Advertisements
Home

Photo Series Depicts The Absurdity Of The Weirdest Laws In America

1 Comment

This is from Elite Daily.

Here in Indiana it is against the law to eat onions on Sunday.

It is legal to have a duel in Indiana as long as the following conditions are met.

1- you notify and get approval from the Sheriff in the county of where the duel is to be fought.

2-You have to hold the duel 15 minutes before day break.

3- Have a medical doctor in attendance.

3- You and the other party have to chose seconds.

4-You must use single shots pistol or a swords.

 

 

Believe it or not, it’s against the law to walk around with an ice cream cone in your back pocket when you’re in Alabama.

It makes complete sense, though. Why would you want to do that to yourself? In addition, there are a bunch of other obscure laws that are currently being enforced around the United States.

In a recent photo series conducted by Olivia Locher, a handful of outrageous laws from Maine to California are visualized.

If you plan on traveling any time soon and engaging in strange activities, you’re going to want to know your rights first. Or the rights you don’t have, rather.

Check them out below!

It’s against the law to tickle a woman under her chin with a feather duster in Maine.


You can’t carry a violin in a paper bag while in public in Utah.


It’s unlawful to sell hollow logs in Tennessee.


You can’t wear transparent clothing in Rhode Island. I’m guessing they’ve had horrific experiences with that kind of stuff.


Serving wine in teacups while in Kansas is highly illegal. Mugs are fine, though.


In California, it’s against the law to ride a bike in a swimming pool.


Don’t walk around with an ice cream cone in your back pocket while in Alabama. That’d also be illegal.


If pickles don’t bounce in Connecticut, they’re not considered pickles.


In Wisconsin, it’s against the law to serve apple pie without cheese.


While you’re in Oregon, you can’t test your physical endurance or exercise while driving. Kiss your spring workout routine goodbye!


Don’t put coins in your ears while in Hawaii. That’s illegal, too.


In Texas, it’s unlawful for children to have absurd, obscure haircuts.


Wearing jeans that are form-fitting around the waist is considered unlawful in Delaware.

H/T: UFunk, Photos Courtesy: Olivia Locher

 

 

Advertisements

Family of Home Invader Killed by Homeowner Says He Was “No Criminal, Just Trying to Make Ends Meet”

Leave a comment

This is from Guns Saves Lives.

Why is it when a scumbag gets taken out trying to commit a crime

becomes a candidate for sainthood?

This scumbag broke in wearing a ski mask and carrying a set of brass knuckles.

Then the family saying he was not going to rob the homeowner just beat him up.

YGTBSM! 

Here is his picture from his Obituary.

Let’s add it to the list of things not to bring to a gunfight – brass knuckles.

The family of 44-year-old Christopher Dennison is speaking out after he was killed by a homeowner whose home he broke into.

According to WGME,

“He didn’t deserve to die,” said his wife Cherie Thibault. “I know he shouldn’t have did what he did, but he did it for us.”

They say Dennison wasn’t there to kill anyone or steal anything, he was simply hired by a third party to go scare or beat up the homeowner to get him to pay an outstanding debt. Yeah. That’s all.

 

lso from WGME,

“This guy approached him on going to scare, possibly beat, up, not kill somebody, and he would pay him, and pay him quite a bit of money,” she explained. “I know it’s not legal, it’s not right”

When Dennison went to the home and burst through the front door around 8pm, he was confronted by the homeowner, who was armed. Dennison, wearing a black ski mask at the time, was shot several times by the homeowner. Dennison died of his injuries.

The homeowner’s lawyer says this is a clear cut case of self defense and the homeowner was simply trying to protect himself and his teenage son, who was also home at the time.

 

Mirror, Mirror, on the Wall, Which States Provide the Most Handouts of All?

Leave a comment

This is from Town Hall.

The welfare system discourages stay at home fathers.

The welfare system also discourages being responsible for your children.

The only thing the welfare systems encourages staying dependent 

on the taxpayers money the system takes away from working citizens. 

 

 

About two years ago, I shared a map put together by a pro-statism organization that supposedly showed that welfare benefits were very miserly and not sufficiently generous to lift people out of poverty.

My gut instinct was to reject the findings. As I wrote at the time:

The poverty line is set considerably above a level that would indicate material deprivation…far above the average level of income in most nations of the world. …Welfare checks are just one of many forms of redistribution, and the data used to create the map do not count food stamps, Medicaid, housing subsidies and a plethora of other means-tested programs.

