What's the frequency, Colorado?

[LadyShea]

Parents always know best about everything doncha know

[Janet]

Monday night was spaghetti night at our house. If it's good enough for us, it's good enough for Colorado! Make it so.

[Stephen Maturin]

Originally Posted by LadyShea

Parents always know best about everything doncha know

Damned straight! And, as always, the rights of the frightened and chronically ill-informed trump everything.

Originally Posted by Janet

If it's good enough for us, it's good enough for Colorado!

I suspect that's true of all your family's customs, Janet. Please put together a comprehensive list and email it to the Colorado Senate Republicans.

[Dingfod]

Funny, it was in Colorado where the sheriff overruled the Jehovah's Witness parents next door to us when they refused to allow an ambulance to take their daughter to the hospital after she had been shot in the back of the head by a shotgun. I believe the sheriff was so angry at their actions that would have used lethal force on the parents if necessary.

[lisarea]

I'm not happy about weird vaccine alarmism, but I'm also not happy with religious doctrine and croakers being the sole gatekeepers of exemptions.

[LadyShea]

There is a real discussion to be had on that pea. I did a lot of research, I didn't take vaccines lightly. But, I noted I have to sign a consent form every time, but if I didn't consent then what? We don't have a personal conscience exemption here, religious or medical only. That's not right.

[godfry n. glad]

Originally Posted by LadyShea

There is a real discussion to be had on that pea. I did a lot of research, I didn't take vaccines lightly. But, I noted I have to sign a consent form every time, but if I didn't consent then what? We don't have a personal conscience exemption here, religious or medical only. That's not right.

The consent form must be for some kind of state or institutional requirement, because the federal government does not require consent, informed or otherwise, for immunizations. Beyond that, the vaccine manufacturers and those who administer the vaccine are not liable should any adverse event occur in the wake of an immunization.

So...I'm not sure why the feds have not outfitted some CDC units with air guns and vaccine darts to go anti-vaxxer hunting. I mean...really...nobody is liable for anything, and it could be fun as well as socially redeeming. I'd say they should start with Marin County, California.

ETA: Aw, cheeze...Evidently, the vaccinated are to be handed the VIS (Vaccine Information Statement) prior to their vaccination and allowed an opportunity to ask questions of the person doing the vaccination. That's gonna crimp the hunt.

[Stephen Maturin]

It's a depressing time for political reporting here in lolorado. Eli Stokols is leaving Denver's Fox affiliate at the end of the month for a jerb in D.C. covering the 2016 presidential race for Politico. Stokols is one of a very few reporters anywhere in the state who actually investigated political stories. The vast majority of his compatriots vacuously accept the party line with smiles on their faces, songs in their hearts and vast empty spaces between their ears. Of the few actual journalists of the lot, Stokols is by far the most skilled investigator. Dude actually made the website of the local Fox affiliate the place to go for in-depth political investigation and analysis.

Well, we still have the lazy, don't-make-waves political knob gobblers at the Denver Post, so I'm sure everything will be just fine.

[lisarea]

Horrific attack on pregnant woman prompts debate over Colorado’s fetal homicide laws - The Washington Post

I knew these personhood botherers were going to get all opportunistic about this, but I was still hoping they'd find the decency not to. They sit around waiting for late-term fetuses to die violently so they can stand on street corners looking smug, trying to get support for the next iteration of their ridiculous eggmendment.

Look at them. Look how smug they look. They're happy right now.

Fucking ghouls.

[Stephen Maturin]

As Dingfod reported here, far right religious psycho Gordon Klingenschmitt managed to get himself elected to the Colorado House of Representatives last November. Ol' Gordo, never one to pull punches (or act as though he possesses even a modicum of sanity, for that matter), took to the airwaves on Wednesday to blame the savage attack about which Lisa reported on our toleration of abortion:

On his "Pray In Jesus Name" program today, Klingenschmitt discussed the story and tied it to a passage from Hosea in which God curses the people of Samaria for their rebellion by declaring that "their little ones shall be dashed in pieces, and their pregnant women ripped open."

"I wonder if there is prophetic significance to America today in that scripture," he said. "This is the curse of God upon America for our sin of not protecting innocent children in the womb and part of that curse for our rebellion against God as a nation is that our pregnant women are ripped open."

Remember how the religiously insane told us that satellite photos of Hurricane Katrina resembled ultrasounds of a fetus, therefore Katrina was God's punishment for abortion? Yeah, well, your god's a knob, Gordo.

Klingenschmitt's remarks are causing soiled underwear throughout the Republican caucus:

"We don't want it representing the other members of this caucus and the Republican party at large across the state," said assistant house minority leader Polly Lawrence, who added that the leadership doesn't have many options to punish Klingenschmitt because he's a duly elected member of the house.

