johnnyhacker2600Owner DEVILSPARIDISE's blog: "black ice porn!"

Lawyers for Patrick Kennedy, a Louisiana man who received a death sentence for raping a child has petitioned the U.S. Supreme Court to have his case heard before the justices. Kennedy's legal team wants the court to declare Louisiana's law allowing the death penalty for child rape unconstitutional. The petition asks the court to consider whether the Eighth Amendment's Cruel and Unusual Punishment clause permits a state to impose the death penalty for child rape - a punishment usually reserved for those convicted of murder. If this is the case, Kennedy's attorneys ask a second question: Does Louisiana's capital rape statute violates the Eighth Amendment because it does not set clear guidelines for juries as to who is eligible for the death penalty? There has not been an execution for rape in the United States since 1964, and no one has been executed for such a crime since the death penalty was reinstated in 1976. Lawyers have petitioned the Supreme Court before (1997) over Louisiana's child rape death penalty law. The court declined to hear the case, resulting in three of the justices - John Paul Stevens, Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Stephen Breyer - releasing a statement that indicated they had reservations about the law. During the twentieth century, there were at least 14 States found to have had death penalties for the crime of rape: Alabama, Arkansas, Delaware, Georgia, Kentucky (if under age of 12), Louisiana, Maryland, Mississippi, Missouri, South Carolina, Tennessee (if under age of 18), Texas, Virginia, and West Virginia. There were also a number of State statutes that called for life imprisonment in lieu of death. Whatever reservations these three justices may care to drum up, they cannot argue such laws are “unusual” in regards to punishment by death for rape. The issue is not strictly confined to Louisiana as Texas recently joined six other states (Florida, Louisiana, Montana, Georgia, South Carolina and Oklahoma) with statutes allowing for the death penalty for the rape of a child. So what does the Eighth Amendment under the United States Constitution have to do with State guidelines of capital punishment or even methods of execution? Amazingly, nothing at all. Why do we find the words “cruel and unusual punishment” under the Eighth Amendment? The answer is simply because Congress was empowered to declare punishment for acts of treason, leading to the desire to have a precaution against mimicking England’s own shocking punishments for treason. Blackstone described England’s punishment for treason as “very solemn and terrible.” How terrible? The guilty could first be hanged, to then be disemboweled, even if still alive. The head was then cut off and body carved up in four parts for the king to dispose. In some cases, one could be burned alive. It should be noted the Eighth Amendment has nothing to do with torture but only with punishment. Torture is not used for punishment, but for obtaining confessions (witness against oneself) or information. The Fifth Amendment's no person "shall be compelled (tortured) in any criminal case to be a witness against himself" specifically addresses torture. Many States adopted their own form of the U.S. Constitution’s Eighth Amendment because they too had their own laws for treason against the State. State courts and legislatures had since the beginning voided many kinds of punishments as a violation under the States own Eighth Amendment, whether dealing with cruel punishments or excessive fines. Following the adoption of the Fourteenth Amendment, the court in Kemmler (136 U.S. 436) unanimously held the Eighth Amendment under the United States Constitution in no way restrained the States. There is a very good reason why this is so. The Fourteenth Amendment is not about federal meddling in the administration of justice within any State, nor is it about forcing federal limitations or norms of justice upon the States. The Fourteenth Amendment is all about redress for the “willful and corrupt” (Bingham’s words) denial or unequal application of State laws in the administration of justice for life, liberty, and property by either the State executive officer or courts. One might protest by pointing out the Fourteenth’s first section primary author, John Bingham, proclaimed three years after its adoption that the first eight