The Obama administration appears to have bowed to pressure from pro-life groups that discovered it had authorized abortion funding in three states under the new high risk health insurance programs created under the new government-run health care bill, President Barack Obama signed into law.
-- From "Obama administration restricts abortion coverage in high-risk insurance pools" By Julian Pecquet, The Hill 7/29/10
A new regulation issued by the Department of Health and Human Services on Thursday clearly prohibits state high-risk pools from covering elective abortions.
“The (high-risk pool) program,” the regulation states, “is Federally-created, funded, and administered (whether directly or through contract); it is a temporary Federal insurance program in which the risk is borne by the Federal government up to a fixed appropriation. As such, the services covered by the PCIP [Pre-existing Condition Insurance Plan] program shall not include abortion services except in the case of rape or incest, or where the life of the woman would be endangered.”
An HHS spokeswoman on July 14 said the department would be issuing guidance to states setting up the pools regarding the restrictions. But Senate Republicans, armed with a report from the Congressional Research Service, said Wednesday that statement was insufficient. The senators had given HHS until Friday to issue more restrictive regulations.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Obama Admin Bows to Pressure, Appears to Limit Abortion Funding in Health Care" by Steven Ertelt, LifeNews.com Editor 7/29/10
. . . pro-life groups informed LifeNews.com this morning that they are subjecting the new regulations to scrutiny to determine whether the Obama administration is following through on its promise to withhold abortion funding.
The new regulation says the subject of taxpayer funding of abortion under the new health care bill was addressed in the executive order Obama released that pro-life groups said was not sufficient to prevent abortion funding.
It also said the health care bill did not overturn current limits on abortion funding such as the Hyde Amendment, although the amendment does not apply to the health care law.
The regulation is a temporary proposed rule, known as an interim final regulation, that begins a 60-day comment period in which the public and groups on both sides of the abortion divide can weigh in on the regulation.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
Also read: Babies Spared Death, Liberals Furious
Thursday, July 29, 2010
Fed. Judge OKs Christians Expelled over Morals
A federal judge has ruled in favor of a public university that removed a Christian student from its graduate program in school counseling over her belief that homosexuality is morally wrong. Monday's ruling, according to Julea Ward's attorneys, could result in Christian students across the country being expelled from public university for similar views.
UPDATE 12/10/12: After appeals court supports Julea Ward, Univ. pays her off to end battle and to keep its anti-Christian policies intact
-- From "Anti-gay EMU social-work student loses appeal" by David Ashenfelter, Detroit Free Press Staff Writer 7/27/10
Lawyers for a national religious liberty group said they plan to appeal a federal judge’s decision to dismiss a lawsuit filed by a former Eastern Michigan University graduate student who said she was kicked out of a master’s program because she refused on religious grounds to counsel a homosexual client.
“There are aspects of the decision that present appealable issues and we disagree with the court on his conclusions,” David French, a lawyer for Alliance Defense Fund said today.
EMU said it was pleased.
Julea Ward, who lives in Metro Detroit, said she was unfairly removed from the program after she asked that a client be assigned to another counselor. She said her religious views prohibit her from affirming or condoning gay relationships.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Court Upholds Expulsion of Counseling Student Who Opposes Homosexuality" by Todd Starnes, FoxNews.com 7/28/10
U.S. District Judge George Caram Steeh dismissed Ward’s lawsuit against Eastern Michigan University. She was removed from the school’s counseling program last year because she refused to counsel homosexual clients.
The university contended she violated school policy and the American Counseling Association code of ethics.
In his 48-page opinion, Judge Steeh said the university had a rational basis for adopting the ACA Code of Ethics.
“Furthermore, the university had a rational basis for requiring students to counsel clients without imposing their personal values,” he wrote in a portion of his ruling posted by The Detroit News. “In the case of Ms. Ward, the university determined that she would never change her behavior and would consistently refuse to counsel clients on matters with which she was personally opposed due to her religious beliefs – including homosexual relationships.”
Ward’s attorneys claim the university told her she would only be allowed to remain in the program if she went through a “remediation” program so that she could “see the error of her ways” and change her belief system about homosexuality.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Judge tosses suit similar to ASU case" by Kyle Martin, Staff Writer, The Augusta Chronicle 7/28/10
A federal judge dismissed a case this week with striking similarities to one filed by an Augusta State University student who claims discrimination because of her biblical beliefs.
The Augusta case was filed last Wednesday by graduate student Jennifer Keeton, 24, who contends her professors want her to a undergo a remediation plan because of her Christian convictions.
Specifically, Keeton has expressed her views both during and outside class that gays, lesbians and transgender people suffer "identity confusion."
In a similar incident last year, an Eastern Michigan University student working toward her master's degree was criticized by her professors for her opinions on homosexuality, according to the Alliance Defense Fund, a faith-based coalition of lawyers.
The Ward case at Eastern Michigan University started shortly after she enrolled in the counseling program. Her professors openly mocked her beliefs and called her a "homophobe" when she expressed her view that homosexuality is wrong, according to the Alliance Defense Fund.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
UPDATE 12/10/12: After appeals court supports Julea Ward, Univ. pays her off to end battle and to keep its anti-Christian policies intact
-- From "Anti-gay EMU social-work student loses appeal" by David Ashenfelter, Detroit Free Press Staff Writer 7/27/10
Lawyers for a national religious liberty group said they plan to appeal a federal judge’s decision to dismiss a lawsuit filed by a former Eastern Michigan University graduate student who said she was kicked out of a master’s program because she refused on religious grounds to counsel a homosexual client.
“There are aspects of the decision that present appealable issues and we disagree with the court on his conclusions,” David French, a lawyer for Alliance Defense Fund said today.
EMU said it was pleased.
Julea Ward, who lives in Metro Detroit, said she was unfairly removed from the program after she asked that a client be assigned to another counselor. She said her religious views prohibit her from affirming or condoning gay relationships.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Court Upholds Expulsion of Counseling Student Who Opposes Homosexuality" by Todd Starnes, FoxNews.com 7/28/10
U.S. District Judge George Caram Steeh dismissed Ward’s lawsuit against Eastern Michigan University. She was removed from the school’s counseling program last year because she refused to counsel homosexual clients.
The university contended she violated school policy and the American Counseling Association code of ethics.
In his 48-page opinion, Judge Steeh said the university had a rational basis for adopting the ACA Code of Ethics.
“Furthermore, the university had a rational basis for requiring students to counsel clients without imposing their personal values,” he wrote in a portion of his ruling posted by The Detroit News. “In the case of Ms. Ward, the university determined that she would never change her behavior and would consistently refuse to counsel clients on matters with which she was personally opposed due to her religious beliefs – including homosexual relationships.”
Ward’s attorneys claim the university told her she would only be allowed to remain in the program if she went through a “remediation” program so that she could “see the error of her ways” and change her belief system about homosexuality.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Judge tosses suit similar to ASU case" by Kyle Martin, Staff Writer, The Augusta Chronicle 7/28/10
A federal judge dismissed a case this week with striking similarities to one filed by an Augusta State University student who claims discrimination because of her biblical beliefs.
The Augusta case was filed last Wednesday by graduate student Jennifer Keeton, 24, who contends her professors want her to a undergo a remediation plan because of her Christian convictions.
Specifically, Keeton has expressed her views both during and outside class that gays, lesbians and transgender people suffer "identity confusion."
In a similar incident last year, an Eastern Michigan University student working toward her master's degree was criticized by her professors for her opinions on homosexuality, according to the Alliance Defense Fund, a faith-based coalition of lawyers.
The Ward case at Eastern Michigan University started shortly after she enrolled in the counseling program. Her professors openly mocked her beliefs and called her a "homophobe" when she expressed her view that homosexuality is wrong, according to the Alliance Defense Fund.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
Wednesday, July 28, 2010
Prayer in Legislature Desired by Dems & GOP Alike
Despite the recent anti-prayer lawsuit wave, both Democrat and Republican voters in North Carolina want guest chaplains in government to pray in Jesus' name, according to a new poll by the Civitas Institute.
-- From "Poll: Majority of Democrats and Republicans Don’t Like Forbidding Mention of Jesus in State House Chamber" by Staff Reports, Lincoln Tribune (Lincolnton, NC) 7/28/10
According to the live caller poll of 600 likely voters, 70 percent of voters said they disagree with the policy that forbids chaplains from mentioning Jesus in their prayer. Twenty-seven percent of voters said they agree, and three percent said they are not sure.
Republicans oppose the guidelines by a 74 percent-24 percent margin. Democrats also disagree with a 70 percent-26 percent margin in opposition. Moreover, unaffiliated voters also oppose the policy by 61 percent-31 percent.
“Speaker Hackney’s attempt to stifle free speech has backfired, evidenced by voter disagreement with this policy that caters to a minority viewpoint,” said Civitas Institute president Francis De Luca. “Has political correctness gone so awry that we can no longer mention Jesus while saying a prayer in a Judeo-Christian nation? What is next, no prayer to open the session?”
To read the entire article, CLICK HERE.
-- From "Poll: Majority of Democrats and Republicans Don’t Like Forbidding Mention of Jesus in State House Chamber" by Staff Reports, Lincoln Tribune (Lincolnton, NC) 7/28/10
According to the live caller poll of 600 likely voters, 70 percent of voters said they disagree with the policy that forbids chaplains from mentioning Jesus in their prayer. Twenty-seven percent of voters said they agree, and three percent said they are not sure.
