US: 2016 race kicks off with long day of auditions in Iowa

0 0
Read Time:7 Minute, 44 Second

DES MOINES, Iowa (CNN)The 2016 Republican presidential race in Iowa got its unofficial start Saturday with a marathon of speeches, giving close to a dozen potential candidates a chance to introduce (or re-introduce) themselves to a core group of caucus-goers roughly one year before the contest.

Immigration and Islamic extremism took front and center as the White House hopefuls sought to test-drive their stump speeches. On style, it was Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker and Texas Sen. Ted Cruz who saw strong receptions from the audience, though support for a wide number of candidates was expressed in the hallways after the event.

New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie also sought to establish a deeper bond with the Iowa. The Hawkeye State receives outsized attention in presidential years thanks to its first-in-the-nation status during the primary season.

Marathon time

For the 10-hour day of back-to-back speeches, "the candidates" — as they were called — joined other high-profile Republicans at Hoyt Sherman Place, an old, intricate theater built in 1877 that also became the first public art museum in Des Moines.

Billed as the Iowa Freedom Summit, the event was co-hosted by Citizens United and Rep. Steve King, a revered lawmaker who represents the northwestern part of the state and has considerable clout among the more social conservative and Christian right faction of the party.

It was no secret that it was considered a cattle call for the presidential race. Former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee, for example, said that the reason he ended his Fox News show was for a bigger goal he has in mind.

"It wasn't just so I can go deer hunting every weekend, I can assure you that," he said.

Others were more blatant.

"I am a potential presidential candidate, yes I am," former Hewlett Packard CEO Carly Fiorina told CNN.

Even Palin angled to get in on some of the action, teasing ahead of her appearance Saturday that she was now seriously considering a third run. And real estate titan Donald Trump told reporters Saturday that he'll make his decision before June.

"I'm the one person who can make this country great again, that's all I know," he told reporters Saturday. "Nobody else can."

Palin, in her remarks, was less forward. Ticking through a somewhat dizzying and hard-to-follow speech, Palin suggested that the country is ready for a woman leader — just not Hillary Clinton.

"Hey Iowa, can anyone stop Hillary?" she said, prompting the audience to cheer. "To borrow a phrase, yes we can!"

The class of 2016

The speakers, who were typically allotted 20 minutes, used a bulk of their speeches to share their own personal upbringings. Ben Carson and Christie talked about their strict but sharp mothers, while Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker and Texas Sen. Ted Cruz talked about having pastors as fathers.

Other more well-known names in Iowa — like former Pennsylvania Sen. Rick Santorum who won the state's caucuses in 2012 and Huckabee, who won in 2008 — tried to remind Iowans why they picked them in the first place, dipping into their personalities but also focusing on the issues.

Given King's firebrand credentials as an outspoken opponent of illegal immigration, it was no surprise that problems at the border became a focal point in much of the speeches Saturday.

Carson, a retired neurosurgeon, argued "there wouldn't be people coming in here if there wasn't a magnet pulling them in," suggesting there should be criminal punishment for employers who hire undocumented workers.

The main target in the immigration battle, however, was President Barack Obama's executive action to delay deportation for up to five million undocumented immigrants. Or as Palin put it, in her folksy swagger, Obama's decision makes him seem "like an overgrown little boy who's just acting kinda spoiled."

Speakers railed against the President's pledge to use his "pen and his phone" to work around Congress, with immigration as just one example of what many called the president's "overreach."

That was punctuated with DREAM Act Coalition protesters interrupted Rick Perry's speech, leading to one arrest and theater full of Iowans trying to drown out the demonstrators' chants.

The potential candidates also warned about what they see as a dire path for the country, in particular when it comes to foreign policy, a theme that, along with immigration, also seems poised to become a flash point in the 2016 presidential race, unlike in 2012.

Santorum argued that the growth of is a consequence of the "isolationism" and "weakness" from the Obama's administration. Cruz, like several speakers, said the President will fail in the war on terror if he refuses to use the words "radical Islamic terrorism."

Huckabee blasted Obama for devoting more time to climate change in the State of the Union address than talking about terrorism.

"A beheading is a far greater threat to American than a sunburn," Huckabee said.

The issues

There was plenty of the usual Iowa charm on stage, speeches with pig analogies and corn references. And there was more than one reference to how people in Iowa are somehow taller than average.

