Gay Politician No 5 Research Paper

Senator Huff first introduced this bill on February 25, 2015 where it was first presented to a committee on RLS, waiting for the approval to print. Freshly off the printer on February 26, 2015, the bill was accepted and began its journey through the Senate. On March 5, 2015 the bill was referred to the committee on PUB. S (“Bill History-SB 420,” 2015). On April 6, 2015 the committee read the bill for a second time and amended what Huff had previously drafted. This new draft was re-referred to the committee on PUB. S. On April 7, 2015 a hearing was set for April 21st. On April 23, 2015 this new draft of the bill was passed. On April 27, 2015, this drafted bill was read for a second time and recommended that it be amended. Once amended, the bill was approved for a third reading (“Bill History-SB- 420 Prostitution,” 2015). On May 4, 2015, the bill passed its third reading in the Senate and was ordered to the Assembly. On May 5, 2015, the bill arrived in the Assembly and was held at the desk after being read for the first time. On May 22, 2015 the bill was referred to a committee on Pub. S. There was a hearing on June 16, 2015 where the bill was held in the committee

The history of the gay rights movement goes as far back as the late 19th century. More accurately, the quest by gays to search out others like themselves and foster a feeling of identity has been around since then. It is an innovative movement that seeks to change existing norms and gain acceptance within our culture. By 1915, one gay person said that the gay world was a "community, distinctly organized" (Milestones 1991), but kept mostly out of view because of social hostility. According to the Milestones article, after World War II, around 1940, many cities saw their first gay bars open as many homosexuals began to start a networking system. However, their newfound visibility only backfired on them, as

As the mother of a transgender son and an advocate for the LGBT community, Representative Ros-Lehtinen co-sponsored a bill to repeal the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), which defines marriage as “a legal union between one man and one woman” and preventing same-sex marriages as being recognized by the federal government as being a legitimate marriage. Co-sponsoring the repeal of DOMA marked yet another first for the Representative making her the first Republican to co-sponsor a bill to repeal the ban on gay marriage at the federal level. She was also a leading sponsor of the reauthorization of the Violence Against Women Act, which increases resources towards the prosecution of domestic violence, dating violence, and sexual assault. While these are examples of her efforts on a national level, her service in Congress is on behalf of her Florida

When Cruz’s fake accounts were blocked, she resorted to harassment and violent threats which were included the messages that were to expose the victim’s hidden past making porn video as well as demands to be paid $100,000 in return for leaving the

Another legislator added a clause to Glick’s proposal that would classify attacks against law enforcement as a hate crime as added incentive to garner support for passage. However, the bill failed to pass and when re-introduced again this year due was killed due to pressure from Focus on the Family, Alliance Defending Freedom and the Family Research Council. All three are powerful, well-funded organizations that oppose any rights or protections for sexual orientation or gender identity for “religious” reasons. It is troubling that the Congress within Indiana didn’t even vote after the policy passed through the Senate. The organizations lobbying against Glick’s hate crime bill believe that these laws infringe on Christians, promote the “homosexual agenda”, and that the laws could eventually be used to prosecute people who oppose homosexual or transgender activism.

The #MeToo movement— one that was started in the wake of Weinstein’s crimes (a famous director that was charged with sexually harassing women) being revealed to the public— has sparked much controversy all over the United States about how we punish those who are found guilty of sexual harassment, assault, or abuse. In Kentucky, we are seeing how our legislators are being held accountable for their questionable actions and noticing that the punishment rarely fits the crimes against female legislators, interns, and others. Late last year we saw many states deal with the sexual misconduct of their legislators, and now we need to deal with the sexual misconduct of legislators in Kentucky. As citizens of Kentucky and respecters of the rights of others, we must fight to ensure that any found committing acts like sexual assault, abuse, and harassment, are punished equally with their crime(s).