My skepticism was further augmented when I ran across an amazing chartshowing that it made more sense to live off the government in Pennsylvania rather than earn more income.

It turns out that I was right to be skeptical. My colleagues at the Cato Institute have just released a detailed study calculating the amount of handouts available in each state. They then investigated whether the level of redistribution was so high that people might decide it didn’t make sense to be productive members of society.

You probably won’t be surprised to learn that it’s better to live off the government in most states.

Welfare benefits continue to outpace the income that most recipients can expect to earn from an entry-level job, and the balance between welfare and work may actually have grown worse in recent years. The current welfare system provides such a high level of benefits that it acts as a disincentive for work. Welfare currently pays more than a minimum-wage job in 35 states, even after accounting for the Earned Income Tax Credit, and in 13 states it pays more than $15 per hour.

Here are some of the details from the study, which used the example of a mother and two children.

…the federal government currently funds 126 separate programs targeted toward low-income people, 72 of which provide either cash or in-kind benefits to individuals. …no individual or family receives benefits from all 72 programs, but many recipients do receive aid from a number of the programs at any given time. …this study seeks to determine the approximate level of benefits that a typical welfare family, consisting of a single mother with two children, might receive, and to compare those benefits with the wages that a recipient would need to earn in order to take home an equivalent income.

What shocked me the most were a couple of tables showing how living off the taxpayers is a pretty good deal.

The first table shows how much a household would have to earn – before tax – to have the same lifestyle that is available from the welfare system. The study also looks at median salary in each state and shows that eight states actually provide handouts that are greater than that amount!

Redistribution Nation Worst 24

The study also reveals that handouts give recipients far more than is needed to reach the federal poverty level. Indeed, the panoply of benefits is so excessive in some places that recipients are pushed to more than twice what is needed to get out of poverty.

Redistribution Nation Poverty Rate

Or maybe it would be more accurate to state that handouts are so excessive that recipients are lured into dependency.

I’ll close with a couple of surprises from the study. I was shocked that Illinois and Maine both ranked among the least extravagant states. Maine “earned” third place in the Moocher Index, so I assumed they would be especially profligate. But I guess having a lot of people on welfare doesn’t necessarily mean that they’re getting a lot of money.

And Illinois has veered far to the left on fiscal policy in recent years, so I assumed politicians were giving out lots of goodies. But apparently bureaucrats are first in line for handouts and that reduces the amount of loot available for other groups.

On the other hand, I didn’t expect to find New Hampshire being about as profligate as Vermont.

Most of the other states are where you would expect them to be. Fiscal hell-holes like New York and California redistribute money like crazy, while zero-income tax states such as Texas, Florida, and Tennessee are comparatively frugal.

P.S. Here’s a map showing which states have the most food stamp dependency.

P.P.S. Let’s not forget that the poverty rate was falling steadily before the federal government declared a “War on Poverty.”

P.P.P.S. If you’re thinking about moving, you may want to avoid “death spiral states.”

P.P.P.P.S. The U.K. welfare system also makes work unattractive compared to living off taxpayers.

 

Winter’ – maybe even snow – to return for Memorial Day weekend

Leave a comment

This is from U.S.A News on N.B.C.

How long before George W.Bush and the Republicans get blamed?

As they do not believe in  globull warming.

I do not nor never have I ever believed in globull warming.

 

 

Memorial Day weekend is expected to feel more like “winter” for areas of the eastern U.S., according to forecasters at weather.com, with snow possible for parts of the Northeast.

The National Weather Service issued flash flood warnings for parts of Massachusetts and Texas early Friday as much of the country continued to be hit by miserable weather. The warnings are only issued when there is the potentially for “rapid” and “life threatening” flooding.

The Tri-State area was also hit by heavy rainfall and thunderstorms through the night,NBCNewYork.com reported.

A house in Glen Rock, New Jerseywas hit by lightning, sending a couple running outside.

“It sounded like an explosion,” one resident of the house told NBCNewYork.com. The strike went through the house’s alarm system. “Pieces of plastic hit me in the back of the head and I turned around … the alarm panel blew out of the wall.”

View more videos at: http://nbcnewyork.com.

Some areas of the Tri-State saw as much as 3 to 4 inches of rain by Thursday night.

In Connecticut, storms brought down trees in Waterbury and there were floods in Danbury,NBCConnecticut.com reported.

Weather.com said that while the Memorial Day weekend was supposed to mark the start of the summer season “unfortunately for parts of the East, it won’t feel anything like summer. In fact, a few locales may refer to it as winter.”

