The latest installment in the Civitas Institute Agenda “20 Changes for 2010: A Primer for State Reform” focuses on strengthening state marriage laws in North Carolina. I recommend echoing the two-thirds of North Carolina voters who support passing a constitutional amendment and declare that marriage is defined as one man and one woman.
A Defense of Marriage Act would allow North Carolina voters to amend the state constitution to include the definition of marriage as solely between a man and a woman. If approved by voters, a constitutional amendment would strengthen already existing state marriage laws and not allow activist courts and legislatures to alter the definition of marriage.
Where should Obama look for his high-speed rail revival? No further than the Acela rail services along Amtrak’s Northeast Corridor-that is, according to Christian Wolmar of the NYTimes. Connecting Washington DC and Boston, the tracks offer the best “test case” for Obama to demonstrate high speed rail efficiency. Here are some highlights of the article:
The 450-mile trip from Boston to Washington takes almost seven hours and averages just 71 miles per hour, hardly faster than by car and uncompetitive with air.
How can Acela be improved without building an entirely new system? Money is needed to improve the overhead electric wires, straighten out curves and upgrade the track. And more trains are needed to increase trip frequency, reduce overcrowding and offer flexibility.
Basically, trains require money to run, not people and certainly not demand. Who’s money? Ours-the people not riding the train but paying for it.
That’s what some researchers are saying. Mitchell Hartman of NPR reports on a recent study from the non-hereditary Marketplace Entrepreneurship Desk at Oregon Public Broadcasting. If there is a genetic link to the start-up lifestyle, more than just entrepreneurs are interested. Here is a highlight of the report:
Knowing which genes encourage entrepreneurship, and who has them, could help educators design better programs to spur business-creation. It could even help venture capitalists pick whose startup to fund, though there’s no guarantee the genes actually lead to success.
Still, many researchers doubt we’ll ever be able to pinpoint exactly what role environment and genes play in raising up entrepreneurs.
Complaints about voter fraud at UNC-Chapel Hill continued over the weekend. Taylor Holgate filed her second complaint with the Student Supreme Court last Saturday to seek a re-vote in Student Congress District 5-Greek housing. According to the Daily Tar Heel,
As many as 296 students could have had problems voting in the student body election Feb. 9 because of incorrect class or residential information.
The Tar Heel junior lost her race by only 25 votes, which she claims could be the result of technical problems. But UNC’s own “Greek Tragedy” may not conclude for another few weeks as the Student Supreme Court agreed Sunday to hear the case after Spring Break.
Many UNC students support Holgate’s efforts saying they deserve representatives elected by a fair system, according to the campus newspaper. You can check out the list of court documents here and follow the case at dailytarheel.com.
Robert Rector of the NRO takes aim at the left’s response to the recent findings of abstinence-based sex education. Here are a few highlights of his article:
You can bet that anyone who pontificates about “moralistic overtones” in abstinence education has never held an actual abstinence curriculum in his hands, let alone read one.
Second, abstinence curricula teach that sex should be linked to “love, intimacy, and commitment” and that these qualities are most likely to be found in marriage.
The recent revelation that abstinence-based sex education programs actually work has left many with questions about what we are teaching our children. I am confident that we will hear much more of the left’s scrambling ”new take” on abstinence-based education.
A recent decision by the Wake County board of commissioners will affect abortion coverage for county employees. The N&O does an excellent job explaining the changes, be sure to read full story here.
Conservative pundit Mary Katharine Ham recently addressed a crowd of 50 people at Meredith College. Her topic: “NeW Wave Feminism: Girl Power without Government.” Hosted by the NC chapters of the Network of enlightened Women, her talk came mere hours after Apple’s release of the “IPad” and just before the President’s State of the Union. Talk about timing.
Be sure to watch MKH’s interesting perspective on all things women, conservative and SOTU.
The recently effective HB 9, “No Texting While Driving”, is not enough regulation for the city of Chapel Hill. The Chapel Hill Town Council is considering banning the use of cell phones, or any handheld devices, while driving. Council member Penny Rich told WRAL; “banning cell phone use while driving would improve safety on the road.”
Hmm… sounds to me like this is just another case of the nanny-state. Being that town councils are now concerned with regulating behavior instead of actually changing bad habits, I wonder what is next? Will drivers be banned from changing CDs or radio stations while driving? That seems the logical next step.
Our very own UNC-Chapel Hill was highlighted in the NYT over the weekend discussing how the college gender gap affects more than just academia. The article, “The New Math on Campus,” looked into the social ramifications of a non-traditional male/female ratio, specifically how it effects college dating and relationships.
“University of North Carolina-Chapel Hill, with a student body that is nearly 60 percent female, is just one of many large universities that at times feel eerily like women’s colleges.
Needless to say, this puts guys in a position to play the field, and tends to mean that even the ones willing to make a commitment come with storied romantic histories.”
The article sheds light on the overlooked situation most college men and women regularly face: there are more women than men in the classroom, the graduating class and now, the social scene.
According to a recent report by the American Council on Education, women have represented about 57 percent of enrollment in colleges since 2000. The increase of women on campuses is significant to note as women only began attending college in the late 19th Century. But today, women outnumber men and such a population change is sure to bring social ramifications. While understanding the full effect, if any, the lop-sided male/female ratio is having on the dating culture is far from conclusive. What we do know is women on gender-imbalanced campuses are sacrificing values for an encounter with the disappearing male- and these consequences should not be overlooked.
“Tim Tebow is one of the better things to happen to young women in some time” states Sally
Jenkins, a pro-choice woman, of the Washington Post. In the face of resourceful feminists who spent the last two weeks declaring the exact opposite, Jenkin’s article, “Tebow’s Super Bowl ad isn’t intolerant; its critics are,” does the unthinkable: defend Pam Tebow’s right to choose and Timmy’s right to publicly share his mother’s choice.
By now we are all familiar with the details of the “Tebow- CBS- Modern Feminists Are Crazy” debate which captured our attention last week when NOW and the Women’s Media Center mounted a full frontal attack against the yet-to-be-viewed 30-second Super Bowl ad. But as Jenkin’s points out:
“The National Organization for Women Who Only Think Like Us” has revealed something important about themselves: They aren’t actually “pro-choice” so much as they are pro-abortion.
NOW is not only wrong to attack Tebow’s ad but I am offended that NOW has become the de-facto voice for women. NOW is suppose to speak for all women, but it is completely out of touch with what women actually want. Women want freedom to express their life choices. Pam Tebow fully exercised her choice and we should celebrate her story. America is thrilled with the birth of her record-breaking, scripture wearing, gator chompin son and so should groups who allegedly “speak for women”.
NOW should take a cue from the public support for Tebow: other issues warrant more controversy than a 30-second ad celebrating family. Last I checked, women are still starving, female entrepreneurs are being shut down by their nanny-states and barely there bikinis walk around advertising the latest brew. Where were NOW’s resources on these issues this past week?
Jenkin’s correctly asserts that the Super Bowl is not a reality-free escape zone that is untouchable by advocacy ads. Instead, the Super Bowl celebrates the game of football, and what comes along with football? Players. Athletes who were born from mothers who wrestled with pregnancy, disease and an extra 30 pounds to give birth to the next generation’s role models. Since NOW wants to take issue with the best role model our kids have today, I would like to see who they recommend. On second thought, no thank you.