woowoo friends you had a crush on was into them, and you kind of liked the art. In learning about tarot, you learn about witchcraft and crystals and stuff. Okay, sure. You'll do that. In a year, you're googling plant correspondences on tumblr whenever you cook a recipe. You always make your coffee with intention. But it still doesn't feel fine? Something was missing. You get into the wiccan side of tumblr witchcraft, and start adding deities into your lineup, making altars and worshipping any one of them that strikes your fancy. It costs a bit of money but it's worth feeling like you're doing something right. Eventually that gets boring for you and you sort of move on to other things. A few years later you get back into the woowoo stuff, and start thinking about the deities again. You feel a little guilty but don't get any closure about those worship relationships. It feels awkward. You swerve back into divination, choosing to pick up runes instead. You learn about how Odin is weird and masculine and can be evil. Whatever, you just want the runes. A few months in, someone questions an offhand remark you make about Odin being bad. You get corrected, learn a bit more about him, and... he sounds cool? You've known about the concept of godspousing for a while now, but you're a little leery about the whole worship thing, especially since it didn't work out last time. You approach Odin but you're CLEAR you don't want a relationship like a godspouse. You work with him for a few months. He shows up in your dreams as a variety of characters, you start to associate him with certain tv shows and watch those to bond. You started out fearing him a bit and worshipping him in a very rigid way, designing your own prayers and protocols, but now he's just the weird dude that watches Warehouse 13 with you and calls dibs on half your nachos when you make them. (You eat them anyways.) Eventually, you have a dream in which he kisses you. Um. Okay. No. You ignore it. You don't say anything to him, you just pretend it never happened. It happens again. This time, you sit down and have a conversation. You weren't interested in dating him. He's interested in dating you. ....... Well, maybe you're interested in dating him now. After all, he's not the terrifying figure you thought he was. You set a date in 6 months upon which you'll give him an answer, and tell him you expect him to behave until then and any misbehavior means you're booting him out of your life. He does behave, but another of your gods has to kick him in the ass for toeing the line. In 6 months, you tell him that you can date, and you set a bunch of rules out. No showing me imagery of the ocean or deep water, you have a phobia. No bothering me at work. Don't send me sexual stuff unless I ask for it. He reluctantly follows through but he does have to be reminded. Eventually, you dating Odin is just. The thing that you're doing. You don't really want to label it. It gives you some amazing sex dreams and weird fantasies that you're embarrassed about, but there's a lot of people who think about Odin that way online, yeah?

I genuinely don't know what information I can give you, but again, feel free to DM. Hope these were entertaining at least.

[pompelon]

They are different

If you really think the two parties are the same, and you live in a blue state, move to a red state. here's some things that are happening in mine, or have happened:

Republicans are currently trying to trick voters into passing a constitutional amendment banning ranked choice voting - our best chance to chip away at the two-party system. Democrats are currently opposing it.

Republicans are, ironically, also trying to gerrymander the process of passing a constitutional amendment to give voters in red counties more weight - because voters passed amendments they didn't like. Democrats are opposing it.

Republicans wrote and instituted an extremely strict abortion ban immediately after roe v. wade was overturned. Democrats are trying to pass a constitutional amendment to make abortion legal again.

Republicans refused to pass medicaid expansion, and then refused to fund it even after it won an overwhelming majority in a ballot initiative. This led to tens of thousands of people (including me) having no access to healthcare. Democrats led the court battle that forced them to institute the law voters passed.

Republicans are currently defending child marriage; that sixteen-year-old girl who can't get an abortion should be "allowed" to marry the man who impregnated her, they say. Democrats are trying to raise the marriage age.

Republicans have deliberately defunded programs that dispense benefits, resulting in kids literally going hungry. Democrats are trying to fund them.

Republicans have already managed to ban some forms of trans health care and are attempting to ban more. Democrats are opposing it.

Republicans are trying to make it a sex crime to support a trans minor, meaning you could go to prison and be labeled a sex offender for life. They also are trying to make sex crimes against minors punishable by the death penalty. Democrats are opposing it.