Shown on a big screen above the stage was an image of a red barn sitting on a green hill surrounded by white fences. Steve King's name — in all caps — was plastered across banners on the stage, as well as the podium.

The contenders also dished out a bevy of red meat, blasting Obamacare, Common Core, the media, Hillary Clinton and the $18 trillion debt. Cruz won huge applause for proposing to place 110,000 IRS employees on the southern border, joking that they'll do a better job at deterring illegal immigration than anything else.

Giving a shout out to the state's newly elected U.S. senator, Joni Ernst, was also a popular item on the agenda for the potential candidates. Nearly all of them referred to her as her "friend," and almost equal amount of affection and time was dedicated to the state's other beloved senator, Chuck Grassley.

Walker, who, like Cruz, paced the stage back and forth as he spoke, delivered an impressive speech that honed in on his record as governor. He talked about implementing voter ID laws, and he painting himself as the valiant warrior who took on the public employees and won during the collective bargaining rights debate of 2011.

He also didn't forget to mention that he's been elected three times in the past four years.

Shortly after his speech, two men, both from Council Bluffs, talked outside about how they were wowed by Walker's remarks.

"If he could do on a nationwide scale what he did in Wisconsin, this country would be," one man, Michael Patomson, started to say, before his friend, Bill Hartzell, interjected: "Transformed. The country would be transformed."

The reception

Many attendees had a hard time picking just one favorite in the line of potential contenders. Several mentioned Fiorina as a surprise hit.

"There was just a pantheon of people to listen to," said Eric Rosenthal of Cedar Rapids.

"Rick Perry was better than last time I heard him — that's good. He needs it," said Ernie Rudolph of Dallas County, Iowa.

Christie also saw a warm reception and contested the idea that a Republican governor of a blue state who has a "Jersey guy" reputation will not connect with voters in Iowa.

"That somehow I'm too loud, I'm too blunt and I'm too direct," Christie said, dismissing the criticism as "conventional wisdom" from Washington pundits. "They're wrong."

Still, he was noticeably different from his usual style. His demeanor was toned down and he read from his prepared remarks on the podium, a stark contrast to his preferred off-the-cuff method.

Some of the chatter in the hallways and to reporters also featured two potential contenders who weren't there: Jeb Bush and Mitt Romney.

Trump put it simply: "Mitt had his chance. He should have won and he choked." As for Bush: "We've had enough of the Bushes."

Sens. Rand Paul and Marco Rubio, as well as Gov. Bobby Jindal, also skipped the event, but given that it's year ahead before Iowans start to caucus, it's unlikely that missing one event will hurt them.

Saturday's event was more of a curtain raiser, giving the first glimpse of what will likely be a competitive Republican primary.

Walker, as he closed his speech, offered a pledge that will likely be mirrored my several of the speakers on stage over the next year: "I'm going to come back many more times."

About Post Author

Anthony-Claret Ifeanyi Onwutalobi

Anthony-Claret is a software Engineer, entrepreneur and the founder of Codewit INC. Mr. Claret publishes and manages the content on Codewit Word News website and associated websites. He's a writer, IT Expert, great administrator, technology enthusiast, social media lover and all around digital guy.
Happy
0 0 %
Sad
0 0 %
Excited
0 0 %
Sleepy
0 0 %
Angry
0 0 %
Surprise
0 0 %

Joseph Sledge, wrongly imprisoned for decades, now free

0 0
Read Time:2 Minute, 23 Second

 (CNN)A man who spent more than half his life in a North Carolina prison for two murders he didn't commit walked out a free man Friday, holding his belongings in two white plastic bags.

Joseph Sledge, who was wrongfully convicted in 1978, said he feels wonderful about his freedom. He is now 70-years old.

Sledge was exonerated by a three-judge panel who reviewed post-conviction DNA evidence from the victims. The panel said that evidence excluded Sledge as a suspect. A witness who testified that Sledge had admitted to the murders recanted his testimony in 2013.

Josephine Davis and her daughter Aileen Davis were discovered in September 1976 inside their home in Elizabethtown, North Carolina. The women had been beaten and stabbed multiple times; Aileen Davis had been sexually assaulted. The day before the women's bodies were found, Sledge had escaped from White Lake Prison Camp, approximately 4 miles from the victims' home. He had been serving a four-year sentence for larceny.