“Low pressure is expected to wrap-up and crawl northward along the coast of New England late Friday into Sunday,” weather.com reported.

“As a result, most residents from New Jersey, eastern Pennsylvania and eastern New York to Maine will see a wet start to the weekend on Saturday,” it added. “The rain will continue over much of New England southward to near or just north of New York City right into Sunday.”

And weather.com said it could even get cold enough to see snow at higher altitudes in northern New York, northern Vermont, northern New Hampshire and northern Maine.

It said high temperatures were expected to be in the 50s and 60s from Pennsylvania and New York to New England both Saturday and Sunday.

In the Southeast, weather.com said it would be unseasonably cold with “near-record low temperatures” in Asheville, N.C., Nashville, Tenn., and Greenville, S.C., on Saturday morning in the 40s and low 50s.

Thunderstorms could hit Tennessee on Sunday, and parts of Alabama, Mississippi and Georgia on Memorial Day, Weather.com warned.

There would also be a threat of thunderstorm over the holiday weekend from the Plains into the middle and upper Mississippi Valleys.

The Northwest could see showers through the weekend, while dry weather was expected to prevail in the Southwest.

View more videos at: http://nbcnewyork.com.

 

Harkin: ‘Is It a Spending Problem? No … It’s a Misallocation of Wealth’

Leave a comment

This is from CNSNews.

Shame on the people of  Iowa for electing this mental midget.

Shame on you for reelecting this mental midget.

We need to remove this mentality from Congress.

 

(CNSNews.com) – Sen. Tom Harkin (D-Iowa) said on Thursday that U.S. government does not have a spending problem, but America suffers from “a misallocation of wealth.”

“I look at it this way,” Harkin said at a Senate Appropriations Committee hearing on the Budget Control Act of 2011 (the law that includes the automatic spending cuts referred to as “sequestration”). “We’re the richest nation in the history of the world.  That kind of begs the question doesn’t it? If we’re so rich, why are we so broke?”

“Is it a spending problem? Harkin said. “No, it’s because we have a misallocation of capital, a misallocation of wealth.”

“All of this wealth that’s been built up by hard-working Americans has been accumulated into fewer and fewer and fewer hands all the time,” Harkin said.

Harkin, who sits on the Appropriations Committee, criticized a U.S. tax code he said benefits wealthy people.

“I tell you we’ve got to get back to a better, rationale system of revenues and spending in this country and back to our obligations,” Harkin said. “I just feel very strongly, that it’s not just appropriations that’s causing this problem.

“It’s the lack of the revenue that we should be taking in to meet our obligations as a country,” Harkin said.

But Sen. Susan Collins (R-Maine), who said she supported tax increases for the wealthy and opposed letting sequestration commence, took issue with Harkin’s views on federal spending.

“It’s very difficult to follow the eloquence of my colleague from Iowa,” Collins said. “The fact is, however, I believe we do have a spending problem and the $16.4 trillion dollar debt is ample evidence of that.”

 

Soft plastics — banned?

Leave a comment

This is from Bass Masters.

State Representative Paul Davis (RINO-ME) claims to be an avid fisherman.

Yet Rep.Davis is ignorant of what is used in soft bait lures.

It is plastic not rubber there is a huge difference in the two materials.

Rep.Davis is a fisherman like Obama shoots skeet in his mind.

 

 

Soft plastics are on the chopping block in the state of Maine.

On Jan. 17, state Representative Paul Davis introduced a bill that would prohibit the use of all “rubber” lures. The bill does not define “rubber” — which is not a standard material for soft baits — so it leaves it open that all soft baits would be prohibited if the bill is passed. Tomorrow, the state’s Joint Standing Committee on Inland Fisheries and Wildlife will hold a public hearing on this bill.Make your voice heard!

KeepAmericaFishing officials released a statement last week, noting that it is not aware of any study of fish in the wild regarding problems with soft baits and that research experience is that fish either regurgitate or pass baits that they ingest.

“We are very grateful for our alert and connected Maine B.A.S.S. Nation folks who contacted us concerning this proposed legislative action,” said Noreen Clough, B.A.S.S. national conservation director. “Immediately, we joined forces with American Sportfishing Association (ASA) and its KeepAmericaFishing advocacy site to squash this ill-conceived proposal. B.A.S.S. Conservation is the home of the ReBaits program, providing recycling for discarded plastics in 37 states, Canada and South Africa. When anglers bring discarded plastic baits in, there is absolutely no need to legislate a ban on their use.”