Republicans are attempting to repeal environmental regulations to allow businesses more dumping of toxic chemicals into our water without consequences. Democrats are opposing it.

Republicans are oppposed to laws that regulate puppy mills, resulting in us being one of the worst states for this form of animal cruelty. Democrats would like to regulate them - though tbh this is not high on their list of priorities with everything else going on.

Republicans are attempting to relax child labor laws so that children's labor can be exploited more easily. Children are already being found working in chicken plants. Democrats are opposing it.

Republicans are leading the charge to ban LGBTQ+ books, book about the experience of being a racial minority, or basically anything that exposes children to the idea that being white, straight, and Christian isn't the only good type of person. Democrats are opposing the bans.

I am not fond of the Democratic party, my politics are far to the left of them, but here's the thing: They are not the same as the Republicans at all. They have not lost their fucking minds. They're centrists, not leftists, but there are real, meaningful differences between living under a centrist government and living under a fascist one.

Electing Republicans in 2024 isn't going to wake up the country and cause a revolution. My state has been under Republican control for way too long, and we have not fucking woken up. You don't understand how easy it is for ordinary, everyday people to compartmentalize the suffering of others.

I think that people are doing that a little bit too when they say "both parties are the same." The child that can't get an abortion, the parent who can't feed their children, the neighborhood with toxic chemicals in the creek - these are minor abstractions - distractions from the fact that both parties are fundamentally capitalist.

Come to me honestly and say that you cannot vote for Democrats because genocide is your red line, and I will talk to you about how I struggled with that too, and why I decided to vote for Democrats anyway. But if you say that both parties are the same, you are not engaging with the truth of that decision.

[theconstitutionisgayculture]

I've always wanted to ask how you felt about the Catholic Church's teachings about homosexuality and their refusal to sanctify gay marriages. I know you're on pretty decent terms with multiple individual Catholics (like me), so I assumed you didn't care that much, but still would like to know

I actually feel the same way about the Church's refusal to perform gay marriage as I do about government sanctioned gay marriage, or marriage in general. I don't need any third party to validate my marriage or my relationship. To me, marriage is a lifetime commitment to love another person. I can do that in a cave with just the person I love and it would have the same meaning to me as if I did it in a church with 1000 people. If anything, I understand the Church's position on not accepting it a lot more than I do the government's. Outside the Constitution, which never mentions marriage at all, all laws can be changed or repealed by congress at any time. Hell, even the Constitution can be changed through the amendment process if there are enough states that support it. That's just how our government is supposed to work. If all these politicians wanted to make gay marriage legal, they could have done it at any time instead of waiting until the Supreme Court ruled that banning gay marriage is unconstitutional and then acting like they supported that all along. The Church isn't like that, the way I understand it. Its laws are made by God and aren't supposed to be subject to change. Especially not change because secular society has changed.

As for my feelings about the Church's teachings about homosexuality, I don't really have any. I'd probably feel differently if I was a believer, but even though I was raised Catholic, I don't believe in God and I don't follow the Church's teachings. I've honestly never understood why so many atheists get so mad about what Christians believe. To me, one of the best parts of not believing was not having to care what the Church says about anything anymore. But so many of them seem to base their entire lives around hating Christianity or doing the opposite of what the Bible says and to me that's just another way of having religion dictate your life. That's a whole other thing, though, lol. Basically I have no issue with what the Church, or individual Christians, think about my sexuality. If anyone says they want to pray for me, I take it in the spirit I assume it's intended, that they have genuine concern for my soul and are being compassionate in their own way. If they're saying it with scorn and to feel superior, I just ignore it. And if Christians are right about God and the afterlife, I think Jesus would have a few things to say about people using his teachings as an excuse to hate other people.

[goldieghoulie]

New Chapter! (14 of ?)

Isabel endures mass, and the week of court life that follows. At least she finds a reason to look forward to the next Sunday morning.

