A popular role-playing combat video game featuring graphic homosexual sex between a man and an elf has hit store shelves just in time for Christmas.
-- From "Dragon Age: Origins video game contains secret gay sex scene" by Matthew Moore, London Telegraph 11/24/09
The website GayGamer.net wrote: "With this bare-chested and unflinching portrayal, it feels as if the depiction of gay sex in video games has reached a new level of equal treatment.
"This is more than just a mincing gay pirate or an evasive fade-to-black: there's choreography, tenderness, humor and even an element of sexual politics to Zevran's post-coital conversation.
"Kudos to BioWare for adding a bit of a gay storyline to their game and for dealing with gay romance as even-handedly as they do the heterosexual options."
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Players have dirty 'gay' sex in hit game" by Chelsea Schilling © 2009 WorldNetDaily 11/29/09
"Dragon Age: Origins," released Nov. 3 for Microsoft Windows, PlayStation 3 and Xbox 360, depicts two men in various sex positions in a secret scene of homosexual seduction.
The video cuts to a scene in which the two men are dirty, naked and kissing. They are depicted in various homosexual sex positions, and the clip concludes with the two nestling together and gazing into one another's eyes.
According to an Amazon description, the game also features moral dilemmas "offering no easy choices," where characters must "decide how to handle complex issues like murder, genocide, betrayal and the possession and sacrificing of children."
In another YouTube clip of a role-playing scene, a young boy possessed by a demon declares, "You'll never win! You'll never take him! He's mine!"
The child is slain, and a female demon with horns and a tail emerges from his corpse.
The game is now available at many retailers' locations and websites, including Wal-Mart's online store, Target stores, Best Buy, Amazon and eBay.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
Monday, November 30, 2009
Sunday, November 29, 2009
Teach Students: "America 'an oppressive hellhole'"
A program proposed at the University of Minnesota would result in required examinations of teacher candidates on "white privilege" as well as "remedial re-education" for those who hold the "wrong" views . . .
UPDATE 12/26/o9: University backtracks after watchdog pressure
UPDATE 12/10/09: Additional report with link to university report
-- From "They must denounce exclusionary biases and embrace the vision. (Or else.)" by Katherine Kersten, Minneapolis Star Tribune 11/22/09
Do you believe in the American dream -- the idea that in this country, hardworking people of every race, color and creed can get ahead on their own merits? If so, that belief may soon bar you from getting a license to teach in Minnesota public schools -- at least if you plan to get your teaching degree at the University of Minnesota's Twin Cities campus.
In a report compiled last summer, the Race, Culture, Class and Gender Task Group at the U's College of Education and Human Development recommended that aspiring teachers there must repudiate the notion of "the American Dream" in order to obtain the recommendation for licensure required by the Minnesota Board of Teaching. Instead, teacher candidates must embrace -- and be prepared to teach our state's kids -- the task force's own vision of America as an oppressive hellhole: racist, sexist and homophobic.
The task group is part of the Teacher Education Redesign Initiative, a multiyear project to change the way future teachers are trained at the U's flagship campus. The initiative is premised, in part, on the conviction that Minnesota teachers' lack of "cultural competence" contributes to the poor academic performance of the state's minority students. Last spring, it charged the task group with coming up with recommendations to change this. In January, planners will review the recommendations and decide how to proceed.
To read the entire column above, CLICK HERE.
Response to above: "American Dream lives on at the U" Commentary by Jean K. Quam, Minneapolis Star Tribune 11/27/09
. . . The American Dream lives and thrives in the College of Education and Human Development.
We do not take a narrow view of who is an American and who can achieve the dream. We expect and require that teachers of the next half-century take a broad, balanced view of that dream.
To read the commentary above, CLICK HERE.
From "Teaching plan: America 'an oppressive hellhole'" by Bob Unruh © 2009 WorldNetDaily 11/27/09
[The Foundation for Individual Rights in Education (FIRE)], which promotes civil liberties on the campuses of America's colleges and universities, has dispatched a letter to University of Minnesota President Robert Bruininks asking him to intervene to prevent the adoption of policies proposed in his College of Education and Human Development.
"The university's general counsel should be asked to comment as soon as possible," said the letter from Adam Kissel, an officer with FIRE. "If the Race, Culture, Class, and Gender Task Group achieves its stated goals, the result will be political and ideological screening of applicants, remedial re-education for those with the 'wrong' views and values, [and] withholding of degrees from those upon whom the university's political re-education efforts proved ineffective."
