Evangelical Sarah Palin counters liberals' utopian totalitarianism with a traditional American liberty movement: Government "is not to perfect us, but to protect us."
UPDATE 11/22/09: Palin tour fans give Obama an earful via New York Times
-- From "Will Palin's book tour jump-start a political movement?" by Erika Bolstad, McClatchy Newspapers 11/21/09
In the first few days of a cross-country book tour to promote her memoir, the former Alaska governor's supporters have greeted her with a populist fervor unmatched in Internet-age Republican politics.
While it's too early to call it a campaign, Palin's brand of common sense conservatism crackles with the energy of a burgeoning political movement.
In "The Way Forward," the title of the final chapter of her memoir, she says that her persona and her political philosophy are based on common sense that were last espoused by Reagan, her political idol. The role of government, Palin writes, "is not to perfect us, but to protect us."
Some . . . see Palin's political philosophy as a stand against . . . "government control, dependence on the government and loss of liberty."
Palin appears to have tapped into a powerful strain of populism fueled by dissatisfaction with the economy and by fear that the Democratic Party that's running the country is made up of elites who aren't listening, said Dennis Goldford, a professor of politics at Drake University in Iowa.
The term coined by Palin in her book has been around for a while, said Greg Mueller, a conservative strategist and a veteran of Republican presidential campaigns. Palin, however, seems to have seized on something timely by putting her brand on common sense conservatism, he said.
Steven Zerbini, a 19-year-old college student and National Guardsman from Greensburg, Pa., offered his own definition of it.
"It's not bringing in a terrorist to civilian courts in New York City," Zerbini said, referring to confessed 9/11 mastermind Khalid Sheik Mohammed. "It's not raising taxes in a recession."
To read all of this very lengthy article, CLICK HERE.
Saturday, November 21, 2009
Wide-ranging Christian Leaders Sign Manifesto Opposing Obama Agenda
The "Manhattan Declaration" signers include nine Roman Catholic archbishops and evangelical leaders ranging from Southern Baptists, to Moody Bible Institute, to Focus on the Family, to Wheaton College, to conservative leaders in mainline protestant denominations.
-- From "Christian Leaders Unite on Political Issues" by Laurie Goodstein, New York Times 11/20/09
Citing the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.’s call to civil disobedience, 145 evangelical, Roman Catholic and Orthodox Christian leaders have signed a declaration saying they will not cooperate with laws that they say could be used to compel their institutions to participate in abortions, or to bless or in any way recognize same-sex couples.
“We pledge to each other, and to our fellow believers, that no power on earth, be it cultural or political, will intimidate us into silence or acquiescence,” it says.
The manifesto [click to see list of signers] is an effort to rejuvenate the political alliance of conservative Catholics and evangelicals . . .
They want to signal to the Obama administration and to Congress that they are still a formidable force that will not compromise on abortion, stem-cell research or gay marriage. They hope to influence current debates over health care reform, the same-sex marriage bill in Washington, D.C., and the Employment Non-Discrimination Act, which would prohibit discrimination based on sexual orientation. [. . . perhaps the new 'hate crimes' legislation?]
[The 4,700-word document is called the “Manhattan Declaration: A Call of Christian Conscience”] was written by Mr. Colson; Robert P. George, a professor of jurisprudence at Princeton University, who is Catholic; and the Rev. Timothy George, dean of Beeson Divinity School, an evangelical interdenominational school on the campus of Samford University, in Birmingham, Ala.
To read the entire article, CLICK HERE.
-- From "Christian Leaders Unite on Political Issues" by Laurie Goodstein, New York Times 11/20/09
Citing the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.’s call to civil disobedience, 145 evangelical, Roman Catholic and Orthodox Christian leaders have signed a declaration saying they will not cooperate with laws that they say could be used to compel their institutions to participate in abortions, or to bless or in any way recognize same-sex couples.
“We pledge to each other, and to our fellow believers, that no power on earth, be it cultural or political, will intimidate us into silence or acquiescence,” it says.
The manifesto [click to see list of signers] is an effort to rejuvenate the political alliance of conservative Catholics and evangelicals . . .
They want to signal to the Obama administration and to Congress that they are still a formidable force that will not compromise on abortion, stem-cell research or gay marriage. They hope to influence current debates over health care reform, the same-sex marriage bill in Washington, D.C., and the Employment Non-Discrimination Act, which would prohibit discrimination based on sexual orientation. [. . . perhaps the new 'hate crimes' legislation?]
[The 4,700-word document is called the “Manhattan Declaration: A Call of Christian Conscience”] was written by Mr. Colson; Robert P. George, a professor of jurisprudence at Princeton University, who is Catholic; and the Rev. Timothy George, dean of Beeson Divinity School, an evangelical interdenominational school on the campus of Samford University, in Birmingham, Ala.
To read the entire article, CLICK HERE.
Texas Marriage Amendment Banned ALL Marriages?
Candidate for attorney general claims vague language in 2005 Texas constitutional amendment "eliminates marriage in Texas"
-- From "Texas' gay marriage ban may have banned all marriages" by Dave Montgomery, Fort Worth Star-Telegram 11/18/09
Barbara Ann Radnofsky, a Houston lawyer and Democratic candidate for attorney general, says that a 22-word clause in a 2005 constitutional amendment designed to ban gay marriages erroneously endangers the legal status of all marriages in the state.
The amendment, approved by the Legislature and overwhelmingly ratified by voters, declares that "marriage in this state shall consist only of the union of one man and one woman." But the troublemaking phrase, as Radnofsky sees it, is Subsection B, which declares:
"This state or a political subdivision of this state may not create or recognize any legal status identical or similar to marriage."
She calls it a "massive mistake" and blames the current attorney general, Republican Greg Abbott, for allowing the language to become part of the Texas Constitution. Radnofsky called on Abbott to acknowledge the wording as an error and consider an apology. She also said that another constitutional amendment may be necessary to reverse the problem.
Abbott spokesman Jerry Strickland said the attorney general stands behind the 4-year-old amendment.
[Kelly Shackelford, president of the Liberty Legal Institute in Plano,] whose organization helped draft the amendment dismissed Radnofsky’s position, saying it was similar to scare tactics opponents unsuccessfully used against the proposal in 2005.
To read the entire article, CLICK HERE.
-- From "Texas' gay marriage ban may have banned all marriages" by Dave Montgomery, Fort Worth Star-Telegram 11/18/09
Barbara Ann Radnofsky, a Houston lawyer and Democratic candidate for attorney general, says that a 22-word clause in a 2005 constitutional amendment designed to ban gay marriages erroneously endangers the legal status of all marriages in the state.
The amendment, approved by the Legislature and overwhelmingly ratified by voters, declares that "marriage in this state shall consist only of the union of one man and one woman." But the troublemaking phrase, as Radnofsky sees it, is Subsection B, which declares:
"This state or a political subdivision of this state may not create or recognize any legal status identical or similar to marriage."
She calls it a "massive mistake" and blames the current attorney general, Republican Greg Abbott, for allowing the language to become part of the Texas Constitution. Radnofsky called on Abbott to acknowledge the wording as an error and consider an apology. She also said that another constitutional amendment may be necessary to reverse the problem.