Republicans oppose the guidelines by a 74 percent-24 percent margin. Democrats also disagree with a 70 percent-26 percent margin in opposition. Moreover, unaffiliated voters also oppose the policy by 61 percent-31 percent.
“Speaker Hackney’s attempt to stifle free speech has backfired, evidenced by voter disagreement with this policy that caters to a minority viewpoint,” said Civitas Institute president Francis De Luca. “Has political correctness gone so awry that we can no longer mention Jesus while saying a prayer in a Judeo-Christian nation? What is next, no prayer to open the session?”
To read the entire article, CLICK HERE.
Tuesday, July 27, 2010
Abortion is Election Issue with Some Candidates
The "hot button" issue of abortion is trumpeted by a minority of candidates -- even some Republicans with a pro-life record avoid the issue. Yet, pro-life organizations continue to back such stealth pro-life candidates, as some social conservative strategists believe it's a losing position.
Voters should scrutinize their local candidates' positions; some previously pro-life politicians have wiped "abortion" from their websites.
UPDATE 9/9/10: Mississippi Governor Hailey Barber says pro-life advocates should ditch social issues.
UPDATE 8/17/10: Why conservatives have abandoned The Culture War (commentary)
-- From "Election 2010 Heats Up For Pro-Life Groups, 100 Days Until November Elections" by Steven Ertelt, LifeNews.com Editor 7/26/10
With just months before polls open -- and less time in states with early voting -- the push is on now by pro-life groups and political organization to get involved.
House Minority Leader John Boehner, a pro-life Ohio Republican, says now is the time for those upset with the pro-abortion health care bill Obama and his allies approved to stand up.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Abortion provision threatens Dems" by Jeanne Cummings, Politico 7/27/10
Freshman Rep. Kathleen Dahlkemper (D-Pa.) seemed destined for a tough reelection campaign from the moment she was sworn into office two years ago.
Now, the issues of health care and abortion could make Dahlkemper’s campaign against Republican Mike Kelly even tougher.
The question being debated: Will the reform of the health care system create a loophole that allows taxpayer money to fund abortions? The White House says it won’t; abortion opponents say it will.
[Marilyn Musgrave, a former Colorado congresswoman who is project director of the Votes Have Consequences campaign for the conservative women’s group Susan B. Anthony List,] will be targeting Ohio Rep. Steve Driehaus and Indiana Reps. Joe Donnelly and Brad Ellsworth, who is running for Senate. Musgrave said Rep. Alan Mollohan of West Virginia was also a target of her campaign, and he was defeated in the Democratic primary by anti-abortion candidate Mike Oliverio.
Meanwhile, Democrats for Life has launched a website aimed at refuting mischaracterizations about the law and highlighting the Whole-Life Heroes, the 16 anti-abortion Democrats who backed the reform bill.
David Kozak, a political scientist at Gannon University in Erie, Pa., said the outcome of the abortion skirmish could have an impact on the race.
As with many things in politics, money could influence the effectiveness of the issue campaigns.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Abortion returns to campaign forefront" by Sean Lengell, Washington Times 7/19/10
An Obama administration effort to rein in states treading toward using new health care laws to fund abortions - and provide political cover for pro-life Democrats - reignited a politically explosive issue that Republicans and pro-life activists are eager to exploit in the lead-up to the fall midterm elections.
The thorny abortion issue almost derailed President Obama's health care overhaul earlier this year, as many conservative House Democrats threatened to withhold support if the measure called for spending federal dollars on abortions.
House Minority Leader John A. Boehner and other Ohio Republicans on Monday sent a letter to Ohio Gov. Ted Strickland urging him not to include elective abortions as a covered benefit.
Nancy Keenan, president of NARAL Pro-Choice America, a leading abortion rights group, called the Obama administration's exclusion of abortion coverage from newly created high-risk pools "wrongheaded and inexplicable."
[Norman Ornstein of the American Enterprise Institute, a conservative-leaning think tank] added, however, that in an election cycle dominated by the sluggish economy and high unemployment, abortion will have little impact when voters go to the polls in November.
"This is not going to be the factor that determines these elections, even at the margins," he said. What will "is a combination of the pessimism that people are feeling about the state of the world."
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
Voters should scrutinize their local candidates' positions; some previously pro-life politicians have wiped "abortion" from their websites.
UPDATE 9/9/10: Mississippi Governor Hailey Barber says pro-life advocates should ditch social issues.
UPDATE 8/17/10: Why conservatives have abandoned The Culture War (commentary)
-- From "Election 2010 Heats Up For Pro-Life Groups, 100 Days Until November Elections" by Steven Ertelt, LifeNews.com Editor 7/26/10
With just months before polls open -- and less time in states with early voting -- the push is on now by pro-life groups and political organization to get involved.
House Minority Leader John Boehner, a pro-life Ohio Republican, says now is the time for those upset with the pro-abortion health care bill Obama and his allies approved to stand up.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Abortion provision threatens Dems" by Jeanne Cummings, Politico 7/27/10
Freshman Rep. Kathleen Dahlkemper (D-Pa.) seemed destined for a tough reelection campaign from the moment she was sworn into office two years ago.
Now, the issues of health care and abortion could make Dahlkemper’s campaign against Republican Mike Kelly even tougher.
The question being debated: Will the reform of the health care system create a loophole that allows taxpayer money to fund abortions? The White House says it won’t; abortion opponents say it will.
[Marilyn Musgrave, a former Colorado congresswoman who is project director of the Votes Have Consequences campaign for the conservative women’s group Susan B. Anthony List,] will be targeting Ohio Rep. Steve Driehaus and Indiana Reps. Joe Donnelly and Brad Ellsworth, who is running for Senate. Musgrave said Rep. Alan Mollohan of West Virginia was also a target of her campaign, and he was defeated in the Democratic primary by anti-abortion candidate Mike Oliverio.
Meanwhile, Democrats for Life has launched a website aimed at refuting mischaracterizations about the law and highlighting the Whole-Life Heroes, the 16 anti-abortion Democrats who backed the reform bill.
David Kozak, a political scientist at Gannon University in Erie, Pa., said the outcome of the abortion skirmish could have an impact on the race.
As with many things in politics, money could influence the effectiveness of the issue campaigns.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Abortion returns to campaign forefront" by Sean Lengell, Washington Times 7/19/10
An Obama administration effort to rein in states treading toward using new health care laws to fund abortions - and provide political cover for pro-life Democrats - reignited a politically explosive issue that Republicans and pro-life activists are eager to exploit in the lead-up to the fall midterm elections.
The thorny abortion issue almost derailed President Obama's health care overhaul earlier this year, as many conservative House Democrats threatened to withhold support if the measure called for spending federal dollars on abortions.
House Minority Leader John A. Boehner and other Ohio Republicans on Monday sent a letter to Ohio Gov. Ted Strickland urging him not to include elective abortions as a covered benefit.
Nancy Keenan, president of NARAL Pro-Choice America, a leading abortion rights group, called the Obama administration's exclusion of abortion coverage from newly created high-risk pools "wrongheaded and inexplicable."
[Norman Ornstein of the American Enterprise Institute, a conservative-leaning think tank] added, however, that in an election cycle dominated by the sluggish economy and high unemployment, abortion will have little impact when voters go to the polls in November.
"This is not going to be the factor that determines these elections, even at the margins," he said. What will "is a combination of the pessimism that people are feeling about the state of the world."
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
'Morning-after' Pill Gone at Pharmacists Choosing in WA
Pharmacists in the State of Washington may soon be free to choose the medications they want to provide in their pharmacies – and those they don’t – after a lawsuit prompted the state’s pharmacy board to reevaluate the current regulations.
-- From "Washington pharmacy board making Plan B rules" by Jordan Schrader, The Olympian 7/14/10
Pharmacists who object to selling Plan B emergency contraception suddenly have the upper hand in their legal fight with the state.
In a reversal, the state Board of Pharmacy now wants to let pharmacies refuse to dispense that or any other drug, as long as they refer patients to a pharmacy that sells it.
It's essentially what pharmacies suing the state over moral objections wanted all along, said Kevin Stormans, co-owner of Ralph's Thriftway in Olympia, where druggists don't stock Plan B. "That's what we've done for as long as I can remember," he said.
A trial was set to begin July 26, but a judge postponed it indefinitely Monday at the request of lawyers for both sides, who cited the board's June decision to begin a new rulemaking process.
The deal surprised women's-rights advocates who had watched the pharmacy board pass a rule in 2007 at the urging of Gov. Chris Gregoire that barred pharmacies from refusing to sell a legal drug out of a moral or religious objection. The rule never took effect, awaiting the outcome of the lawsuit.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Washington State to Allow Pharmacies A Choice in Stocking ‘Morning-After Pill’" by Nick Dean, CNSNews.com 7/27/10
The ["morning-after pill"], Levonorgestrel, is promoted as an “emergency contraceptive” for use after sexual intercourse. It is controversial because, in some cases, it works as an abortifacient by preventing the implantation in the uterus of a fertilized egg. Concerns also have been raised about health risks to women.
The regulation requiring pharmacists to stock Plan B prompted two pharmacists and a pharmacy to bring a lawsuit against the state.
Proceedings in Stormans v. Selecky were suspended this month after the two sides agreed to stay the case while the state pharmacy board considers changing its current regulations.