Story summary

Having fled the instability of Scotland when the Bruce declared himself king, Isabel has spent the past years living off the goodwill of her royal godmother, but that can’t go on forever. With no offers of marriage forthcoming, and no other abbeys willing to take her, Isabel hopes the Ministry at Linköping will at last offer her a home.

Read on AO3

or a snippet below the cut

This was what she got for attending a Christian mass as a Satanist, wasn’t it?  

When they had all filed into the chapel, Isabel had hoped that the nobility would take all the prime positions, and that she could find a discreet place in the back. She had a feeling that Secondo would put on a grand display and wanted to enjoy and appreciate it without all eyes on her. However, Bunny hadn’t released her until they were both seated, next to each other, right in front of the altar. Isabel on the side of the pew next to the aisle. A space where she was visible to every person in the church who cared to look. 

As she had anticipated, Secondo had commanded the room from the moment he walked in. She had heard the feminine draw of breath from both Bunny sitting next to her and Ingeborg who had taken the place directly across the aisle. She had done her best to fight the same reaction in her. Even without his paints, and the pale chasuble in place of her beautiful work, he was a sight to behold.  

As if guessing his effect on her, he had sneaked glances and teasing almost smiles all mass and Isabel eventually crossed her hands to tuck them into her sleeves so she could grip her forearms. Better she bruise her own forearms than risk some larger reaction that might be noticed by one of the nobles around her. If she thought that bowing her head would be taken as piety, she would have done that as well. As it was, she would just have to suffer. 

At last, the service wound down and, as Secondo stepped past her to lead the procession from the church, she breathed her first deep, full breath since mass had started. They remained in their seats as those closer to the doors rose and exited first, though conversation now filled the hall. 

“If Father Peter delivered mass like that every week, I’d certainly stay awake for it.” Ingeborg said, leaning to address the woman seated beside her, but not bothering to keep her voice particularly quiet.  

“Certainly! Though I can’t say I’m feeling particularly pious at the moment,” the woman tittered back. Ingeborg collapsed in giggles herself and leaned into her friend. Isabel felt the bite of her nails against her arms and forced herself to turn to Bunny on her other side. She reminded herself that Ingeborg was still young, well a teenager, and commanded herself to remember what her own feelings had been at the time. Even if she had been better at hiding them. 

“I’m hungry. Are you?” Isabel asked, striking for what she hoped was an unaffected tone.  

“Yes, but don’t worry. They always lay out a big breakfast for after mass,” Bunny reassured with a smile and Isabel tried to smile back. 

“That sounds lovely.” As the giggles from behind her hasn’t subsided, she fished for something else to talk about. “I have been thinking that I might improve the coverlet for little Erik. Seems the brown is rather plain for one so important as him.” 

“Oh, would you?” Bunny asked, placing her hands on Isabel’s still entwined arms. “I had thought of commissioning you, only it seemed so silly. He’ll only be small for a little while and I don’t want you to work so hard on something that will be put away after only a little bit.” 

Isabel relaxed, the familiar world of embroidery allowing her to push past her maelstrom of other emotions. “I’ll do something simple. Something I can complete before I head back to the ministry. He’s a duke, or a future one, he deserves nice things.” 

“Oh, Stony, thank you! That sounds wonderful.” 

“What sounds wonderful?” Ingeborg’s voice pulled them from conversation and they both turned to see her and the lady she had been chatting with standing in the aisle, waiting for them.  

“Stony is going to do some embroidery on Erik’s coverlet,” Bunny confessed with a broad smile.  

“That’s nice.” Ingeborg said, though Isabel could see that her smile was slightly strained. “Can you make one for my little Magnus too?”  

“Happily,” Isabel said, her own smile never faltering. She had expected this; Ingeborg always needed to have the best and prettiest things, couldn’t abide others getting more attention than her. “Though, as I expect work on Erik’s to take up all of my time during our stay, I hope you can tolerate a delay.” 

A small frown pulled at Ingeborg's mouth and Isabel was thankful for being raised with siblings, Ingeborg had never had to share or accept a “no.” She could almost picture Ingeborg stamping her foot and demanding the coverlet now.  