Sledge was picked up after he was spotted in Dillon, South Carolina, driving a stolen car, arrested and brought back to North Carolina, where he was charged with two counts of first-degree murder in the deaths of the Davises.

At trial, the state presented forensic evidence linking Sledge to the crime. Two inmates also testified against Sledge, saying he had admitted to the crimes behind bars. He was convicted and sentence to life in prison.

During the more than three decades Sledge was in prison, he maintained his innocence, filing numerous post-conviction motions on various grounds. All were denied without hearing.

In 2003, however, his request for new DNA testing was granted; testing began five years later.

The North Carolina Innocence Inquiry Commission took on investigating Sledge's case. It in December found "sufficient evidence of factual innocence to merit judicial review."

Speaking to reporters outside the Columbus County jail, Sledge said, "When you're conscious of something you didn't do, you can live with yourself. It's between you and your maker."

The family of Josephine and Aileen Davis expressed their disapproval with the panel's decision.

Catherine Brown, Josephine Davis' granddaughter, reading from a prepared statement, said, "We, the family, are heartbroken by this decision."

Sledge, who was wrongly incarcerated for 37 years, addressed the Davis family directly, saying, "I'm very, very sorry for your loss. I hope you get closure in this matter."

The commission, which began operating in 2007, is the first of its kind in the country, and is separate from the appeals process, according to the organization's website. A person exonerated by the commission process is declared innocent and cannot be retried for the same crime.

About Post Author

Anthony-Claret Ifeanyi Onwutalobi

Anthony-Claret is a software Engineer, entrepreneur and the founder of Codewit INC. Mr. Claret publishes and manages the content on Codewit Word News website and associated websites. He's a writer, IT Expert, great administrator, technology enthusiast, social media lover and all around digital guy.
Happy
0 0 %
Sad
0 0 %
Excited
0 0 %
Sleepy
0 0 %
Angry
0 0 %
Surprise
0 0 %

Alabama judge strikes down ban on gay marriage

0 0
Read Time:1 Minute, 28 Second

 (CNN)States struggling to define the question of marriage equality have an addition to their ranks: Alabama.

A U.S. district judge struck down Alabama's ban on same-sex marriage Friday after two Mobile women sued the state for failing to recognize the couple's union.

Cari Searcy and Kimberly McKeand were married legally in California and have been together for 15 years. But the issue of their rights as a couple came about after Searcy's petition to adopt McKeand's 9-year-old son was denied.

Alabama's adoption code gives a person a right to adopt a spouse's child. But because Alabama doesn't recognize their marriage, Searcy could not qualify for adoption.

The couple's lawyer, David Kennedy, said McKeand and Searcy were "very pleased with the court's ruling."

"We are happy for the tens of thousands of gay Alabamians and their children," Kennedy said. "Justice and equality are guaranteed to everyone and we are proud to know that is true in Alabama tonight."

The state filed a motion Friday seeking to put a hold on the judge's decision pending a ruling from the U.S. Supreme Court, effectively trying to keep couples from applying for marriage licenses in the meantime.

The Supreme Court has previously refused to hear cases from states — Indiana, Oklahoma and Wisconsin, to name a few — seeking to keep their bans against same-sex marriage in place. But the court is expected to consider petitions from lower courts in five states where judges upheld laws banning same-sex marriage.

If the ruling is upheld, Alabama would be the 37th state to authorize same-sex marriage.

About Post Author

Anthony-Claret Ifeanyi Onwutalobi

Anthony-Claret is a software Engineer, entrepreneur and the founder of Codewit INC. Mr. Claret publishes and manages the content on Codewit Word News website and associated websites. He's a writer, IT Expert, great administrator, technology enthusiast, social media lover and all around digital guy.
Happy
0 0 %
Sad
0 0 %
Excited
0 0 %
Sleepy
0 0 %
Angry
0 0 %
Surprise
0 0 %

Cuban diplomats slam U.S. on human rights

0 0
Read Time:1 Minute, 51 Second

Washington (CNN)U.S. and Cuban officials began a historic round of talks on Wednesday to bridge a 50-year rift in diplomatic relations, but just a day later, the Cuban delegation slammed the United States on its human rights track record.

Cuban diplomats announced in a statement Thursday that in discussions with American officials they expressed their "serious concerns" over human rights in the United States, citing everything from detentions at Guantanamo Bay, to "police abuse" in Ferguson and New York to racial and gender inequalities.