The motion to stay the trial was agreed upon to allow the state’s pharmacy board to begin the process of amending the rules, especially the one in question, Sally Boyer, executive director of the Washington State Board of Pharmacy and Clinical Facilities, told CNSNews.com.
Eric Rassbach, the pharmacists' lawyer and national director of litigation for the Becket Fund for Religious Liberty, argues that a rule requiring pharmacists to stock Plan B is unconstitutional.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
-- From "Washington pharmacy board making Plan B rules" by Jordan Schrader, The Olympian 7/14/10
Pharmacists who object to selling Plan B emergency contraception suddenly have the upper hand in their legal fight with the state.
In a reversal, the state Board of Pharmacy now wants to let pharmacies refuse to dispense that or any other drug, as long as they refer patients to a pharmacy that sells it.
It's essentially what pharmacies suing the state over moral objections wanted all along, said Kevin Stormans, co-owner of Ralph's Thriftway in Olympia, where druggists don't stock Plan B. "That's what we've done for as long as I can remember," he said.
A trial was set to begin July 26, but a judge postponed it indefinitely Monday at the request of lawyers for both sides, who cited the board's June decision to begin a new rulemaking process.
The deal surprised women's-rights advocates who had watched the pharmacy board pass a rule in 2007 at the urging of Gov. Chris Gregoire that barred pharmacies from refusing to sell a legal drug out of a moral or religious objection. The rule never took effect, awaiting the outcome of the lawsuit.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Washington State to Allow Pharmacies A Choice in Stocking ‘Morning-After Pill’" by Nick Dean, CNSNews.com 7/27/10
The ["morning-after pill"], Levonorgestrel, is promoted as an “emergency contraceptive” for use after sexual intercourse. It is controversial because, in some cases, it works as an abortifacient by preventing the implantation in the uterus of a fertilized egg. Concerns also have been raised about health risks to women.
The regulation requiring pharmacists to stock Plan B prompted two pharmacists and a pharmacy to bring a lawsuit against the state.
Proceedings in Stormans v. Selecky were suspended this month after the two sides agreed to stay the case while the state pharmacy board considers changing its current regulations.
The motion to stay the trial was agreed upon to allow the state’s pharmacy board to begin the process of amending the rules, especially the one in question, Sally Boyer, executive director of the Washington State Board of Pharmacy and Clinical Facilities, told CNSNews.com.
Eric Rassbach, the pharmacists' lawyer and national director of litigation for the Becket Fund for Religious Liberty, argues that a rule requiring pharmacists to stock Plan B is unconstitutional.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
Monday, July 26, 2010
Civil Rights Movement for Unborn
Dr. Alveda King, the niece of civil rights icon Martin Luther King, Jr., organized the Pro-Life Freedom Ride with the national director of Priests for Life, Father Frank Pavone.
-- From "Abortion Protesters Hold Pro-Life Freedom Ride" by Kim Carapucci, WIAT-TV CBS42.com (Birmingham, AL) 7/24/10
Pro-life supporters held an anti-abortion rally in Birmingham on Saturday, calling for justice for the unborn. Hundreds convened at the Planned Parenthood on 27th Place South for the first-ever Pro-Life Freedom Ride. The Ride was the first convoy of its kind, carrying people from Birmingham to Atlanta to speak out against abortion.
Protesters say abortion is not a women’s issue or a religious issue. They say abortion is “a violation of civil rights of more than one million people every year.”
That is why they’re resurrecting the Freedom Rides from the 1960s, hoping to send a message: the unborn are denied inalienable rights.
Their hope is to eventually end abortion, if not through protest, then through prayer.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Freedom Ride Tactics to Protest Abortion" by Elizabeth Prann, FOXNews.com 7/24/10
This event is a first of its kind. It borrows tactics from the civil rights movement to bring attention to what many say is a woman’s right to choose.
“We’re trying to do a couple different things,” said spokesperson Leslie Palma. “Abortion is this generation’s greatest violation of civil rights. We also are trying to get African-Americans on board a civil rights movement.”
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
-- From "Abortion Protesters Hold Pro-Life Freedom Ride" by Kim Carapucci, WIAT-TV CBS42.com (Birmingham, AL) 7/24/10
Pro-life supporters held an anti-abortion rally in Birmingham on Saturday, calling for justice for the unborn. Hundreds convened at the Planned Parenthood on 27th Place South for the first-ever Pro-Life Freedom Ride. The Ride was the first convoy of its kind, carrying people from Birmingham to Atlanta to speak out against abortion.
Protesters say abortion is not a women’s issue or a religious issue. They say abortion is “a violation of civil rights of more than one million people every year.”
That is why they’re resurrecting the Freedom Rides from the 1960s, hoping to send a message: the unborn are denied inalienable rights.
Their hope is to eventually end abortion, if not through protest, then through prayer.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Freedom Ride Tactics to Protest Abortion" by Elizabeth Prann, FOXNews.com 7/24/10
This event is a first of its kind. It borrows tactics from the civil rights movement to bring attention to what many say is a woman’s right to choose.
“We’re trying to do a couple different things,” said spokesperson Leslie Palma. “Abortion is this generation’s greatest violation of civil rights. We also are trying to get African-Americans on board a civil rights movement.”
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
Atheist Org. Swamped Suing to Stop Prayer
There are more legal challenges to prayer in the United States than ever before, says Annie Laurie Gaylor, co-founder of the Freedom From Religion Foundation, an atheist organization whose business is booming as Americans increasingly tackle church vs. state issues.
-- From "Legal Challenges to Prayer on the Rise" By Lauren Green, FoxNews.com 7/23/10
Arizona school children are told they can't pray in front of the Supreme Court building ... Two University of Texas Arlington employees are fired for praying over a co-worker's cubicle after work hours ... In Cranston, R.I., a high school banner causes controversy when a parent complains it contains a prayer and demands that it be removed.
"We've never had more complaints about government prayer," Gaylor says. "We have just hired a second staff attorney in July. It's turned into a cottage industry for our attorneys."
The foundation has had a huge volume of complaints about prayer in the public sector, including numerous issues involving civic and government meetings where sessions have traditionally begun with a prayer or moment of silence.
"Religious liberties are under attack across the country," [Nate Kellum, an attorney with the Alliance Defense Fund,] says. "My sense is that there's some type of knee-jerk reaction, almost an allergic reaction, if someone sees the expression of religion," he says.
And the bulk of the complaints are directed at Christians, he says.
"There's an overreaching presumption that there's something wrong," he says.
Kelly Shackelford, president of the Liberty Institute, . . . [said,] "There's a hostility, and there are folks who want to change this country and want to engage in some kind of religious cleansing."
Shackelford is also part of the legal team that filed a brief on Thursday defending the National Day of Prayer, which a federal judge ruled unconstitutional in April.
To read the entire article, CLICK HERE.
-- From "Legal Challenges to Prayer on the Rise" By Lauren Green, FoxNews.com 7/23/10
Arizona school children are told they can't pray in front of the Supreme Court building ... Two University of Texas Arlington employees are fired for praying over a co-worker's cubicle after work hours ... In Cranston, R.I., a high school banner causes controversy when a parent complains it contains a prayer and demands that it be removed.
"We've never had more complaints about government prayer," Gaylor says. "We have just hired a second staff attorney in July. It's turned into a cottage industry for our attorneys."
The foundation has had a huge volume of complaints about prayer in the public sector, including numerous issues involving civic and government meetings where sessions have traditionally begun with a prayer or moment of silence.
"Religious liberties are under attack across the country," [Nate Kellum, an attorney with the Alliance Defense Fund,] says. "My sense is that there's some type of knee-jerk reaction, almost an allergic reaction, if someone sees the expression of religion," he says.
And the bulk of the complaints are directed at Christians, he says.
"There's an overreaching presumption that there's something wrong," he says.
Kelly Shackelford, president of the Liberty Institute, . . . [said,] "There's a hostility, and there are folks who want to change this country and want to engage in some kind of religious cleansing."
Shackelford is also part of the legal team that filed a brief on Thursday defending the National Day of Prayer, which a federal judge ruled unconstitutional in April.
To read the entire article, CLICK HERE.
Sunday, July 25, 2010
NJ Gov. Vetos Funding Planned Parenthood
New Jersey Governor Chris Christie vetoed restoration of $7.5 million of family planning funds that he'd previously cut from the state budget.
UPDATE 11/24/10: State Assembly still short votes to override veto
UPDATE 9/21/10: Governor's veto sustained by Senate
UPDATE 7/28/10: Mainstream media reacts to funding cuts
-- From "Gov. Christie vetoes bill restoring $7.5M grant for family planning" by Susan K. Livio, Statehouse Bureau, The Star-Ledger 7/24/10
Democrats who control the Legislature said they are weighing whether to seek an override on the bills, which would require 54 votes in the 80-member Assembly and 27 in the 40-member Senate.
Although Christie said he opposed family planning bill purely on budgetary grounds, his decision is likely to stoke an ongoing ideological debate among conservative Republicans on whether the state ought to financially support clinics run by Planned Parenthood, which provides abortions and birth control — an issue brought up several times by Assemblyman Jay Webber (R-Morris), the Republican state Committee chairman.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "New Jersey Governor Christie Vetoes Bill Sending Millions to Planned Parenthood" by Steven Ertelt, LifeNews.com Editor 7/23/10
The funds go to 58 family planning clinics but Planned Parenthood, the nation's largest abortion chain, runs 29 of the facilities.
