Abigail Adams: Remember the Ladies

March 31, 1776

Abigail Adams wrote this to her husband John Adams:

"I long to hear that you have declared an independency. And, by the way, in the new code of laws which I suppose it will be necessary for you to make, I desire you would remember the ladies and be more generous and favorable to them than your ancestors.

"Do not put such unlimited power into the hands of the husbands.

"Remember, all men would be tyrants if they could. If particular care and attention is not paid to the ladies, we are determined to foment a rebellion, and will not hold ourselves bound by any laws in which we have no voice or representation.

"That your sex are naturally tyrannical is a truth so thoroughly established as to admit of no dispute; but such of you as wish to be happy willingly give up -- the harsh tide of master for the more tender and endearing one of friend.

"Why, then, not put it out of the power of the vicious and the lawless to use us with cruelty and indignity with impunity?

"Men of sense in all ages abhor those customs which treat us only as the (servants) of your sex; regard us then as being placed by Providence under your protection, and in imitation of the Supreme Being make use of that power only for our happiness."

Do you ever hear Abigail's name mentioned by Feminists or Women's Rights Groups? I certainly have not.

A woman's right to vote was nearly 150 years later, in 1920.

Abigail was surely ahead of her time.

More quotes and exhanges John Adams Famous Quotes

Civil Rights Act turned 50 with no fanfare

Originally published at DeskofBrian.com:
http://sites.google.com/site/thedeskofbrian/state-of-the-nation/civilrightsactturned50withnofanfare

From Wikipedia:

The Civil Rights Act of 1960 was a United State federal law that established federal inspection of local voter registration polls and introduced penalties for anyone who obstructed someone's attempt to register to vote or actually vote.

The Senate's debate over the passage of this bill actually started on February 29, 1960. However, a group of 18 Southern Democrats divided into three teams of six in order to be able to create a continuous filibuster wherein each member would only have to speak for four hours every three days. This system resulted in the longest filibuster in history, lasting over 43 hours from February 29 to March 2. On the morning of March 2nd, only a fifteen-minute break was allowed before the Senate sat for another 82 hours. By the time the 24-hour sessions were called off by majority leader Lyndon Johnson, the Senate had sat for 125 hours and 31 minutes minus a fifteen-minute break.

The act was signed into law by President Eisenhower on May 6, 1960.

We have the first black President and MSNBC, CNN, Newsweek, Times -- I haven't seen this mentioned anywhere.

You people are fired!

Aren't you sensitive to the accomplishments of the Civil Rights Movement.

Those 18 Democrats executed the LONGEST FILIBUSTER in history to stop blacks from voting. This bill was the precursor to the landmark 1964 Civil Rights Act and the 1965 Voting Rights Act.

By the way, how did that '64 Civil Rights Vote Go:

By party

The original House version:

• Democratic Party: 152-96 (61%-39%)
• Republican Party: 138-34 (80%-20%)

Cloture in the Senate:

• Democratic Party: 44-23 (66%-34%)
• Republican Party: 27-6 (82%-18%)

The Senate version:

• Democratic Party: 46-21 (69%-31%)
• Republican Party: 27-6 (82%-18%)

The Senate version, voted on by the House:

• Democratic Party: 153-91 (63%-37%)
• Republican Party: 136-35 (80%-20%)

That included a 14 hour, 13 minute speech by Robert Byrd to delay the vote. Yes, that's the same Senator from West Virginia.





http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civil_Rights_Act_of_1960

Why Gay Initiatives keep Failing

31 states and (counting)...to 5 (plus some states with civil union provisions) and all 5 states were initiatives by their state legislatures or face a state constitutional vote.

"Gay marriage" lost its initiative in Maine while civil unions passed in Washington state. The gay community is still reeling from the reversal in California last year as Prop 8, the biggest mishandled referendum to date, still scorns homosexuals.

California and Maine are two liberal states, in fact, their idea of "Conservative" and electable Republicans are Olympia Snowe or Arnold Schwartzenegger.

So why are they failing?

I'm reminded of a blog post I read some time ago: "Marriage is a Religious Rite, not a Constitutional Right." Gay activists expect to overturn thousands of years of universally recognized morality and practice a "right"?

This is NOT just a battle with Bible thumpers from Southern Baptists Churches, homosexuality is NOT accepted by Jews or Muslims -- they murder homosexuals in the streets or Iran.

In May, a poll of 500 Muslims in Britain revealed zero tolerance towards homosexual acts. compared to their counterparts in France and Germany, according to a survey published today.¹ NONE! Even in France and Germany, the figure never tops 48%!

