The NFL on Wednesday said it would investigate a report that at least one team at the scouting combine asked a draft prospect about his sexual orientation.Those are nice words from the NFL, but the problem is the willful ignorance and likely ignoring at the top. Five will get you ten this is not the first time this has happened and that there are people high up in the league who probably know this type of questioning is going on. Why would the league ignore it? I can think of one big and stupid reason: Football is a macho man's sport and there's no room in it for sissies (i.e, gays).
Colorado tight end Nick Kasa told ESPN Radio Denver on Tuesday that he was asked a series of questions that touched on sexual orientation at the just-completed combine in Indianapolis.
"[Teams] ask you like, 'Do you have a girlfriend?' 'Are you married?' 'Do you like girls?' " Kasa said in the radio interview. "Those kinds of things, and you know it was just kind of weird. But they would ask you with a straight face, and it's a pretty weird experience altogether."
In the statement announcing it would check into Kasa's claim, the NFL said "teams are expected to follow applicable federal, state and local employment laws."
"It is league policy to neither consider nor inquire about sexual orientation in the hiring process. In addition, there are specific protections in our collective bargaining agreement with the players that prohibit discrimination against any player, including on the basis of sexual orientation," the league said. "We will look into the report on the questioning of Nick Kasa at the scouting combine. Any team or employee that inquires about impermissible subjects or makes an employment decision based on such factors is subject to league discipline."
NFL Players Association executive director DeMaurice Smith addressed the league's promised investigation in a statement Tuesday to USA Today Sports.
"I know that the NFL agrees that these types of questions violate the law, our CBA and player rights," Smith said. "I hope that they will seek out information as to what teams have engaged in this type of discrimination and we should then discuss appropriate discipline."
The Liberal Party is awake to the danger of losing its ACT seat and consistently spends its local advertising budget on Senate ads. The ACT is the only jurisdiction where one of the major parties devotes its advertising budget to a Senate contest. The graph above indicates the Liberal Party has been successful in convincing its supporters not to split their vote. The decision of Family First and the Christian Democrats not to contest recent ACT elections also helps the Liberal Party keep its vote above a quota.Personally I'd prefer 2 Labor senators, but if shutting out the LNP means electing one Labor and one Green, I guess that's better than nothing.
While the Greens continue to talk up their chances of winning the second ACT Senate seat, this is only possible if the Liberal vote falls below 33.3%. While the Liberal vote has fallen at the last two election, that has been in line with national trends. The Greens vote has increased, and Labor has continued to deliver the Greens preferences, but that will not deliver victory in the ACT Senate unless there is a further fall in Liberal vote at the 2013 election.
It may be that local issues surrounding possible public service cuts under a Coalition government could bite in Canberra. However, it would unusual for the Liberal vote to fall to a record low level at the same time as it is increasing in the rest of the country.
While the Liberal Party losing its ACT Senate seat is unlikely, it is a possibility the party has to avoid. Losing the ACT Senate seat would greatly complicate the Senate position of a new Coalition government.
If Mr Seselja goes ahead with his challenge to Senator Humphries, you can expect to hear much about each candidate's level of personal support, Senator Humphries at past election, Mr Seselja at the ACT election last October.
The board of trustees of Pflugerville ISD made history in December 2012 with a 5-1 vote, becoming the first school district in Texas to offer health benefits for domestic partners.Here's the kicker though:
“I think the money we give to educate our kids should go to the kids and not trying to expand social benefits that we decided in 2005 was unconstitutional,” Springer said Thursday, referring to the Defense of Marriage Act of 2005, which defined marriage in the Texas Constitution as between one man and one woman. "We're not taking away all the funding, just the 7.5 percent that goes to the health benefit plan."
Opponents of Springer’s bill argue that it mischaracterizes the school's health plan policy. “No tax dollars are being used,” said Chuck Smith, president of Equality Texas, an LGBT lobbying group. Smith said that no money is taken from funding the classroom, but rather the policy “allows access to the benefit plan, but the employee still pays the premium.”Just as an aside, Rep. Springer comes from that bustling metropolis of Muenster, TX. Never heard of it? That's understandable. As of the 2010 Census it counted 1,544 people in its population. Just as an FYI, the 2011-2012 enrollment figures for Pflugerville ISD listed 3 schools that had a larger student body than Muenster had people: Pflugerville HS, 2,293; Hendrickson HS, 2,291; John Connally HS, 2,008. Another 3 schools had nearly the same student population as Muenster: Kelly Lane MS, 1,153; Pflugerville MS, 1,039; Dessau MS, 1,019. Altogether Pflugerville ISD has 23,287 students.
"It’s yet another legislative overreach, and it seeks to undermine local control,” Smith said of Springer's bill.
A Perth university student's pun-ridden online petition against tax on tampons has attracted almost 40,000 supporters.While the petition and it's puns are no doubt funny, the student does make a good point:
Sophie Liley from the Women's Department of the University of Western Australia's student guild created the petition earlier this month.
Other essential items and services, such as basic food, water, education, child care and health are exempt from GST, but tampons and sanitary pads attract the 10 per cent charge as part of the goods and services tax, introduced in 2000.
The petition claims there's "no womb in society for a tampon tax," that the tax was "cramping my style" and the tax is described as a "bloody outrage," "a stain on our national image" and a "bleeding disgrace."
While Ms Liley has taken a humorous approach to the matter, a letter addressed to Prime Minister Julia Gillard, Opposition Leader Tony Abbott and other politicians makes some serious points.Now there is a female condom, but 5 will get you 10, it's probably not used to the extent that regular male condoms are. And how many people actually think the tax free condoms are female condoms versus those used by males? Having said that, if you can classify condoms as "essential health products", how can you not say the same for tampons?
"Charging women as a direct result of their basic biology is hugely and fundamentally sexist - especially given that condoms are classified as GST-free essential health products while sanitary items are not," the letter stated.