Christie thinks there's little reason to send the abortion centers $7.5 million when the state currently faces an $11 billion deficit.
"Reproductive health care services will continue to be available in each of New Jersey's 21 counties, including Planned Parenthood clinics, local health department clinics, standing free clinics, and hospital-based clinics," he said.
Marie Tasy, executive director of New Jersey Right to Life, told LifeNews.com this afternoon, "For far too long and without voter approval, NJ taxpayers were forced to fund Planned Parenthood in the state budget under 'family planning services.'"
"Despite assertions to the contrary from some lawmakers that none of the money will be used for abortion, the funds will be used for abortion because these centers have the mutual financial advantage of referring pregnant clients to one of the three “Planned Parenthood/family planning” centers that perform abortion," she said.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
UPDATE 11/24/10: State Assembly still short votes to override veto
UPDATE 9/21/10: Governor's veto sustained by Senate
UPDATE 7/28/10: Mainstream media reacts to funding cuts
-- From "Gov. Christie vetoes bill restoring $7.5M grant for family planning" by Susan K. Livio, Statehouse Bureau, The Star-Ledger 7/24/10
Democrats who control the Legislature said they are weighing whether to seek an override on the bills, which would require 54 votes in the 80-member Assembly and 27 in the 40-member Senate.
Although Christie said he opposed family planning bill purely on budgetary grounds, his decision is likely to stoke an ongoing ideological debate among conservative Republicans on whether the state ought to financially support clinics run by Planned Parenthood, which provides abortions and birth control — an issue brought up several times by Assemblyman Jay Webber (R-Morris), the Republican state Committee chairman.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "New Jersey Governor Christie Vetoes Bill Sending Millions to Planned Parenthood" by Steven Ertelt, LifeNews.com Editor 7/23/10
The funds go to 58 family planning clinics but Planned Parenthood, the nation's largest abortion chain, runs 29 of the facilities.
Christie thinks there's little reason to send the abortion centers $7.5 million when the state currently faces an $11 billion deficit.
"Reproductive health care services will continue to be available in each of New Jersey's 21 counties, including Planned Parenthood clinics, local health department clinics, standing free clinics, and hospital-based clinics," he said.
Marie Tasy, executive director of New Jersey Right to Life, told LifeNews.com this afternoon, "For far too long and without voter approval, NJ taxpayers were forced to fund Planned Parenthood in the state budget under 'family planning services.'"
"Despite assertions to the contrary from some lawmakers that none of the money will be used for abortion, the funds will be used for abortion because these centers have the mutual financial advantage of referring pregnant clients to one of the three “Planned Parenthood/family planning” centers that perform abortion," she said.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
Saturday, July 24, 2010
Italian Homosexual Priests Exposed
The diocese of Rome criticized journalists for creating a scandal, and urged all homosexual priests to resign, saying they "ought not to have become priests."
-- From "Catholic church embarrassed by gay priests revelations" by John Hooper in Rome, The Guardian 7/24/10
Using hidden cameras, the weekly Panorama [magazine], owned by Italy's prime minister, Silvio Berlusconi, captured priests visiting gay clubs and bars and having sex. The Vatican does not condemn homosexuals, but it teaches that gay sex is "intrinsically disordered". In one of his earliest moves, pope Benedict barred actively gay men from studying for the priesthood.
A member of the clergy quoted by the magazine put the proportion of gay priests in the Italian capital at "98%". The Rome diocese insisted the vast majority of priests in the city were "models of morality for all", while adding that the number of gay clergyman was "small, but not to be written off as isolated cases". A review eight years ago of research on the American church concluded that between a quarter and a half of seminarians and priests there were homosexual.
A former Italian MP and gay activist, Franco Grillini, said: "If all the gays in the Catholic church were to leave it at once – something we would very much like – they would cause it serious operational problems."
To read the entire article, CLICK HERE.
Read this related article: Archbishop Blames Pro-homosexual Culture for Priest Abuse
-- From "Catholic church embarrassed by gay priests revelations" by John Hooper in Rome, The Guardian 7/24/10
Using hidden cameras, the weekly Panorama [magazine], owned by Italy's prime minister, Silvio Berlusconi, captured priests visiting gay clubs and bars and having sex. The Vatican does not condemn homosexuals, but it teaches that gay sex is "intrinsically disordered". In one of his earliest moves, pope Benedict barred actively gay men from studying for the priesthood.
A member of the clergy quoted by the magazine put the proportion of gay priests in the Italian capital at "98%". The Rome diocese insisted the vast majority of priests in the city were "models of morality for all", while adding that the number of gay clergyman was "small, but not to be written off as isolated cases". A review eight years ago of research on the American church concluded that between a quarter and a half of seminarians and priests there were homosexual.
A former Italian MP and gay activist, Franco Grillini, said: "If all the gays in the Catholic church were to leave it at once – something we would very much like – they would cause it serious operational problems."
To read the entire article, CLICK HERE.
Read this related article: Archbishop Blames Pro-homosexual Culture for Priest Abuse
Montana Same-sex Partnerships: ACLU Fights Voters
Despite the Montana constitution that defines marriage as one man and one woman, homosexualists are pressing the courts to defy the will of the people to achieve the same legal standing for same-sex couples as those married.
-- From "ACLU sues Montana over rights for same-sex couples" Associated Press 7/22/10
The ACLU filed the lawsuit Thursday in Helena on behalf of seven gay couples living in the state.
The plaintiffs say state law denies them the same rights as married couples when it comes to health care, end-of-life decisions and inheritance.
They are asking a judge to require the state to make laws and regulations giving gay couples and their families the same protections as married couples.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Montana ACLU files lawsuit seeking same-sex protections" By KXLH News, Helena, MT 7/23/10
The Montana Constitution bars recognition of same-sex marriage.
Betsy Griffing, legal director for ACLU Montana, said, “It’s unfair for same-sex couples who have made commitments and formed families to be treated by the state like legal strangers. Lesbian, gay and bisexual Montanans are valuable and productive members of society who should be treated fairly if their partner is in the hospital or dies without a will.”
Plaintiffs in the case Donaldson and Guggenheim v. State of Montana are Mary Anne Guggenheim and Jan Donaldson of Helena, Stacey Haugland and Mary Leslie of Bozeman, Mike Long and Rich Parker of Bozeman, MJ Williams and Nancy Owens of Basin, Rick Wagner and Gary Stallings of Butte, Denise Boettcher and Kellie Gibson of Laurel, and Casey Charles and David Wilson of Missoula.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
-- From "ACLU sues Montana over rights for same-sex couples" Associated Press 7/22/10
The ACLU filed the lawsuit Thursday in Helena on behalf of seven gay couples living in the state.
The plaintiffs say state law denies them the same rights as married couples when it comes to health care, end-of-life decisions and inheritance.
They are asking a judge to require the state to make laws and regulations giving gay couples and their families the same protections as married couples.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Montana ACLU files lawsuit seeking same-sex protections" By KXLH News, Helena, MT 7/23/10
The Montana Constitution bars recognition of same-sex marriage.
Betsy Griffing, legal director for ACLU Montana, said, “It’s unfair for same-sex couples who have made commitments and formed families to be treated by the state like legal strangers. Lesbian, gay and bisexual Montanans are valuable and productive members of society who should be treated fairly if their partner is in the hospital or dies without a will.”
Plaintiffs in the case Donaldson and Guggenheim v. State of Montana are Mary Anne Guggenheim and Jan Donaldson of Helena, Stacey Haugland and Mary Leslie of Bozeman, Mike Long and Rich Parker of Bozeman, MJ Williams and Nancy Owens of Basin, Rick Wagner and Gary Stallings of Butte, Denise Boettcher and Kellie Gibson of Laurel, and Casey Charles and David Wilson of Missoula.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
Friday, July 23, 2010
Restrict Abortion, Say 61% of Americans
A large majority of U.S. adults either want abortion illegal or legal with some level of restriction -- similar to all other recent polls.
-- From "One-in-Six Americans Would Ban Abortion" Source: Angus Reid Public Opinion 7/21/10
Do you think abortion should be legal under any circumstances, legal only under certain circumstances, or illegal in all circumstances?
To read the full poll data, CLICK HERE.
From "Poll: More than Half of Americans Favor Abortion Restrictions" by Peter J. Smith, LifeSiteNews.com 7/22/10
Recent polls have found that America appears to be trending pro-life. Earlier in May, a Gallup-commissioned poll found for the third consecutive time that more Americans identified themselves as “pro-life” rather than “pro-choice,” leading the pollster to conclude that “pro-life” had become the “new normal” on the question of abortion.
In that survey, 47% of Americans identified themselves as “pro-life,” while 45% said they were “pro-choice.” Last May, the divide was 51% to 42% in favor of “pro-life.”
Another survey published in January 2010 and commissioned by the Knights of Columbus found that the post-baby boom generation showed a clear pro-life trend. Approximately 58% of adults (18-29), the “Millennial” generation, said they considered abortion to be “morally wrong.” Sixty percent of Gen-Xers (ages 30-44), the generation immediately after the Baby Boom generation, also saw abortion as “morally wrong.”
In contrast, amongst the Boomers (ages 45-64) just over a majority (51%) said abortion is “morally wrong.”