Below is the testimony that Gordon Robertson, vice president of ASA, will present tomorrow. You can send your own letter to the committee at this link just by submitting your contact information. You do not have to live or fish in Maine to make your voice heard.

Testimony of the American Sportfishing Association on LD 42/HP 37, “An Act to Prohibit the Use of Rubber Lures for Fishing

Maine Joint Standing Committee on Inland Fisheries and Wildlife

Submitted by Gordon Robertson, Vice President

February 5, 2013

Thank you, Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, for the opportunity to present testimony on the topic of soft baits used for recreational fishing. The American Sportfishing Association (ASA) is the sportfishing industry’s trade association and has represented the industry since1933. We understand that for our members’ businesses to succeed the Nation must have abundant and sustainable fisheries. Therefore, we spend considerable resources assuring that actions at the state and federal level support clean waters, healthy habitats and angler access to the public’s fishery resources.

We urge the committee to not pass this legislation but instead allow the Maine Department of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife to conduct the appropriate field studies to determine if this theoretical problem with soft baits poses any practical population management problem in Maine to fish and other aquatic life and to further determine the role of angler education in minimizing the number of soft baits discarded while fishing.

To the best of our knowledge the Maine legislature is the first to consider legislation on this topic. Also, we are not aware of any study other than the 2009 laboratory study by G. Russell Danner published in theNorth American Journal of Fisheries Management that raises a concern with soft baits. In addition, we know of no study of fish in the wild on this topic. To the contrary industry research involving literally thousands of soft baits to test fish of many species (particularly bass and trout) has indicated minimal problems for the research fish involved. The research experience is that the fish either regurgitate or pass the baits without problem. These studies fed baits appropriate for the size of the fish being tested. It is possible that the Danner study may have fed trout large soft baits and the selection of those size ranges is much less likely to occur by free swimming trout in the wild. There is a wide variety of types, sizes and shapes of soft baits and we are not aware of these causing problems, even in laboratory experiments.

We do know that soft baits are popular among anglers and that they comprise a considerable segment of the artificial bait market. They are popular because they negate the need to obtain and keep live baits and they are effective. For this reason they are especially popular with non-resident anglers who visit Maine to sportfish.  From the publication Sportfishing in America published in January 2013 we know that anglers in Maine provide a $614,401,455 economic infusion to the state each year supporting 6,723 Maine jobs. This economic engine from recreational fishing in Maine also provides $42.8 million in state and local tax revenue.  Forty-four percent of Maine’s angling days are done by non-resident anglers. Obviously curtailing the use of popular artificial baits may cause a negative impact on tourism expenditures in Maine. In addition, forcing anglers to use live bait, or once live baits, can cause the inadvertent introduction of nonnative invasive aquatic species.

Obviously Maine wishes to take prudent steps to sustain its fishery resource base and the economic base that flows from recreational fishing. Given that there is no study of the impact of soft baits on fish and other aquatic life in the wild, legislation banning these types of popular baits is unwarranted. The legislation seeks to ban “rubber” baits with rubber being undefined.  Realistically, there are no such baits on the market as soft baits are made from various substances, none of which are rubber. There are biodegradable soft baits available and this legislation would ban even the use of those baits and certainly does nothing to encourage further research into that area or to improve consumer demand for those types of baits.

Much can also be done through angler education to minimize the number of soft baits lost. There are, and can be more, soft bait recycling programs and programs describing the proper disposal of used soft baits. Anglers by nature are conservationists and they will react positively to practical, commonsense programs that allow them to fish with effective baits and that educate them on their use and disposal. We encourage the Department of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife to work with local angler groups to accomplish this.

Again, Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, we urge you to reject this legislation and instead allow the Maine Department of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife to conduct the appropriate field studies to determine if this theoretical problem with soft baits poses any practical population management problem in Maine to fish and other aquatic life and to further determine the role of angler education in minimizing the number of soft baits discarded while fishing.

Thank you and please make these comments part of the official hearing record.

 

Maine Lawmaker Proposes Teachers Carry Concealed Weapons

Leave a comment

This is from News Talk 77 WABC New York.

I am shocked as Maine is a blue state.

I should have known the State Senator would be a Republican.

As no DemocRat would make such a proposal.

 

(WASHINGTON) — In the midst of the gun debate, a state senator from Maine proposed a bill that would allow teachers and other school employees to carry concealed weapons on the job.