The sniping comes just before Roberta Jacobson, the head of the U.S. delegation, was set to meet Friday morning with the "Ladies in White," the wives and other female relatives of Cuban political prisoners, and other dissident groups.

Cuban officials also suggested "building up on the positive experience achieved in Cuba with regard to the enjoyment of human rights" and pointed to Cuba's efforts to improve human rights in the world.

Cuba is known to be among the world's worst human rights offenders, frequently jailing political dissidents and restricting freedom of expression, according to Human Rights Watch.

"The Cuban government continues to repress individuals and groups who criticize the government or call for basic human rights. Officials employ a range of tactics to punish dissent and instill fear in the public, including beatings, public acts of shaming, termination of employment, and threats of long-term imprisonment," Human Rights Watch wrote about Cuba in its 2014 report.

The Cuban officials said they relayed their concerns to American diplomats about the "alarming cases of brutality and police abuse" in the United States, "which show the worsening of racism and racial discrimination," according to the Cuban statement.

The Cuban diplomats said they are also concerned about racial disparities in the application of the death penalty in the U.S. as well as the state of unequal pay for men and women in the United States.

President Barack Obama again made a push during his State of the Union address for Congress to pass legislation to improve protections for equal pay for men and women performing the same job.

About Post Author

Anthony-Claret Ifeanyi Onwutalobi

Anthony-Claret is a software Engineer, entrepreneur and the founder of Codewit INC. Mr. Claret publishes and manages the content on Codewit Word News website and associated websites. He's a writer, IT Expert, great administrator, technology enthusiast, social media lover and all around digital guy.
Happy
0 0 %
Sad
0 0 %
Excited
0 0 %
Sleepy
0 0 %
Angry
0 0 %
Surprise
0 0 %

Prince Andrew denies sex abuse claims

0 0
Read Time:5 Minute, 44 Second

 (CNN)In his first public remarks since being accused of having sex with an underage American woman, Britain Prince Andrews briefly addressed the allegation before a crowd in Davos, Switzerland.

"Firstly, I think I must, want, for the record to refer to the events that have taken place in the last three weeks. And I just wish to reiterate and to reaffirm the statements which have already been made on my behalf by Buckingham Palace," he said Thursday at the World Economic Forum.

Earlier this month, Buckingham Palace issued a statement which said, "It is emphatically denied that the Duke of York [Andrew] had any form of sexual contact or relationship" with the woman. "Any claim to the contrary is false and without foundation."

Andrew is a son of Queen Elizabeth II and a brother of Prince Charles, the next in line for the British throne.

The prince is accused of having sex with the woman when she was 17, details of which are is a sworn affidavit in Florida court dated January 19. The woman said that she and the Prince had sex "three times, including one orgy."

The court documents showed that her lawyers had sent a letter to Buckingham Palace asking to interview the prince under oath.

In her sworn affidavit, the woman described Buckingham Palace's denial that sexual contact ever took place between the pair as "false and hurtful to me."

Interview request

The woman, identified by Buckingham Palace as Virginia Roberts, first named the prince in a civil motion filed December 30 in the U.S. District Court in southern Florida in which she claims she was forced to have sex with several men. She is referred to as Jane Doe No. 3 in the legal filings.

In the letter the woman's lawyers sent to Buckingham Palace, attorneys Paul Cassell and Bradley Edwards asked to interview Prince Andrew "under oath regarding interactions that you had with Jane Doe No. 3 beginning in approximately early 2001. Jane Doe No. 3 was then 17 years old."

The letter includes a picture of the woman and Andrew which was taken around that time, they say. The lawyers also want to discuss subsequent interactions with their client in New York City later that year, the letter says.

"The interview could be conducted at a time and place of your choosing, and with your cooperation, I believe the interview could be completed in two hours or less," it says.

New court pleadings involving the relationship between Jane Doe No. 3 and the prince are being prepared, the letter adds, but their filing will be delayed if Andrew accepts the interview request by January 19.

The attorney for her legal team confirmed to CNN that Buckingham Palace had refused to accept the letter to Prince Andrew and that it was returned to them.

Buckingham Palace didn't respond Thursday when asked by CNN about the letter.

But the woman's allegations have previously been firmly rejected by Buckingham Palace.

