Gay couples wed in Utah after judge overturns ban.

The article can be found here.

   Just yesterday Salt Lake began issuing marriage licenses to gay couples. The U.S. District Judge Robert J. Shelby has declared Utah's voter-approved ban on gay marriage unconstitutional saying that the ban violates the constitutional rights of gay couples and ruled that Utah failed to show that allowing same-sex marriages would affect opposite-sex marriages in any way. This doesn't mean that everyone is on board with this recent change. Utah Governor Gary Herbert said, "I am very disappointed an activist federal judge is attempting to override the will of the people of Utah. I am working with my legal counsel and the acting attorney general to determine the best course to defend traditional marriage within the borders of Utah." Soon after the ruling, the state filed both a notice of appeal of the ruling and a request for an emergency stay that would stop marriage licenses from being issued to same-sex couples. Though the LDS church do not support this ruling, a group called Mormons for Equality applauded it. The group has been among the leaders of growing movement among Mormons to push the church to teach that homosexuality isn't a sin. If this ruling stands, Utah would become the 18th state to legalize gay marriages.

   I think that this is absolutely fantastic. I never thought I would see a day where Utah becomes accepting enough to allow gay marriage. Although it is still banned here in Utah County, acceptance of same sex marriage in Salt Lake is still a HUGE step even though the state is currently trying to fight it. But with the way gears are turning, I think that complete acceptance here is closer than it may appear. Of course there are activists here in Utah who openly support gay marriage, but even many members of the LDS church who do not support same sex marriage do feel that we do not have a right to deny these couples a legal marriage license. We are definitely one step closer to greater acceptance here in the United States. Within the next 15 years, it is very possible that we will see same sex marriage legalized in every part of the United States and we will see that all of this hate and fear is completely silly. Love is nothing to fear.

Supreme Court to revisit death penalty for mentally disabled.

The article can be found here.

   In Atkins v. Virginia, the Supreme Court prohibited states from executing anyone with "mental retardation." Mental health professionals define it as substantial limitations in intellectual functions such as reasoning or problem-solving, limitations in adaptive behavior or "street smarts," and evidence of the condition before age 18. This spring the Supreme Court will revisit their previous ruling from 12 years ago that left the details in the hands of the states. "Most likely, the case won't result in a dramatic shift in national criminal justice policy, but will further clarify who should and should not be eligible for execution", said Ronald Tabak, an attorney who has represented multiple clients with intellectual disabilities and chairs the American Bar Association's death penalty committee (article).

   I think that it would definitely be best for the Supreme Court to clarify who should and should not be eligible for execution and set that standard for all of the states. The death penalty is quite a heavy punishment (The heaviest punishment.You can't really just bring someone back from the dead and have them retried.) and I think that if it is allowed in a state, no matter what state it is, the requirements should be the same. This revisit from the court won't change a whole lot for the states who still practice the death penalty, it will just set more of a standard. This topic is always a hard one. I'm not entirely sure how I feel about all of it. There are always going to be those borderline cases, and I agree with the advocates who want the Supreme Court to revisit these cases. There should be no doubts in a ruling when someone is sentenced to the death penalty. Maybe one day there will no longer be a death penalty anywhere in the United States. And maybe one day we will do more to help convicts so that they are able to function successfully in society. And then there's that impossible hope that one day people will stop doing such awful things to other people that get them sentenced to the death penalty.
 

President Obama's law faces hurdles beyond the Supreme Court case on the birth control mandate.

    Article can be found here.

 
   In courtrooms across the country, Republicans are challenging the way the Affordable Care Act was passed and the bureaucracy it created. Namely contraception. But for Obama and the millions of Americans who stand to benefit from the law, the good news is that the lawsuits are long-shots.