Sorry, Polly, but that's a no-go. The GOP spent decades courting lunatics like Klingenschmitt. It's a little late for dissociation now. You can't intentionally drag crazy people into your tent and then claim that they aren't True Republicans when act entirely in-character.

[Stephen Maturin]

Rep. Brian DelGrosso, the Colorado House Minority Leader, has removed right wing religious crazy Gordon Klingenschmitt from the House Health, Insurance and Environment Committee for saying that God is "ripp[ing] open" our pregnant women as a punishment for abortion. DelGrosso said that "there needed to be some kind of disciplinary action" and that taking away committee assignments "is one of the few tools I have in my toolbox[.]"

Republicans around the state are scrambling to condemn Klingenschmitt's comments. Of course, condemnation doesn't necessarily mean disagreement. I suspect a lot of these GOP assholes agree wholeheartedly with ol' Gordo but are upset that he was so public with his truth-telling. Kinda like how Scientologists get all bent out of shape when members talk Xenu in public.

And then there's Republican Rep. Justin Everett, who took to the podium yesterday to condemn DelGrosso for taking away Gordo's committee assignment:

Justin Everett Defends Dr. Chaps - YouTube

The issue might be a bit personal for Everett. Last year DelGrosso removed Everett from two committees. Seems Everett was something of a train wreck as a legislator. At the time of his removal, Everett had more absences than all other House members combined. When he did show up, he was habitually late. He was photographed sleeping in multiple committee meetings, and when he managed to stay awake he was completely unprepared. After all, the best government is no government at all.

[Stephen Maturin]

The ghastly Duggar family is coming to the right-wing religious crazy shitshow known as the Rocky Mountain Super Conference on the Family, being held this year at the ever-so-special Denver Merchandise Mart ().

So far as I can tell, there's no official word on whether eldest Duggar spawn Josh will be attending, what with the recent revelations of molestation and godly cover-ups. I suppose the Duggars need to amend their grifting practices now that sponsors of their abominable teevee show are bailing and TLC has suspended all further broadcasts.

[BrotherMan]

This just proves how hard it is to be a decent God fearing Christian in America today. GUYS. HE PRAYED ABOUT IT AND WAS FORGIVEN. Why are you making such a big deal about it? Why do YOU want to ruin HIS life?

[Stephen Maturin]

Srsly. Have we really learned NOTHING from our appalling mistreatment of Jimmy Swaggart?

[Stephen Maturin]

The Duggars aren't coming to that lolorado homeschoolers conference after all. They're staying away due to “recent and increased attacks and pressure on the family.”

Way to go, ya knobs. Dude molests some young girls, including his own sisters, parents cover it up multiple times in Jesus' name, and you pee see shitheads get all bent outta shape.

[ChuckF]

Originally Posted by Stephen Maturin

They're staying away due to “recent and increased attacks and pressure on the family.”

oh god did somebody sexually molest their children or something, that sounds awful

[Stephen Maturin]

Originally Posted by Stephen Maturin

Mr. Coats' lawyer and I sat down on Friday to discuss some of the ins and outs of oral argument in an appellate court. (He'd never done one before.) The argument before the Colorado Supreme Court happened on Tuesday and went pretty well. Oral argument isn't much of an indicator about how a case is going to turn out, but it's encouraging just the same.

One of the issues in the case is whether medical marijuana use was "lawful" in Colorado at the time DISH fired Mr. Coats. DISH's position is that use wasn't fully lawful because the applicable constitutional amendment merely provides that compliance with the medical marijuana regs simply creates an affirmative defense to a criminal prosecution for use or possession. Justice Nathan Coats (no relation to Brandon) asked DISH's lawyer whether that means a murder that was fully justified under the affirmative defense of self-defense was unlawful. She immediately answered, "Yes." The video in the above-linked article doesn't show it, but I hear-tell a couple of the justices laughed in a "wow, that's totally fucking stupid" sort of way.

And the news is bad, I'm sorry to say. On Monday the Colorado Supreme Court held that DISH was within its rights to fire Coats for his strictly off-the-job medicinal use of marijuana. The Court held (6-0, with one recusal) that Mr. Coats' marijuana use was not a "lawful activity" for purposes of the above-cited state statute because the activity, though allowed under state law, is prohibited by federal law. The author of the opinion is a former law clerk for Clarence Thomas, a former speechwriter for obnoxious finger-wagging glutton William Bennett, and a true believer with regard to textualism.

I've got an email in to our state rep about the possibility of getting the Supreme Court's ruling overturned legislatively. Issues such as this aren't really in Dianne's wheelhouse -- insurance and health care access are her main interests -- but next year's legislative session will be her last (fucking term limits) so there won't be much of a political cost to pay for supporting an amendment to the lawful activities statute.