The bill proposed by Sen. David Burns, R-Washington County, a few weeks ago follows the shooting tragedy at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Conn., where 20 children and six adults were slain.

Burns’ bill would allow educators and school employees to carry a concealed weapon while in school under the stipulation that they undergo a psychological exam, take a firearms training course and receive certification to carry the weapon.

“My bill would have the option of either putting together a training curriculum through the [Maine] Criminal Justice Academy or it would be put together by private vendors trained in firearms,” he told ABC News.  Police officers in Maine’s cities are trained at the academy.

When asked where the licensed gun holders would actually keep the guns during school hours, Burns told ABC News that trained staff members would keep the weapon on them, saying, “That is the value of this bill.”

Burns says that the idea of carrying a concealed weapon, however, is no new phenomenon.

“It’s something that police officers have been doing for years.” He continues, “The key is proper screening, training and oversight. We do this all the time with our police department; there are people in schools with the right aptitude to do it too.”

Parents of students would be notified that an employee at their child’s school is carrying a concealed weapon, but the identity of the weapon carrier would be kept confidential.

Maine would not be the first state to adopt similar laws. Utah, Alabama, Texas and even Ohio have had armed employees in schools, even before the Sandy Hook Elementary shooting.

Burns, who is a first-term state senator representing District 29, worked for 24 years as a Maine state trooper before taking office. He told ABC News that he has seen both sides of the spectrum, having worked as a state trooper as well as a policymaker for both private and public schools in Maine.

Burns said that he has no concerns about this bill and that it is a good option for rural communities with a lack of resources to protect students and staff.

“It’s an option proposal that schools can opt in or opt out of.” He continues, “If a school chooses to do that, they can do so and that result would be kept confidential.”

Institution of the bill would rely upon approval of the local school board, superintendent and building principal.

 

The 10 most interesting ballot initiative battles to watch on Tuesday

Leave a comment

This is from The Daily Caller.

This ballot initiatives will be interesting to watch.

Some I agree with and some I do not and others I am not sue how I feel.

What say you about these initiatives?

 

Voting for president, congressman, senator, governor, county councilman, alderman, sheriff and dogcatcher apparently isn’t enough to think about Tuesday. Voters in dozens of states will also be faced with ballot initiative and amendment questions running the gamut from guns to gay marriage, from “Frankenfoods” to photo IDs.

Sure, four states have initiatives teed up to counter Obamacare, but aren’t you a bit tired of hearing about the president’s health care law by now? There are ten other ballot measures worth watching, and these wont bore you to tears.

#10: Perhaps the most unusual measure is The Safer Sex in the Adult Film Industry Act, on the ballot as Measure B in Los Angeles County, California. Voters will decide whether actors in pornographic movies made in Southern California should have to wear condoms and practice safe sex while the cameras roll. Measure B is a response to the outbreak of sexually transmitted diseases among California’s adult film “actors” and “actresses.”

#9: North Dakota produces a lot of cattle, and those folks aren’t messing around. Measure 3 would forever enshrine farmers and ranchers as a protected class by adding a whole new section to the state constitution. “The right of farmers and ranchers to engage in modern farming and ranching practices shall be forever guaranteed in this state,” it would read. “No law shall be enacted which abridges the right of farmers and ranchers to employ agricultural technology, modern livestock production and ranching practices.” Take that, PETA.

#8: Minnesota voters will decide whether to require every voter to show a photo ID at the polls. Democrats have claimed similar requirements in other states were efforts to depress turnout among minority and low-income voters. Some even say voter ID laws  can prevent elderly voters from going to the polls if they no longer have driver’s licenses. But conservatives counter that the best way to make sure no one cheats on Election Day is to require IDs at check-in. If you have to show photo ID to get on an airplane or rent a car, they say, voting should be even more secure.

#7: A proposal in Missouri would more than quintuple the state’s cigarette tax to 90 cents per pack, up from a lowest-in-the-nation 17 cents. New York leads the field with a whopping $4.35 tax for every pack of smokes. And that’s on top of a $1.01 federal tax. If you’re lighting up in New York City, there’s also a cigarette tax levied by the city — another $1.50 — adding up to $6.86 in taxes per pack for smokers in the Big Apple. That’s 34 cents to the government for every cigarette.

#6: Proposition 37 in California would require food marketers to label genetically modified foods. It would set up a lawsuit-based enforcement mechanism like the “Proposition 65″ toxics right-to-know law already employs, even though there’s no evidence so-called “frankenfoods” are actually unsafe to eat. (You probably ate some today.) While the measure is ahead in the polls, some fear it would raise grocery bills and create deceptive labeling schemes.