   In my opinion: whether or not people agree with birth control, they should not prevent those who do request it the opportunity to receive it with their health care plan. "It is essential that the women's preventive coverage benefit, including contraception, be available to all women, regardless of what health plan they have or where they work - as Congress intended. Providing access to birth control just makes good sense" (Gwen Moore). Yes, being sexually active bears consequences but women have the right to be in charge of when they are ready to bear children. I believe that it's a good idea that the government include birth control in the required heath care standards because it is very important to the lives of many families today. "I'm pro responsible choice. You know, there is choice to abstain, choice to do contraception. There are all kinds of good choices" (Sharron Angle).  It is not responsible in any sense to have more children than you can afford to take care of. I feel like the ability to regulate how many (if any) children a family is ready to have is the most responsible thing to do. "For most women, including women who want to have children, contraception is not an option; it is a basic health care necessity" (Louise Slaughter). Whatever pros or cons you want to throw out there are fine and dandy as long as each woman has the ability to make her own informed choice on the matter.

Judge says Mich. gay marriage ban will go to trial.

The article can be found here.

   This article is about how the fate of Michigan's ban on gay marriage will be decided in a trial Feb. 25. This was brought to the attention of the Court when a lesbian couple filed a lawsuit challenging the state's ban on adoption by unmarried couples.

   I personally feel that gay marriage and adoption should not be illegal anywhere. We have no right to tell two people who love each other that they can't get married and that they can't start a family. When it comes to gay adoption, we all need to realize that these children want a home where they will be loved unconditionally. These children don't discriminate, love is love. And being "gay" is not contagious. I think that the decision of who is or isn't allowed to be married should not fall into the hands of either the state or the federal government. Our Declaration of Independence states that "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness". To me, being able to love whoever you want is included in everyone's pursuit of happiness. If you don't agree with gay marriage, don't have one. We are all human beings, why do we need to hate each other for being exactly who we are? And even if we flat out disagree with a particular group of people, majority still must rule with respect to the minority. I like to believe that one day our nation will see that these people deserve the same rights as everyone else. Let's legalize love.

Obama to GOP: Win an election.

The article can be found here.

   This article is about a statement that President Obama said to the Republicans who want to defund his health care law. He said, "You don't like a particular policy -- or a particular president -- then argue for your position. Go out there and win an election.''

   This statement made by the president definitely cuts to the chase. If you don't agree, don't throw a fit about it. "Tolerate" it as long as you have to, and when the next election comes around, get the people on your side and change it when you win the election. "Push to change it. But don't break it." We can't always agree on everything issue that comes up, but that in no way gives us any reason to completely shut down and refuse compromise. Rarely can anyone, whether it's a party or just an individual, get their way all the time. We need to be mature enough to know that compromise isn't the end of the world. And by our next election, if the people unite and decide that they are completely against how the health care reform has been running, then by all means we can elect a president willing to change it. But for now, we all just need to be patient and come at this with an open mind. It might not be as awful as a lot of our nation likes to believe, just give it a chance.

Redford: Racism drives some Obama critics.

The articles can be found here and here.

   This article is about Actor Robert Redford in a CNN interview talking about his new film and how it could serve as an analogy to the shutdown crisis. He brings up the point that he feels that racism does drive some Obama critics. He also talks about how he feels what our government needs are more women and young people.

   So I do think that Redford makes some good points here. I'm not saying that everyone against Obama is a racist, but I do believe that for some people, that is a driving force to their hate. Redford states in the interview that Obama's opponents reject whatever he might propose because their determination was to destroy this man. And I feel that there is a lot of truth in that. A lot of us are so quick to talk about all the things our President has done that are "ruining" our country, but is that really the case? Honestly, I believe that he is trying his best to do what he feels our country needs. Rather than represent the interests of the public, our Congress seems to be so set on going against anything that the President proposes that they will do anything they can to come out "on top". But have they really won? I think that causing an unnecessary government shutdown is far from winning. Let's take a step back and remember that all of us, even the President, are human beings. Let's stop attacking each other and do everything in our power to shape up and make our nation stronger and more unified than ever before.

Senators say they are nearing a deal on shutdown, debt.

The article can be found here.

   This article is about the President meeting with congressional leaders today at 3 p.m. E.T. to hopefully come to an agreement. They will be discussing a deal to raise the debt ceiling, ending the government shutdown. Senators Reid and McConnell seem to be quite optimistic that an agreement will be reached but the President said: "We'll see this afternoon whether this progress is real."