By any "nontotalitarian" standards, he wrote, the plans being made so far by the school are "severely unjust and impermissibly intrude into matters of individual conscience."
Kissel wrote that it appears that the university "intends to redesign its admissions process so that it screens out people with the 'wrong' beliefs and values – those who either do not have sufficient 'cultural competence' or those who the college judges will not be able to be converted to the 'correct' beliefs and values even after remedial re-education."
"These intentions violate the freedom of conscience of the university's students. As a public university bound by the First Amendment to the United States Constitution, the university is both legally and morally obligated to uphold this fundamental right," he wrote.
Among the issues discussed in the plans are requirements that teachers would be able to instruct students on the "myth of meritocracy" in the United States, "the history of demands for assimilation to white, middle-class, Christian meanings and values," and the "history of white racism."
"Here's the kicker," FIRE said in its report. "The college even realizes that its efforts to impose such a severe ideological litmus test may be unconstitutional."
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
UPDATE 12/26/o9: University backtracks after watchdog pressure
UPDATE 12/10/09: Additional report with link to university report
-- From "They must denounce exclusionary biases and embrace the vision. (Or else.)" by Katherine Kersten, Minneapolis Star Tribune 11/22/09
Do you believe in the American dream -- the idea that in this country, hardworking people of every race, color and creed can get ahead on their own merits? If so, that belief may soon bar you from getting a license to teach in Minnesota public schools -- at least if you plan to get your teaching degree at the University of Minnesota's Twin Cities campus.
In a report compiled last summer, the Race, Culture, Class and Gender Task Group at the U's College of Education and Human Development recommended that aspiring teachers there must repudiate the notion of "the American Dream" in order to obtain the recommendation for licensure required by the Minnesota Board of Teaching. Instead, teacher candidates must embrace -- and be prepared to teach our state's kids -- the task force's own vision of America as an oppressive hellhole: racist, sexist and homophobic.
The task group is part of the Teacher Education Redesign Initiative, a multiyear project to change the way future teachers are trained at the U's flagship campus. The initiative is premised, in part, on the conviction that Minnesota teachers' lack of "cultural competence" contributes to the poor academic performance of the state's minority students. Last spring, it charged the task group with coming up with recommendations to change this. In January, planners will review the recommendations and decide how to proceed.
To read the entire column above, CLICK HERE.
Response to above: "American Dream lives on at the U" Commentary by Jean K. Quam, Minneapolis Star Tribune 11/27/09
. . . The American Dream lives and thrives in the College of Education and Human Development.
We do not take a narrow view of who is an American and who can achieve the dream. We expect and require that teachers of the next half-century take a broad, balanced view of that dream.
To read the commentary above, CLICK HERE.
From "Teaching plan: America 'an oppressive hellhole'" by Bob Unruh © 2009 WorldNetDaily 11/27/09
[The Foundation for Individual Rights in Education (FIRE)], which promotes civil liberties on the campuses of America's colleges and universities, has dispatched a letter to University of Minnesota President Robert Bruininks asking him to intervene to prevent the adoption of policies proposed in his College of Education and Human Development.
"The university's general counsel should be asked to comment as soon as possible," said the letter from Adam Kissel, an officer with FIRE. "If the Race, Culture, Class, and Gender Task Group achieves its stated goals, the result will be political and ideological screening of applicants, remedial re-education for those with the 'wrong' views and values, [and] withholding of degrees from those upon whom the university's political re-education efforts proved ineffective."
By any "nontotalitarian" standards, he wrote, the plans being made so far by the school are "severely unjust and impermissibly intrude into matters of individual conscience."
Kissel wrote that it appears that the university "intends to redesign its admissions process so that it screens out people with the 'wrong' beliefs and values – those who either do not have sufficient 'cultural competence' or those who the college judges will not be able to be converted to the 'correct' beliefs and values even after remedial re-education."
"These intentions violate the freedom of conscience of the university's students. As a public university bound by the First Amendment to the United States Constitution, the university is both legally and morally obligated to uphold this fundamental right," he wrote.
Among the issues discussed in the plans are requirements that teachers would be able to instruct students on the "myth of meritocracy" in the United States, "the history of demands for assimilation to white, middle-class, Christian meanings and values," and the "history of white racism."