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
-- From "One-in-Six Americans Would Ban Abortion" Source: Angus Reid Public Opinion 7/21/10
Do you think abortion should be legal under any circumstances, legal only under certain circumstances, or illegal in all circumstances?
Legal under any circumstances: 30%Methodology: Online interviews with 1,002 American adults, conducted on Jul. 8 and Jul. 9, 2010. Margin of error is 3.1 per cent.
Legal only under certain circumstances: 46%
Illegal in all circumstances: 15%
Not sure: 9%
To read the full poll data, CLICK HERE.
From "Poll: More than Half of Americans Favor Abortion Restrictions" by Peter J. Smith, LifeSiteNews.com 7/22/10
Recent polls have found that America appears to be trending pro-life. Earlier in May, a Gallup-commissioned poll found for the third consecutive time that more Americans identified themselves as “pro-life” rather than “pro-choice,” leading the pollster to conclude that “pro-life” had become the “new normal” on the question of abortion.
In that survey, 47% of Americans identified themselves as “pro-life,” while 45% said they were “pro-choice.” Last May, the divide was 51% to 42% in favor of “pro-life.”
Another survey published in January 2010 and commissioned by the Knights of Columbus found that the post-baby boom generation showed a clear pro-life trend. Approximately 58% of adults (18-29), the “Millennial” generation, said they considered abortion to be “morally wrong.” Sixty percent of Gen-Xers (ages 30-44), the generation immediately after the Baby Boom generation, also saw abortion as “morally wrong.”
In contrast, amongst the Boomers (ages 45-64) just over a majority (51%) said abortion is “morally wrong.”
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
Reject Christ, Says Univ. to Grad Student
An Augusta State University graduate student is facing dismissal from the university's counseling program unless she silences her convictions on homosexuality and gender identity, according to court documents filed Wednesday.
UPDATE 12/20/11: Federal Court Rules out Christian Beliefs at University
UPDATE 12/6/10: Court battle continues
UPDATE 7/26/10: National counseling code of ethics forbids such Christian faith beliefs
-- From "Christian student sues ASU" by Stephanie Toone, Staff Writer, The Augusta Chronicle 7/22/10
Jennifer Keeton is suing ASU for trying to silence her religious views. Jennifer Keeton, 24, plans to press forward with her lawsuit against the university if she is not allowed to retain her biblical viewpoints and remain a graduate student at ASU, according to the complaint filed by the Alliance Defense Fund. The complaint names ASU President William Bloodworth and professors Mary Jane Anderson-Wiley, Paulette Schenck and Richard Deaner as defendants, according to the documents filed in United States District Court in Augusta.
"Jennifer Keeton has not been accused of mistreating a client," said David French, senior counsel for ADF, a legal alliance that supports religious freedom. "She's being told, 'You must change your beliefs or we'll deny you a degree.' "
Keeton claims that she has voiced her Christian beliefs inside and outside the classroom on homosexuality and other biblical teachings. ASU faculty has ordered her to undergo a remediation plan, which would include diversity sensitivity workshops, she says.
Professors also suggested that she attend Augusta's Gay Pride Parade last month, Keeton told her attorneys. As a part of the plan, she would report back once a month to faculty to determine whether the activities have an impact on her convictions.
The defense fund has handled similar cases the past few years. A Missouri State University social work student filed suit against the university when she was asked to change her views on same-sex adoption, French said. The university later settled. An Eastern Michigan University counseling student filed suit when the university threatened to dismiss her for her religious views. The case is still pending.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "'Lose Christianity or face expulsion'" by Bob Unruh © 2010 WorldNetDaily 7/22/10
School officials Mary Jane Anderson-Wiley, Paulette Schenck and Richard Deaner demanded student Jen Keeton, 24, go through a "remediation" program after she asserted homosexuality is a behavioral choice, not a "state of being" as a professor said, according to the complaint.
Also named as defendants in the case that developed in May and June are other administrators and the university system's board of regents.
The remediation program was to include "sensitivity training" on homosexual issues, additional outside study on literature promoting homosexuality and the plan that she attend a "gay pride parade" and report on it.
School spokeswoman Kathy Schose today declined to address the allegations in the case but agreed to discuss the counselor teaching program in general.
She cited the American Counseling Association's code of ethics and said students would be required to adopt its provisions.
"There is a code of ethics that govern counselors," she said. "They have to abide by the code of the profession."
Ethics codes generally govern behavior, and Schose denied the school was attempting to alter any student's beliefs or moral values.
But the lawsuit specifically charges the faculty members targeted Keeton's biblically based belief system and values, not her behavior regarding the treatment of any clients, which had not yet happened.
"Schenck told Miss Keeton that it was unethical for her to believe that her convictions should also be shared by other persons. … Schenck explained that while Miss Keeton was free to have points of view about how she personally should conduct and define herself, she may not believe that others should adopt the standards she personally is convinced are true," the lawsuit said.
"Anderson-Wiley confirmed that Miss Keeton will not be able to successfully complete the remediation plan and thus complete the ASU counseling program unless she commits to affirming the propriety of gay and lesbian relationships if such an opportunity arises in her future professional efforts," it continued.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
UPDATE 12/20/11: Federal Court Rules out Christian Beliefs at University
UPDATE 12/6/10: Court battle continues
UPDATE 7/26/10: National counseling code of ethics forbids such Christian faith beliefs
-- From "Christian student sues ASU" by Stephanie Toone, Staff Writer, The Augusta Chronicle 7/22/10
Jennifer Keeton is suing ASU for trying to silence her religious views. Jennifer Keeton, 24, plans to press forward with her lawsuit against the university if she is not allowed to retain her biblical viewpoints and remain a graduate student at ASU, according to the complaint filed by the Alliance Defense Fund. The complaint names ASU President William Bloodworth and professors Mary Jane Anderson-Wiley, Paulette Schenck and Richard Deaner as defendants, according to the documents filed in United States District Court in Augusta.
"Jennifer Keeton has not been accused of mistreating a client," said David French, senior counsel for ADF, a legal alliance that supports religious freedom. "She's being told, 'You must change your beliefs or we'll deny you a degree.' "
Keeton claims that she has voiced her Christian beliefs inside and outside the classroom on homosexuality and other biblical teachings. ASU faculty has ordered her to undergo a remediation plan, which would include diversity sensitivity workshops, she says.
Professors also suggested that she attend Augusta's Gay Pride Parade last month, Keeton told her attorneys. As a part of the plan, she would report back once a month to faculty to determine whether the activities have an impact on her convictions.
The defense fund has handled similar cases the past few years. A Missouri State University social work student filed suit against the university when she was asked to change her views on same-sex adoption, French said. The university later settled. An Eastern Michigan University counseling student filed suit when the university threatened to dismiss her for her religious views. The case is still pending.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "'Lose Christianity or face expulsion'" by Bob Unruh © 2010 WorldNetDaily 7/22/10
School officials Mary Jane Anderson-Wiley, Paulette Schenck and Richard Deaner demanded student Jen Keeton, 24, go through a "remediation" program after she asserted homosexuality is a behavioral choice, not a "state of being" as a professor said, according to the complaint.
Also named as defendants in the case that developed in May and June are other administrators and the university system's board of regents.
The remediation program was to include "sensitivity training" on homosexual issues, additional outside study on literature promoting homosexuality and the plan that she attend a "gay pride parade" and report on it.
School spokeswoman Kathy Schose today declined to address the allegations in the case but agreed to discuss the counselor teaching program in general.
She cited the American Counseling Association's code of ethics and said students would be required to adopt its provisions.
"There is a code of ethics that govern counselors," she said. "They have to abide by the code of the profession."
Ethics codes generally govern behavior, and Schose denied the school was attempting to alter any student's beliefs or moral values.
But the lawsuit specifically charges the faculty members targeted Keeton's biblically based belief system and values, not her behavior regarding the treatment of any clients, which had not yet happened.
"Schenck told Miss Keeton that it was unethical for her to believe that her convictions should also be shared by other persons. … Schenck explained that while Miss Keeton was free to have points of view about how she personally should conduct and define herself, she may not believe that others should adopt the standards she personally is convinced are true," the lawsuit said.
"Anderson-Wiley confirmed that Miss Keeton will not be able to successfully complete the remediation plan and thus complete the ASU counseling program unless she commits to affirming the propriety of gay and lesbian relationships if such an opportunity arises in her future professional efforts," it continued.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
Thursday, July 22, 2010
Pastor Fired for Refusing to Enable Abortion
An Austin bus driver [and Christian pastor] who was fired for refusing to drive a passenger to Planned Parenthood is suing his employer for religious discrimination.
-- From "'Next stop: Planned Parenthood'... but not with this driver" by Kate Shellnutt, posted at The Houston Chronicle 7/20/10
According to the Austin American-Statesmen, the driver identifies as "an ordained Christian minister who is opposed to abortion," and he called his supervisor to say he couldn't in good conscience take someone to have an abortion at the clinic. The supervisor took that as his resignation.
Last week, Edwin Graning filed a suit against the Capital Area Rural Transportation System at a federal district court in Austin, seven months after his dismissal. He argues that the system violated the protections against employment discrimination based on religion in Title VII of the Civil Rights Act.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Bus driver says he was fired over Planned Parenthood dispute" by Dana Ford, CNN 7/21/10
Graning's last day of employment was the same day he refused service.
He is seeking reinstatement, back pay, and compensatory damages for pain, suffering and emotional distress.
