PFLAG of Tulare and Kings Counties will continue to meet on the third Sunday of each month.

Next meeting:

Everyone is welcome, and no one is required to speak. A PFLAG meeting is a safe place, and everyone is expected to respect the confidentiality of what is said.

This message went out to the CCA mailing list this morning. I know not many of you are likely to vote in the upcoming Fresno mayoral race, but just in case…

I saw both Henry T. Perea and Ashley Swearengin this evening and asked each one directly their position on Proposition 8, the proposed constitutional amendment seeking to ban same-sex marriage in California. Swearengin told me that she is supporting Proposition 8. Perea told me he saw same-sex marriage as a civil rights issue and he is opposing Proposition 8.

Howard K. Watkins
Chair, CVPPAC

Since October 29, 1929 is likely right around the corner, a review of the rules for FDIC insured bank accounts is probably not a bad idea. I don’t have a lot of love for CNBC, but Suze is good, and probably on our team.

I stumbled upon this at The Times of London. It’s about a new presentation of the Roman emperor Hadrian. Nicely seasoned excerpts:

Among the most appealing sections of this show is that dedicated to Antinous, the beautiful Greek boy with whom Hadrian fell in love. Curators let the museum’s wonderful silver Warren Cup with its flagrant scenes of sodomy set the stage for a liaison which at that time was considered quite normal. What was odd, this show suggests, was the cult that ensued after Antinous’ death in a Nile flood. The mourning Hadrian not only founded an entire new city in his honour but commemorated him in various god-like incarnations including as the Egyptian deity Osiris, who (complete with perfectly polished pectorals and loincloth bulge) meets the visitor at the entrance to this show.

Sadly, the article is not illustrated. It continues:

Was it the depth of his grief that made Hadrian create this gay icon? The exhibition suggests another slant. Hadrian, the first emperor to sport a full Greek-style beard, was nicknamed “the Greekling” for his love of Hellenic culture. Now by celebrating this passion through the apotheosis of a Greek boy, he kept a potentially rebellious sector of society safely pacified. He made the Greeks feel an appreciated part of his empire. It was an adept political move.

Bright man! Full story here.

… stupidity would hurt.

I found this through a member of the International Court System emails.

Can you believe a company can actually get away with this?

I choose not to shop here until they change their policies and who knows. Maybe I will take my business elsewhere from now on.

Michael

Dollar Tree refuses to recognize California law & same-sex marriage

It is not above the law even if the corporation powers that be have a contempt or strong distaste for that law.

Dennis Wyatt Managing Editor

Ann Mollica is a law-abiding citizen. She pays her taxes on time and follows the law. She is also a dependable employee having worked at Dollar Tree for 12 years.The Manteca resident on June 17 married her long-time partner Judy Deane.

The law allowed it so they decided to make their commitment to each other official.

But then Mollica discovered that there are people - strike that - there are corporations that believe they are above the law. Among them, apparently, is her employer.

She applied on June 19 for medical insurance through her employer for her spouse.

The Manteca store manager passed on the insurance application along with the copy of the marriage certificate to corporate headquarters on the East Coast.

This little gem came back from benefits specialist Patti L. Todd: “Although, I do not have a problem with same sex marriage personally, I have to go by the rules set forth. Please send her my personal CONGRATS!!”

Dollar Tree’s position is that the benefit book given to employees makes it clear they do not recognize same sex marriage. Really. There are two little problems with that. One, is that Dollar Tree cannot operate in California and be above the law. Two, that is not what their own benefits booklet distributed to Dollar Tree employees states.

Here’s what the booklet says who can enroll under the Dollar Tree health plan: “Your legally wedded spouse (coverage for common-law spouses, same sex marriages, fiancés, boy/girlfriend, and ex-spouses are not allowed under this plan.)”

Dollar Tree believes they are covered by the “same sex marriage” exclusion. But there’s a little detail. Judy is Ann’s legally wedded spouse in the State of California where Dollar Tree happens to operate some 300 stores.