amendments were never a limitation upon the States until made so by the Fourteenth Amendment. Many conveniently ignore the fact that he also made clear he was only speaking of the privileges and immunities of United States citizens as distinguished from citizens of a State. He also made clear that if the first eight amendments were to be applicable against the States, it was through the privileges and immunities of United States citizens - not due process. The distinction between citizens of the United States, and citizens of a State was well known and understood in 1866, yet Mr. Bingham settled upon the language “citizens of the United States.” He later declared in January of 1871 (House Report No. 22) that the Fourteenth Amendment neither changed nor modified the relationship between citizens of a State, and citizens of the United States. In other words, citizens of the States under the Fourteenth Amendment were left exclusively under the protection and laws of the States, and no jurisdiction over matters of administering State laws were surrendered. If this were to be the purpose of the amendment, then all the coercion in the world by radical Republicans would have lead to no more than four States at best ratifying such an amendment. All Bingham did, as he explained in March of 1871, was imitate Article I, Section 10. Did Congress or the court ever use anything under Article I, Section 10 as a pretext for new expansive federal powers over the States? No because like the Fourteenth’s first section, merely imposed a limitation upon the States directly, that is, "a law unto itself." It gave the federal judiciary no direct jurisdiction or legislative powers over State enactments that did not clearly touch upon any of the provisions prohibited to the States. After all, Bingham did state over and over that the Fourteenth Amendment did not change anything in regards to existing rights belonging to the States or the citizens of a State. Citizens have an inviolable right to enact whatever laws they deem fit for their security, and to punish offenders of their laws. What might constitute cruel and unusual punishment in the ordinary course of imprisoning convicts, or in executing them, only the political societies of the States can judge. The only thing that can be said the Fourteenth Amendment does indeed prohibit in regards to capital punishment - and indeed, any punishments for that matter - is whatever punishments that may be authorized, they must be equally applicable to all, i.e., no caste laws of punishment. Whatever one might think in regards to the death penalty for rape under State statutes, one thing is certain: The Fourteenth Amendment does not give the federal judiciary any jurisdiction under any pretense to sit in judgment over the validity of any State enacted statute any more than Article I, Section 10 had. The only remote jurisdiction the court could claim under the Fourteenth Amendment is in the event of a “willful and corrupt disregard” for the States own laws of due process - or when some State court decides white defendants will be spared execution while blacks will face death (unequal administration of laws). Until the Fourteenth Amendment is amended to allow for federal review of all State laws in terms of whether they are just and proper, meet federal judicial standards, or whether the law promotes some substantial state interest, the court is just kidding itself in unlawfully extending its jurisdiction where it has long been prohibited.

The Marin Family Service Agency. The Live Auction will feature a “fund a need” auction item where guests will be asked to contribute to fund the purchase of a new van for the agency. Family Service Agency’s van (nicknamed Greeny) transports child victims of domestic violence, and physical, emotional, and/or sexual abuse to the highly respected Childhood Trauma Program treatment services. These children from distressed homes would not be able to access treatment without the van. Marin Family Service Agency provides an invaluable to the Marin community. Some of its services include: Child, Adult and Family Counseling Substance Abuse Recovery Services Childhood Trauma Program The Jeannette Prandi Children’s Center Pregnancy and Early Parenting Program Suicide Prevention and Community Counseling For more information about Marin Family Service Agency and La Dolce Vita, visit www.fsamarin .org or ask me!

