Thursday, April 21, 2005
Party with Christians....No, seriously!
We're Putting the "Fun" in "Fundamentalist"
Texas Tommy does the "Texas Tommy"
Dear VitW Readers,
I do not entreat you to personal matters very often, yet I thought it OK to make an exception this time 'cause I think you'll dig it.
This Saturday evening, April 23rd, the singles class of First Evangelical Free Church is putting on a dance party featuring Salsa, Two-step, Hip-Hop and Swing from 8pm to 12 midnight. Austin bloggers are invited.
Texas Tommy does the "Texas Tommy"
Dear VitW Readers,
I do not entreat you to personal matters very often, yet I thought it OK to make an exception this time 'cause I think you'll dig it.
This Saturday evening, April 23rd, the singles class of First Evangelical Free Church is putting on a dance party featuring Salsa, Two-step, Hip-Hop and Swing from 8pm to 12 midnight. Austin bloggers are invited.
$2 cover charge gets you the aforementioned dance party....
Lessons.....
- Country (8:30)
- Swing (9:00) (Yours truly will be teaching swing. I plan to demonstrate the "Texas Tommy" spin....yes, I took the name of a dance move as my online sobriquet)
- Salsa (9:30)
And Snacks & (Java, water, cola)....
And a comfy couch zone for hanging out and chatting
WHERE: First Evangelical Free Church, 4220 Monterey Oaks Blvd, just north of the William Cannon/Mopac intersection. Get to the parking lot & we'll get you upstairs.
Phone: 512.891.1600
Click here for a map.
Email impact@fefc.org or myself for more info.
Tuesday, April 19, 2005
Parental Rights Update
HB 1212 Helps Parents Protect Progeny from Predators
A big part of VitW's coverage of the Texas Rally for Life last January were the powerful testimonies of 4 post-abortive women, which were the centerpiece of the event (despite what the Statesman said about it).
A common theme in their testimonies was the exploitation and manipulation by older, predatory men. According to some of the women who spoke at the rally, their abortions were coerced by the older man without their parents' knowledge. Maybe it was "consensual", but that does not make it right. HB 1212 would go a long way to preventing such blatant usurpations of parental authority.
Yet, to hear pro-abortion activists talk, you would think that parents were the problem in the first place and that abusive family situations are the universal cause of underage pregnancies. They seem completely oblivious to how sexual predators are gaming the system to the detriment of young women and their children. If a family situation is so abusive that a minor girl has to secretly go to a judge to get an abortion (because of incest or severe consequences of being found out), then maybe Child Protective Services involvement would be a better alternative. I do not see how subjecting the girl to a second predation by greedy abortion doctors is going to make her situation any better. If pro-abortion activists applaud liberal pols who claim they want to make abortion "safe, legal, and rare", why not support this bill?
The bill also includes the following language about judicial bypasses, the legalese term meaning 'judges decide when not to obtain parental consent', requiring a public report that says:
Under HB 1212, the judges who are granting these judicial by passes will be known and bypasses will have to be issued in close proximity to the girl's residence. No more foraging around for the weakest link. No wonder the abortion industrial complex and its acolytes are so much against this bill; it will cut off a significant revenue stream.
According to the Capitol website, HB 1212 was left pending in the State Affairs Committee on April 13.
5/16/05 update: I posted more about this topic here.
A big part of VitW's coverage of the Texas Rally for Life last January were the powerful testimonies of 4 post-abortive women, which were the centerpiece of the event (despite what the Statesman said about it).
A common theme in their testimonies was the exploitation and manipulation by older, predatory men. According to some of the women who spoke at the rally, their abortions were coerced by the older man without their parents' knowledge. Maybe it was "consensual", but that does not make it right. HB 1212 would go a long way to preventing such blatant usurpations of parental authority.