"It is emphatically denied that the Duke of York had any form of sexual contact or relationship with Virginia Roberts. Any claim to the contrary is false and without foundation," the palace said early this month.

Statement: I just called him 'Andy'

Prince Andrew is named in the court filing in Florida as one of a number of prominent people who allegedly had sexual contact with teenage girls through self-made billionaire Jeffrey Epstein, who pleaded guilty some years ago in Florida to a state charge of prostitution solicitation.

CNN was unable to reach Martin Weinberg, Epstein's attorney, on Thursday.

In her first sworn statement to the court, Jane Doe No. 3 gave more details of the alleged encounters.

"Epstein made me have sex with Prince Andrew several times," she said, according to the court document.

"I had sex with him three times, including one orgy. I knew he was a member of the British Royal Family, but I just called him 'Andy.' "

One day when she was in London, she said, Epstein told her she would be meeting a "major prince."

She continued: "Epstein told me 'to exceed' everything I had been taught. He emphasized that whatever Prince Andrew wanted, I was to make sure he got."

'Sexual interests in feet'

When the prince arrived, she was introduced, she said, and "we kissed formally, cheek to cheek." The group went for dinner and to a nightclub where she was served alcohol before returning to the townhouse. The picture referred to in the letter, of the prince with Roberts, was taken there, she said.

After the pair were left alone, she said, "We went to the bathroom and bedroom, which were just steps away from where the picture was taken. We engaged in sexual activities there. Afterwards, Andy left quickly with his security."

She said she had reported back to Epstein on the encounter next day, telling him, "It went great."

"I told Epstein about Andy's sexual interests in feet. Epstein thought it was very funny. Epstein appeared to be collecting private information about Andy," she added.

Roberts also gave details of two more alleged occasions when the pair had sex. One was in Epstein's New York mansion in spring 2001, she said, when she was 17.

The third and last occasion was at an orgy involving nine girls on Epstein's private island in the U.S. Virgin Islands, her statement said.

"I was around 18 at the time. Epstein, Andy, approximately eight other young girls, and I had sex together."

The other girls, who appeared to be under 18, were "European looking and sounding" and didn't really speak English, she said. She said she "felt disgusted" after the orgy.

'Voluntarily tell the truth'

Roberts rejected the palace's denial of the allegations and said she hoped Andrew would agree to be interviewed under oath. "I did have sexual contact with him as I have described here — under oath," she said.

"Given what he knows and has seen, I was hoping that he would simply voluntarily tell the truth about everything."

Roberts and another woman are seeking to join two other women who are arguing in federal court for the U.S. government to reexamine its case involving Epstein.

The investment banker agreed to a state plea deal in 2007 and began serving an 18-month sentence in 2008, according to court documents. He pleaded guilty to solicitation of prostitution and procurement of a minor for prostitution.

About Post Author

Anthony-Claret Ifeanyi Onwutalobi

Anthony-Claret is a software Engineer, entrepreneur and the founder of Codewit INC. Mr. Claret publishes and manages the content on Codewit Word News website and associated websites. He's a writer, IT Expert, great administrator, technology enthusiast, social media lover and all around digital guy.
Happy
0 0 %
Sad
0 0 %
Excited
0 0 %
Sleepy
0 0 %
Angry
0 0 %
Surprise
0 0 %

U.S. military advisers headed to front lines in Iraq

0 0
Read Time:3 Minute, 35 Second

 (CNN)The upcoming Iraqi assault to retake Mosul from ISIS control could include U.S. military advisers near the front lines.

U.S. military leadership has held open the possibility it would recommend moving advisers closer to combat lines. As the key Mosul battle looms, that remains a potential consideration "if and when they believe it's necessary," a senior U.S. military official tells CNN.

The possible recommendation would need to be approved by President Barack Obama, who has said that U.S. troops will not be sent on a combat mission. But putting advisers with front-line Iraqi troops puts American troops in close range of what is likely to be an intense battle with the terror group.

Gen. Martin Dempsey, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and Gen. Lloyd Austin, head of U.S. Central Command, would make that recommendation to Obama if they determine Iraqis need U.S. help and there is no other option for providing it.

The official declined to be named due to the sensitivity of the situation but has direct knowledge of both generals' thinking.