Abbott spokesman Jerry Strickland said the attorney general stands behind the 4-year-old amendment.
[Kelly Shackelford, president of the Liberty Legal Institute in Plano,] whose organization helped draft the amendment dismissed Radnofsky’s position, saying it was similar to scare tactics opponents unsuccessfully used against the proposal in 2005.
To read the entire article, CLICK HERE.
Friday, November 20, 2009
Tampa Gives Green Light to Men in Ladies' Room
Following the nationwide trend, the Tampa, Florida city council passed a "gender identity" anti-discrimination ordinance allowing any man to stand in the women's restroom and claim he "feels like a woman today," and forbidding Christian schools from firing a male teacher who might show up one day in women's clothing.
-- From "Tampa Council approves transgender protections" by Christian M. Wade, Tampa Tribune 11/20/09
Following two hours of testimony from grandmothers, ministers, transgendered people and representatives of Fortune 500 companies, the city council voted 5 to 1 on Thursday to prohibit discrimination in employment, housing and public facilities based on "gender identity and expression."
More than 60 people on either side of the issue filled council chambers to voice their support or opposition to the changes.
Members of several Christian evangelical groups and other opponents called the move an assault on their religious values they fear will sanction sexually deviant behavior.
Terry Kemple, president of the Community Issues Council, said he thought the protections would allow "sexual predators" to go into restrooms for the opposite sex, and force business owners and landlords, regardless of their religious beliefs, to accept cross-dressers.
David Caton, executive director of the Florida Family Association, told council members the city hadn't proved that transgender individuals were being discriminated against.
Philip Dinkins, chairman of the Human Rights Board, said the board has received at least 13 complaints of transgender discrimination in recent years.
Rocco Vallerand, who also goes by the name Raquel, said transgender individuals are not sexual deviants and are merely looking to have the same protections as others.
At least 13 states across the country and 16 municipalities in Florida, as well as some Fortune 500 companies, have extended such protections to transsexuals, transvestites and others with a gender identity that differs from their sex at birth.
President Barack Obama's administration is drafting proposed federal guidelines that would prohibit workplace discrimination against transgender federal employees.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "City vote opens women's restroom doors to men" by Drew Zahn © 2009 WorldNetDaily 11/17/09
A statement from the American Family Association explained, "Tampa Police arrested Robert Johnson in February 2008 for hanging out in the locker room–restroom area at Lifestyle Fitness and watching women in an undressed state. The City of Tampa's 'gender identity' ordinance could provide a legal defense to future cases like this if the accused claims that his gender is female."
. . . the section that makes it illegal to "segregate any person at a place of public accommodation, or to segregate any person in regards to … facilities" leads some to worry about the consequences of forbidding discrimination "regardless of the individual's sex at birth."
"This ordinance will give lawful protection to cross-dressing males to patronize women's restrooms," the Florida Family Association said in a statement. "And men dressed as women or women who perceive themselves as men can also use men's restrooms."
City Attorney Chip Fletcher told The Tampa Tribune the changes are not meant to protect the occasional cross-dresser, but individuals who are undergoing sexual reassignment surgery.
The gender identity ordinance makes exception for religious organizations, nonprofits and parochial schools, but does not exempt private businesses, public restrooms, public schools or nonreligious day-care centers.
Therefore, the AFA pointed out, the issue moves beyond just public restrooms.
"The gender identity ordinance also provides legal protection for transgenders to teach schoolchildren one day as a man and another day as a woman," AFA President Tim Wildmon wrote in an e-mail. "Unfortunately, the ordinance does not attempt to qualify who really is a transgender and who is not. That is left up to the individual to determine what his 'gender identity' is that day."
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
-- From "Tampa Council approves transgender protections" by Christian M. Wade, Tampa Tribune 11/20/09
Following two hours of testimony from grandmothers, ministers, transgendered people and representatives of Fortune 500 companies, the city council voted 5 to 1 on Thursday to prohibit discrimination in employment, housing and public facilities based on "gender identity and expression."
More than 60 people on either side of the issue filled council chambers to voice their support or opposition to the changes.
Members of several Christian evangelical groups and other opponents called the move an assault on their religious values they fear will sanction sexually deviant behavior.
Terry Kemple, president of the Community Issues Council, said he thought the protections would allow "sexual predators" to go into restrooms for the opposite sex, and force business owners and landlords, regardless of their religious beliefs, to accept cross-dressers.
David Caton, executive director of the Florida Family Association, told council members the city hadn't proved that transgender individuals were being discriminated against.
Philip Dinkins, chairman of the Human Rights Board, said the board has received at least 13 complaints of transgender discrimination in recent years.
Rocco Vallerand, who also goes by the name Raquel, said transgender individuals are not sexual deviants and are merely looking to have the same protections as others.
At least 13 states across the country and 16 municipalities in Florida, as well as some Fortune 500 companies, have extended such protections to transsexuals, transvestites and others with a gender identity that differs from their sex at birth.
President Barack Obama's administration is drafting proposed federal guidelines that would prohibit workplace discrimination against transgender federal employees.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "City vote opens women's restroom doors to men" by Drew Zahn © 2009 WorldNetDaily 11/17/09
A statement from the American Family Association explained, "Tampa Police arrested Robert Johnson in February 2008 for hanging out in the locker room–restroom area at Lifestyle Fitness and watching women in an undressed state. The City of Tampa's 'gender identity' ordinance could provide a legal defense to future cases like this if the accused claims that his gender is female."
. . . the section that makes it illegal to "segregate any person at a place of public accommodation, or to segregate any person in regards to … facilities" leads some to worry about the consequences of forbidding discrimination "regardless of the individual's sex at birth."
"This ordinance will give lawful protection to cross-dressing males to patronize women's restrooms," the Florida Family Association said in a statement. "And men dressed as women or women who perceive themselves as men can also use men's restrooms."
City Attorney Chip Fletcher told The Tampa Tribune the changes are not meant to protect the occasional cross-dresser, but individuals who are undergoing sexual reassignment surgery.
The gender identity ordinance makes exception for religious organizations, nonprofits and parochial schools, but does not exempt private businesses, public restrooms, public schools or nonreligious day-care centers.
Therefore, the AFA pointed out, the issue moves beyond just public restrooms.
"The gender identity ordinance also provides legal protection for transgenders to teach schoolchildren one day as a man and another day as a woman," AFA President Tim Wildmon wrote in an e-mail. "Unfortunately, the ordinance does not attempt to qualify who really is a transgender and who is not. That is left up to the individual to determine what his 'gender identity' is that day."
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
Thursday, November 19, 2009
CA School Defies State by Favoring Parental Consent for Abortion
San Juan Unified School District board members voted 3 to 2 on Tuesday to preserve a policy requiring parental consent to excuse students for "confidential medical services" even though it could cause the district to lose state funding.
-- From "San Juan keeps parental consent rule on 'confidential medical services'" by Diana Lambert, Sacramento Bee 11/19/09
District staff proposed changing the policy after they discovered it doesn't reflect a state law that allows students in grades seven to 12 to leave campus for medical services that could include birth control, abortion, treatment for sexual assault, and drug and mental health issues.
After more than three hours of heated discussion, trustees voted not to change the policy.
California State Department of Education officials said Wednesday that some of the district's state funding could be in jeopardy.