“Good things come to those who wait,” Isabel added, trying to keep any note of censure from her voice. Ingeborg pouted still and opened her mouth to reply but Isabel slid a pointed glance to Ingeborg’s friend and then back. Her gentle efforts would be for naught if Ingeborg decided to throw a tantrum and embarrass herself anyways. Ingeborg got the hint, and her mouth snapped shut.  

“Of course,” she finally said. “You promised to work on Erik’s first, so that you must do. And with as wonderful as your work is, I’m sure it will be worth the wait.” 

“I will do my best,” Isabel promised.  

“I look forward to it,” she said, with only a hint of surliness. “Shall we go to breakfast?” 

Isabel nodded in response. Ingeborg turned back to her friend, and they took off down the aisle. Isabel and Bunny followed at a more sedate pace, arms linked, as they discussed what design Isabel might work.  

“A wonderful mass, Bishop,” Bunny said as they stopped in front of Secondo at the exit of the chapel.  

“Thank you, Your Grace,” he replied. “How did you find the mass, Sister?” 

“Wonderful, same as Ingeborg,” Isabel replied. She lifted her chin to meet his gaze. “Slightly different than what I have grown accustomed to at the Ministry, but you adapted well to the changes.” 

“I am pleased for your approval.” He met her gaze and for a moment Isabel saw her own yearning reflected back at her, but then Bunny tugged on her elbow and the moment was gone. 

“Come, let’s get to breakfast.” Bunny nodded towards the main hall. “Something tells me Ingeborg’s in a petty enough mood that she may not hold the meal for us today.” 

“Right,” Isabel murmured and allowed herself to be pulled across the bailey. She glanced back as they reached the doors but found him already gone. While she had known she wouldn’t have time with Secondo at court, she hadn’t prepared for how painful it would be. How much his nearness but inaccessibility would a be knife in the heart. As much as she dreaded their return—the sooner they returned to the abbey, the sooner Secondo would leave for Italy—she wished their time at court would pass quickly. 

[01298283]

According to the tradition of my country (Brazil),a good woman,a real woman is one who follows the biblical commandments, which means that according to tradition I am a witch,crazy,slut and pervert and a mockery to society,but I I love being a witch,crazy, slut and horny.

Here you must be submissive to your man and follow moralistic and conservative principles to be accepted,there is a social standard based on religious principles in absolutely everything here,a kind of religious fascism,even adopted by the political and judicial system.

But the majority of religious people here (Christians) are extremely hypocritical and here there is a high rate of femicide,sexism, homophobia precisely because the basis of society here and its teachings are based on biblical principles,even part of the misery in this country is thanks to religious imposition, as this religion is a mass of political maneuver here.

Everything that deviates from Christian modesty and custom is demonized here and most of them live on appearances and are fascists,most Brazilian men are extremely misogynistic and sexist and are part of Christianity,Christianity is a factory of abusers and sexists.

It is normal within religious institutions here to witness different types of abuse and all of this is camouflaged by religion and justified in the name of a God,the Christian God for example,their customs and teachings are similar to Islam. Your value here is based mainly on your religion,many companies when they find out that you are not part of the Christian carcinogenic herd automatically delete you and they declare war on you.

Many women ally themselves with patriarchy and male chauvinism,defending sexist or scoundrel men for fear of criticism and exclusion and for fear of dying single,they shape themselves to fit archaic and medieval standards. Now they are voting in the political plenary to ban gay marriage and are using the Bible as a reference and implementing their religious dictatorship in society and many Brazilians are supporting this,religious fascism is very strong here.

Here it is normal to see women defending patriarchy,archaic customs and abusive men, especially if he becomes a Christian,he will automatically be canonized,rape culture in this country is still very strong and is far from over.

Christians fight to impose their religious dictatorship on everyone and anyone who does not follow their principles will always be hostile to them and seen as inferior, especially women who decide to live a life free from religious and conservative impositions.

They preach the famous charity and Christian love,but all of this is just a farce to camouflage who they really are,their charity is limited, that is it is only done for those who really decide to follow what they believe. They are always looking for ways to brainwash you and convert you, especially with tales of Christian guilt and hell.