   I think that President Obama is completely right when he said: "There are going to be differences between the parties,there are going to be differences in terms of budget priorities. But we don't need to inflict pain on the American people, or risk the possibility of America's full faith and credit being damaged just because one side is not getting its way." (article) This whole shutdown is a bit silly. Differences don't need to start an all out war. I like to think that they will be able to come to an agreement, but we'll just have to see. Congress needs to work together, not tear our nation apart.

School kitchens take fresh approach for healthier foods.

The article can be found here.

   This article is about the conflicts that arise with farm-to-school movements. A lot of work goes into preparing fresh produce, many of the lunch workers are not chefs, they are there because they like the kids. They often lack proper culinary training because most of the food they receive is already processed cutting and preparing is a whole different process. Because schools feed so many students, small local farmers may not be able to supply the bushels and pounds needed for each meal. Larger school districts face challenges in finding enough fresh foods and the costs of hand-preparing foods on a large scale. Smaller districts may not have proper equipment or storage space, and workers may need culinary training (article).

   The Healthy, Hunger-Free Kids Act of 2010, signed by Barack Obama on December 13, 2010, funds standard child nutrition and school lunch programs. One of the new nutrition standards is to provide resources for schools and communities to utilize local farms and gardens to provide fresh produce. I think that it is important that we are making healthy food a standard in our schools and that we are doing our best to integrate the local farms. Though it has faced some challenges, the health of our nation is important enough that we should continue to pursue change at root of it all: the children. If we enforce healthy eating from the start, it becomes easier for kids to make healthier decisions on their own. I think it was necessary that our federal government stepped in and gave an overall standard for our nation to strive toward. Though serving healthier food in schools will inevitably cost more, taxpayers could decide it's worth it. A recent Wisconsin poll found 77 percent of 300 people surveyed said they were willing to pay more for locally grown foods in schools (article). All in all, I think it's important that we support our local farms, incorporate more fresh produce in our schools, and provide proper culinary training to our lunch workers.

Obama in gun law plea after Washington Navy Yard deaths.

The article can be found here.

   This article is about President Obama's speech at the memorial service for victims of the shooting at the Washington Navy Yard. He talked about how we shouldn't let this continue to happen; there is nothing normal about these tragic events. We need to take the steps required to change our policies in regulating firearms.

   After the massacre at the Sandy Hook elementary school in Connecticut last December, the president sought to introduce expanded background checks for buyers of guns, and to re-introduce an expired ban on military-style assault weapons (article). These measures to better our regulation have been turned down by the Senate and cannot get the needed votes to pass. Yes, it is our Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms, but is this really applicable to our nation today? We need to do what's in the best interest for the safety of the American people and I think that regulation of firearms is necessary and not at all unreasonable. I agree with Obama's statement: "Change will come the only way it ever has come, and that's from the American people". We shouldn't continue to let this happen, we need to take the steps necessary to better ensure the safety of our entire nation from more gun violence.

As health costs rise, some companies blame Obamacare.

The article can be found here.

   This article is about how some businesses are blaming the healthcare reform for the cuts that hurt workers. It also shows the side of businesses who are taking this reform as an opportunity to benefit their employees. Healthcare is a private issue that has become public. Since business haven't always done their part in providing affordable health insurance to their employees, the government has had to step in and regulate it so that the people all have the opportunity to receive it.

    I agree with the ending feel of this article. We're going to have to spend some more money on healthcare but it's worth it. The health of their employees is a good thing to invest in. With companies like Starbucks offering health insurance access for employees who work just 20 hours a week. “This is going to be a differentiator for us in our recruitment process,” said Scott Thomson, vice president of total rewards and HR technology. “We’ll be able to access a higher quality of candidate and hang onto them longer.” All in all, I think that companies shouldn't cut health benefits because they would need to be spending a bit more money, I think that they should see it as an opportunity to "invest" in good employees who want to work for the long haul.