The generals want to wait as long as possible to decide whether moving American ground troops closer to the front lines is necessary. Their hope is that Iraq will be able to field more experienced units perhaps as soon as this spring that can begin the Mosul assault, the official told CNN.

Right now, the most experienced and loyal Iraqi units are protecting Baghdad. The Iraqis may need to be convinced to move them into the Mosul operation, and backfill with other units. Retaking Mosul from ISIS is considered one of the most important objectives of Iraq forces.

This month, coalition airstrikes have stepped up around Mosul, in an effort to cut key ISIS supply lines into the city, as an opening move to a future assault. The U.S. military assessment is the soonest the assault could begin is spring.

Obama has been adamant that no U.S. troops will be put into direct ground combat in Iraq.

In a speech to troops in September, Obama said, "The American forces that have been deployed to Iraq do not and will not have a combat mission. They will support Iraqi forces on the ground as they fight for their own country against these terrorists."

What Dempsey and Austin are holding open is the possibility of a small number of U.S. military troops working as advisers alongside Iraqi units involved in the upcoming Mosul assault in a front-line combat situation. Those troops could potentially also work on the ground to help Iraq units pick out targets to strike, if a recommendation is made and the mission approved.

In September, Dempsey said he believed U.S. advisers on the front lines would not be needed. "But if it fails to be true, and if there are threats to the United States, then I of course would go back to the President and make a recommendation that may include the use of U.S. military ground forces." In recent weeks, advisers have gone out in the field.

Dempsey, for now, is strongly focusing on the pace of the Iraqi government meetings its goals first, according to the official. He still wants to see more progress on Iraq forming a unity government, proceeding with reconstruction goals and countering ISIS propaganda, the official said. "If we offer too much before Iraqis are ready, we are just painting over the rust," the official said. Recent comments by Prime Minister Haider al-Abadi that the coalition wasn't doing enough to support Iraq only reinforced Dempsey's view, the official said.

And even working as advisers is risky for troops. Canadian forces in the field recently had to return fire when they came under attack during an advisory mission.

As for ISIS's current strength, the U.S. military assessment continues to be their momentum has been somewhat stalled in Iraq and territory gains in Syria are stagnant, the official said. The United States also believes ISIS is stepping up its terror tactics in both areas, including forcing people to fight, because they are having trouble recruiting and paying new fighters, the official said.

About Post Author

Anthony-Claret Ifeanyi Onwutalobi

Anthony-Claret is a software Engineer, entrepreneur and the founder of Codewit INC. Mr. Claret publishes and manages the content on Codewit Word News website and associated websites. He's a writer, IT Expert, great administrator, technology enthusiast, social media lover and all around digital guy.
Happy
0 0 %
Sad
0 0 %
Excited
0 0 %
Sleepy
0 0 %
Angry
0 0 %
Surprise
0 0 %

married naked in naturist weddings under a rethink of marriage law.

0 0
Read Time:4 Minute, 3 Second

It is a long time since all brides were expected to wear white. But the government is insisting that they must at least wear something, after ministers ruled out lifting the ban on nude weddings. Justice Secretary Chris Grayling today rejected the idea of allowing naturist weddings, saying he had ‘absolutely no intention’ of allowing naked couples to tie the knot. It was suggested last week that couples may be allowed to get married naked in naturist weddings under a rethink of marriage law.

Ministers launched a consultation on staging ‘non-relgious’ marriages, which was seen as a move to give humanist ceremonies legal status. But among those expressing a view was British Naturism, which campaigns on behalf of thousands of members ‘against the ever-changing environment that constantly throws up new threats to our freedom’.

In response Harry Benson of the Marriage Foundation joked: ‘Some of these ideas are just silly. I hope there will be guidance for the best man at a nude wedding on where to keep the ring.’

The wedding law review is expected to look at sweeping reforms which could allow weddings in the open air, in people’s homes and gardens or with the couple and guests in the nude.

But Mr Grayling today insisted that wedding parties had to keep their clothes on. He insisted that he had not ordered a review into naked weddings, despite coming under pressure from British Naturism.

He told BBC One’s Sunday Politics: ‘There’s a difference between somebody expressing an interest and it actually happening. 'At the moment we are looking at the issue of humanist marriage, but it’s something that’s being reviewed by the marriage law commission.’