There is a high rate of abuse among Christian couples,many husbands abuse their wives physically and psychologically and develop various psychological and physical health problems and the church blames the woman and the Devil,and uses biblical verses to justify abuse and encourage women to continue living alongside their abusive husbands and save the relationship,most of these men are mass abusers,violent,cheaters,manipulators, pedophiles,rapists.

Brazilian justice is abusive in several aspects and continues to abuse victims in the courts, patriarchy and sexism are very strong among them and the entire judicial system has no preparation whatsoever to judge or protect victims of abuse and are extremely slow in the processes on purpose,they try in every way to blame the victim and you can hardly get justice,the judiciary hates women,hates children and hates the poor. If the abuser is white,Christian and has more favorable conditions in the eyes of the law, he is well regarded even if he abused,the majority of judges are sexist,including female judges.

So in fact Brazil is a large medieval colony full of corruption among the majority,especially the political class and judiciary and fascism is present in several places here.

[tomorrowusa]

Nowadays, if a group has "freedom" or "patriot" in its name, it's more likely than not that it has links to the far right. The "Alliance Defending Freedom" certainly qualifies.

Since it was formed in 1994, Alliance Defending Freedom has been at the center of a nationwide effort to limit the rights of women and LGBTQ+ people, all in the name of Christianity. The Southern Poverty Law Center has termed it an “anti-LGBTQ hate group” that has extended its tentacles into nearly every area of the culture wars. In the process, it has won the ear of some of the most influential people in the US, and become “a danger to every American who values their freedoms”, according to Glaad, the LGBTQ+ advocacy organization. Through “model legislation” and lawsuits filed across the country, ADF aims to overturn same-sex marriage, enact a total ban on abortion, and strip away the already minimal rights that trans people are afforded in the US.

The ADF is a bigtime lobbying and political action group which is a major force in the homophobia-patriarchy industrial complex.

Under the Trump administration, the group found its way into the highest echelons of power, advising Jeff Sessions, the then attorney general, before he announced sweeping guidance to protect “religious liberty” which chipped away at LGBTQ+ protections. The organization counts among its sometime associates Amy Coney Barrett, the supreme court justice who the Washington Post reported spoke five times at an ADF training program established to push a “distinctly Christian worldview in every area of law”. ADF is engaged in “a very strong campaign to put a certain type of religious view at the center of American life”, said Rabia Muqaddam, senior staff attorney at the Center for Reproductive Rights. “[The ADF campaign] extends to abortion, it extends to LGBTQ folks, to immigration, to what kind of religion we think is America, what kind of people we think are American,” Muqaddam said. “It’s as dramatic as that. I think we are in a fight to preserve democracy and preserve America as a place where we do tolerate and encourage and empower everyone.”

Their connection to the odious "Focus on the Family" is not unexpected.

ADF was founded in 1994 by a group of “leaders in the Christian community”, according to its website. Among those leaders was James Dobson, the founder of the anti-LGBTQ+ Focus on the Family organization who has said the 2012 Sandy Hook mass shooting, in which 20 children and six adults were killed, was a “judgment” from God because of declining church numbers. [ ... ] Over the past two decades, ADF has been a main driver in dozens of pieces of rightwing legislation and lawsuits.

ADF has gobs of money to spend on promoting anti-LGBTQ legislation – especially in state legislatures. And they have been successful because people on the moderate to progressive part of the political spectrum have been badly neglecting state legislatures for decades.

Emerson Hodges, a research analyst at the SPLC, said what ADF is really doing is attempting to “undo LGBTQ social and legislative progress”. “They go under the guise of religious liberty, and religious freedom. What that means, though, is this religious liberty to discriminate and the religious freedom to invalidate LGBTQ individuals,” Hodges said. Worryingly, there are signs that ADF, and other groups like it, are growing in influence. As Republican politicians and rightwing media fan the flames of an extremist culture war, NBC reported that donations to ADF, which is a registered non-profit, more than doubled from 2011 to 2021. As it has grown in influence, ADF’s “model legislation” has found its way into state legislatures across the country, as the group attempts to strip away LGBTQ+ rights, and the rights of trans people in particular.