"It's only because he voiced his religions beliefs that he was canned," Edward White III, Graning's lawyer, told CNN. "Employers have a legal responsibility to at least attempt to accommodate an employee's religious beliefs. ... CARTS clearly violated Mr. Graning's religious freedom."
White, who works for [the American Center for Law and Justice,] a public interest law group founded by evangelical Christian leader Pat Robertson, said CARTS sent a second driver to collect the client and took her and a friend to the Planned Parenthood office.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
-- From "'Next stop: Planned Parenthood'... but not with this driver" by Kate Shellnutt, posted at The Houston Chronicle 7/20/10
According to the Austin American-Statesmen, the driver identifies as "an ordained Christian minister who is opposed to abortion," and he called his supervisor to say he couldn't in good conscience take someone to have an abortion at the clinic. The supervisor took that as his resignation.
Last week, Edwin Graning filed a suit against the Capital Area Rural Transportation System at a federal district court in Austin, seven months after his dismissal. He argues that the system violated the protections against employment discrimination based on religion in Title VII of the Civil Rights Act.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Bus driver says he was fired over Planned Parenthood dispute" by Dana Ford, CNN 7/21/10
Graning's last day of employment was the same day he refused service.
He is seeking reinstatement, back pay, and compensatory damages for pain, suffering and emotional distress.
"It's only because he voiced his religions beliefs that he was canned," Edward White III, Graning's lawyer, told CNN. "Employers have a legal responsibility to at least attempt to accommodate an employee's religious beliefs. ... CARTS clearly violated Mr. Graning's religious freedom."
White, who works for [the American Center for Law and Justice,] a public interest law group founded by evangelical Christian leader Pat Robertson, said CARTS sent a second driver to collect the client and took her and a friend to the Planned Parenthood office.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
Wednesday, July 21, 2010
School Yields First Amendment to ACLU
After one parent objected to words posted in the Rhode Island school auditorium since it opened in 1958, and the ACLU threatened the school, labeling it "a prayer," the school now plans to change it, saying "it's an argument over very little."
UPDATE 8/17/10: School hears citizens' arguments, decides to study further
-- From "School Department won’t fight prayer case in court" by Maria Armental, Providence Journal Staff Writer 7/22/10
Strapped for cash, the School Department cannot afford to go to court, despite the appeal of fighting to uphold words that exhort Cranston High School West students to behave honorably to bring credit to their school, school officials said Wednesday.
Instead, the School Committee is discussing a compromise: to drop all religious references from the school prayer, turning it into a creed similar to the one at Cranston High School East, while keeping its message intact. The committee is expected to take action on Aug. 16.
The latest chapter in the often acrimonious debate over separation of church and state surfaced when the Rhode Island affiliate of the American Civil Liberties Union sent a letter to Supt. Peter L. Nero on July 6, after receiving a complaint from an unidentified mother who attended an event in the high school auditorium.
To read the entire article, CLICK HERE.
UPDATE 8/17/10: School hears citizens' arguments, decides to study further
-- From "School Department won’t fight prayer case in court" by Maria Armental, Providence Journal Staff Writer 7/22/10
Strapped for cash, the School Department cannot afford to go to court, despite the appeal of fighting to uphold words that exhort Cranston High School West students to behave honorably to bring credit to their school, school officials said Wednesday.
Instead, the School Committee is discussing a compromise: to drop all religious references from the school prayer, turning it into a creed similar to the one at Cranston High School East, while keeping its message intact. The committee is expected to take action on Aug. 16.
The latest chapter in the often acrimonious debate over separation of church and state surfaced when the Rhode Island affiliate of the American Civil Liberties Union sent a letter to Supt. Peter L. Nero on July 6, after receiving a complaint from an unidentified mother who attended an event in the high school auditorium.
To read the entire article, CLICK HERE.
Sky Falling on Dying Apostate 'Churches'
Is God sending a message to a mainline Protestant church when the ceiling collapses during Sunday services, injuring more than a dozen pew occupants?
-- From "Congregations struggle in aging, decaying churches" by Tom Breen, Associated Press 7/14/10
Caring for old church facilities is an increasingly acute problem, particularly for mainline Protestant denominations. As membership declines and budgets shrink, the beautiful edifices of American Christianity can feel like weights dragging down churches that are forced to spend money on maintenance and repairs instead of ministry, charity and other Gospel-derived imperatives.
. . . decline in fortune is mirrored among Protestant denominations like the [ELCA] Lutherans, [PCUSA] Presbyterians and [ECUSA] Episcopalians, [United Methodists, and United Church of Christ,] which have seen membership drop in recent decades while the average age of remaining worshippers gets older.
"A lot of these churches have shrunk from 500 members to 100 members, or from 800 members to 200 members," said Robert Jaeger, executive director of the Partnership for Sacred Places. "They look at the trend lines and they see the decline in membership and wonder, 'Gosh, in 10 or 15 years are we going to be gone?'"
To read the entire article, CLICK HERE.
-- From "Congregations struggle in aging, decaying churches" by Tom Breen, Associated Press 7/14/10
Caring for old church facilities is an increasingly acute problem, particularly for mainline Protestant denominations. As membership declines and budgets shrink, the beautiful edifices of American Christianity can feel like weights dragging down churches that are forced to spend money on maintenance and repairs instead of ministry, charity and other Gospel-derived imperatives.
. . . decline in fortune is mirrored among Protestant denominations like the [ELCA] Lutherans, [PCUSA] Presbyterians and [ECUSA] Episcopalians, [United Methodists, and United Church of Christ,] which have seen membership drop in recent decades while the average age of remaining worshippers gets older.
"A lot of these churches have shrunk from 500 members to 100 members, or from 800 members to 200 members," said Robert Jaeger, executive director of the Partnership for Sacred Places. "They look at the trend lines and they see the decline in membership and wonder, 'Gosh, in 10 or 15 years are we going to be gone?'"
To read the entire article, CLICK HERE.
Tuesday, July 20, 2010
Babies Spared Death, Liberals Furious
After pro-life advocates exposed abortion coverage in ObamaCare, the White House said that it would limit taxpayer-funded abortion to only cases of rape, incest and the mother's life. As a result, liberals of every stripe are "screaming bloody murder."
-- From "Abortion foes win a round in health overhaul" by Ricardo Alonso-Zaldivar, Associated Press 7/19/10
Abortion foes have won a round in the first test of how President Barack Obama's health care law will be applied to the politically charged issue.
Meanwhile, traditional allies of the administration are grumbling about a decision to ban most abortion coverage in insurance pools for those unable to purchase health care on their own.
The Catholic bishops "welcome this new policy," said Cardinal Daniel DiNardo, although he added the organization remains concerned that other parts of the health care overhaul will promote abortion.
NARAL Pro-Choice America called it "inexplicable and wrongheaded."
. . . the Health and Human Services Department announced last week the program will not cover abortions except in cases of rape, incest or when the mother's life is in danger — exceptions traditionally allowed under federal law.
That's a more restrictive policy than will be generally applied under Obama's new health care law.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Abortion rights activists shocked, mad at Obama White House over abortion coverage in new health care law" by Lynn Sweet, Chicago Sun-Times 7/18/10
below, from NARAL Pro choice America......
From "Democrats for Life Attacks Pro-Life Groups on Abortion Funding in Health Care" by Steven Ertelt, LifeNews.com Editor 7/20/10
Last week, the National Right to Life Committee exposed three different instances in which the Obama administration had approved federal taxpayer financing of abortions in new high risk health insurance pools. But to hear Democrats for Life of America tell the story, NRLC officials lied about the funding.
NRLC pointed to information in press releases and on web sites of state agencies in Pennsylvania, New Mexico and Maryland showing the new high risk programs would not prevent funding of abortions.
The Obama administration was forced to retreat and make a promise that the new programs would not fund abortions, though several pro-life groups and the nation's Catholic bishops agreed with the NRLC analysis and said they would believe the Obama administration's word only when they see it implemented.
In an email to its members that LifeNews.com obtained, Democrats for Life trashed NRLC and other pro-life advocates for exposing the funding and supposedly lying about it.
"The National Right to Life Committee and others accused President Obama of allowing public funds to be used for abortion," DFLA said in a statement, saying NRLC "issued a false press release."
DFLA said pro-life advocates and Republicans in Congress "continue to mischaracterize aspects of the health reform bill, we will work to ensure the law provides affordable and accessible health care for millions of Americans while upholding the longstanding ban on public funding of abortion."
DFLA went further in saying Right to Life is wrong to support pro-life candidates who opposed the pro-abortion health care bill over pro-life Democrats who supported it -- and made the claim NRLC is working with a prominent pro-abortion group.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
-- From "Abortion foes win a round in health overhaul" by Ricardo Alonso-Zaldivar, Associated Press 7/19/10
Abortion foes have won a round in the first test of how President Barack Obama's health care law will be applied to the politically charged issue.
Meanwhile, traditional allies of the administration are grumbling about a decision to ban most abortion coverage in insurance pools for those unable to purchase health care on their own.
The Catholic bishops "welcome this new policy," said Cardinal Daniel DiNardo, although he added the organization remains concerned that other parts of the health care overhaul will promote abortion.
NARAL Pro-Choice America called it "inexplicable and wrongheaded."
. . . the Health and Human Services Department announced last week the program will not cover abortions except in cases of rape, incest or when the mother's life is in danger — exceptions traditionally allowed under federal law.