Hello sun sprouts! Ok, day 5 with no tea (zoomy tea) and I feel great. Finally made my way into the wheat grass hut. Yum/yuck, I drank it down and shot it up, (in the nether region) ZOINKS! Felt a difference almost instantly, it's actually quite refreshing... he he he... Why did I wait till wed? Stubborn! We fasted on Wednesday and though I thought I'd be hungry it was totally fine, well except for the emotional detox. I got cranky and my liver flared with a wee bit of anger and growls. Only one guest was injured. Thursday morning - colonic at 7am - HELLO! Though it was glorious, the downside of living on sprouts is the (how shall I say) GAS! Good lorrrd. Digestive enzymes certainly help. They're also really great when you're eating any cooked food. I take them daily without fail. But the best thing about yesterday was that I got to sit in with Anna Maria Clement and watch her do live blood analysis on the guests. REMARKABLE! There is no doubt in my mind that the terrain doesn't lie. Dairy, coffee, animal protein, sugar, drugs/chemicals - we saw it all. It inspired me like crazy. Today I get to shadow Brian Clement (the big cheese). Gotta run! Peace & Wheat grass! lmao

There are many trends today in the blogosphere. From "Bitch Blogs" to having cartoon women in your blog header, as well as many others. One such "trend" as it may be called by some is not in fact a trend at all, but an interesting societal statement. So-called "crazy blogs", coming from those with mental illnesses of every variety from manic depression to multiple personality disorder (MPD), seem to be popping up all over the place. How many times have you seen a blog themed with the blogger's own personal mental disorder? Are these people faking their illnesses because it is the trendy thing to do? Or is there more to these blogs than meets the eye? Interestingly, the National Mental Health Association (NMHA) reports these statistics: * More than 54 million Americans have a mental disorder in any given year, although fewer than 8 million seek treatment (SGRMH, 1999). * Depression and anxiety disorders - the two most common mental illnesses - each affect 19 million American adults annually (NIMH, 1999). * Approximately 12 million women in the United States experience depression every year - roughly twice the rate of men (NIMH, 1999). * One percent of the population (more than 2.5 million Americans) has schizophrenia (Schizophrenia Bulletin, 1998). * Bipolar disorder, also known as manic-depressive illness, affects more than 2 million Americans (NIMH, 2000). So it would stand to good reason that if 54 million Americans have mental illnesses, quite a few of them are going to be blogging about it. So if these illnesses are real, why are people so skeptical? I personally believe that when a person says they have a mental illness, immediately the person hearing that statement looks for "signs". Obviously, when a person has a physical illness, it is often noticeable to the naked eye - a broken limb, a cut or open wound, an amputation. When a person is mentally ill, often with brief meetings or over the internet, there are no such the person is speaking coherently, in complete sentences, without running through the town square shouting gibberish, we automatically assume the person to be "sane". But with the introduction of the internet and blogs - people who, if you lived with them on a daily basis, you would know that there is a serious mental health problem can actually "hide" their illness quite well over the internet. With the use of the backspace key, editing, and re-thinking what they write, people can appear to be whatever they want to be on the internet. And with the help of the right combinations of psychiatric medications and regular therapy, the person can appear to be quite normal to casual observers. So are these bloggers lying about their illness for readers, or because it is "trendy" to do so? Likely not. In fact, every single blogger I know who has a mental illness and posts about it in their blog has a serious illness which they and their families have to deal with and cope with on a daily basis. Most likely we only know the "face" that is presented to us, and not the person behind that public image. Mental illness of any kind is a problem that seriously affects not only the person with the illness, but their relatives, friends, spouses, and community. We should be helping them and being considerate of them - not judging them or excluding them. This entire post has been written by a diagnosed paranoid schizophrenic with borderline personality disorder, PTSD and clinical depression - all which I have had since I was 12 years old (except for the schizophrenia which it's onset was at age 20. I am currently 27 years old). I write pretty well for being "nuts", don't I? Would it surprise you to know that I have my own business where I make handmade candles and incense - so that I can earn a living but don't have to come in contact with the public? Would it surprise you to know that I'm a married woman, and my husband helps me deal as best as he can? Would it surprise you to know that you see people like me all the time, at the grocery store, in the bank, at the restaurant? Would it surprise you to know I have a blog...?