[ ... ] “They’ve also worked to ban the right to choose, and are in cahoots with other extremist groups to oppress marginalized people. ADF is a danger to every American who values their freedoms – to be ourselves, live freely, and be welcome to contribute and to succeed in every area of society.”

The only way to curb groups like the ADF on a state level is by making sure there are are fewer Republicans in state legislatures who will do the ADF's bidding.

Find out who represents you in your legislature if you don't already know.

Find Your Legislators Look your legislators up by address or use your current location.

If you have moved since the last election, even just down the block, then register at your new address. Voter registration is done by address.

Be A Voter - Vote Save America

Once registered, never miss an election. There's no such thing as an unimportant election.

[jiojithwebservices]

Online Marriage Registration in Chennai

We (Subam Associates) provide Exclusive Special Marriage Registration services in Chennai

We (Subam Associates) provide Exclusive Special Marriage Registration services for Muslim, Christian, Hindu Muslim, Hindu Christian and Muslim Christian couples in Chennai. Inter religious couples those who are struggling to get married legally and those who are in need of Marriage certificate in quick process for apply visa, passport and face police cases in Tamilnadu can utilize our exclusive court marriage service. If you are looking for Court Marriage Lawyer/Special Marriage Registration consultancy services in Chennai then you are the right place.

Marriage Registration in Chennai

One day process

Quick certificate

Free legal advise

Now a days marriage registration is mandatory for all due to legal entity changes. So everyone need to register marriage.

Subam Associates

[mksinghlegal]

Latest Update on Family Law in India

India's family law landscape is undergoing significant transformations in 2024, emphasizing equity and efficiency. Recent updates include changes in divorce laws, inheritance rights, and broader reforms under discussions like the Uniform Civil Code (UCC).

Key Highlights:

Revised Divorce Rules:

Digitalization of legal processes, including online filing for divorce cases, aims to streamline the court system and reduce delays【38】【39】.

Mandatory counseling is introduced to ensure emotional and procedural clarity during divorce proceedings【39】.

Shared custody and financial support provisions for children are now more flexible, prioritizing their welfare【39】.

Marriage Laws for Various Communities:

The UCC proposes uniform marriage and divorce laws for all religions, abolishing practices like polygamy and introducing interfaith marriage rights【39】.

Christian inheritance and Parsi interfaith marriage rules are under review to promote inclusivity【39】.

Property and Alimony Provisions:

Women in live-in relationships can claim maintenance under the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, recognizing non-marital partnerships【39】.

Transparent division of digital and physical assets is becoming a priority, reflecting modern complexities【38】.

These reforms reflect India's evolving legal system, balancing tradition with contemporary societal needs.

For expert guidance on navigating these legal changes, consult M K Singh Legal Services at +91 9811432933 or visit metrolegalexperts.in.

Follow Us for More Updates Facebook | Instagram | LinkedIn | Twitter | Youtube #FamilyLawIndia #LegalUpdates #DivorceReforms #MKSinghLegal

[advkaransinghlegal]

If a marriage is not registered in India, can a divorce case be filed? Will the wife & child get their alimony and other financial help from the husband

In India, a marriage does not have to be registered for a divorce case to be filed. However, the process and implications can vary depending on several factors, such as the personal laws applicable to the parties involved (Hindu, Muslim, Christian, etc.) and the circumstances surrounding the marriage.

Filing for Divorce: A divorce can be filed under various grounds as per the personal laws applicable, such as adultery, cruelty, desertion, etc. The lack of a registered marriage might complicate some aspects, but it does not prevent the filing for divorce.

Alimony & Financial Support: In case of divorce, the wife and child may be entitled to maintenance or alimony, regardless of whether the marriage is registered. The court can order maintenance based on the financial status of the husband and the needs of the wife and child.