That's a more restrictive policy than will be generally applied under Obama's new health care law.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Abortion rights activists shocked, mad at Obama White House over abortion coverage in new health care law" by Lynn Sweet, Chicago Sun-Times 7/18/10
below, from NARAL Pro choice America......
NARAL Pro-Choice americaTo read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
Pro-Choice Activist, I wanted to make sure you saw the important message that I sent late on Thursday. We've sent 28,045 messages to President Obama in just a few days, and now he needs to hear from you. Help us keep the pressure on the White House. Please contact President Obama today.
Bad news from the Obama administration on the health-care law:
A Stupak-style ban applies to women in new, temporary high-risk pools.
I am outraged that such a decision would come from a pro-choice president that we helped elect.
Abortion is the most common surgical procedure women receive. At a time when the country is on the cusp of implementing nationwide health-insurance coverage, it is unacceptable to treat abortion care differently in the new high-risk pools.
Help us fight back. Tell President Obama that the abortion-coverage ban was not part of the agreement on health reform.
From "Democrats for Life Attacks Pro-Life Groups on Abortion Funding in Health Care" by Steven Ertelt, LifeNews.com Editor 7/20/10
Last week, the National Right to Life Committee exposed three different instances in which the Obama administration had approved federal taxpayer financing of abortions in new high risk health insurance pools. But to hear Democrats for Life of America tell the story, NRLC officials lied about the funding.
NRLC pointed to information in press releases and on web sites of state agencies in Pennsylvania, New Mexico and Maryland showing the new high risk programs would not prevent funding of abortions.
The Obama administration was forced to retreat and make a promise that the new programs would not fund abortions, though several pro-life groups and the nation's Catholic bishops agreed with the NRLC analysis and said they would believe the Obama administration's word only when they see it implemented.
In an email to its members that LifeNews.com obtained, Democrats for Life trashed NRLC and other pro-life advocates for exposing the funding and supposedly lying about it.
"The National Right to Life Committee and others accused President Obama of allowing public funds to be used for abortion," DFLA said in a statement, saying NRLC "issued a false press release."
DFLA said pro-life advocates and Republicans in Congress "continue to mischaracterize aspects of the health reform bill, we will work to ensure the law provides affordable and accessible health care for millions of Americans while upholding the longstanding ban on public funding of abortion."
DFLA went further in saying Right to Life is wrong to support pro-life candidates who opposed the pro-abortion health care bill over pro-life Democrats who supported it -- and made the claim NRLC is working with a prominent pro-abortion group.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
Monday, July 19, 2010
Liberal Media Claim Evangelicals Back Obama on Immigration
According to the New York Times, "immigration overhaul . . . supporters have unleashed a secret weapon: a group of influential evangelical Christian leaders." However, any such Christians will "jump ship" if the immigration bill includes national recognition of same-sex "marriage."
UPDATE 6/17/11: Southern Baptists back 'path to legal status' for undocumented immigrants
-- From "Obama Wins Unlikely Allies in Immigration" by Laurie Goodstein, New York Times 7/18/10
Normally on the opposite side of political issues backed by the Obama White House, these [evangelical] leaders are aligning with the president to support an overhaul that would include some path to legalization for illegal immigrants already here. They are preaching from pulpits, conducting conference calls with pastors and testifying in Washington — as they did last Wednesday.
When President Obama gave a major address pushing immigration overhaul this month, he was introduced by a prominent evangelical, the Rev. Bill Hybels of Willow Creek Community Church in Illinois. Three other evangelical pastors were in the audience, front and center.
Their presence was a testament, in part, to the work of politically active Hispanic evangelical pastors, who have forged friendships with non-Hispanic pastors in recent years while working in coalitions to oppose abortion and same-sex marriage. The Hispanics made a concerted effort to convince their brethren that immigration reform should be a moral and practical priority.
Hispanic storefront churches are popping up in strip malls, and Spanish-speaking congregations are renting space in other churches. Some pastors, like Mr. Hybels, lead churches that include growing numbers of Hispanics. Several evangelical leaders said they were convinced that Hispanics are the key to growth not only for the evangelical movement, but also for the social conservative movement.
Although other religious leaders have long favored immigration overhaul — including Roman Catholics, mainline Protestants, Jews and Muslims — the evangelicals are crucial because they have the relationships and the pull with Republicans.
To read the entire article, CLICK HERE.
UPDATE 6/17/11: Southern Baptists back 'path to legal status' for undocumented immigrants
-- From "Obama Wins Unlikely Allies in Immigration" by Laurie Goodstein, New York Times 7/18/10
Normally on the opposite side of political issues backed by the Obama White House, these [evangelical] leaders are aligning with the president to support an overhaul that would include some path to legalization for illegal immigrants already here. They are preaching from pulpits, conducting conference calls with pastors and testifying in Washington — as they did last Wednesday.
When President Obama gave a major address pushing immigration overhaul this month, he was introduced by a prominent evangelical, the Rev. Bill Hybels of Willow Creek Community Church in Illinois. Three other evangelical pastors were in the audience, front and center.
Their presence was a testament, in part, to the work of politically active Hispanic evangelical pastors, who have forged friendships with non-Hispanic pastors in recent years while working in coalitions to oppose abortion and same-sex marriage. The Hispanics made a concerted effort to convince their brethren that immigration reform should be a moral and practical priority.
Hispanic storefront churches are popping up in strip malls, and Spanish-speaking congregations are renting space in other churches. Some pastors, like Mr. Hybels, lead churches that include growing numbers of Hispanics. Several evangelical leaders said they were convinced that Hispanics are the key to growth not only for the evangelical movement, but also for the social conservative movement.
Although other religious leaders have long favored immigration overhaul — including Roman Catholics, mainline Protestants, Jews and Muslims — the evangelicals are crucial because they have the relationships and the pull with Republicans.
To read the entire article, CLICK HERE.
'Gay Dollars' Buy Sex Offender Freedom in Palm Springs
"Gay dollars are keeping this city afloat. Let's get real. The gay events are the largest events in the valley. The gay tourist dollar is crucial to the economic survival of Palm Springs."
-- From "Palm Springs cops feel heat over gay sex sting" by Hank Plante, San Francisco Chronicle 7/18/10
. . . new frictions have arisen between the city's Police Department and its sizable gay population - estimated to be as high as 30 to 40 percent - over a police sting of gay public sex.
Last summer, Palm Springs police used undercover officers to arrest 24 men in a gay neighborhood for allegedly trying to engage the officers in sex. While few in the gay community defend anyone having public sex - whether gay or straight - the anger is over the unusual charges in the case: The men are charged under Section 290(c) of the California Penal Code, making those who are convicted register as sex offenders for life, their names added to a police database.
The new scrutiny of the Palm Springs Police Department also reveals that there isn't a single openly gay male police officer among the 99 officers on the force (there is only one open lesbian), despite the city's reputation as a gay mecca. Reacting to anger in the gay community, the Palm Springs police chief now finds himself in the position of damage control. Last week, he met with gay leaders, and he brought in an openly gay Los Angeles sheriff's sergeant to help conduct sensitivity training on lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender issues in the Palm Springs force.
The economic fallout on the city is not lost on City Manager David Ready, who says, "Palm Springs is very concerned and spends a significant amount of resources on tourism as our driving economic factor. So anything that affects tourism is of great concern to the city. That being said, the chief is doing his internal review of this sting operation, and he will be making recommendations on our policy going forward."
To read the entire article, CLICK HERE.
-- From "Palm Springs cops feel heat over gay sex sting" by Hank Plante, San Francisco Chronicle 7/18/10
. . . new frictions have arisen between the city's Police Department and its sizable gay population - estimated to be as high as 30 to 40 percent - over a police sting of gay public sex.
Last summer, Palm Springs police used undercover officers to arrest 24 men in a gay neighborhood for allegedly trying to engage the officers in sex. While few in the gay community defend anyone having public sex - whether gay or straight - the anger is over the unusual charges in the case: The men are charged under Section 290(c) of the California Penal Code, making those who are convicted register as sex offenders for life, their names added to a police database.
The new scrutiny of the Palm Springs Police Department also reveals that there isn't a single openly gay male police officer among the 99 officers on the force (there is only one open lesbian), despite the city's reputation as a gay mecca. Reacting to anger in the gay community, the Palm Springs police chief now finds himself in the position of damage control. Last week, he met with gay leaders, and he brought in an openly gay Los Angeles sheriff's sergeant to help conduct sensitivity training on lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender issues in the Palm Springs force.
The economic fallout on the city is not lost on City Manager David Ready, who says, "Palm Springs is very concerned and spends a significant amount of resources on tourism as our driving economic factor. So anything that affects tourism is of great concern to the city. That being said, the chief is doing his internal review of this sting operation, and he will be making recommendations on our policy going forward."
To read the entire article, CLICK HERE.
Sunday, July 18, 2010
Obama Moving Gay Agenda at U.N.
The Obama administration, with only 14 congressmen (led by Rep. Barney Frank), are opposing Egypt and pushing the U.N. Economic and Social Council to accredit the International Gay and Lesbian Human Rights Commission.
UPDATE 7/19/10: U.N. ECOSOC accredited the "consultative status" of the homosexual advocacy NGO
-- From "US pushing UN status for gay rights group" by Edith M. Lederer, Associated Press 7/16/10
The U.S.-based organization, which has offices in South Africa, Argentina and the Philippines, has been trying since 2007 to get consultative status with the council, which serves as the main U.N. forum for discussing international economic and social issues.