Representatives of the Pacific Justice Institute, a conservative nonprofit legal group, and the American Civil Liberties Union were among the more than 40 people who debated the issue.
San Juan joins a growing fraternity of school districts choosing to forgo the state mandate after being contacted by the Pacific Justice Institute, which bills itself as a legal defense organization specializing in the defense of religious freedom, parental rights and other civil liberties. The nonprofit has claimed victory in school districts in Modesto, Fairfield-Suisun and San Diego, where school boards decided not to change policy to allow students to leave campus for confidential medical services without parental consent.
To read the entire article, CLICK HERE.
-- From "San Juan keeps parental consent rule on 'confidential medical services'" by Diana Lambert, Sacramento Bee 11/19/09
District staff proposed changing the policy after they discovered it doesn't reflect a state law that allows students in grades seven to 12 to leave campus for medical services that could include birth control, abortion, treatment for sexual assault, and drug and mental health issues.
After more than three hours of heated discussion, trustees voted not to change the policy.
California State Department of Education officials said Wednesday that some of the district's state funding could be in jeopardy.
Representatives of the Pacific Justice Institute, a conservative nonprofit legal group, and the American Civil Liberties Union were among the more than 40 people who debated the issue.
San Juan joins a growing fraternity of school districts choosing to forgo the state mandate after being contacted by the Pacific Justice Institute, which bills itself as a legal defense organization specializing in the defense of religious freedom, parental rights and other civil liberties. The nonprofit has claimed victory in school districts in Modesto, Fairfield-Suisun and San Diego, where school boards decided not to change policy to allow students to leave campus for confidential medical services without parental consent.
To read the entire article, CLICK HERE.
Schism Looms for ELCA Lutherans
A Bible-believing Christian movement within the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America has a plan to create a new denomination for ELCA congregations and individual ELCA Christians who respect the Authority of Scripture.
-- From "Lutheran group considers leaving ELCA over gay vote" by Annysa Johnson, Milwaukee Journal Sentinel 11/19/09
"We don't feel we have a choice," said Paull Spring, a retired Pennsylvania bishop now chairman of Minnesota-based Lutheran CORE. "The vote on sexuality opened the eyes of many to how far the ELCA has moved from biblical teaching."
Local pastors who have aligned themselves with Lutheran CORE said it's too early to decide whether their congregations would sever their ties with the ELCA, the largest Lutheran church body in Wisconsin and the nation.
Lutheran CORE called the Indianapolis meeting after the ELCA voted at its national assembly to allow congregations to call gay and lesbian pastors in, or expecting to enter into, committed relationships.
CORE members voted to begin discussing with congregations whether to move toward schism or work from within the church. It will vote on the breakaway proposal at its convocation Aug. 26-27 in Columbus, Ohio. Lutheran CORE would remain a free-standing synod serving congregations inside and outside the ELCA under a separate recommendation also being drafted, the organization said.
Wisconsin CORE members will meet Nov. 28 in Lebanon.
To read the entire article, CLICK HERE.
-- From "Lutheran group considers leaving ELCA over gay vote" by Annysa Johnson, Milwaukee Journal Sentinel 11/19/09
"We don't feel we have a choice," said Paull Spring, a retired Pennsylvania bishop now chairman of Minnesota-based Lutheran CORE. "The vote on sexuality opened the eyes of many to how far the ELCA has moved from biblical teaching."
Local pastors who have aligned themselves with Lutheran CORE said it's too early to decide whether their congregations would sever their ties with the ELCA, the largest Lutheran church body in Wisconsin and the nation.
Lutheran CORE called the Indianapolis meeting after the ELCA voted at its national assembly to allow congregations to call gay and lesbian pastors in, or expecting to enter into, committed relationships.
CORE members voted to begin discussing with congregations whether to move toward schism or work from within the church. It will vote on the breakaway proposal at its convocation Aug. 26-27 in Columbus, Ohio. Lutheran CORE would remain a free-standing synod serving congregations inside and outside the ELCA under a separate recommendation also being drafted, the organization said.
Wisconsin CORE members will meet Nov. 28 in Lebanon.
To read the entire article, CLICK HERE.
Senate Bill Funds Abortion, Gives White House Prerogative
The health care bill released yesterday by Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid attempts to hide sizeable funding of abortion, and authorizes the Obama administration to decide on further funding, all under the "public option."
Illinois residents: Click here to E-mail President Obama, Sens. Durbin & Burris, and your own congressman -- takes less than 60 seconds.
-- From "Senate Wording Angers Abortion Opponents" by Katharine Q. Seelye, New York Times 11/18/09
In seeking to fend off a major revolt by supporters of abortion rights, Democratic leaders in the Senate have infuriated abortion opponents with their new version of health care legislation.
The National Right to Life Committee called the Senate language “completely unacceptable.”
The Senate bill drops some of the restrictive abortion language that was part of the House health care bill. But it contains an ambiguous provision that could bar any government-run insurance plan, or public option, from providing abortion coverage.
The Senate bill says that no federal funding can be used to pay for abortion coverage, which is language that abortion-rights supporters have accepted for decades.
But it also says that any public option could not provide insurance for abortions unless the Secretary of Health and Human Services [Kathleen Sebelius] determined that a payment plan would not use federal money.
This provision to allow the health secretary to determine whether a payment plan passed muster seems open to interpretation. An administration that supported abortion rights could include plans that might be excluded by an administration that opposed abortion rights, and vice versa.
[The bill] seemed to satisfy some Senators who support abortion rights.
The Senate language is not likely to end discussion of abortion as part of the health care debate, but instead to provoke it further.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Pro-Life Groups: Reid's Senate Health Care Bill Contains Massive Abortion Funding" by Steven Ertelt, LifeNews.com Editor 11/19/09
"Reid has rejected the bipartisan Stupak-Pitts Amendment and has substituted completely unacceptable language that would result in coverage of abortion on demand in two big new federal government programs," National Right to Life legislative director Douglas Johnson assured LifeNews.com late Wednesday.
"Reid seeks to cover elective abortions in two big new federal health programs, but tries to conceal that unpopular reality with layers of contrived definitions and hollow bookkeeping requirements," he continued.
Johnson notes that Reid's bill establishes the public option and authorizes (on page 118) the Secretary of Health and Human Services to require coverage of any and all abortions throughout the public option program.
"This would be federal government funding of abortion, no matter how hard they try to disguise it," he says.
Attorney Mary Harned of Americans United for Life, has also examined the abortion sections of Reid's new measure, which she says "provides for an unprecedented expansion of federally-funded abortion."
Harned says the bill does not reflect the principles of the Hyde amendment, which, since the 1970s, has been used to stop taxpayer funded abortions under Medicaid,
Reid's release of the bill comes after a new CNN poll showing a strong majority of Americans oppose government funding of abortions and oppose all or most abortions.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
Illinois residents: Click here to E-mail President Obama, Sens. Durbin & Burris, and your own congressman -- takes less than 60 seconds.
-- From "Senate Wording Angers Abortion Opponents" by Katharine Q. Seelye, New York Times 11/18/09
In seeking to fend off a major revolt by supporters of abortion rights, Democratic leaders in the Senate have infuriated abortion opponents with their new version of health care legislation.
