Posts

Half of All Girls In South Sudan Forced To Marry

/0 Comments/in , /by

Photo Credit: AP

The 17-year-old beaten to death for refusing to marry a man old enough to be her grandfather. The teen dragged by her family to be raped to force her into marrying an elderly man. They are among 39,000 girls forced into marriage every day around the world, sold like cattle to enrich their families.

More than one-third of all girls are married in 42 countries, according to the U.N. Population Fund, referring to females under the age of 18. The highest number of cases occurs in some of the poorest countries, the agency figures show, with the West African nation of Niger at the bottom of the list with 75 percent of girls married before they turn 18. In Bangladesh the figure is 66 percent and in Central African Republic and Chad it is 68 percent.

Most child marriages take place in South Asia and rural sub-Saharan Africa, according to the population fund. In terms of absolute numbers, India, because of its large population, has the most child marriages with child brides in 47 percent of all marriages.

Government statistics in South Sudan show half the girls there aged 15 to 19 are married, with some brides as young as 12 years old.

“The country’s widespread child marriage exacerbates South Sudan’s pronounced gender gaps in school enrollment, contributes to soaring maternal mortality rates, and violates the right of girls to be free from violence,” says a Human Rights Watch report published Thursday ahead of International Women’s Day on Friday.

Read more from this story HERE.

Why Marriage Matters For America And Conservatism

/0 Comments/in , /by

Photo Credit: Ken Weingart Some former officials in the Republican Party are urging the Supreme Court to redefine marriage for the nation. But support for marriage as the union of a man and a woman is essential to American—and conservative—principles. Indeed, nothing could be less conservative than urging an activist court to redefine an essential institution of civil society.

As my co-authors and I argue in our new book, What Is Marriage?, and in the amicus brief we filed with the Supreme Court, marriage exists to bring a man and a woman together as husband and wife to be father and mother to any children their union produces. It is based on the anthropological truth that men and women are different and complementary, on the biological fact that reproduction depends on a man and a woman, and on the social reality that children need a mother and a father. Marriage has public purposes that transcend its private purposes.

Marriage predates government. It is the fundamental building block of all human civilization. All Americans, especially conservatives, should respect this crucial institution of civil society. This is why 41 states, with good reason, affirm that marriage is between a man and a woman.

Government recognizes marriage because it is an institution that benefits society in a way that no other relationship does. Marriage is society’s least restrictive means to ensure the well-being of children. State recognition of marriage protects children by encouraging men and women to commit to each other and take responsibility for their children. While respecting everyone’s liberty, government rightly recognizes, protects, and promotes marriage as the ideal institution for childbearing and childrearing.

Redefining marriage would further distance marriage from the needs of children. It would deny as a matter of policy the ideal that a child needs a mom and a dad. We know that children tend to do best when raised by a mother and a father. The confusion resulting from further delinking childbearing from marriage would force the state to intervene more often in family life and cause welfare programs to grow even more.

Read more from this story HERE.

The ObamaCare War On Marriage

/3 Comments/in , , /by

Photo Credit: Human Events“Companies have a new solution to rising health-insurance costs: Break up their employees’ marriages,” says the Wall Street Journal’s MarketWatch:

By denying coverage to spouses, employers not only save the annual premiums, but also the new fees that went into effect as part of the Affordable Care Act. This year, companies have to pay $1 or $2 “per life” covered on its plans, a sum that jumps to $65 in 2014. And health law guidelines proposed recently mandate coverage of employees’ dependent children (up to age 26), but husbands and wives are optional. “The question about whether it’s obligatory to cover the family of the employee is being thought through more than ever before,” says Helen Darling, president of the National Business Group on Health.

But… but… “if you like your plan, you can keep your plan.”

Such exclusions barely existed three years ago, but experts expect an increasing number of employers to adopt them: “That’s the next step,” Darling says. HMS, a company that audits plans for employers, estimates that nearly a third of companies might have such policies now. Holdouts say they feel under pressure to follow suit. “We’re the last domino,” says Duke Bennett, mayor of Terre Haute, Ind., which is instituting a spousal carve-out for the city’s health plan, effective July 2013, after nearly all major employers in the area dropped spouses.

MarketWatch cites anecdotal evidence that some people are dropping their personal coverage so they can migrate to joint coverage provided by companies that do continue to offer it. That’s a nice near-term solution… if you happen to be married to someone who works for such a company. In the longer-term, what happens to the remaining plans that offer spousal coverage, after they’ve attracted all of those expensive spouses?

Read more from this story HERE.

Atheists Sue Indiana Over “Unconstitutional Marriage Statute”

/3 Comments/in , /by

An atheist organization claims Indiana’s marriage statute is unconstitutional because it doesn’t allow nonbelievers to be married by their own leaders, but state officials say the group is divorced from reality.

The New York-based Center for Inquiry claims in a federal lawsuit that Indiana Code 31-11-6-1 violates the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment since it sets clear preference for religious individuals over those devoted to the “pursuit of ethical alternatives to religion.” The group says it filed suit on behalf of members John Kiel and Michelle Landrum, who plan to wed in the next six months.