"Here's the kicker," FIRE said in its report. "The college even realizes that its efforts to impose such a severe ideological litmus test may be unconstitutional."
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
Federal Court OKs Ban on Christmas from Schools
The 3rd Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals in Philadelphia has upheld a school district's ban on Christmas carols such as "Silent Night," "Joy to the World," "Oh, Come All Ye Faithful" and "Hark the Herald Angels Sing" – and approved "Rudolph the Red-Nosed Reindeer" and "Frosty the Snowman."
UPDATE 10/4/10: Supreme Court allows ban to stand, favoring a secular "inclusive environment" to celebrate Christmas
-- From "Appeals Court: School district can ban Christmas carols" by Philadelphia Inquirer Staff 11/25/09
"Certainly, those of us who were educated in the public schools remember holiday celebrations replete with Christmas carols, and possibly even Hanukkah songs, to which no objection had been raised," the court said in its ruling.
"Since then, the governing principles have been examined and defined with more particularity. Many decisions about how to best create an inclusive environment in public schools, such as those at issue here, are left to the sound discretion of the school authorities."
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Out with Jesus, in with 'Frosty the Snowman'" by Chelsea Schilling © 2009 WorldNetDaily 11/29/09
In the Nov. 24 ruling the Third Circuit approved the school policy banning all religious Christmas music, including instrumentals, that had been part of the South Orange–Maplewood School District's Christmas program for years – until one parent complained.
Attorneys with the Thomas More Law Center, a national public interest law firm based in Ann Arbor, Mich., argued to reverse a lower-court ruling affirming the policy. The firm argued the district's ban on religious music conveys a government-sponsored message of disapproval and hostility toward religion in violation of the Establishment Clause.
The complaint was filed on behalf of Michael Stratechuk and his children in the district. The ban deprived the Stratechuk children the right to receive information and ideas, the suit asserts, an inherent corollary of their First Amendment rights to freedom of speech and academic freedom.
Thomas More Law Center attorney Robert Muise indicated the case is not over. Muise said he will ask the Third Circuit to rehear it on both substantive and procedural errors. If denied, the Law Center indicated it will most likely appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
UPDATE 10/4/10: Supreme Court allows ban to stand, favoring a secular "inclusive environment" to celebrate Christmas
-- From "Appeals Court: School district can ban Christmas carols" by Philadelphia Inquirer Staff 11/25/09
"Certainly, those of us who were educated in the public schools remember holiday celebrations replete with Christmas carols, and possibly even Hanukkah songs, to which no objection had been raised," the court said in its ruling.
"Since then, the governing principles have been examined and defined with more particularity. Many decisions about how to best create an inclusive environment in public schools, such as those at issue here, are left to the sound discretion of the school authorities."
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Out with Jesus, in with 'Frosty the Snowman'" by Chelsea Schilling © 2009 WorldNetDaily 11/29/09
In the Nov. 24 ruling the Third Circuit approved the school policy banning all religious Christmas music, including instrumentals, that had been part of the South Orange–Maplewood School District's Christmas program for years – until one parent complained.
Attorneys with the Thomas More Law Center, a national public interest law firm based in Ann Arbor, Mich., argued to reverse a lower-court ruling affirming the policy. The firm argued the district's ban on religious music conveys a government-sponsored message of disapproval and hostility toward religion in violation of the Establishment Clause.
The complaint was filed on behalf of Michael Stratechuk and his children in the district. The ban deprived the Stratechuk children the right to receive information and ideas, the suit asserts, an inherent corollary of their First Amendment rights to freedom of speech and academic freedom.
Thomas More Law Center attorney Robert Muise indicated the case is not over. Muise said he will ask the Third Circuit to rehear it on both substantive and procedural errors. If denied, the Law Center indicated it will most likely appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
Saturday, November 28, 2009
Atheist Recruiting on the Rise at Colleges
As the stigma of atheism has diminished, campus atheists and agnostics are coming out of the closet, fueling a sharp rise in the number of clubs like the 10-year-old group at Iowa State.
-- From "Atheist student groups flower on college campuses" by Eric Gorski, The Associated Press 11/22/09
Campus affiliates of the Secular Student Alliance, a sort of Godless Campus Crusade for Christ, have multiplied from 80 in 2007 to 100 in 2008 and 174 this fall, providing the atheist movement new training grounds for future leaders. In another sign of growing acceptance, at least three universities, including Harvard, now have humanist chaplains meeting the needs of the not-so-spiritual.