The National Right to Life Committee called the Senate language “completely unacceptable.”
The Senate bill drops some of the restrictive abortion language that was part of the House health care bill. But it contains an ambiguous provision that could bar any government-run insurance plan, or public option, from providing abortion coverage.
The Senate bill says that no federal funding can be used to pay for abortion coverage, which is language that abortion-rights supporters have accepted for decades.
But it also says that any public option could not provide insurance for abortions unless the Secretary of Health and Human Services [Kathleen Sebelius] determined that a payment plan would not use federal money.
This provision to allow the health secretary to determine whether a payment plan passed muster seems open to interpretation. An administration that supported abortion rights could include plans that might be excluded by an administration that opposed abortion rights, and vice versa.
[The bill] seemed to satisfy some Senators who support abortion rights.
The Senate language is not likely to end discussion of abortion as part of the health care debate, but instead to provoke it further.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Pro-Life Groups: Reid's Senate Health Care Bill Contains Massive Abortion Funding" by Steven Ertelt, LifeNews.com Editor 11/19/09
"Reid has rejected the bipartisan Stupak-Pitts Amendment and has substituted completely unacceptable language that would result in coverage of abortion on demand in two big new federal government programs," National Right to Life legislative director Douglas Johnson assured LifeNews.com late Wednesday.
"Reid seeks to cover elective abortions in two big new federal health programs, but tries to conceal that unpopular reality with layers of contrived definitions and hollow bookkeeping requirements," he continued.
Johnson notes that Reid's bill establishes the public option and authorizes (on page 118) the Secretary of Health and Human Services to require coverage of any and all abortions throughout the public option program.
"This would be federal government funding of abortion, no matter how hard they try to disguise it," he says.
Attorney Mary Harned of Americans United for Life, has also examined the abortion sections of Reid's new measure, which she says "provides for an unprecedented expansion of federally-funded abortion."
Harned says the bill does not reflect the principles of the Hyde amendment, which, since the 1970s, has been used to stop taxpayer funded abortions under Medicaid,
Reid's release of the bill comes after a new CNN poll showing a strong majority of Americans oppose government funding of abortions and oppose all or most abortions.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
Wednesday, November 18, 2009
Pastors Tell White House 'Hate Crimes' Law Unconstitutional
Pastors rallied at the Justice Department Monday to protest the 'hate crimes' law (signed by the President in the dark of night two weeks ago) by reading from the Book of Romans regarding homosexual behavior.
-- From "Edmond pastor challenges hate crimes law" by Mark Schlachtenhaufen, The Edmond Sun (Oklahoma) 11/17/09
U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder is reviewing a letter from an ad hoc coalition of pastors asking that a new hate crimes law not be enforced because they believe it violates the Constitution.
Paul Blair, senior pastor at Edmond’s Fairview Baptist Church, and two other metro pastors were part of the group that held a press conference in front of the U.S. Justice Department building Monday afternoon in Washington, D.C.
Blair said he wants Oklahoma’s attorney general to not enforce the law when it comes to a pastor’s ability to preach on homosexuality. He said the press conference was a response to President Barack Obama’s signing The Matthew Shepard and James Byrd Hate Crimes Prevention Act into law last month.
Blair said the press conference was needed to get the federal government on the record and to show clergy across America that they still may preach that homosexuality is contrary to biblical teachings and to God’s creation.
Blair questioned the justification for the law and postulated that it may come to be used to assault free speech and thought as well as Christianity. He said he is in need of God’s unmerited favor like every other human, and that his message is about the need for all to repent.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Pastors to Holder: Bible still condemns homosexuality" by Bob Unruh © 2009 WorldNetDaily 11/18/09
A former U.S. Navy chaplain who was removed from the service after he exercised his right to pray "in Jesus' name" against the wishes of his chain of command read the biblical condemnation of homosexuality at a rally in front of the U.S. Justice Department to protest the nation's new "hate crimes" law.
Former Navy Chaplain Gordon Klingenschmitt of PrayInJesusName.com read from Romans: "And they that commit such things are worthy of death."
"The government has to invade my thoughts to decide what my motive was in quoting the Bible," Klingenschmitt explained. "I can be prosecuted if the government thinks my motive was wrong."
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
The 'hate crimes' law includes a "fig leaf" religious exemption.
-- From "Edmond pastor challenges hate crimes law" by Mark Schlachtenhaufen, The Edmond Sun (Oklahoma) 11/17/09
U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder is reviewing a letter from an ad hoc coalition of pastors asking that a new hate crimes law not be enforced because they believe it violates the Constitution.
Paul Blair, senior pastor at Edmond’s Fairview Baptist Church, and two other metro pastors were part of the group that held a press conference in front of the U.S. Justice Department building Monday afternoon in Washington, D.C.
Blair said he wants Oklahoma’s attorney general to not enforce the law when it comes to a pastor’s ability to preach on homosexuality. He said the press conference was a response to President Barack Obama’s signing The Matthew Shepard and James Byrd Hate Crimes Prevention Act into law last month.
Blair said the press conference was needed to get the federal government on the record and to show clergy across America that they still may preach that homosexuality is contrary to biblical teachings and to God’s creation.
Blair questioned the justification for the law and postulated that it may come to be used to assault free speech and thought as well as Christianity. He said he is in need of God’s unmerited favor like every other human, and that his message is about the need for all to repent.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Pastors to Holder: Bible still condemns homosexuality" by Bob Unruh © 2009 WorldNetDaily 11/18/09
A former U.S. Navy chaplain who was removed from the service after he exercised his right to pray "in Jesus' name" against the wishes of his chain of command read the biblical condemnation of homosexuality at a rally in front of the U.S. Justice Department to protest the nation's new "hate crimes" law.
Former Navy Chaplain Gordon Klingenschmitt of PrayInJesusName.com read from Romans: "And they that commit such things are worthy of death."
"The government has to invade my thoughts to decide what my motive was in quoting the Bible," Klingenschmitt explained. "I can be prosecuted if the government thinks my motive was wrong."
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
The 'hate crimes' law includes a "fig leaf" religious exemption.
Pro-life Democrats Ignored - Liberals Ignorant of American Opinion
Congressional Democrat leaders turned a deaf ear to 25% of their own House members for months; CNN reports that 61% of Americans favor the pro-life amendment to health care bill.
Illinois residents: Click here to E-mail President Obama, Sens. Durbin & Burris, and your own congressman -- takes less than 60 seconds.
-- From "What our amendment does" by Rep. Bart Stupak (D-Mich.) writing in Politico 11/18/09
Abortion rights supporters have spent the past week expressing their outrage over the passage of the Stupak-Ellsworth-Pitts amendment to the House health care reform bill. This amendment was not the result of a last-minute backroom deal. Anti-abortion Democrats have said since July that we would oppose any rule to bring a health care bill to the floor that did not contain the Hyde language. Rather than work with us to find a true compromise, members who support abortion rights ignored our concerns.
With 64 Democrats — a quarter of the Democrats in the House — voting in favor of the Stupak-Ellsworth-Pitts amendment, this decision was clearly a mistake on their part.