Dollar Tree has added the caveat that the insurance program is voluntary. That means the State of California doesn’t mandate employers to offer health insurance. But there’s a funny little caveat attached to it. If they do offer insurance, it has to be offered on the same footing to everyone who qualifies for it. That means that if the benefits extended to legally married couples a corporation has no right to start picking and choosing.

Which brings us to the cusp of Dollar Tree’s problem.

Does this mean back in the 1950s that a company like Dollar Tree would have found it OK to add an exclusion such as not providing benefits to racially mixed couples after clearly stating an employee can enroll their legally wedded spouse?

There have been laws on the books in this country in various states that at one time banned racially mixed marriages. And there have been companies that frowned on it as well.

Does that mean in another time and age Dollar Tree would have seen it OK to make such exclusion?

Regardless, there is one overriding little detail here that Dollar Tree and others who do business in California have no right to ignore. The law is the law.

Picking and choosing what laws you recognize in California, as a corporation is not simply arrogant, it is frightening.

In essence, they are contending that the corporation has more rights under state law than individuals. What else could they mean by saying they are above the law?

You may personally disagree with same sex marriage and think why should you get indignant about Dollar Tree’s blatant discrimination and decision to operate outside and above the law of California.

But here’s the catch. If you condone corporations picking and choosing who gets the protection of the law in this country, you’re taking your individual rights out of the hands of the public sector and empowering corporations to have the final say on how America is run.

Churches do not have to recognize same sex marriage. But then again, churches don’t have to apply for a business license when they are preaching their gospel. Churches, if they so chose can discriminate who is in their membership. Stores can say “no shirts, no shoes, no service” but they can’t say we refuse the right to serve same sex couples or homosexuals.

They may reserve the right to refuse anyone, but it had better not been because they are part of a protected class.

And as of June 17, legally married women or men of the same sex became a protected class in California.

Dollar Tree has no right to conduct business in California on the premise they can ignore the laws of this state.

It kind of makes you wonder if their cavalier attitude extends to other segments of the state’s labor laws or general rules governing the conduct of business when it comes to fair trade, the environment and a host of other laws that are the laws of this state.

The last time I checked, Dollar Tree is neither a sovereign nation nor is it one of the 50 recognized states.

Yes, I know. I’m dating myself.

And they said John Kerry flip-flopped!

She started out calling local police.  Then the Tulare County Sheriff’s Department. Then other local agencies. For years she’s been telling the same story, about drug usage, drug sales, child endangerment, and lately prostitution of a very small child.  She’s called agencies in surrounding counties, such as Kings County Sheriff, Hanford and Lemoore PD, Fresno County Sheriff, and Fresno PD.  Her story sounds legit at first, sometimes you just never know. But after years of dealing with her, we knew that her stories had almost no basis in fact.  The last couple of years she did become aware of some legitimate information about drug dealing, and detectives tried to separate the fact from delusion, but it was never easy.  Well, this year she really escalated her activities.  We had already heard from the Fresno office of the FBI, but within the past few months it just got out of hand.  She called the Highway Patrol (and used the name “Mrs. Reeves”!!) after calling and speaking to me (”Sheriff’s office, dispatcher Reeves”) to get the number to “the state police”.  In the past few weeks, we’ve heard from The Office of the Secretary of Defense, at the Pentagon, The Secret Service, and the DEA!  It was just getting nuts….   pardon the pun.

Well, no more.  Documentation, documentation, documentation.  It was finally possible to get her admitted on a mental health hold.  First a 3 day hold, then a 14 day hold, then some kind of permanent commitment.  She shouldn’t be able to harass anybody with her delusions anymore.  Hopefully they’ll find some level of medication for her so she’ll at least be free of her fear for the child.  It would be terrible to actually believe that what she described was going on, and nobody would listen to you.  She’s getting help, and we won’t have to deal with her anymore!  Of course, nature abhors a vacuum, so the next 5150 is undoubtedly waiting in the wings to step in and taker her place……

I can’t wait……