More than three-quarters of young adults taking part in the National Study of Youth and Religion profess a belief in God. But almost 7 percent fewer believe in God as young adults (ages 18 to 23) than did as teenagers, according to the study, which is tracking the same group of young people as they mature.
What young adults are less likely to believe in is religion. The number of those who describe themselves as "not religious" nearly doubled, to 27 percent, in young adulthood.
Growing hostility toward religion was found, too. About 1 in 10 young adults are "irreligious" - or actively against religion - after virtually none of them fit that description as teenagers.
At Iowa State, most of the club's roughly 30 members are "former" somethings, mostly Christians. Many stress that their lives are guided not by anti-religiousness, but belief in science, logic and reason.
When the ISU club began in 1999, it was mostly a discussion group. But it soon became clear that young people who leave organized religion miss something: a sense of community. So the group added movie and board-game nights and, more recently, twice-monthly Sunday brunches to the calendar.
Members also seek to engage their peers at Iowa State . . .
To read the entire article, CLICK HERE.
-- From "Atheist student groups flower on college campuses" by Eric Gorski, The Associated Press 11/22/09
Campus affiliates of the Secular Student Alliance, a sort of Godless Campus Crusade for Christ, have multiplied from 80 in 2007 to 100 in 2008 and 174 this fall, providing the atheist movement new training grounds for future leaders. In another sign of growing acceptance, at least three universities, including Harvard, now have humanist chaplains meeting the needs of the not-so-spiritual.
More than three-quarters of young adults taking part in the National Study of Youth and Religion profess a belief in God. But almost 7 percent fewer believe in God as young adults (ages 18 to 23) than did as teenagers, according to the study, which is tracking the same group of young people as they mature.
What young adults are less likely to believe in is religion. The number of those who describe themselves as "not religious" nearly doubled, to 27 percent, in young adulthood.
Growing hostility toward religion was found, too. About 1 in 10 young adults are "irreligious" - or actively against religion - after virtually none of them fit that description as teenagers.
At Iowa State, most of the club's roughly 30 members are "former" somethings, mostly Christians. Many stress that their lives are guided not by anti-religiousness, but belief in science, logic and reason.
When the ISU club began in 1999, it was mostly a discussion group. But it soon became clear that young people who leave organized religion miss something: a sense of community. So the group added movie and board-game nights and, more recently, twice-monthly Sunday brunches to the calendar.
Members also seek to engage their peers at Iowa State . . .
To read the entire article, CLICK HERE.
Friday, November 27, 2009
Activist Calif. Judge Challenges Obama to Advance Gay Agenda
The ruling in San Francisco sidestepped the constitution to order health care benefits be instated for employee's "same-sex wife."
UPDATE 12/18/09: Obama administration defies judge and, again, trashes DOMA
-- From "California Judge Challenging Obama on Gay Rights" by Michael A. Lindenberger, Time Magazine 11/25/09
"The Office of Personnel Management shall cease at once its interference with the jurisdiction of this tribunal," wrote Chief Judge Alex Kozinski of the Ninth Circuit of the U.S. Court of Appeals. He gave the Administration 30 days to permit Karen Golinski, a lawyer employed by the Ninth Circuit, to include the woman she married under California law last year on her family health-insurance plan. "Some branch must have the final say on a law's meaning. At least as to laws governing judicial employees, that is entirely our duty and our province. We would not be a co-equal branch of government otherwise."
By issuing such a stern challenge to the power of the Executive Branch, Kozinski managed to do what even the most sweeping state-court constitutional decisions on gay marriage have not: put the issue of equal treatment for gays to President Barack Obama in a way he will find hard to ignore. The unusual order is only incidentally about gay rights — the judge sidestepped the constitutional question about gays entirely — and is instead a fiery defense of the rights of the judiciary to manage its own employees. But if the Administration chooses to fight the order, it will have to tread carefully to avoid looking to gay-rights advocates like it is waging war in defense of a statute — the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) — that candidate Obama had said should be overturned.
Kozinski's order comes at an interesting time in the Ninth Circuit. It was matched last week by an order by a fellow judge on the appeals court, who ruled that Brad Levenson, a public defender working for the federal courts, was entitled to back pay to cover costs associated with buying separate insurance policies he purchased for Tony Sears, whom he married under California law before last year's Prop 8 made gay marriage illegal there. That state constitutional amendment will itself be on trial beginning in January, when a U.S. district judge in San Francisco will hold the first federal jury trial on whether the U.S. Constitution requires that gay couples be given the opportunity to be married. As chief judge of the circuit, Kozinski will then almost certainly hear the Prop 8 case when it goes on appeal.
To read the entire article, CLICK HERE.
UPDATE 12/18/09: Obama administration defies judge and, again, trashes DOMA
-- From "California Judge Challenging Obama on Gay Rights" by Michael A. Lindenberger, Time Magazine 11/25/09
"The Office of Personnel Management shall cease at once its interference with the jurisdiction of this tribunal," wrote Chief Judge Alex Kozinski of the Ninth Circuit of the U.S. Court of Appeals. He gave the Administration 30 days to permit Karen Golinski, a lawyer employed by the Ninth Circuit, to include the woman she married under California law last year on her family health-insurance plan. "Some branch must have the final say on a law's meaning. At least as to laws governing judicial employees, that is entirely our duty and our province. We would not be a co-equal branch of government otherwise."
By issuing such a stern challenge to the power of the Executive Branch, Kozinski managed to do what even the most sweeping state-court constitutional decisions on gay marriage have not: put the issue of equal treatment for gays to President Barack Obama in a way he will find hard to ignore. The unusual order is only incidentally about gay rights — the judge sidestepped the constitutional question about gays entirely — and is instead a fiery defense of the rights of the judiciary to manage its own employees. But if the Administration chooses to fight the order, it will have to tread carefully to avoid looking to gay-rights advocates like it is waging war in defense of a statute — the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) — that candidate Obama had said should be overturned.
Kozinski's order comes at an interesting time in the Ninth Circuit. It was matched last week by an order by a fellow judge on the appeals court, who ruled that Brad Levenson, a public defender working for the federal courts, was entitled to back pay to cover costs associated with buying separate insurance policies he purchased for Tony Sears, whom he married under California law before last year's Prop 8 made gay marriage illegal there. That state constitutional amendment will itself be on trial beginning in January, when a U.S. district judge in San Francisco will hold the first federal jury trial on whether the U.S. Constitution requires that gay couples be given the opportunity to be married. As chief judge of the circuit, Kozinski will then almost certainly hear the Prop 8 case when it goes on appeal.
To read the entire article, CLICK HERE.
Thursday, November 26, 2009
Activist Federal Judge Defies Marriage Act
In a legal end-run around the 1996 Defense of Marriage Act, a federal judge . . . ordered compensation for a Los Angeles man denied federal employee benefits for his spouse because they are both men.
-- From "Judge orders compensation for gay couple who were denied healthcare, other benefits" by Carol J. Williams, Los Angeles Times 11/19/09
Skirting the Defense of Marriage Act, a 9th Circuit judge orders that a federal attorney be reimbursed the costs associated with the denial of coverage for his husband.
Brad Levenson, a lawyer with the federal public defender's office, had applied for and been denied healthcare coverage and other benefits for Tony Sears after their July 12, 2008, marriage. Same-sex marriage was legal in California for five months last year, until voters passed Proposition 8, which defines marriage as between one man and one woman.
U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals Judge Stephen Reinhardt had previously ruled the denial of benefits for Sears to be discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation, a violation of state law and an unconstitutional denial of due process.
Reinhardt, who is responsible for resolving employee disputes for public defenders within the 9th Circuit, had ordered the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts to process Levenson's application for spousal benefits. But the federal Office of Personnel Management stepped in to derail the enrollment, citing the Defense of Marriage Act, which prohibits federal government recognition of same-sex marriage.
Levenson appealed, seeking either an independently contracted benefits package for Sears or compensation for the costs they incurred in the absence of coverage. Reinhardt ordered the latter, based on a back pay provision in the law governing federal defenders' employment.
To read the entire article, CLICK HERE.
-- From "Judge orders compensation for gay couple who were denied healthcare, other benefits" by Carol J. Williams, Los Angeles Times 11/19/09
Skirting the Defense of Marriage Act, a 9th Circuit judge orders that a federal attorney be reimbursed the costs associated with the denial of coverage for his husband.