The organization, the U.S. government and the members of Congress believe the group's application has not been approved because it promotes gay rights.
The council, known as ECOSOC, is currently holding its high-level meeting at U.N. headquarters and the United States decided to seek approval directly from its membership.
A U.S. draft resolution circulated Friday would have ECOSOC grant the International Gay and Lesbian Human Rights Commission consultative status.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "U.S. Attacks Egypt Over Homosexual Rights at UN" by Susan Yoshihara, Ph.D., Catholic Family and Human Rights Institute 7/8/10
At the United Nations (UN) last month, several U.S. representatives attacked Egypt for asking for further investigation into a homosexual advocacy organization which has applied for special consultative status with the UN Economic and Social Council. These attacks culminated in a sharp rebuke delivered last week by U.S. ambassador Susan Rice. The actions seem to contravene President Obama’s strategy of engaging Egypt and other Muslim societies in key foreign policy aims such as Middle East peace.
Ambassador Rice then announced, “The United States Mission to the UN is, among other efforts, working to reverse an attempt by some members of the NGO [Non-Governmental Organization] Committee of the Economic and Social Council to deny UN consultative status to the International Gay and Lesbian Human Rights Commission.” The U.S. is planning to circumvent Egypt and the committee by bringing the matter to a vote at the upcoming ECOSOC meeting.
Rice used the occasion of the Obama administration’s celebration of “Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender Pride Month” to make the announcement. Rice further asserted that, “In some nations, sexual orientation is considered a crime, and punished with unspeakable violence and humiliation.” However, “sexual orientation” is generally not criminalized, and Rice did not refer to specific cases. Homosexual sex or “sodomy” is banned in nearly half of all UN member states.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
Click headlines below for previous articles:
U.N. Rejects Homosexual Group Supported by Obama
Obama Elevates Homosexuality via United Nations
UPDATE 7/19/10: U.N. ECOSOC accredited the "consultative status" of the homosexual advocacy NGO
-- From "US pushing UN status for gay rights group" by Edith M. Lederer, Associated Press 7/16/10
The U.S.-based organization, which has offices in South Africa, Argentina and the Philippines, has been trying since 2007 to get consultative status with the council, which serves as the main U.N. forum for discussing international economic and social issues.
The organization, the U.S. government and the members of Congress believe the group's application has not been approved because it promotes gay rights.
The council, known as ECOSOC, is currently holding its high-level meeting at U.N. headquarters and the United States decided to seek approval directly from its membership.
A U.S. draft resolution circulated Friday would have ECOSOC grant the International Gay and Lesbian Human Rights Commission consultative status.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "U.S. Attacks Egypt Over Homosexual Rights at UN" by Susan Yoshihara, Ph.D., Catholic Family and Human Rights Institute 7/8/10
At the United Nations (UN) last month, several U.S. representatives attacked Egypt for asking for further investigation into a homosexual advocacy organization which has applied for special consultative status with the UN Economic and Social Council. These attacks culminated in a sharp rebuke delivered last week by U.S. ambassador Susan Rice. The actions seem to contravene President Obama’s strategy of engaging Egypt and other Muslim societies in key foreign policy aims such as Middle East peace.
Ambassador Rice then announced, “The United States Mission to the UN is, among other efforts, working to reverse an attempt by some members of the NGO [Non-Governmental Organization] Committee of the Economic and Social Council to deny UN consultative status to the International Gay and Lesbian Human Rights Commission.” The U.S. is planning to circumvent Egypt and the committee by bringing the matter to a vote at the upcoming ECOSOC meeting.
Rice used the occasion of the Obama administration’s celebration of “Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender Pride Month” to make the announcement. Rice further asserted that, “In some nations, sexual orientation is considered a crime, and punished with unspeakable violence and humiliation.” However, “sexual orientation” is generally not criminalized, and Rice did not refer to specific cases. Homosexual sex or “sodomy” is banned in nearly half of all UN member states.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
Click headlines below for previous articles:
U.N. Rejects Homosexual Group Supported by Obama
Obama Elevates Homosexuality via United Nations
ObamaCare Funding Planned Parenthood to Reduce Abortions: Liberal 'Christians'
The Department of Health and Human Services -- as directed by the new health care law -- is now accepting applications for a grant program that will help states provide support services to pregnant teens and women. . . . funnel more taxpayer dollars to pro-abortion groups such as Planned Parenthood and NARAL Pro-Choice America.
-- From "Health reform will help reduce the number of abortions" by Peg Chemberlin, National Council of Churches; and Sister Simone Campbell, E.D. of NETWORK 7/14/10
. . . The Pregnancy Assistance Fund provides $250 million over the next decade to help pregnant and parenting women and teens with child care, housing, education and services for those victimized by domestic or sexual violence. This network of comprehensive support is especially critical for women who lack the resources to raise a healthy child and view abortion as their only option in difficult situations.
. . . The funds, distributed through state grants, will ensure women and families have access to baby food, post-partum counseling, parenting classes and other holistic services. This encourages best practices and also builds a foundation for effective future programs.
. . . we believe most Americans want commonsense solutions that extend a compassionate hand of support to women rather than a judgmental finger waved in condemnation. More than 1 million abortions are performed in the United States every year. Canada, Germany, Japan and Britain all have lower abortion rates than the U.S., despite having less restrictive abortion laws. Why? In large part because those countries offer comprehensive healthcare that includes robust pre-natal and post-natal care.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Government’s New $25-Million Fund to Help Pregnant Teens May Benefit Abortion Providers, Pro-Family Advocates Say" by Penny Starr, CNSNews.com Senior Staff Writer 7/12/10
The Pregnancy Assistance Fund – established on page 2,162 of the new health care law – offers states a total of $25 million for each fiscal year through 2019.
States that win the grants will distribute the money to organizations and programs that support pregnant or parenting teens and women who want to complete high school or college, for example, or who need access to health care, child care, housing and “other critical support.” The Health and Human Services Department also announced that states may use the funds to combat violence against pregnant women.
Jeanne Monahan, director of the Center for Human Dignity at the Family Research Council [FRC], told CNSNews.com that one particular program mentioned in the grant application is a good indication of the kind of groups that will end up getting the money.
Section IV of the grant application asks applicants to describe how they would use the grant money, and it cites as a successful example “Text4baby," a program designed by the federal government in partnership with the Guttmacher Institute and organizations affiliated with the Planned Parenthood Federation of America.
“FRC has been a leading voice for life-affirming pregnancy services, but we strongly oppose the idea that these grant recipients should include any group that financially profits from abortions,” the group said in a statement.
“The only way to help these mothers and their babies is by funneling the $25 million to organizations that won't make a profit from their work, namely pregnancy resources centers,” the statement said. “And if President Obama truly cared about these women, HHS would have issued real regulations--this time enforcing his Executive Order to strip abortion from the health care bill.”
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
-- From "Health reform will help reduce the number of abortions" by Peg Chemberlin, National Council of Churches; and Sister Simone Campbell, E.D. of NETWORK 7/14/10
. . . The Pregnancy Assistance Fund provides $250 million over the next decade to help pregnant and parenting women and teens with child care, housing, education and services for those victimized by domestic or sexual violence. This network of comprehensive support is especially critical for women who lack the resources to raise a healthy child and view abortion as their only option in difficult situations.
. . . The funds, distributed through state grants, will ensure women and families have access to baby food, post-partum counseling, parenting classes and other holistic services. This encourages best practices and also builds a foundation for effective future programs.
. . . we believe most Americans want commonsense solutions that extend a compassionate hand of support to women rather than a judgmental finger waved in condemnation. More than 1 million abortions are performed in the United States every year. Canada, Germany, Japan and Britain all have lower abortion rates than the U.S., despite having less restrictive abortion laws. Why? In large part because those countries offer comprehensive healthcare that includes robust pre-natal and post-natal care.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Government’s New $25-Million Fund to Help Pregnant Teens May Benefit Abortion Providers, Pro-Family Advocates Say" by Penny Starr, CNSNews.com Senior Staff Writer 7/12/10
The Pregnancy Assistance Fund – established on page 2,162 of the new health care law – offers states a total of $25 million for each fiscal year through 2019.
States that win the grants will distribute the money to organizations and programs that support pregnant or parenting teens and women who want to complete high school or college, for example, or who need access to health care, child care, housing and “other critical support.” The Health and Human Services Department also announced that states may use the funds to combat violence against pregnant women.
Jeanne Monahan, director of the Center for Human Dignity at the Family Research Council [FRC], told CNSNews.com that one particular program mentioned in the grant application is a good indication of the kind of groups that will end up getting the money.
Section IV of the grant application asks applicants to describe how they would use the grant money, and it cites as a successful example “Text4baby," a program designed by the federal government in partnership with the Guttmacher Institute and organizations affiliated with the Planned Parenthood Federation of America.
“FRC has been a leading voice for life-affirming pregnancy services, but we strongly oppose the idea that these grant recipients should include any group that financially profits from abortions,” the group said in a statement.
“The only way to help these mothers and their babies is by funneling the $25 million to organizations that won't make a profit from their work, namely pregnancy resources centers,” the statement said. “And if President Obama truly cared about these women, HHS would have issued real regulations--this time enforcing his Executive Order to strip abortion from the health care bill.”
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)