He added: 'No nude marriage right now as far as I’m concerned.’ Presenter Andrew Neil joked: ‘I’m sure they’ll be appalled. Mind you, the weather’s quite cold out there at the moment.’
The paper last week by the Ministry of Justice confirmed that among groups that have expressed an interest in changing the wedding laws is British Naturism. It said naturists could qualify to conduct weddings if the rules were changed.

At the moment wedding law allows couples to have a traditional wedding in church, under rules set by the Church of England and other churches with the right to conduct the ceremonies, or a civil wedding in a register office or ‘approved premises’. Approved premises, which include stately homes, hotels and sports ground entertainment suites, have proved highly popular since they were introduced in the 1990s.

Only Jews and Quakers are allowed to marry in their own homes, under laws from 1753 which released them from the requirement to be married by the Church of England.

Tony Blair’s government tried to introduce a law to allow people to get married anywhere they liked in 2000, but dropped the idea in the face of the complications involved.

The 2013 Marriage (Same Sex Couples) Act said ministers would review whether ‘non-religious belief organisations’, like humanists, should also be able to conduct weddings.

The consultation response from the Ministry of Justice last week said that humanists were anxious to hold weddings in the open air or at places couples find ‘meaningful’, which could mean a preferred holiday beach, the place where they met, a place where a parent’s ashes were scattered, or even a football pitch.

But it said that there was a risk that criminal gangs running sham or forced marriages would move in, and that ‘inappropriate’ organisations could win the right to run marriages.

‘There was a risk that any group, including those with a cult following, could potentially qualify if they could show their purpose as the advancement of beliefs and the ethics associated with those beliefs, or could successfully have it determined that they were being discriminated against if excluded from conducting legal ceremonies,’ the paper said.

It added: ‘The groups identified as a risk included political organisations, Jedi Knights, Hell’s Angels, radicalised groups and criminal gangs involved in forced marriage.’ One critic of reform, it said, feared that pressure groups would try to conduct marriages to raise funds for their cause.

The Ministry of Justice paper said that the Government law reform advisers, the Law Commission, will be asked to ‘begin as soon as possible a broader review of the law concerning marriage ceremonies.

‘An independent review should be able to examine all the issues arising from the consultation alongside all other relevant matters. The Government will start to work with the Commission in January to consider the scope of such a review.’

About Post Author

Anthony-Claret Ifeanyi Onwutalobi

Anthony-Claret is a software Engineer, entrepreneur and the founder of Codewit INC. Mr. Claret publishes and manages the content on Codewit Word News website and associated websites. He's a writer, IT Expert, great administrator, technology enthusiast, social media lover and all around digital guy.
Happy
0 0 %
Sad
0 0 %
Excited
0 0 %
Sleepy
0 0 %
Angry
0 0 %
Surprise
0 0 %

Barack Obama Is Out Of Fucks

0 0
Read Time:3 Minute, 5 Second

If you’re a liberal this paragraph from the end of Obama’s State of the Union has to excite you:

  I have no more campaigns to run. My only agenda for the next two years is the same as the one I’ve had since the day I swore an oath on the steps of this Capitol — to do what I believe is best for America. If you share the broad vision I outlined tonight, join me in the work at hand. If you disagree with parts of it, I hope you’ll at least work with me where you do agree. And I commit to every Republican here tonight that I will not only seek out your ideas, I will seek to work with you to make this country stronger.

Obama has zero fucks left to give. This is good. This is smart. To quote Mark Manson’s wonderful “The Subtle Art of Not Giving A Fuck”:

Developing the ability to control and manage the fucks you give is the essence of strength and integrity. We must craft and hone our lack of fuckery over the course of years and decades. Like a fine wine, our fucks must age into a fine vintage, only uncorked and given on the most special fucking occasions.

Obama also made a fairly convincing case that Congress is giving too many fucks.