 

#5: In Louisiana, voters will decide whether to add the right to acquire, transport, carry, transfer, and use firearms to the constitutional right to bear arms. If approved, Louisiana ‘s current gun restrictions could be scrapped in favor of a policy that forces state and local governments to have a specific and compelling reason to limit gun rights. Universities and bars would be able to have gun-free zones, but the burden would be on the anti-Second Amendment side of the argument to prove why new firearms restrictions are necessary.

#4: There are several ballot questions about marijuana on statewide ballots this year, with Colorado’s Amendment 64 being perhaps the most significant. It would amend the Colorado Constitution to license and regulate growing and selling pot. it would make it legal for anyone over 21 to have an ounce of finished weed for their personal use — and six marijuana plants, with some restrictions. The state would get to tax Mary Jane, however, with the first $40 million every year going to a school construction fund. Also, the legislature would be required to pass legislation concerning the growth, processing, and sale of industrial hemp.

#3: Four states have measures on the ballot specifically about protecting citizens’ right to go hunting and fishing. This is largely a preemptive strike against the mega-rich Humane Society of the United States, whose president has said in the past that he would ban all sport hunting if he could. All four measures — in Idaho, Kentucky, Nebraska and Wyoming — would amend state constitutions, making it harder for animal rights groups to have their way later on.

#2: Gay marriage history could be made in a few states Tuesday. Maine is asking voters a straight-up question: Do you want to allow the State of Maine to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples? Minnesotans will be faced with a constitutional amendment establishing one-man, one-woman couples as the only legal definition of marriage. And Maryland’s question is unusual: Will voters accept a “civil marriage” recognition for gays and lesbians if churches can’t be forced to perform the ceremonies?

#1: Nine U.S. states don’t have personal income taxes, but only New Hampshire has “Live Free or Die” as its state motto. The Granite State will have a ballot measure Tuesday that would make its no-income-tax policy a permanent thing. The magic language reads, “No new tax shall be levied, directly or indirectly, upon a person’s income, from whatever source it is derived.”

Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2012/11/05/the-10-most-interesting-ballot-initiative-battles-to-watch-on-tuesday/#ixzz2BMIRdBhY

 

Marriage expert Brad Pitt donates $100k to Human Rights Campaign

Leave a comment

This is from The Daily Caller.

Brad should listen to his mother not the  his friends in Holly Weird.

I can proudly say I have never watched a Brad Pitt movie and I never will.

Brad is an expert on how not to stay married.

Brad should read what the Bible has to say about same-sex marriage.

Leviticus 18:22-23

New Living Translation (NLT)

22 “Do not practice homosexuality, having sex with another man as with a woman. It is a detestable sin.

23 “A man must not defile himself by having sex with an animal. And a woman must not offer herself to a male animal to have intercourse with it. This is a perverse act.

 

On Wednesday, the Human Rights Campaign (HRC)  — the nation’s largest gay advocacy organization — announced a $100,000 pledge from marriage expert Brad Pitt ”to secure marriage equality in the final days of this election cycle,” according to HRC President Chad Griffin.

With a prior five-year marriage to Jennifer Aniston under his belt, Pitt is now properly armed to fight the battle for marriage equality with his Hollywood cash.

The HRC featured this donation on their website, advertising Pitt’s agreement to “match contributions from HRC members and supporters up to $100,000 in order to direct resources to the marriage campaigns entering their final week in Maine, Maryland, Minnesota and Washington State.”

“It’s unbelievable to me that people’s lives and relationships are literally being voted on in a matter of days,” Pitt said in an email to HRC members and supporters. “If you’re like me, you don’t want to have to ask yourself on the day after the election, what else could I have done?”

In an interview last July, Pitt expressed his opinion to the American People that “it is each American’s constitutional right to marry the person they love, no matter what state they inhabit. No state should decide who can marry and who cannot.”

The HRC featured this notable donation on their blog, in light of the recent campaign efforts in Maine, Maryland, Minnesota, and Washington state.

It is unclear at the time if Pitt will lobby to extend the no-fault divorce law to married gay couples so they, too, have equal opportunity leave their spouse for Angelina Jolie.

Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2012/11/01/constitutional-right-to-marry-brad-pitt-donates-100k-to-human-rights-campaign-for-gay-marriage/#ixzz2B4uhSYVf

 

%d bloggers like this: