Always glad to hear some positive news Hope for more and more in the future

Good article

I strongly suspect that Apple either didn't look into the app closely enough, or they were examining this office from such a place (e.g. certain states for which I won't name, but if you're from North America, you know what I'm talking about) where the motto is "I fucks what I feeds…" where such a reaction is perfectly "acceptable" in society.

@leatherbear: By B.J. Reyes Less than a year after seeing the push for civil unions vetoed, gay rights advocates cheered as Gov. Neil Abercrombie signed into law a bill legalizing civil unions and making Hawaii the seventh state to grant such privileges to same-sex couples. Abercrombie signed the legislation at a ceremony today at historic Washington Place. "E Komo Mai: It means all are welcome," Abercrombie said in remarks before signing the bill into law. "This signing today of this measure says to all of the world that they are welcome. That everyone is a brother or sister here in paradise." "The legalization of civil unions in Hawaii represents in my mind equal rights for all people," he said. The ceremony was broadcast live on television and the Internet as Abercrombie, a Democrat who campaigned on a promise to sign the bill if it reached his desk, reversed the decision made by his Republican predecessor. Not everyone was thrilled with the new law. "It's a sad day for the people of Hawaii," said Sen. Mike Gabbard. "Politicians have shown that they just don't care about the views and values of the majority of Hawaii's residents." The Hawaii Catholic Conference issued a statement expressing disappointment. "Passage of this legislation is just a step towards the legalization of same-sex marriage," read the statement. Gov. Linda Lingle had characterized it as same-sex marriage by another name, which she opposed, saying the issue was too important for government to decide and should be put to the people for a vote. She vetoed the proposal in July. But advocates, buoyed by the results of the 2010 elections which saw civil union opponents fail in their attempts to unseat supportive lawmakers, brought the issue back under a more favorable climate. With support in both chambers, lawmakers sought to take advantage of the all-around consensus and fast-track the bill. Rep. Blake Oshiro, the House majority leader and primary sponsor, said he was proud of the accomplishment, but the passage only means that the Legislature can move on to more important matters such as the budget. "So we have one big thing down and now we move on to the next fight, the next battle, the next big issue," said Oshiro (D, Aiea-Halawa). Senate Bill 232 allows all couples — same-sex and heterosexual — to enter into a civil union, a legal status with all the rights, benefits, protections and responsibilities as traditional marriage. It is largely similar to the bill vetoed by Lingle, but contains specific provisions aimed at clarifying implementation for the state Department of Health. Couples would be allowed to start entering into a civil union on Jan. 1. "This bill has been a long time coming for committed couples in Hawaii who have been denied the basic right to take care of their families," said Laurie Temple, a staff attorney for the American Civil Liberties Union of Hawaii. Approval of the bill also brings an end to a lawsuit filed by gay couples against the state last year after Lingle's veto, the ACLU said. Gay rights advocacy group Lambda Legal and ACLU sued on behalf of six gay couples, alleging the state failed to provide equal rights to gays and lesbians short of marriage. Opponents have held prayer vigils at the Capitol this week in advance of the bill signing. Many have repeated Lingle's call for a vote and said the measure would lead to gay lifestyles being taught in public schools. Opponents also have called civil unions a gateway to the acceptance of same-sex marriage. Hawaii has figured prominently in the national gay rights movement's efforts since the early 1990s, when the state Supreme Court nearly legalized gay marriage. The 1993 ruling would have made Hawaii the first state to allow same-sex couples to wed, but it did not take effect while voters were given a chance to decide the matter. They responded in 1998 by overwhelmingly approving the nation's first "defense of marriage" state constitutional amendment, giving the Legislature the authority to define marriage as between one man and one woman but leaving the door open for civil unions. Final approval of Hawaii's civil unions law came the same day as the Obama administration reversed its previous position and said it no longer would defend the constitutionality of the federal law banning recognition of same-sex marriage. U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder said President Barack Obama has concluded that the administration cannot defend the federal law that defines marriage as only between a man and a woman. He noted that the congressional debate during passage of the Defense of Marriage Act "contains numerous expressions reflecting moral disapproval of gays and lesbians and their intimate and family relationships — precisely the kind of stereotype-based thinking and animus" the Constitution is designed to guard against. hXXp://www.staradvertiser.com/news/breaking/116776119.html when str8s get a civil union as they claim they will - ill believe it isnt discriminatory - but till then - DISCRIMINATION!!!!

Censorship only matters if it makes censor not.

he might end up being the librarian whose best friend is a mouse and can't sit down because of all the… loving.

hehehe… at least we have a slightly sensible guy sitting in the oval office

The testimony led lawyer Valentine to ask, "When does a fish become a whale?" When she's a bull dyke.  >:D

Section 2 that allows statesto discriminate against gays in marriage will still be defended, as part of "state's rights".  However, no one ever talks about how DOMA {specifically Section 2} killed the full faith and credit clause of the constitution all because of hate mongers.

I just saw on the news that later today, a UK court will rule on whether a mentally disabled woman should be sterilized after she gives birth in a couple of weeks.   There is no attempt to ban her from having sex. hXXp://www.allheadlinenews.com/articles/7023158562?British%20court%20mulls%20forced%20surgical%20sterility%20for%20disabled%20woman This is more proof that the UK is still very homophobic. EDIT:  The case has been adjourned until after she has the baby in May.

i detest drug traffickers.

we've been patient for the past century.  i hope we don't need to wait another one hehehe.  But at least there seems to be light at the end of the tunnel.

@fancydude: How would a porn star know he got HIV from being a rent boy when almost no one in porn is tested? Granted, the series I mentioned in the post above, most of them admitted to being rent boys, due to the whole "no royalties" thing and porn doesn't pay enough to live. But I really wonder HOW one would know for sure who passed on the HIV???  If a person has sex with 10 people (seemingly low in the Gay community) and I have sex with him, I've had sex with 11 people; in turn if I've had sex with 10 people, the first person mentioned has had sex with 20 people.  or whatever the exponential math is.  Again, how would you know who is responsible? According to Dr. Chris Steingart M.D. (Registered HIV Specialist) there are two different types of tests that are run to determine the exact strain of the virus. The first is known as a Western Blot. This test breaks the virus down into one of two categories. There is what is referred to as "Type 1"[nb]Type 1 HIV is generally more docile by comparison, however it does have varying degrees of severity, depending on the person's body chemistry and immune system.[/nb], which is more commonly found within North America, more particularly (but not necessarily exclusive to) gay men. There is also what is referred to as "Type 2"[nb]Type 2 tends to be a little more aggressive than Type 1, which makes for a particularly nasty threat if a person with Type 1 should become co-infected with Type 2 or vice versa.[/nb], which is more commonly found within African and Caribbean Communities[nb]The #1 problem that still lies with African and Caribbean communities is the availability of the drugs. In countries like Kenya, the question is more "Who doesn't have HIV?". In those countries, they are currently living in the days of the 80's in North America. In fact, AIDS related deaths account for 87.8% of death that occur in that region.[/nb]. The second test is referred to as a "Ginotype" test. This test breaks down the DNA strands of the HIV virus itself after it has bombarded the CD4 cell to determine its genetic makeup. This allows for the lab technician to be able to determine certain properties of the virus such as its origin, drug resistances, aggressiveness of the strain, incubation period for the virus to fuse with the CD4 cell, and a basic fingerprint of the virus itself. A Ginotype test in most cases can accurately predict whether or not the virus came from a particular origin by comparing its DNA. The only problem with this is that the virus does sometimes make "mistakes" when it begins to duplicate its DNA to overpower that of the CD4 cell. This results in a "mutation"[nb]Mutations can also occur if you are HIV positive and you have gone an extended period (generally several days) without your medication, giving the virus a chance to adapt itself to the medication. This problem brings on a whole new world of possible issues when you get into the subject of co-infection[/nb] if you will of the virus, or a slight alteration. In this case, the Ginotype test could verify that it is most likely the source of the virus based on its overall DNA structure, similar to testing a person's DNA to see if they are the parent of a child. The only problem that comes into play when mutation occurs is it leaves a small amount of margin for error, which means it's sometimes not always possible to scientifically prove 100% where the virus was transmitted from.

oh i didn't know he was THAT notorious.  my bad.

Ugandan police say David Kato was killed over sex payment Ugandan police have claimed that gay rights campaigner David Kato was killed by a man he had arranged to pay for sex. Mr Kato, who was recently outed by a newspaper, was beaten to death with a hammer at his home last week. His fellow activists said they feared he had been killed in a homophobic attack and urged police to investigate his death fully. Police first said he had been killed in a robbery but yesterday they claimed that he was attacked by a a man he knew. Enock Nsubuga, who was described by police as a “well-known thief”, was arrested this week at his girlfriend’s house. Police say that Mr Kato bailed Mr Nsubuga out of prison in late January and that the suspect had been staying at his house. Inspector General Kale Kayihura, told reporters yesterday: “According to the suspect he negotiated with the deceased to be paid money as he was to be used as a sexual partner.” He added that Mr Kato refused to pay the money after the pair had sex. “The following day Nsubuga confesses that he picked a hammer from the bathroom and hit him on the head,” Kayihura claimed. “There is nothing concrete to suggest that Nsubuga was motivated by hate, although we are not dismissing it.” Mr Kato had received death threats after successfully suing a newspaper for publishing his name, address and photo in an anti-gay campaign. He was buried last week, although his funeral was disrupted when the pastor began urging gays to repent.

i don't think it's ever going to be done here in the Philippines.  can't even get the church to accept condom use.

i agree with the decision not to allow sites eshow sexually explicit adverts.  but that's just me.