Every year at kinky sex camp, we create a multi-room erotic play-space for attendees, and for one night, each room has a theme. We like to keep things fresh, so we change up the themes every couple of years, but one never seems to go out of style: the Brothel. It's a modest space with eight stations, each with a bed, a little table, and a flimsy curtain separating it from the next bed, plus a back room with a double bed and a little more privacy (which costs more, natch). We have our own currency at the event (kundalini kash), which campers can win, earn, borrow, and eventually spend. There's a madam who recruits and organizes the whores, collects kash, matches clients with workers, and generally oversees the place. It's always the busiest room. People don't tire of the sex-for-money fantasy. Actually, there is no one fantasy, but multiple scenarios, dynamics, and roles possible within the brothel setting. I talked to a bunch of this year's whores (who included men, women, transfolk, and cross-dressers) about what they got out of their experiences. Some said they like being a whore because it's taboo, naughty, and transgressive; the fact that it's illegal prevents them from pursuing it in real life. For others, being a sex worker is a longtime fantasy, like Nikki, a newcomer to both the camp and the brothel: "Being paid for sex is an ongoing fantasy of mine. If I had had more confidence in my looks and body, and much less emotional baggage when I was still a young woman, I would have loved to have been a call girl or mistress in my real life." Nikki said she enjoyed the experience so much—with one client, she had her first orgasm ever in a position she usually can't come in—that she wants to do it again. Playing this role can trigger other turn-ons, like having sex with strangers, no strings attached, and no pretense of romance. Mr. G., a fortysomething straight guy from New York, told me: "It creates a 'container' for the experience of sex. We're both there for the same reason. There's a beginning and an end, and no confusion about our roles once they're negotiated." Pink Pet, another whore, agreed: "At a club or even a play party, there is usually a certain amount of small talk and flirting that takes place. Don't get me wrong—I love flirting, but I also love when that barrier is removed and you can get right to the lust. You can walk right up and suggest what scene you want to do. It's a way to cut to the chase." A sex-worker fantasy can also fulfill a desire to be used for sex, objectified, forced, pimped out, or made to perform. Many of the whores had pimps who collected their money or made them work. There are so many power dynamics to play with. "I am turned on by the power exchange involved," explained Ellie, a phone-sex operator in real life who's never done sex work with physical contact. "To some extent, the worker is fully in control of the sexual encounter and can create seemingly arbitrary boundaries or limits without being expected to explain them to a partner. On the other hand, the worker is acting in service to the client, and is expected to please and satisfy them. The tension between the dominant and submissive roles in these sorts of exchanges is interesting to me." Pink Pet found that the role gave him the opportunity to explore a particular side of himself: "I love the idea of being seen as a sex object or fetish object. That is a real turn-on for me. Being male-bodied, I'm often expected to make the first move. I'm genderqueer, and my sexuality is much more femme, so I often prefer to be propositioned, as opposed to making the proposition. In general, this doesn't usually work out. But being a whore allowed me to take on a more receptive role, a more traditionally female role. So I also liked that it helped me feel more like a girl and be accepted as a girl." Similarly, for one customer, it was a chance to be in control and ask for exactly what she wanted without ambivalence. Wendy Blackheart said: "My experience was fantastic, much better than I thought it would be. What was surprising to me was how quickly I was able to fall into the role of a demanding john, asking the house madam if she had any boys available to take care of my massive erection. I paid about $1,500 up-front for a lovely round of oral servicing. He worked my cock like a pro, the whole time exclaiming about how big it was, and I really got into the aggressive john-type verbal roleplay." Everyone I talked to felt safe—physically and emotionally—which was a big part of why their experiences were so positive. For many, the role worked as a tool of negotiation: Several whores told me it was easy to turn down a client they weren't interested in by saying they were booked or waiting for their next appointment. Because it was so busy, their statement rang true, and no one walked away with hurt feelings. No one felt pressured to do anything they weren't into; one whore even had a pre-printed menu of services: "I made up a menu of things I knew I'd be comfortable doing even with strangers. I did it partly because it was a fun way to suggest a scene to someone, but also because I'm not a real hard player, and I knew I'd blank on things to do in the moment. This was a way to remind myself of the kinds of things I enjoy and feel comfortable doing." I purchased the services of this particular whore, a cute girl wearing kitten ears and garters. I wanted her to suck off another whore, a short guy wearing a cashmere argyle sweater and glasses. It was very hot in the brothel at that point, so we grabbed some condoms and went out on the front lawn. I liked the idea of making them perform for my pleasure. The kitten displayed some extraordinary deep-throating skills, well-matched by the guy's face-fucking acumen. Later, separately, they both thanked me for buying them and told me their scene really turned them on. Gratification for all!