[BrotherMan]

That's feels like an odd hair to split. I mean, I figured it would come down to a company can hire or not regardless of the legality of the vice in question. I mean, companies likely release employees for alcohol abuse even though being an alcoholic is legal. (Setting aside the issue of determining if consuming X is impacting the ability of the employee to perform on the job.)

[Stephen Maturin]

Cynthia Coffman, spouse of roaring wingnut asshole Congressman Mike Coffman, got herself elected as lolorado's Attorney General last year. Getting elected to office in a statewide race is an impressive accomplishment, and lots of Republicans were just plain giddy over the prospect of running Ms. Coffman for governor in 2018 or even for U.S. Senator next year.

Yeah, well, that shit's over.

A few months back a dude named Steve House took over as chairman of the Colorado Republican Party. Coffman was quite vocal in her support of House's candidacy for that job.

House was summoned to a meeting with the AG on Monday night. When he arrived Coffman was there along with Pueblo County Republican Party Chair Becky Mizel and draft-dodging, Mexican-hating wingnut ex-Congressman Tom Tancredo. The group informed House that they were upset over House's decision not to hire former state senator Ted Harvey as the state party's executive director. The group told House that he must resign or face a lawsuit and public dissemination of marital infidelity rumors.

After initially telling Coffman in a post-meeting text message that he'd resign, House publicly told the Gang of Three to go fuck themselves. House describes the meeting here.

Coffman has now shown every Republican in the state that she can't be trusted and made an enemy of the state party chair. So let's have a moment of silence, if you please, for the future political career of Cynthia Coffman, the Salvatore Tessio of the Colorado Republican Party.

show spoiler

[Dingfod]

Abe Vigoda is alive and well and living in Colorado?

[Stephen Maturin]

A couple of dipshits who are in no way, shape or form butthurt over the recent U.S. Supreme Court decision regarding same-sex marriage have proposed a couple of ballot initiatives here in Lolorado. A proposed amendment to the state constitution would redefine all same-sex marriages (prospectively and retroactively alike) as civil unions. That is brilliant since, as everyone knows, (1) separate but equal has an impeccable pedigree in this here country, and (2) states have full authority to override federal constitutional protections within their own sacred sovereign territory.

My favorite part is the declaration that marriage is a "form of religious expression" and the state cannot regulate civil marriage in any way that "implicitly or explicitly defines a marriage in opposition or agreement with any particular religious belief." So marriage is a form of religious expression that cannot be defined in terms of religious belief. The derp is boundless.

A proposed statutory change would allow businesses opposed to same-sex marriage to provide services to same-sex couples through contractors, and would require the state to maintain a list of businesses willing to serve LBGT couples. Special snowflakes sighted.

If we're going to have a list like that, we should also get a state-maintained list of anti-LBGT businesses for name-and-shame/boycott purposes.

------------

Last week the Colorado Supreme Court held (4-3) that a publicly-funded school voucher program adopted by the Douglas County School District was invalid. Three justices agreed that the program violated a provision of the state constitution forbidding use of public funds to support church or sectarian schools. The fourth justice in the majority determined (contrary to all six of the other justices) that the plaintiffs had standing to challenge the program under the state's Public School Finance Act, that the voucher program violated the Act, and that there was no need to decide the constitutional issue.

The School Board plans to seek relief in the U.S. Supreme Court with "help from the 'top legal minds in the United States.'" The idea is that state constitutional provisions like Colorado's violate the federal constitution because they're based on animus against Catholicism.

[Ari]

Yes sir we will absolutely serve you our finest dining available... but you'll have to sit over here.
-Why?
Dave says so and I always do what Dave says.
-Well can I talk to Dave?
Oh Sorry, Dave's not here man, he lives in Denver.
-He must own the business then!?
Oh god no! Dave hates diner food and would never set foot in here.
-So why do I have to sit in the basement again?
Dave says he doesn't like the thought of you sitting on chairs upstairs and it might give him an aneurism if he knew about it. He think about your butt rubbing on chairs a lot.

[ChuckF]

Originally Posted by Stephen Maturin

A couple of dipshits who are in no way, shape or form butthurt over the recent U.S. Supreme Court decision regarding same-sex marriage have proposed a couple of ballot initiatives here in Lolorado. A proposed amendment to the state constitution would redefine all same-sex marriages (prospectively and retroactively alike) as civil unions. That is brilliant since, as everyone knows, (1) separate but equal has an impeccable pedigree in this here country, and (2) states have full authority to override federal constitutional protections within their own sacred sovereign territory.

loooool, because Colorado has had a lot of success with (2) in the past. The gentle and satisfying irony is that Obergefell is a linear descendant of Romer, so in a sense same-sex marriage is a thing because of an incoherent homophobic Colorado ballot initiative. So thanks for the assist, lolorado!

