Category: ‘Government’

Supreme Court to Decide Whether Gays Nationwide Can Marry

January 16, 2015 Posted by suefairview

17scotus1-superJumbo

Pete Prete with Equality Beyond Gender waved a Marriage Pride flag attached to an American flag outside the Supreme Court in Washington on Friday. Credit Jabin Botsford/The New York Times

Nevada considers tighter rules after porn actor infected with HIV

January 12, 2015 Posted by suefairview

An adult movie shoot in Nevada that ended with two male actors infected with HIV has state and local health officials considering more stringent safety regulations for pornographic film productions, including mandatory use of condoms.

Health officials are looking at whether more specific and stringent rules are needed for the porn industry, which has grown in Nevada since 2012. That’s when Los Angeles County began requiring adult movie performers to wear condoms during filming, prompting a sharp decline in porn production in what long has been the industry’s capital city.

Read the rest of the story here.

Alice, there is no Santa Claus

October 24, 2014 Posted by suefairview

Letter: Linares Debate Response Misunderstood

To the Editor:

I attended the debate between State Senator Art Linares, Emily Bjornberg, and Colin Bennett on October 8th at Valley Regional High School. With regard to the letter from Sue Huybensz, who also attended the debate, I am certain that she misunderstood the discussion. In particular, she completely misinterpreted the response by Senator Linares regarding his stand on the SCOTUS Hobby Lobby decision. In no way did Senator Linares say that he is opposed to a woman’s right to choose. He pointed out that this issue is not germane to candidates running for the State Senate. If he were running for the United States Senate or were in line for consideration for a position on the Supreme Court, the issue of what methods of birth control must be paid for by a private enterprise would be a worthwhile topic for debate. At a debate for election to State Senator, the issue is a red herring. When Art shared that he was raised Catholic, he was pointing out that nobody’s personal and religious beliefs supersede the laws of our country. The aim of Senator Linares on the evening of October 8th was to bring the debate’s discussion back to issues that are germane to CT residents, issues that a state senator is empowered to do something about: returning prosperity and top-notch educational and  professional opportunity to the residents of our state.  As a CT woman, I plan to cast my vote for Senator Art Linares.

Sincerely,

Alice van Deursen

Essex

 

Here is my response:

I completely agree with you that Mr. Linares was stating that the SCOTUS decision was not applicable to his candidacy. Its just that I completely disagree. I think that we need strong advocates for women’s rights in the capitol as well as in all elected/appointed public positions. Most moderate Republicans would fit this bill. Have a look around you at what is happening in this country. States, such as Texas, Mississippi, North Dakota, Michigan, Colorado, Wisconsin, North Carolina and Ohio are making it more difficult for women to obtain abortions. Those decisions are all being made in state senates.  The Hobby Lobby decision a distinct slippage of women’s rights. Are you aware that women earn 23 cents less on the dollar than men, that fewer women enter STEM studies than men, that women are still discriminated against in our country? Across the board, women’s rights are threatened by right-wing extremists such as Mr. Linares seems to be and it is a constant fight to maintain what women have won. His views are not in keeping with this district or the times we live in. These reasons are why women’s issues are not a “red herring”.

If his comment about his religion was to say that religion doesn’t matter, then why didn’t he just say that? Are his debating skills that lacking, or was he just hedging or being disingenuous? Whether I misinterpreted his meaning or not, why couldn’t he just be honest and open about his feelings on this issue and women’s rights like the other candidates were? Perhaps women’s issues don’t matter that much to Mr. Linares. But, we’ll never know because he won’t agree to another debate.

You can thank your long gone sisters for your right to vote for a candidate that might take rights away from you.

Sue Huybensz

Deep River

Recent letter to the editor re: State Senator Art Linares

October 22, 2014 Posted by suefairview

Here is a recent letter to the editor that I wrote about CT State Senator Art Linares:

connecticut-state-senator-art-linares

AN OPEN LETTER TO REPUBLICAN WOMEN ON ELECTION DAY

I am a fellow Republican woman who always wanted to be married, but I wanted a career instead of children. Thankfully, when I headed to college in 1974, I had access to birth control and due to Roe v. Wade I also had access to what could be a very excruciating choice. [Thankfully I never had to make that choice.] So it was time travel for me to hear Art Linares’ answer to this question at the debate held on October 8 at the Valley Regional High School: “Where do you stand on the SCOTUS Hobby Lobby decision?” Linares only stated that “he was raised Catholic and isn’t up for appointment as a Supreme Court Justice.” In other words, Linares is against a woman’s right to choose even birth control!

Haven’t we already dealt with this issue 40 years ago? This extremely right-wing view could have totally changed my life and taken my choice to have a career away from me. Also, I would note that extremist views such as Linares’ are not a fit with his own district’s constituency.

Birthing a child sometimes can be life-threatening. Linares doesn’t care: “No exceptions.” I have had a colleague who died from a brain hemorrhage while she was trying to have a child.

I may have wanted to hear more on Linares’ stances, but it seems he doesn’t like to show up to debates.

Please, if you value your choices as a woman, do not vote for Art Linares.

Sue Huybensz

Deep River

So far it has been published in valleynewsnow.com and Lymeline.net.

Did Rick Perry Have An Innocent Man Executed? YES HE DID!

August 4, 2014 Posted by suefairview

From Joe.My.God.:

“Even though 41 inmates have been exonerated by DNA evidence since he took office, Rick Perry says he has no trouble sleeping.”

Cameron Todd Willingham was executed in Texas in 2004 for allegedly setting a fire that killed his three young daughters 13 years earlier. He always claimed his innocence, and the arson investigation used to convict him was questioned by leading experts before Willingham was executed. Since 2004, further evidence in the case has led to the inescapable conclusion that Willingham did not set the fire for which he was executed. The Texas Forensic Science Commission issued its report on the convictions of Cameron Todd Willingham and Ernest Willis on April 15, 2011 recommending more education and training for fire investigators and implementing procedures to review old cases.

NEWS BROKE YESTERDAY THAT THE JAILHOUSE SNITCH WAS COERCED INTO GIVING DAMNING TESTIMONY AGAINST CAMERON TODD WILLINGHAM.

TEXAS EXECUTED AN INNOCENT MAN.

Read about it here.