Proof of Marriage: In the absence of a registered marriage, it may be necessary to provide evidence of the marriage to support claims for alimony and other rights. This could include documents, photographs, or testimonies from witnesses.

Legal Rights: The wife and child have certain legal rights that are protected by law, and they can seek legal remedies to enforce these rights.

It is advisable to consult a lawyer who specializes in family law in India to navigate the specific circumstances and to receive guidance based on the latest legal framework.

Advocate Karan Singh (Kanpur Nagar) navneet.25dec@gmail.com 8188810555, 7007528025

[nithya-r]

Filing for Mutual Divorce in India: Your Simple Guide

Divorce can be tough, but if both partners agree to separate, a mutual divorce (or Mutual Consent Divorce) can make things easier. In India, this type of divorce allows couples to end their marriage without the stress of a long court battle. Here’s everything you need to know about the process, costs, and what to expect.

What is a Mutual Consent Divorce?

A mutual consent divorce is when both spouses decide to end their marriage together. This approach works well for couples who can agree on key issues like how to divide their property, who will take care of the children, and if there will be any financial support.

Legal Framework

Different laws in India cover mutual divorce depending on your religion. Here’s a quick overview:

Hindu Marriage Act, 1955: For Hindus, Sikhs, Jains, and Buddhists.

Indian Christian Marriage Act, 1872: For Christians.

Parsi Marriage and Divorce Act, 1936: For Parsis.

Muslim Personal Law: For Muslims.

Special Marriage Act, 1954: For interfaith or civil marriages.

While the specific rules may vary, the process is mostly similar across these laws.

Requirements for Mutual Divorce

To file for a mutual divorce, you need to meet certain conditions:

Separation Period: You must have been living apart for at least one year.

Agreement: Both partners need to agree that the marriage cannot continue.

Joint Petition: Both parties must sign the divorce petition together.

Where to File

You can file your mutual divorce petition at the Family Court in the city where:

You last lived together as a couple.

Your marriage took place.

The wife currently lives.

Choosing the right location helps simplify the process.

Documents Needed

Having the right documents is crucial for a smooth divorce. Here’s what you’ll need:

Marriage Proof: This can be a marriage certificate, wedding photos, or any valid proof of marriage.

ID Proofs: Aadhaar cards, PAN cards, or other government IDs for both partners.

Marriage Invitation Card: To prove your relationship.

Mutual Agreement (MoU): A document outlining how you’ll divide property, child custody, and financial support.

Income Proof: Salary slips or proof of income if financial support is involved.

Steps to File for Mutual Divorce

Here’s a simple step-by-step guide to filing for mutual divorce:

Draft the MoU: Create a document that lists all the terms of your divorce, including how you’ll divide property, custody arrangements, and alimony.

File the Joint Divorce Petition: Submit the petition to the Family Court, along with the MoU. Both spouses must sign it.

First Motion Hearing: After filing, a hearing will be scheduled. The judge will check that both partners understand the MoU and agree to the divorce.

Six-Month Cooling-Off Period: The court usually requires a six-month waiting period. This allows both parties to reconsider their decision. If you’re sure about the divorce, you may request a waiver in special cases.

Second Motion Hearing: After the cooling-off period, you’ll have a second hearing. If both partners still agree, the judge will issue a final decree, officially ending the marriage.

Costs Involved

The cost of a mutual divorce in India generally ranges from INR 15,000 to INR 30,000. This includes:

Legal Fees: For drafting documents and legal representation.

Court Fees: For filing and hearing costs.

Mutual divorce is usually cheaper than a contested divorce since it requires less time in court.

Timeline for a Mutual Divorce

The entire process typically takes 6 to 18 months. The timeline can vary based on the cooling-off period and how quickly court dates are available.

Final Thoughts

While a mutual divorce is designed to be straightforward, it can still feel overwhelming. That’s where Zolvit comes in. Our team of divorce legal experts is ready to guide you through each step, ensuring everything is handled correctly. With our help, you can focus on starting your next chapter with peace of mind.

If you’re considering a mutual divorce, reach out to Zolvit today and let us make the process as smooth as possible for you.