Democrats in Congress Seek to Ban LGBTQ “Panic” Defenses

Results of a new poll conducted by the D.C.-based Data for Progress released last week showed that 65 percent of voters believe businesses should not be allowed to turn away customers who are of a particular race, religion, disability, or sexual orientation because of the business owner’s personal beliefs.

law, which was approved by the Republican-dominated legislature and signed by Gov. Bill Lee earlier this year.A federal judge subsequently issued an injunction blocking the state from taking any adverse action against doctors who recommend non-surgical gender-affirming treatments, on the grounds that the plaintiffs in the case were likely to succeed in proving their claim that the law is unconstitutional and should be overturned.The plaintiffs have argued that the Tennessee law runs counter to federal laws prohibiting discrimination in health care and violates both the rights of trans minors and the rights of their parents to make whatever medical decisions they believe to be in their children’s best interests.But in a July 8 decision, the 6th U.S.

six-page letter, dated July 5, also appears to promote a form of Christian nationalism, suggesting right-wing boycotts over the LGBTQ Pride products harmed the company’s market value, and then stating: “It is likely more profitable to sell the type of Pride that enshrines the love of the United States. Target’s Pride Campaign alienates whereas Pride in our country unites.”The letter also refers to reports from right-wing media including the National Review, Fox News, the New York Post, and the Daily Caller, along with articles from Reuters and Axios.It denounces Target’s financial support of GLSEN.

As the Writers Guild-AMTPT standoff hits double digits, Deadline’s Strike Talk podcast host Billy Ray focuses on a topic as important as his masterful recent conversation with AI. Writers rooms are the pipelines of talent that turn rookies into showrunners, the ones that make billions for studios and networks with hit shows.

The Rolling Stones have filed a motion to dismiss the song-theft lawsuit that was launched against them earlier this year. Said motion mainly raises jurisdiction issues with the lawsuit, which was filed by a Spanish musician against a British band with the courts in Louisiana.Sergio Garcia Fernandez claims that the Stones’ 2020 track ‘Living In A Ghost Town’ rips off two songs he wrote in the 2000s, ‘So Sorry’ and ‘Seed Of God’.His lawsuit claims that the Stones track lifted “vocal melodies, the chord progressions, the drum beat patterns, the harmonica parts, the electric bass line parts, the tempos, and other key signatures” from ‘So Sorry’ and the “harmonic and chord progression and melody” from ‘Seed Of God’.As for how Mick Jagger and Keith Richards might have heard Fernandez’s music before writing ‘Living In A Ghost Town’, the Spanish musician alleged that he had previously sent a demo CD to “an immediate family member” of Jagger.According to Digital Music News, legal reps for the Stones filed a motion to dismiss the lawsuit last month.

launched against them earlier this year. Said motion mainly raises jurisdiction issues with the lawsuit, which was filed by a Spanish musician against a British band with the courts in Louisiana.Sergio Garcia Fernandez claims that the Stones’ 2020 track ‘Living In A Ghost Town’ rips off two songs he wrote in the 2000s, ‘So Sorry’ and ‘Seed Of God’.His lawsuit claims that the Stones track lifted “vocal melodies, the chord progressions, the drum beat patterns, the harmonica parts, the electric bass line parts, the tempos, and other key signatures” from ‘So Sorry’ and the “harmonic and chord progression and melody” from ‘Seed Of God’.As for how Mick Jagger and Keith Richards might have heard Fernandez’s music before writing ‘Living In A Ghost Town’, the Spanish musician alleged that he had previously sent a demo CD to “an immediate family member” of Jagger.According to Digital Music News, legal reps for the Stones filed a motion to dismiss the lawsuit last month.

Barbie because the film includes the “nine dash line map” that depicts islands in the South China Sea as being controlled by Beijing.Vi Kien Thanh, director general of the Vietnam Cinema Department under the Ministry of Culture, Sports, and Tourism, announced that Barbie will not be allowed to commercially screen in the nation, as ruled by the National Film Evaluation Council.“We do not grant license for the American movie ‘Barbie’ to release in Vietnam because it contains the offending image of the nine-dash line,” the state-run Tuoi Tre newspaper stated, citing Thanh (via Variety).The move follows Vietnam banning previous films including Uncharted and Abominable over the same issue.In 2016 the UN ruled unanimously against the validity of the “nine dash line” map, however China responded by saying that it doesn’t recognise the UN’s decision.Meanwhile, in other recent Barbie news, Margot Robbie has revealed the one request she made to director Greta Gerwig before filming the new movie.Set for release on July 21, Gerwig’s film stars Robbie in the titular role, with Ryan Gosling as Ken.Speaking about the film in an interview on The Kelly Clarkson Show, Robbie discussed how she fell in love with the character as a child when she was gifted a Barbie Dreamhouse for Christmas.Such was the impact the gift had on her, that she revealed she asked Gerwig to allow her to live out the real-life fantasy of the Dreamhouse in the film.“I’ll follow your vision. Whatever you want this Barbie movie to be, let’s do that,” she remembers telling the director.