. . . abortion rights supporters have tried to argue that the Capps amendment, added to the bill by the Energy and Commerce Committee, was a sufficient “compromise” in line with the Hyde language. Yet this compromise was struck without an anti-abortion presence at the table. It is hardly a good-faith compromise when you circumvent the very group whose concerns you are attempting to address. Not a single anti-abortion group supported the Capps amendment.
The Capps amendment would have set a new precedent for abortion funding, essentially overturning the Hyde language that has been federal policy since 1977.
. . . The Hyde language has never allowed private and public funds to be segregated in the way that Rep. Lois Capps proposed.
[The pro-abortion Democrats] are also off-base in their assertion that the vast majority of Americans disagree with the stance taken by the Catholic bishops.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Poll: Majority favor abortion funding ban" CNN 11/18/09
Six in 10 Americans favor a ban on the use of federal funds for abortion, according to a new poll.
The poll also indicates that the public might also favor legislation that would prevent many women from getting their health insurance plan to cover the cost of an abortion, even if no federal funds are involved.
And by a 51 percent to 45 percent margin, those questioned in the survey think that women who get abortions should pay the full costs out of their own pocket, even if they have private health insurance and no federal funds are involved. The 6-point difference is within the poll's sampling error.
The survey indicates that 26 percent say abortion should be legal in all circumstances, with half of those questioned saying it should be legal in certain circumstances, and just under one in four saying abortion should never be legal.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
The above survey reinforces previous polls of 2009 showing public opposition to abortion.
Illinois residents: Click here to E-mail President Obama, Sens. Durbin & Burris, and your own congressman -- takes less than 60 seconds.
-- From "What our amendment does" by Rep. Bart Stupak (D-Mich.) writing in Politico 11/18/09
Abortion rights supporters have spent the past week expressing their outrage over the passage of the Stupak-Ellsworth-Pitts amendment to the House health care reform bill. This amendment was not the result of a last-minute backroom deal. Anti-abortion Democrats have said since July that we would oppose any rule to bring a health care bill to the floor that did not contain the Hyde language. Rather than work with us to find a true compromise, members who support abortion rights ignored our concerns.
With 64 Democrats — a quarter of the Democrats in the House — voting in favor of the Stupak-Ellsworth-Pitts amendment, this decision was clearly a mistake on their part.
. . . abortion rights supporters have tried to argue that the Capps amendment, added to the bill by the Energy and Commerce Committee, was a sufficient “compromise” in line with the Hyde language. Yet this compromise was struck without an anti-abortion presence at the table. It is hardly a good-faith compromise when you circumvent the very group whose concerns you are attempting to address. Not a single anti-abortion group supported the Capps amendment.
The Capps amendment would have set a new precedent for abortion funding, essentially overturning the Hyde language that has been federal policy since 1977.
. . . The Hyde language has never allowed private and public funds to be segregated in the way that Rep. Lois Capps proposed.
[The pro-abortion Democrats] are also off-base in their assertion that the vast majority of Americans disagree with the stance taken by the Catholic bishops.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Poll: Majority favor abortion funding ban" CNN 11/18/09
Six in 10 Americans favor a ban on the use of federal funds for abortion, according to a new poll.
The poll also indicates that the public might also favor legislation that would prevent many women from getting their health insurance plan to cover the cost of an abortion, even if no federal funds are involved.
And by a 51 percent to 45 percent margin, those questioned in the survey think that women who get abortions should pay the full costs out of their own pocket, even if they have private health insurance and no federal funds are involved. The 6-point difference is within the poll's sampling error.
The survey indicates that 26 percent say abortion should be legal in all circumstances, with half of those questioned saying it should be legal in certain circumstances, and just under one in four saying abortion should never be legal.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
The above survey reinforces previous polls of 2009 showing public opposition to abortion.
Getting Hot? Condoms will Cool the Earth, says U.N.
The battle against global warming could be helped if the world slowed population growth by making free condoms and family planning advice more widely available, the U.N. Population Fund said Wednesday.
-- From "Fight Climate Change With Free Condoms, U.N. Population Fund Says" by Maria Cheng, Associated Press 11/18/09
The agency did not recommend countries set limits on how many children people should have, but said: "Women with access to reproductive health services ... have lower fertility rates that contribute to slower growth in greenhouse gas emissions."
The U.N. Population Fund acknowledged it had no proof of the effect that population control would have on climate change. "The linkages between population and climate change are in most cases complex and indirect," the report said.
On Wednesday, one analyst criticized the U.N. Population Fund's pronouncements as alarmist and unhelpful.
"It requires a major leap of imagination to believe that free condoms will cool down the climate," said Caroline Boin, a policy analyst at International Policy Network, a London-based think tank.
To read the entire article, CLICK HERE.
Also read the never-ending calls to limit procreation (follow embedded links).
-- From "Fight Climate Change With Free Condoms, U.N. Population Fund Says" by Maria Cheng, Associated Press 11/18/09
The agency did not recommend countries set limits on how many children people should have, but said: "Women with access to reproductive health services ... have lower fertility rates that contribute to slower growth in greenhouse gas emissions."
The U.N. Population Fund acknowledged it had no proof of the effect that population control would have on climate change. "The linkages between population and climate change are in most cases complex and indirect," the report said.
On Wednesday, one analyst criticized the U.N. Population Fund's pronouncements as alarmist and unhelpful.
"It requires a major leap of imagination to believe that free condoms will cool down the climate," said Caroline Boin, a policy analyst at International Policy Network, a London-based think tank.
To read the entire article, CLICK HERE.
Also read the never-ending calls to limit procreation (follow embedded links).
Tuesday, November 17, 2009
School Censors Student Expressing Pro-life View
A New Jersey student who was prevented from participating in a national event along with hundreds of thousands of her peers now has legal representation from a pro-life law group.
-- From "NJ teen barred from abortion protest sues school" by Geoff Mulvihill, Associated Press 11/17/09
A New Jersey high school student claims in a federal lawsuit that school administrators violated her First Amendment free-speech and religious-freedom rights when they said she couldn't participate in a day of silent protest against abortion.
The girl, identified in court papers as C.H., says she asked the Bridgeton High School principal last month for permission to join in the Pro Life Day of Silent Solidarity, a worldwide protest organized each year by Stand True, a ministry in Troy, Ohio. But the principal said no, telling her she couldn't do anything "religious," according to her lawsuit.
The lawsuit was filed Friday in U.S. District Court in Camden by a lawyer hired by the Alliance Defense Fund, a Scottsdale, Ariz.-based legal group that takes on religious freedom cases on behalf of Christians. The organization sent an advisory before the day of protest that it would defend students who are barred from participating.
ADF senior counsel David Cortman says his group has intervened in dozens of cases across the country over the six years the protest has been held and has filed suits in about a dozen. He said some have been successful and others are still pending.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "New Jersey Student Stopped From Joining National Pro-Life Event Against Abortion" by Steven Ertelt, LifeNews.com Editor 11/16/09
The student . . . wanted to wear a red armband with the word “LIFE” written on it, but school officials told the student that nothing “religious” is allowed in public schools.
“Pro-life students shouldn't be discriminated against for expressing their beliefs,” said ADF Senior Legal Counsel David Cortman.
“The Pro-Life Day of Silent Solidarity is a non-disruptive, student-led event occurring outside of instructional time," he told LifeNews.com. "The event provides the opportunity for students to exercise their constitutional right to express their viewpoint on abortion, just as other students have the right to express their views.”