“You can have a ceremony as a nonreligious person and have the marriage solemnized by someone in the government, but the issue is that a person of faith can have a leader of their world view solemnize that marriage that the nonreligious do not have,” said Paul Fidalgo, communications director for The Center for Inquiry. “They are looking to win that right, to have it solemnized. That’s the key word.”

According to Hoosier State law, marriages may be solemnized by a member of the clergy or a religious organization such as a priest, a bishop, an archbishop or a rabbi, as well as government officials like a mayor, a clerk or a clerk of the circuit court. It also specifically names the Friends Church, German Baptists, the Baha’i faith, the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints and imams of a mosque as groups who can conduct marriages in the state. Nowhere does the statute list “secular celebrants,” or anyone else whose status is based on their disbelief in a creator.

A ceremony solemnized by secular elected officials – even if they happen to be atheists – is not acceptable, according to the suit, for several reasons, including limitations on time and places where the marriage may occur, unwanted governmental overtone and a lack of personal connection to that official.

Read more from this story HERE.

Democratic Party moves to include Gay Marriage in Platform

/2 Comments/in , /by

Democrats appear ready to embrace same-sex marriage as part of their party platform, a policy shift that reflects the rapidly growing acceptance of gay rights in mainstream politics.

Party officials met over the weekend in Minneapolis and approved the first step to amend their platform. In two weeks, the entire platform committee will vote on the matter at a meeting scheduled in Detroit. Then, if approved as expected, it would move on to convention delegates in Charlotte, N.C., for final approval in September.

According to Democrats who were briefed on the vote in Minneapolis, there was no objection when the issue came up. Though the language that was voted on still could be revised, party officials do not anticipate any major obstacles going forward.

The platform language approved over the weekend also included a condemnation of the Defense of Marriage Act, which prohibits the federal government from recognizing legal same-sex marriages.

The Democratic Party’s move comes more than two months after President Obama personally backed the rights of same-sex couples to wed, making the action decidedly less controversial than it could have been had the party been in conflict with its leader.

The ABC’s of being Joe Miller’s Wife

/4 Comments/in /by

Many people regularly ask how I handle the media, family dynamics, politics, as well as work, travel and being on the Alaska Judicial Council.  So, I decided I would start to pen a few articles on these different areas starting with perhaps the most difficult, yet inspiring . . . drum roll please . . . being Joe Miller’s wife!  Since we do wake up beside each other on more days than not, I will tackle this with some humor and easy to understand points:

 

The ABC’s of being Joe Miller’s Wife

A  Always remember to admire him

B  Be cheerful more days than not

C  Communicate- this is very important!

D  Do remember that I appreciate his reasons for doing what he does even though it may not seem sane at times

E  Enjoy the simple things in life because when he does the thing he does that may be all we have

F  Focus yes, FOCUS, on his good qualities

G  Give and forgive a lot!

H  Hope he remembers to thank everyone for coming, to pay attention to the little things, and HOLD NO GRUDGES!

I    Invite his crazy ideas into the conversation of what I would like to get done around the house and watch that turn into what he would like to get done around the nation

J  Join in his endeavors and enthusiasms

K  Keep my mouth shut about something stupid he did until we are out of earshot of others

L  Love him and try to listen when he’s speaking

M Magnify the good in him because sometimes I may be the only one who did that day

N  Never forget his heart and intentions in everything he does-yes they are not just a benefit to others, but also to myself and our family

O  Oust the negative as often as possible

P  Pray for him

Q  Quickly point out what I think and then let him ponder and bring about a discussion

R  Remember that behind every great man there is an even better woman so I need to encourage him

S  Speak highly of him

T  Treat him as a King because I will be treated as his Queen

U  Unconditionally love him

V  Value his desires, insights and strong demeanor

W  Welcome him with open arms when he’s had a rough day or Welcome his ambition and fight for truth and liberty

X  X-ercise my voice but try my best to keep all of the above because then I can be a happy, productive wife and mother. So,

Y  Y’all now know a few of my secrets and I think they sure help because as you can

Z  Zee for yourself, we make a pretty good team!

 

Until next time – Be Blessed!

Kathleen

 

Photo credit: Joe Miller, All Rights Reserved

Rielle Hunter’s book tour about affair with John Edwards comes to abrupt end with pathetic sales

/0 Comments/in /by

It was billed to be an explosive tell-all about what ‘really happened’ during the affair that ended a marriage and the dreams of the man who was being pipped to be the next U.S. president.

But after all the hype, it seems not that many people really wanted to hear Rielle Hunter’s side of the story, as the book about her relationship with former senator John Edwards has sold just 6,000 copies.

Due to poor sales, Hunter seems to have dropped under the radar and scheduled no additional tour dates despite an initial media blitz.

Boookscan told the New York Post that ‘What Really Happened: John Edwards, Our Daughter And Me’ sold enough copies to make it onto the New York Times best-seller list but ‘not big enough to make the major houses sorry’ for not choosing it.

New York publishers had said they were not interested in Hunter’s book, citing her negative image, so it was instead released through Dallas-based boutique publisher BenBella Books – who reportedly only gave her a small cash advance.

Read more from this story HERE.

Photo credit: Tony Fischer Photography