    So the question for those of us here tonight is how we, all of us, can better reflect America’s hopes. I’ve served in Congress with many of you. I know many of you well. There are a lot of good people here, on both sides of the aisle. And many of you have told me that this isn’t what you signed up for — arguing past each other on cable shows, the constant fundraising, always looking over your shoulder at how the base will react to every decision.
    Imagine if we broke out of these tired old patterns. Imagine if we did something different.
    Understand — a better politics isn’t one where Democrats abandon their agenda or Republicans simply embrace mine.
    A better politics is one where we appeal to each other’s basic decency instead of our basest fears.
    A better politics is one where we debate without demonizing each other; where we talk issues, and values, and principles, and facts, rather than “gotcha” moments, or trivial gaffes, or fake controversies that have nothing to do with people’s daily lives.
    A better politics is one where we spend less time drowning in dark money for ads that pull us into the gutter, and spend more time lifting young people up, with a sense of purpose and possibility, and asking them to join in the great mission of building America.
    If we’re going to have arguments, let’s have arguments — but let’s make them debates worthy of this body and worthy of this country. …
    That’s a better politics. That’s how we start rebuilding trust. That’s how we move this country forward. That’s what the American people want. That’s what they deserve.

You could say that this speech was a clarion call for everyone to give less fucks. It would be great if Republicans joined him in this fuck-less void, but if they don’t, so be it. Obama is out of fucks.

About Post Author

Anthony-Claret Ifeanyi Onwutalobi

Anthony-Claret is a software Engineer, entrepreneur and the founder of Codewit INC. Mr. Claret publishes and manages the content on Codewit Word News website and associated websites. He's a writer, IT Expert, great administrator, technology enthusiast, social media lover and all around digital guy.
Happy
0 0 %
Sad
0 0 %
Excited
0 0 %
Sleepy
0 0 %
Angry
0 0 %
Surprise
0 0 %

Teenage Girl Plans To Marry Her Father After 2 Years Of Dating

0 0
Read Time:1 Minute, 3 Second

A teenager has revealed in an interview that she plans to marry her father and have children after dating for two years.

Continue reading

About Post Author

Anthony-Claret Ifeanyi Onwutalobi

Anthony-Claret is a software Engineer, entrepreneur and the founder of Codewit INC. Mr. Claret publishes and manages the content on Codewit Word News website and associated websites. He's a writer, IT Expert, great administrator, technology enthusiast, social media lover and all around digital guy.
Happy
0 0 %
Sad
0 0 %
Excited
0 0 %
Sleepy
0 0 %
Angry
0 0 %
Surprise
0 0 %

Australia raises terror threat level against police to ‘very high’

0 0
Read Time:1 Minute, 51 Second

SYDNEY (Reuters) – Australia raised the threat level of a terrorist attack against law enforcement officers to "high" on Tuesday, federal police said, citing intelligence, discussions with international partners and recent high-profile attacks in Europe and Canada.

The change in the threat level for police officers brings it in line with the current threat level against the general public, which was raised to high in September and has remained so following a hostage crisis in Sydney in December.

"As a result of intelligence information and discussions with our partners, the terrorism threat level against police is assessed as high, which is commensurate with the broader threat level for the community," the Australian Federal Police (AFP) said in a statement.

"Recent events in France, Canada and Australia serve as a sobering reminder of the risks associated with policing," the statement said.

In December, two hostages and a gunman were killed after police stormed a downtown Sydney cafe to end a 16-hour standoff with the hostage-taker, a loner and convicted criminal who identified himself with radical Sunni Islamist groups.

Australia, a staunch ally of the United States and its action against the Islamic State militant group in Syria and Iraq, is on high alert for attacks by sympathizers of the radical group and from home-grown militants returning from fighting in the Middle East.

Last week in Belgium, two gunmen were killed during raids against an Islamist group that authorities there said were planning to attack police.

Two police officers were among the 12 people killed earlier this month when a pair of gunmen stormed the Paris offices of French satirical newspaper Charlie Hebdo.

In October, one soldier died during an attack by an Islamist radical on the Canadian parliament in an incident cited by the AFP in their statement on Tuesday about the decision to raise the threat level against Australia's police.

The AFP singled out Australian citizens who may have gone overseas to fight with the Islamic State group and returned home as a potential threat, although police commissioners in two states said no specific threats had been identified.

(Additional reporting by Jane Wardell and Lincoln Feast; Editing by Paul Tait)

About Post Author

Anthony-Claret Ifeanyi Onwutalobi

Anthony-Claret is a software Engineer, entrepreneur and the founder of Codewit INC. Mr. Claret publishes and manages the content on Codewit Word News website and associated websites. He's a writer, IT Expert, great administrator, technology enthusiast, social media lover and all around digital guy.
Happy
0 0 %
Sad
0 0 %
Excited
0 0 %
Sleepy
0 0 %
Angry
0 0 %
Surprise
0 0 %