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
-- From "NJ teen barred from abortion protest sues school" by Geoff Mulvihill, Associated Press 11/17/09
A New Jersey high school student claims in a federal lawsuit that school administrators violated her First Amendment free-speech and religious-freedom rights when they said she couldn't participate in a day of silent protest against abortion.
The girl, identified in court papers as C.H., says she asked the Bridgeton High School principal last month for permission to join in the Pro Life Day of Silent Solidarity, a worldwide protest organized each year by Stand True, a ministry in Troy, Ohio. But the principal said no, telling her she couldn't do anything "religious," according to her lawsuit.
The lawsuit was filed Friday in U.S. District Court in Camden by a lawyer hired by the Alliance Defense Fund, a Scottsdale, Ariz.-based legal group that takes on religious freedom cases on behalf of Christians. The organization sent an advisory before the day of protest that it would defend students who are barred from participating.
ADF senior counsel David Cortman says his group has intervened in dozens of cases across the country over the six years the protest has been held and has filed suits in about a dozen. He said some have been successful and others are still pending.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "New Jersey Student Stopped From Joining National Pro-Life Event Against Abortion" by Steven Ertelt, LifeNews.com Editor 11/16/09
The student . . . wanted to wear a red armband with the word “LIFE” written on it, but school officials told the student that nothing “religious” is allowed in public schools.
“Pro-life students shouldn't be discriminated against for expressing their beliefs,” said ADF Senior Legal Counsel David Cortman.
“The Pro-Life Day of Silent Solidarity is a non-disruptive, student-led event occurring outside of instructional time," he told LifeNews.com. "The event provides the opportunity for students to exercise their constitutional right to express their viewpoint on abortion, just as other students have the right to express their views.”
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
Feds' Report Supports Obama's Abstinence Termination
A U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention panel has (surprise!) concluded that abstinence is ineffective, but refuses to substantiate the conclusion with facts.
-- From "Findings inconclusive on teaching abstinence" by Rob Stein, Washington Post Staff Writer 11/7/09
Sex-education programs that encourage teens to delay sexual activity and teach them about contraception cut risky sexual behavior, increase condom use and lower the chances of getting the AIDS virus and other infections, a panel of independent experts concluded in a report released Friday.
But there is insufficient evidence to know whether programs that focus on encouraging teens to remain sexually abstinent until marriage are effective, the panel concluded.
The analysis was conducted by a 19-member team of experts assembled by the federal Centers for Disease Control and Prevention to examine the politically sensitive question.
The findings come as Congress considers whether to approve President Obama's request to discontinue earmarking funding specifically for abstinence programs and instead allocate funding based on whether scientific research supports the approach.
The findings were welcomed by advocates of programs that reduce teen pregnancy and critics of abstinence programs.
Two members of the CDC team issued a dissenting report disputing the findings. They argued, among other things, that the analysis actually shows that comprehensive sexual-education programs in schools do not significantly increase teen condom use, reduce teen pregnancy or sexually transmitted diseases.
"This is an important finding because the school classroom is where most teens receive sex education," said Irene Erickson of the Institute for Research and Evaluation, who issued the dissenting report with Danielle Ruedt of the Georgia Governor's Office of Children and Families. "Furthermore, the data indicated that many types of [comprehensive] programs do not work, even in non-school settings, yet the recommendations do not identify what those are. Unfortunately, the report's conclusion that comprehensive sex-education programs are broadly effective simply ignores these findings. This is misleading to policymakers who are seeking evidence-based programs, especially for schools."
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "CDC Task Force Says Sex Ed Better Than Abstinence Ed But Won’t Release Full Data to Public" by Penny Starr, CNSNews Senior Staff Writer, 11/16/09
The 15-member Task Force on Community Preventive Services and four other experts made up the team, which analyzed dozens of studies of sex education programs conducted between 1980 and 2007.
A list of the studies is available on the Community Guide portion of the CDC Web site, but the task force’s analysis of the studies is not.
Lack of access to that analysis, critics say, prevents an open review of data they contend shows that abstinence programs were underrepresented in the studies used and that using comprehensive sex education programs in school settings did not reduce teen pregnancy, STDs, or increase the use of condoms.
“The Task Force has made public its recommendation statements without also making available to the public the full set of study findings upon which the recommendations are based – both supporting and otherwise,” Irene Ericksen, a member of the review team and researcher with the Institute for Research and Evaluation, said about the recommendations.
“This prevents the public from scrutinizing the body of evidence underlying the CDC Task Force Recommendations in the same time frame in which the CDC recommendations will influence the decisions of policymakers and public health professionals,” she said.
Danielle Ruedt, the public health program coordinator for the Georgia governor’s Office of Children and Families and a member of the task force, said that when used in school settings, the data do not support the task force’s sweeping recommendations.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
-- From "Findings inconclusive on teaching abstinence" by Rob Stein, Washington Post Staff Writer 11/7/09
Sex-education programs that encourage teens to delay sexual activity and teach them about contraception cut risky sexual behavior, increase condom use and lower the chances of getting the AIDS virus and other infections, a panel of independent experts concluded in a report released Friday.
But there is insufficient evidence to know whether programs that focus on encouraging teens to remain sexually abstinent until marriage are effective, the panel concluded.
The analysis was conducted by a 19-member team of experts assembled by the federal Centers for Disease Control and Prevention to examine the politically sensitive question.
The findings come as Congress considers whether to approve President Obama's request to discontinue earmarking funding specifically for abstinence programs and instead allocate funding based on whether scientific research supports the approach.
The findings were welcomed by advocates of programs that reduce teen pregnancy and critics of abstinence programs.
Two members of the CDC team issued a dissenting report disputing the findings. They argued, among other things, that the analysis actually shows that comprehensive sexual-education programs in schools do not significantly increase teen condom use, reduce teen pregnancy or sexually transmitted diseases.
"This is an important finding because the school classroom is where most teens receive sex education," said Irene Erickson of the Institute for Research and Evaluation, who issued the dissenting report with Danielle Ruedt of the Georgia Governor's Office of Children and Families. "Furthermore, the data indicated that many types of [comprehensive] programs do not work, even in non-school settings, yet the recommendations do not identify what those are. Unfortunately, the report's conclusion that comprehensive sex-education programs are broadly effective simply ignores these findings. This is misleading to policymakers who are seeking evidence-based programs, especially for schools."
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "CDC Task Force Says Sex Ed Better Than Abstinence Ed But Won’t Release Full Data to Public" by Penny Starr, CNSNews Senior Staff Writer, 11/16/09
The 15-member Task Force on Community Preventive Services and four other experts made up the team, which analyzed dozens of studies of sex education programs conducted between 1980 and 2007.
A list of the studies is available on the Community Guide portion of the CDC Web site, but the task force’s analysis of the studies is not.
Lack of access to that analysis, critics say, prevents an open review of data they contend shows that abstinence programs were underrepresented in the studies used and that using comprehensive sex education programs in school settings did not reduce teen pregnancy, STDs, or increase the use of condoms.
“The Task Force has made public its recommendation statements without also making available to the public the full set of study findings upon which the recommendations are based – both supporting and otherwise,” Irene Ericksen, a member of the review team and researcher with the Institute for Research and Evaluation, said about the recommendations.