Also, the stars came out to draft this bad boy!

A marriage is recognized as a form of religious expression of the people of Colorado that shall not be abridged through the state prescribing or recognizing any law that implicitly or explicitly defines a marriage in opposition or agreement with any particular religious belief.

Let's break it down:

A marriage

A marriage? One marriage? Which one? Whose? If WORDS HAVE ANY MEANING, this must be referring to exactly one marriage, right? Does anybody know which one? Is that written down somewhere?

is recognized

Recognized by whom? For what purpose?

as a form of religious expression

Whoa! That one marriage that is recognized by somebody for some reason is a form of religious expression for somebody, somewhere, maybe.

of the people of Colorado

One marriage is a form of religious expression of all of the people of Colorado? Like, the people of Colorado got together and expressed their religion in the form of the marriage of two unspecified people? When did that happen? Do the people of Colorado typically do that kind of thing as a people?

that shall not be abridged

What's the antecedent here? The form of religious expression shall not be abridged? Or the religious expression itself (because obviously the marriage is not the same thing as the religious expression - it is a form of the religious expression)? Can a form be abridged? How can the religious expression be abridged - it has already been expressed in the form of a marriage!

through the state

Hm, interesting. What about all of the government entities operating in Colorado that aren't the "state"? See, e.g. Colo. Const. Art 2. sec. 30b (1992) (distinguishing between the State of Colorado, through any of its branches or departments" and " . . . agencies, political subdivisions, municipalities or school districts.”) See also King v. Burwell, 576 U. S. ____ 1 (2015) (Scalia, J., dissenting (distinguishing "the State" from governmental entities other than “the State”.)

prescribing or recognizing any law

Sneaky, sneaky! BUT WHAT ABOUT GOD’S LAW.

that implicitly or explicitly defines a marriage

el oh el what does this even mean. "Implicitly . . . defines a marriage?"

in opposition or agreement with

I’m with you here - a marriage (somebody’s somewhere, I guess) can’t be implicitly defined in opposition or in agreement with a religious belief. Just so we’re clear that interfaith marriage is off the table here. Or any kind of marriage that conflicts with any religious belief.

any particular religious belief.

Any religious belief?

[Stephen Maturin]

Originally Posted by ChuckF

Any religious belief?

Finding a marriage provision that doesn't "implicitly or explicitly" oppose or agree with "any particular religious belief" is gonna be a tall fucking order. Maybe the authors of this scatterbrained nonsense are trying to go all Rand Paul/[quote henry] and get government out of the marriage business entirely. If so, it'd be nice if they came right out and said so.

And here's an interesting factoid. One of the proponents of these ballot initiatives is a Lolorado patent lawyer named D'Arcy Straub. In 2011 a group of state legislators and others filed suit in federal court challenging a voter-approved Colorado constitutional provision known as the Taxpayer Bill of Rights (TABOR). One of the substantive issues is whether TABOR violates the Guarantee Clause in the U.S. Constitution and the Colorado Statehood Act by depriving Lolorado of a "republican form of government."

The case has been bouncing around the federal system for years with no consideration of the merits. The only issues addressed thus far is whether the plaintiffs have standing to challenge TABOR. The Supreme Court recently sent the case back to the court of appeals for further reconsideration.

Lulzily enough, back in 2013, Straub filed an amicus brief on the TABOR case in the 10th Circuit. Dudebro advised the court that:

The unchecked power of direct democracy, which supports citizen-initiated state constitutional amendments (“citizen initiatives”), functions as an anti-republican form of government that threatens government stability and individual liberties.

So then, apparently direct democracy/citizen-initiated amendments to state constitutions are an abomination when it comes to taxation but A-OK when it comes to civil rights for fgts.

[ChuckF]

Originally Posted by Stephen Maturin

Lulzily enough, back in 2013, Straub filed an amicus brief on the TABOR case in the 10th Circuit. Dudebro advised the court that:

So then, apparently direct democracy/citizen-initiated amendments to state constitutions are an abomination when it comes to taxation but A-OK when it comes to civil rights for fgts.

Apples and oranges, counselor!

But if the electorate believes that limiting one’s taxes through a popular vote is a good idea, then the possibility exists that the electorate will one day realize that an even better tax policy is to lower the taxes of the majority while raising the taxes of an identifiable and vulnerable minority group, most obviously the top-income earners.

We're talking about same sex couples here, not an identifiable and vulnerable minority group like the top 1% of income earners, for example.