Less politically conservative proponents of the bill argue that opponents are overreacting and that the bill is designed with the sole purpose of protecting the people’s religious freedom and not to target a specific social class. Despite their insistence that it doesn’t exclude anyone, businesses have already started to discriminate. The owner of a pizzeria in northern Indiana has stated that he will not cater same- sex weddings, an act that caused boycotting of his restaurant and national debate. Supporters of the pizzeria caused outrage when over $842,000 was raised to support the business after its boycott in only 48 hours, but some of these donors claim that homophobia has nothing to do with this. Ken Gumm, one of the customers who rushed down to show his support

Originally the individual that sent the text identified himself as a twenty four (24) year old male. Veda then responded by telling the individual that she is an eleven (11) year old. The individual responded

Throughout the article Queens for a Day: Queer Eye for the Straight Guy and the Neoliberal Project written by Katherine Sender the argument that is presented is the fact that heterosexual men are under a greater pressure to become “more effectively self-monitoring citizens” (144). Sender suggests that this pressure can be directly linked to the ideas of flexible capitalism as well as “inadequate consumption” (140). Due to how the social and cultural changes that were being made in the second half of the twentieth century a shift was being made that allowed women to be more independent and economically secure. This meant that heterosexual men were no longer able to rely on woman being dependant of a man in order to survive. These men now had

Last year, Governor Mike Pence signed his version of the RFRA into law into the state of Indiana, sparking controversy all across the country. Various celebrites, event organizers, and business owners not only believed that this act was unnecessary, but found it to be intolerant, unfriendly, and backwards. Opposers have a right to be considered because this law “effectively nullifies existing municipal protections” (McBride, Durso) that have been established in the city of Indianapolis. Businesses such as Salesforce and Angie’s List have protested the law by reducing spending in Indiana. With Angie’s List alone, the new law cost the state $40 million and 1,000 jobs because the company refused to advertise businesses that endorsed the RFRA. The act has put Indiana at risk of losing on estimated $256.4 million in just one year. In Pence’s defense, he claims that he would not “sign a bill that would diminish religious freedom” (Colombo) yet many LGBT advocates and business groups believe that Pence’s words lack leadership. This implies that Pence most likely signed the bill out of personal interests and beliefs, rather than for the sake of the people of Indiana. Governor Pence’s decision to sign the RFRA has been nothing but detrimental to Indiana's economy and has tarnished the state’s perception and

The United States of America should adopt a federal law that gives rights, protection and recognition of LGBT people based on sexual orientation and gender identity as constitutionally and respectfully equal as others uniformly throughout the nation.

The gay senator against gay rights is a newsworthy story, but the dilemma is whether the statement is true or not. If the statement is false, it would look as if I’m trying to destroy his character. There are a few ways to find the truth behind this statement. I can check with the sources that gave me the information. I can also search to see if there is any photographs, video or any recordings to support my statement. This story will help people to see the true character of the senator, but it will also end his career. As a reporter I would release the information as an anonymous source to another news reporter.

Advice to a U.S. State Senator on whether natural law might determine whether passing a statute prohibiting same-sex marriage is an appropriate legislative act?

People we respect and look to for guidance and wisdom in life, lie. Lies are the cornerstone of unethical behavior; adultery is a lie not only to oneself, also to those whom you have committed to loving. In an article concerning the shocking affair of Gov. Mark Sanford, David Lauderdale makes a very simple yet profound statement, adultery is “a hardship you wouldn't wish on your worst enemy, much less inflict on your flesh and blood.” However, daily this pain is inflicted, the details coursing through the media channels spreading our ethical decline. Politicians; such as, Bill Clinton, Mark Sanford, John Ensign and celebrities Tiger Woods, David Letterman, and Jesse James are the most recent casualties in this decline in ethical behavior. (Garcia) There

Today many people have their own opinions and beliefs when it comes down to the topic of gay marriage. I personally feel that gay marriage should be legalized. Yes God said, “That marriage is to be between a man and a woman.” My question is, “What gives people the right to judge or tell another human-being who to love or how to love?” I personally feel it’s insulting to one’s integrity and people should be able to express their love how they see fit.