“This prevents the public from scrutinizing the body of evidence underlying the CDC Task Force Recommendations in the same time frame in which the CDC recommendations will influence the decisions of policymakers and public health professionals,” she said.
Danielle Ruedt, the public health program coordinator for the Georgia governor’s Office of Children and Families and a member of the task force, said that when used in school settings, the data do not support the task force’s sweeping recommendations.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
Monday, November 16, 2009
Sexual Disease Epidemic Means Infertile Generation Imminent
The U.S. Centers for Disease Control report released Monday paints a dismal future as most sexually active teenage girls suffer from one or more disease. President Obama's solution is to terminate abstinence education.
-- From "Sex infections still growing in U.S., says CDC" by Maggie Fox, Health and Science Editor, Reuters 11/16/09
"Chlamydia and gonorrhea are stable at unacceptably high levels and syphilis is resurgent after almost being eliminated," said John Douglas, director of the division of sexually transmitted diseases at the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
"We have among the highest rates of STDs of any developed country in the world," Douglas added in a telephone interview.
The administration of President Barack Obama has signaled a willingness to move away from so-called abstinence-only sex education approaches promoted by his predecessor, George W. Bush, and conservative state and local governments.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Teen Girls at Higher Risk for STDs: Report" U.S. News & World Report 11/16/09
Teen girls aged 15 to 19 accounted for the largest number (409,531) of the 1.5 million reported chlamydia and gonorrhea cases in the United States in 2008, followed by women aged 20 to 24, according to an annual federal report released Monday.
The researchers also found that black females continue to have a higher rate of sexually transmitted diseases (STDs) than any other racial or ethnic group.
Early testing, diagnosis and treatment are essential to prevent long-term health consequences of sexually transmitted diseases. Each year in the United States, untreated STDs lead to complications that cause at least 24,000 women to become infertile, according to the CDC.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Teen Girls' Chlamydia Drives STD Rate Up" by Daniel J. DeNoon, WebMD Health News 11/16/09
Because chlamydia infections usually don't cause symptoms until they result in pelvic inflammatory disease, many cases remain undetected and hence unreported. Sexually active girls and women under age 26 should be screened for chlamydia every year, but only 41.6% of eligible women enrolled in Medicaid or private health plans do so.
Left untreated, some 10% to 20% of chlamydia infections cause pelvic inflammatory disease. That can lead to long-lasting pelvic pain, ectopic pregnancy, and infertility.
Overall, chlamydia rates went up 9.2% from 2007 to 2008, the most recent year for which there is data. Some of the increase is due to increased screening, but the CDC suspects that much of the increase reflects a rising number of new infections.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
-- From "Sex infections still growing in U.S., says CDC" by Maggie Fox, Health and Science Editor, Reuters 11/16/09
"Chlamydia and gonorrhea are stable at unacceptably high levels and syphilis is resurgent after almost being eliminated," said John Douglas, director of the division of sexually transmitted diseases at the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
"We have among the highest rates of STDs of any developed country in the world," Douglas added in a telephone interview.
The administration of President Barack Obama has signaled a willingness to move away from so-called abstinence-only sex education approaches promoted by his predecessor, George W. Bush, and conservative state and local governments.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Teen Girls at Higher Risk for STDs: Report" U.S. News & World Report 11/16/09
Teen girls aged 15 to 19 accounted for the largest number (409,531) of the 1.5 million reported chlamydia and gonorrhea cases in the United States in 2008, followed by women aged 20 to 24, according to an annual federal report released Monday.
The researchers also found that black females continue to have a higher rate of sexually transmitted diseases (STDs) than any other racial or ethnic group.
Early testing, diagnosis and treatment are essential to prevent long-term health consequences of sexually transmitted diseases. Each year in the United States, untreated STDs lead to complications that cause at least 24,000 women to become infertile, according to the CDC.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Teen Girls' Chlamydia Drives STD Rate Up" by Daniel J. DeNoon, WebMD Health News 11/16/09
Because chlamydia infections usually don't cause symptoms until they result in pelvic inflammatory disease, many cases remain undetected and hence unreported. Sexually active girls and women under age 26 should be screened for chlamydia every year, but only 41.6% of eligible women enrolled in Medicaid or private health plans do so.
Left untreated, some 10% to 20% of chlamydia infections cause pelvic inflammatory disease. That can lead to long-lasting pelvic pain, ectopic pregnancy, and infertility.
Overall, chlamydia rates went up 9.2% from 2007 to 2008, the most recent year for which there is data. Some of the increase is due to increased screening, but the CDC suspects that much of the increase reflects a rising number of new infections.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
Episcopal Church Shuns Pro-life Convert but Embraces Homosexual Priest
Texas ECUSA church gives cold shoulder to member who resigned as Planned Parenthood director, now a pro-life activist
Former New Jersey governor, who resigned due to covert homosexual behavior, now to be openly-homosexual ECUSA priest
-- From "Forgive Me Father McGreevey, For I Have Sinned" by Emily Feldman, NBC New York 11/16/09
The disgraced ex-governor -- who shocked the nation when he abruptly confessed to a homosexual affair -- is set to graduate from General Theological Seminary's Masters of Divinity Program next spring, and in preparation for priesthood, he's spending his weekends warming up at the pulpit, the New York Post reported.
In 2004 . . . Jim McGreevey, spurned wife at his side, announced he had been concealing his homosexuality, "engaged in adult consensual affair with another man," and intended to resign the Garden State's chief executive.
During his time in office, he identified himself as Roman Catholic, an association he traded in for the Episcopal faith, a more liberal branch of Christianity.
Half-a-decade later, he's spending his Sundays in a white robe, greeting parishioners at Hoboken's Episcopal All Saint's Church and helping with everything from sermons to donation drives.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Former clinic director: Church chilly to my pro-life turn" by Julia Duin, Washington Times 11/13/09
Abby Johnson, the former Planned Parenthood clinic director whose about-face on abortion prompted her to resign her job, says she's gotten flack for her decision from an unexpected quarter: her own church . . . St. Francis Episcopal in nearby College Station, the home of Texas A&M University.
Whereas clergy and parishioners welcomed her as a Planned Parenthood employee, now they are buttonholing her after Sunday services.
"Now that I have taken this stand, some of the people there are not accepting of that," she told The Washington Times. "People have told me they disagree with my choice. One of the things I've been told is that as Episcopalians, we embrace our differences and disagreements. While I agree with that, I am not sure I can go to a place where I don't feel I am welcome."
The rector at St. Francis refused to comment on the charge of nonacceptance.
"I was raised Southern Baptist but didn't find the Southern Baptist community was very accepting of my work at Planned Parenthood," she said.
She and her husband, who grew up Lutheran, dropped out of church until two years ago, when they began attending St. Francis, a 25-year-old church that achieved parish status in February.
The U.S. Episcopal Church has one of the most liberal stances on abortion of any mainline Protestant denomination and is a member of the Religious Coalition for Reproductive Choice (RCRC), which supports legalized abortion.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
Former New Jersey governor, who resigned due to covert homosexual behavior, now to be openly-homosexual ECUSA priest
-- From "Forgive Me Father McGreevey, For I Have Sinned" by Emily Feldman, NBC New York 11/16/09
The disgraced ex-governor -- who shocked the nation when he abruptly confessed to a homosexual affair -- is set to graduate from General Theological Seminary's Masters of Divinity Program next spring, and in preparation for priesthood, he's spending his weekends warming up at the pulpit, the New York Post reported.