Got into a discussion over at this blog and since I dug up these many posts citing examples of forced abortion, I thought it worth summarizing in one place here and placing a heading and link on the sidebars of both blogs. I'm so tired of the old canard being tossed at us that there are no women forced into having an abortion. I know several personally and have met or read the stories of many more. Plain and simple truth: many women are forced or coerced into having abortions. There are many innocent victims forced by parents, grandparents, boyfriends, husbands, friends, and/or pressured by bosses, friends, coworkers and/or other family, to have abortions. Here are more than 20 instances of forced abortions on women and young girls (or attempts), including commentary on 4 other lists/sources of research on forced abortions: "Man Charged With Attempted Murder for Slipping Abortion Drug to Girlfriend to Cause Miscarriages", Friday, November 30, 2007 Coerced or Forced abortions in America- statistics, citations to published studies, research books and news reports Force Abortions FactSheet (PDF file) Florida teen says mom forced her into abortion clinic, August 2, 2000 "Guangxi Officials Carry Out Mass Forced Abortions" 41 year old rapist is caught forcing underage teen victim into abortion clinic...by sidewalk counselors with photos of his license plate, not by the clinic workers who were obligated by law to call the police. September 2006: Parents kidnap--at gunpoint--19 y.o. daughter across state lines to force her abortion, in Maine May 2005: "Ma Weihua, a woman facing the death penalty on drugs charges, was reportedly forced to undergo an abortion in police custody in February, apparently so that she could be put to death 'legally' as Chinese law prevents the execution of pregnant women." The above Amnesty International link gives another forced abortion story naming the woman and states that they found that in the period of January through December 2004, "forced abortions and sterilizations...continued to be reported as a result of the enforcement of the family planning policy..." in China. April 24, 2005: "Sharon Osbourne Told To Have Abortion By Mother" Feb. 5, 2005: Girl forced by her grandmother. Spring 2003: 13-year-old being forced by mother. Boyfriend forces woman to return a second time and have the abortion. "Man Convicted in Forced Abortion Attempt." A man forced two misopristol pills (part of the typical two-drug-cocktail-over-many-days that is the RU-486 abortion "pill") into his girlfriend's vagina after she refused to have an abortion. As a result, she had what they referred to in the press as a "miscarriage." She wouldn't have miscarried if he didn't force those pills into her. 1979 through 2001: Coerced abortions in the Church of Scientology. May 2004: U.S. Supreme Court Dockets Forced Abortion Case. Same case as directly above, Jan. 2004: "Eleventh Circuit Court rules that an expectant mother can be aborted by force if the abortionist argues that it is necessary to 'protect the health of the mother.'" Donna Santa Marie, sixteen years old, forced to abort her child by her parents. Father punched her in the stomach when she refused at first. 2000: "Pregnant garment workers on Saipan forced to have abortions to keep their jobs 1999: Women trafficked from Mexico into Florida in 1999, forced into prostitution and some forced to have abortions. 1990 through 2005: North Korea Engages in Forced Abortions, Infanticides 1992: Arlin della Cruz, forced by escorts into Harrisburg, Pennsylvania abortion clinic when she was trying to talk to the prolife sidewalk counselors there. She committed suicide soon after, leaving a note that she “wanted to be with her baby.” "Abuse Often Takes the Form of Forced Abortions", Canadian Medical Association Journal letter printed, by Dr. David Reardon: "Thirty to 60 percent of American women having abortions describe pressure from others as a key reason for having an abortion. Many report that they submit to unwanted abortions only because of abuse." Many links to Unwanted Abortions, a list of many stories of forced or coerced or deceitful abortions: 1) Abortion Whether You Want it or Not 2) The Many Faces of Coercion 3) Coerced Abortions Highlight How Abortion Hurts Women 4) Forced Abortion Stories Covers forced abortions in Tibet, China, Taiwan, East Turkistan, and of course, the United States. UN and UNFPA-supporters, beware.

let us know your wild crazy thoughts!