Yet, to hear pro-abortion activists talk, you would think that parents were the problem in the first place and that abusive family situations are the universal cause of underage pregnancies. They seem completely oblivious to how sexual predators are gaming the system to the detriment of young women and their children. If a family situation is so abusive that a minor girl has to secretly go to a judge to get an abortion (because of incest or severe consequences of being found out), then maybe Child Protective Services involvement would be a better alternative. I do not see how subjecting the girl to a second predation by greedy abortion doctors is going to make her situation any better. If pro-abortion activists applaud liberal pols who claim they want to make abortion "safe, legal, and rare", why not support this bill?
The bill also includes the following language about judicial bypasses, the legalese term meaning 'judges decide when not to obtain parental consent', requiring a public report that says:
whether the minor had a valid court order authorizing the abortion without the consent of a parent, managing conservator, or guardian, and if so, the court that granted the order, and whether the court granted the order by action or inaction;Right now, judges anonymously grant judicial bypasses for the parental notification law. Furthermore, the bill says, regarding jurisdiction:
The application may be filed in any county court at law, court having probate jurisdiction, or district court, including a family district court, for the minor's county of residence or for a county that borders the minor's county of residence.Currently, judicial bypasses can be had anywhere in the state. Now, I do not have a big, fancy law degree. But even I can see that the current law means abortion industry lawyers can go forum shopping in the whole, big state of Texas for a judge that is friendly to Big Abortion with little or no visibility into the process.
Under HB 1212, the judges who are granting these judicial by passes will be known and bypasses will have to be issued in close proximity to the girl's residence. No more foraging around for the weakest link. No wonder the abortion industrial complex and its acolytes are so much against this bill; it will cut off a significant revenue stream.
According to the Capitol website, HB 1212 was left pending in the State Affairs Committee on April 13.
5/16/05 update: I posted more about this topic here.
Monday, April 18, 2005
Puff, the Music's Draggin'
Ephemeral Musings on the Hazy Present
New blogroll addition, Ill-Sorted Ephemera, posted a fairly comprehensive look at the proposed smoking ban, on the ballot on May 7 here.
Some choice excepts, first from a recent Statesman story (emphasis added):
BTW: I blogged about the anonymous do-gooders pushing this draconian ban, Onward Austin, here
New blogroll addition, Ill-Sorted Ephemera, posted a fairly comprehensive look at the proposed smoking ban, on the ballot on May 7 here.
Some choice excepts, first from a recent Statesman story (emphasis added):
"Randall and Donya Stockton launched Beerland on Red River Street almost four years ago with 12 cases of beer and a dream to fill a need for punk and garage bands.In other words, the market desired a smoking venue, causing the local business to respond. Ephemera also cites an Austin Chronicle article by Darcy Stephens:
Neither one a smoker, the Stocktons saw an opportunity to create a punk scene without the haze of cigarette smoke.
"I thought there was an untapped market when we first opened. So we tried it," said Randall.
The nonsmokers did not come, but the smokers did. And they wanted to smoke.
"I had to adjust the model to focus on people who actually come," Randall said. "That's what enables us to be open. That's what enables us to incubate talent . . . and reach an audience."
"Last June's revised ordinance, reworked after the City Council reversed former Mayor Gus Garcia's stringent ban, forced live music venues to offer nonsmoking shows on Mondays, 52 weeks a year. So the clubs did ... and according to them, nobody came. Sure, it was Monday, but compared to smoking-permitted Mondays immediately before the rule, there was a huge drop in attendance. No fans mean no bands want to play. No music, no show."Ooops, law of unintended consequences proven yet again. This is what happens when the government exceeds its proper scope of authority: activities that were freely chosen by individuals and businesses making economically logical decisions are taken away, thus causing the economic benefits of those decision to cease. In the case of Austin, the economic choices prohibited by the ban are the same ones that help create Austin's claim as the "Live Music Capital of the World". Passing the smoking ban could snuff out part of the local music scene and put a drag on the local economy.
BTW: I blogged about the anonymous do-gooders pushing this draconian ban, Onward Austin, here