“Barbie” is entering the contentious realm of global politics.

Reuters. The decision was based on a scene that depicts a map with the “nine-dash line,” a representation of China’s territorial claims in the South China Sea, which Vietnam says violates its sovereignty.

highly-anticipated “Barbie” movie has been banned in Vietnam.The film, directed by Greta Gerwig, was set to hit theaters in the country on July 21, aligning with the cinematic release in most countries around the world. However, state media announced the movie will not be released due to a scene that includes a map using the “nine-dash line” — a set of line segments that represent China’s territorial claims in the South China Sea — which Vietnam claims violates its sovereignty.

The Barbie movie won’t be seen in movie theaters in Vietnam.

Vietnam has banned commercial screenings of Warner Bros’ Barbie due to a scene that depicts a map of the South China Sea with the “nine-dash line” that is contested by the Vietnamese government. 

Patrick Frater Asia Bureau Chief Authorities in Vietnam have banned commercial screenings of Greta Gerwig’s “Barbie.” The Warner Bros. film starring Margot Robbie and Ryan Gosling, one of the most anticipated movies of the summer, was set to have been released in the country on July 21. The film contains a scene that depicts a map with the “nine dash line,” a representation of China’s territorial claims in the South China Sea, which Vietnam says violates its sovereignty. Vi Kien Thanh, director general of the Vietnam Cinema Department under the Ministry of Culture, Sports, and Tourism, said on Monday that the ban was decided by the National Film Evaluation Council.

Michael Imperioli is taking a stand against “bigots and homophobes” and doesn’t want him to watch his work. The actor’s comments come after the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that a web designer could refuse to provide services for same-sex weddings.

resigned from office in 2017 after several women accused him of sexual misconduct — is trying to help an ex-top staffer get elected to Congress in New York.Franken is sending numerous fundraising pitches to boost Josh Riley — who served as Franken’s general counsel — in a likely rematch against first-term incumbent Republican Rep. Marc Molinaro in the 19th congressional district that takes in the mid-Hudson Valley and Southern Tier.Democrats on fundraising lists have been hit with 16 e-letters from Franken since May via several groups backing Riley — including one missive Sunday.“Here’s why I support Josh — and why you should too!” Franken writes.“Josh knows policy issues backward and forward.

LGBTQ advocates and allies are lamenting the Supreme Court’s recent decision in favor of a website designer who sought an exemption from her state’s nondiscrimination law to allow her to refuse to create wedding websites for same-sex couples.Despite one of the alleged requests for service from a gay couple allegedly being fabricated or submitted under false pretenses, as reported by The New Republic, the high court ultimately decided in favor of Lorie Smith, the owner of 303 Creative, LLC, finding that Colorado’s law infringes on her free speech rights.The court further found that, because Smith creates “custom” websites that contain “expressive content,” she should have been granted a “free speech” exemption to the Coloraod Anti-Discrimination Act allowing her to not only refuse service to same-sex couples, but to post a notice that she will refuse to create websites celebrating same-sex marriages.Many allies of the LGBTQ community noted that while the decision is not as broad as to overturn nullify laws prohibiting LGBTQ discrimination, it does create a massive carve-out for businesses providing “custom-made” goods or services, allowing them to discriminate against prospective customers — in this particular case, LGBTQ individuals, but potentially members of other groups in the future — on free speech grounds. “The Supreme Court just gave businesses a license to discriminate,” Ben Olinsky, the senior vice president of Structural Reform and Governance at the left-leaning Center for American Progress, said in a statement.

The U.S. Supreme Court has ruled in favor of a graphic designer who denied service to same-sex couples.

because she refuses to provide that service to same-sex couples. The case is 303 Creative vs.

The Supreme Court ruled that a website designer could refuse to provide services for same-sex weddings, despite a Colorado non-discrimination law.

temporary injunction prohibiting the state from seeking to enforce Section 4 of Senate Bill 150, a sweeping anti-LGBTQ bill that, in addition to barring gender-affirming medical care for minors, restricts which restroom and locker room facilities transgender students can use, allowing teachers and other students to misgender trans-identifying minors, and prohibits certain types of classroom instruction on LGBTQ-related topics and topics related to sexuality, HIV, or other sexually-transmitted diseases.The measure was vetoed by Democratic Gov. Andy Beshear in March over concerns that it infringed not only on LGBTQ students’ right to freedom of expression and equal protection under the law, but the parental rights parents who choose to affirm their children’s identities.In issuing the injunction, Hale sided with the American Civil Liberties Union of Kentucky and the National Center for Lesbian Rights, which sued to overturn the law on behalf of seven families with transgender children.