In 2004 . . . Jim McGreevey, spurned wife at his side, announced he had been concealing his homosexuality, "engaged in adult consensual affair with another man," and intended to resign the Garden State's chief executive.
During his time in office, he identified himself as Roman Catholic, an association he traded in for the Episcopal faith, a more liberal branch of Christianity.
Half-a-decade later, he's spending his Sundays in a white robe, greeting parishioners at Hoboken's Episcopal All Saint's Church and helping with everything from sermons to donation drives.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Former clinic director: Church chilly to my pro-life turn" by Julia Duin, Washington Times 11/13/09
Abby Johnson, the former Planned Parenthood clinic director whose about-face on abortion prompted her to resign her job, says she's gotten flack for her decision from an unexpected quarter: her own church . . . St. Francis Episcopal in nearby College Station, the home of Texas A&M University.
Whereas clergy and parishioners welcomed her as a Planned Parenthood employee, now they are buttonholing her after Sunday services.
"Now that I have taken this stand, some of the people there are not accepting of that," she told The Washington Times. "People have told me they disagree with my choice. One of the things I've been told is that as Episcopalians, we embrace our differences and disagreements. While I agree with that, I am not sure I can go to a place where I don't feel I am welcome."
The rector at St. Francis refused to comment on the charge of nonacceptance.
"I was raised Southern Baptist but didn't find the Southern Baptist community was very accepting of my work at Planned Parenthood," she said.
She and her husband, who grew up Lutheran, dropped out of church until two years ago, when they began attending St. Francis, a 25-year-old church that achieved parish status in February.
The U.S. Episcopal Church has one of the most liberal stances on abortion of any mainline Protestant denomination and is a member of the Religious Coalition for Reproductive Choice (RCRC), which supports legalized abortion.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
Sunday, November 15, 2009
Senate Pushes Anti-christian Judge Confirmation
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., announced his plans to move forward as early as Monday with a confirmation vote on the pro-abortion appeals court nominee who ruled against praying "in Jesus' name" on the floor of the Indiana Legislature.
-- From "Conservatives Oppose Judicial Nominee" by Kate Phillips, New York Times 11/12/09
Conservative groups have been rallying their troops to urge senators to oppose the nomination of Judge David F. Hamilton of Indiana to the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals.
As recently as Thursday morning, Senator Jeff Sessions, the ranking Republican on the Judiciary Committee, labeled Judge Hamilton as too liberal during a speech before the Federalist Society. Advocates and supporters of Judge Hamilton have also jumped into the fray.
The moves afoot followed a decision by the Senate Majority Leader, Harry Reid, to file a procedural motion on Tuesday night that will likely force a vote early next week that will require the support of 60 members to push the nomination forward.
The two Hamilton decisions most often cited by critics are one that struck down the use of Christian prayer by Indiana state lawmakers, and another that struck down a segment of a state law requiring informed consent and a waiting period for women seeking abortions.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Reid speeds confirmation of anti-Jesus, pro-abortion judge" by Chelsea Schilling © 2009 WorldNetDaily 11/12/09
Republicans have attempted to block a vote on Hamilton's nomination. Alabama Sen. Jeff Sessions, the top Republican on the Senate Judiciary Committee, and Sen. James Inhofe, R-Okla., called for a filibuster in April and May. Sessions recently sent a letter to several Republican legislators in opposition to Hamilton, warning that in more than a few instances, he "has used his position as a district court judge to drive a political agenda."
Sessions said Hamilton declared in a 2003 speech that a judge's primary job is "write footnotes in the Constitution" and said he believes "empathy" should sway a judge's decisions.
"This view evidences an activist judicial philosophy," Sessions warned. "Judges are not given the power to amend the Constitution or write footnotes to it."
Also, in 2003, Hamilton struck down an Indiana informed consent law requiring women to receive information about risks and alternatives to abortion in the presence of a physician or nurse 18 hours before the procedure. Hamilton said the provision imposed an "undue burden" on women. His ruling was later dismissed by a panel of the 7th Circuit after appeal.
"In reversing, the 7th Circuit noted that Judge Hamilton had abused his judicial discretion," Sessions wrote.
Hamilton made yet another controversial ruling in the 2005 case Hinrichs v. Bosma. He ruled that the speaker of Indiana's House of Representatives could not allow "sectarian" prayers as part of its official proceedings. He said prayers that use "Christ's name or title" are sectarian, but he ruled in a post-judgment motion that it's not sectarian for a Muslim imam to offer a prayer to "Allah."
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
-- From "Conservatives Oppose Judicial Nominee" by Kate Phillips, New York Times 11/12/09
Conservative groups have been rallying their troops to urge senators to oppose the nomination of Judge David F. Hamilton of Indiana to the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals.
As recently as Thursday morning, Senator Jeff Sessions, the ranking Republican on the Judiciary Committee, labeled Judge Hamilton as too liberal during a speech before the Federalist Society. Advocates and supporters of Judge Hamilton have also jumped into the fray.
The moves afoot followed a decision by the Senate Majority Leader, Harry Reid, to file a procedural motion on Tuesday night that will likely force a vote early next week that will require the support of 60 members to push the nomination forward.
The two Hamilton decisions most often cited by critics are one that struck down the use of Christian prayer by Indiana state lawmakers, and another that struck down a segment of a state law requiring informed consent and a waiting period for women seeking abortions.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Reid speeds confirmation of anti-Jesus, pro-abortion judge" by Chelsea Schilling © 2009 WorldNetDaily 11/12/09
Republicans have attempted to block a vote on Hamilton's nomination. Alabama Sen. Jeff Sessions, the top Republican on the Senate Judiciary Committee, and Sen. James Inhofe, R-Okla., called for a filibuster in April and May. Sessions recently sent a letter to several Republican legislators in opposition to Hamilton, warning that in more than a few instances, he "has used his position as a district court judge to drive a political agenda."
Sessions said Hamilton declared in a 2003 speech that a judge's primary job is "write footnotes in the Constitution" and said he believes "empathy" should sway a judge's decisions.
"This view evidences an activist judicial philosophy," Sessions warned. "Judges are not given the power to amend the Constitution or write footnotes to it."
Also, in 2003, Hamilton struck down an Indiana informed consent law requiring women to receive information about risks and alternatives to abortion in the presence of a physician or nurse 18 hours before the procedure. Hamilton said the provision imposed an "undue burden" on women. His ruling was later dismissed by a panel of the 7th Circuit after appeal.
"In reversing, the 7th Circuit noted that Judge Hamilton had abused his judicial discretion," Sessions wrote.
Hamilton made yet another controversial ruling in the 2005 case Hinrichs v. Bosma. He ruled that the speaker of Indiana's House of Representatives could not allow "sectarian" prayers as part of its official proceedings. He said prayers that use "Christ's name or title" are sectarian, but he ruled in a post-judgment motion that it's not sectarian for a Muslim imam to offer a prayer to "Allah."
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