Activists CANNOT continue to pretend that they are fighting just the Christian Coalition, Pat Buchanan, but rather ALL RELIGIONS.

Likewise, a series of discrimination lawsuits against churches have followed legalizing gay marriages. In April the Iowa Attorney General Tom Miller posted this on his website:

"If necessary, we will explore legal actions to enforce and implement the court's ruling, working with the Iowa Dept. of Public Health and county attorneys."

Now we have lawsuits answering to lawsuits creating a larger and larger divide between both sides. It's hard to believe the gay community in sincere that "marriage" is what they desire, when churches are being FORCED to marry couples or face legal action.

Likewise, we already have a lawsuit in Maine against a teacher (Don Mendell) who appeared in an anti-gay marriage ad who is having his license brought into question. There is no such lawsuit against other educators who appeared in ads supporting the amendment. (Complete story below)

Next are the comparisons to civil rights and the civil rights movement itself.

Approximately 77% of the Black California voters, 92% of which voted for President Obama, voted DOWN Prop 8. They obviously DON'T see it as a RIGHT and definitely NOT a "civil right" comparable to the oppression of blacks.

There have been horrible crimes against gays, Matthew Shepard is the most famous case, but there are no separation of bathrooms, seats on a bus and certainly no lynchings like those in the 60's.

Most of us have people close to us that we care dearly for who are gay. Even Dick Cheney is NOT trying to lynch his daughter because she's a lesbian or his new grandchild.



Then we have a lack of leadership.

Sure President Obama can talk out of the other side of his mouth at a GLAAD fundraiser, but he's been enigmatic on the topic since taking office. He's just NOT willing to burn political capital for gay rights.

Where's the leaders of Congress: Barney Frank, Jared Polis (Colorado) or Tammy Baldwin (Wisconsin) -- how many of you reading this NEVER heard of Polis or Baldwin???

I'm sure you'll hear about the massive amounts of money funding anti-gay ads, blaming out-of-staters swaying the votes in each of these states, but the pattern is clear -- no.

You are NOT going to undo someone's religious perspective on traditional values in this manner. You are NOT going to garner support by comparing your plight to that of the civil rights movement. You can't expect Christians to believe that "getting married" is the endgame when activist follow successful votes with attacks on churches.

More than anything let me state here that gay marriage, to me, is first and foremost a STATES issue and NOT a Federal one. To argue that the Constitution guarantees equal treatment to all citizens, both men and women, does not say anything about what constitutes marriage, or a family, or a business enterprise, or a university, or a friendship.

An appeal for equal treatment would certainly not lead a court to require that a small business enterprise be called a marriage just because two business partners prefer to think of their business that way.

Nor would equal treatment of citizens before the law require a court to conclude that those who pray before the start of sporting event should be allowed to redefine the NFL or NBA as churches.

The simple fact is that the civil right of equal treatment cannot constitute social reality by declaration. Civil rights protections function simply to assure every citizen equal treatment under the law depending on what the material dispute in law is all about. Law that is just must begin by properly recognizing and distinguishing identities and differences in reality in order to be able to give each its legal due.

This is where civil unions take the lead. Partnered with medical surrogates, power of attorney and other provisions, a gay couple would probably be better covered and bound than most married couples. In fact, I'd rather see these legal documents become a requirement, but that's another topic all together.

Forcing their perspective, always crying "homophobe" or playing the victim card will NEVER result in any changes. Attacking Christians or forcing churches to marry gay couples isn't going to win support. Marginalizing the black community with inappropriate comparisons to the "Civil Rights Movement" isn't going to garner any favor.

Maybe you disagree with me, but maybe you can understand where so many folks are coming from.

SPECIAL NOTE: I purposefully left the children our of the debate. One could write pages and expand on statements that I've made here, but I've tried to be simplistic and straight to the point. As a father of five children, I'm too biased to even speak on the effects of Kevin Jennings² and the Gay Tolerance in school movement. I find it divisive for the government, school board or even my Pastor, to DICTATE to me how I'm going to raise my kids and there's NO WAY I'd even try to defend their tactics.


1. http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2009/may/07/muslims-britain-france-germany-homosexuality

2. http://brandon7221.blogspot.com/2009/10/their-own-words-kevin-jennings.html

Press release on Maine lawsuit against Don Mendell:
http://www.asmainegoes.com/content/yes-1-situation-guidance-counselor-worse-we-thought