Brad Levenson, a lawyer with the federal public defender's office, had applied for and been denied healthcare coverage and other benefits for Tony Sears after their July 12, 2008, marriage. Same-sex marriage was legal in California for five months last year, until voters passed Proposition 8, which defines marriage as between one man and one woman.
U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals Judge Stephen Reinhardt had previously ruled the denial of benefits for Sears to be discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation, a violation of state law and an unconstitutional denial of due process.
Reinhardt, who is responsible for resolving employee disputes for public defenders within the 9th Circuit, had ordered the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts to process Levenson's application for spousal benefits. But the federal Office of Personnel Management stepped in to derail the enrollment, citing the Defense of Marriage Act, which prohibits federal government recognition of same-sex marriage.
Levenson appealed, seeking either an independently contracted benefits package for Sears or compensation for the costs they incurred in the absence of coverage. Reinhardt ordered the latter, based on a back pay provision in the law governing federal defenders' employment.
To read the entire article, CLICK HERE.
More Americans Attribute Bible Verse Authorship to Obama
A Bible verse about caring for the poor and the oppressed was wrongly attributed by a majority of U.S. adults to celebrities, politicians and other prominent figures including President Obama, Oprah, Bono and Angelina Jolie.
-- From "Americans More Likely to Credit Obama for Verse on Justice than Bible" by Joshua A. Goldberg, Christian Post Reporter 11/24/09
Only 13 percent of Americans surveyed by Harris Interactive on behalf of the American Bible Society was able to correctly credit the Bible as the source of Proverbs 31:8-9, the Contemporary English Version of which states: “You must defend those who are helpless and have no hope. Be fair and give justice to the poor and homeless.”
Fifty-four percent, meanwhile, credited the passage to other sources, with President Obama cited as the most likely author by Americans (16 percent). Behind Obama, the Dalai Lama was cited as the most likely author by survey participants (nine percent), followed by Martin Luther King Jr. (eight percent), Oprah Winfrey (four percent), and U2 frontman Bono (three percent).
Other findings of the Harris Interactive survey included the percentage of adults claiming to be familiar with the Bible (80 percent) and the percentage adults who think the Bible offers the most teachings on heaven, hell, adultery, pride or jealousy (46 percent).
To read the entire article, CLICK HERE.
-- From "Americans More Likely to Credit Obama for Verse on Justice than Bible" by Joshua A. Goldberg, Christian Post Reporter 11/24/09
Only 13 percent of Americans surveyed by Harris Interactive on behalf of the American Bible Society was able to correctly credit the Bible as the source of Proverbs 31:8-9, the Contemporary English Version of which states: “You must defend those who are helpless and have no hope. Be fair and give justice to the poor and homeless.”
Fifty-four percent, meanwhile, credited the passage to other sources, with President Obama cited as the most likely author by Americans (16 percent). Behind Obama, the Dalai Lama was cited as the most likely author by survey participants (nine percent), followed by Martin Luther King Jr. (eight percent), Oprah Winfrey (four percent), and U2 frontman Bono (three percent).
Other findings of the Harris Interactive survey included the percentage of adults claiming to be familiar with the Bible (80 percent) and the percentage adults who think the Bible offers the most teachings on heaven, hell, adultery, pride or jealousy (46 percent).
To read the entire article, CLICK HERE.
Wednesday, November 25, 2009
Calif. College Sued Internally for Public Prayer
School trustees and administrators who oversee two south Orange County community colleges are being sued by a group of faculty and students who contend they routinely lead official prayers at school ceremonies.
-- From "Prayers land college district in legal dispute" by Lindsey Baguio, The Orange County Register 11/23/09
The federal lawsuit was filed on Thursday by Americans United for Separation of Church and State on behalf of several faculty members and students [against] Saddleback College professors [and more] . . .
They are seeking for a court ruling that finds the district in violation of the First Amendment and an order that prohibits school prayers at events.
One of the incidents outlined in the lawsuit cites a faculty training session in August 2009 in which administrators showed a video titled "God Bless the USA." The video shows religious images and ended with two pictures of military personnel carrying a flag-draped coffin. Superimposed on the image was the quote "Only two defining forces have ever offered to die for you. Jesus Christ and the American G.I. One died for your soul, the other died for your freedom."
[Karla] Westphal, a math professor at Saddleback College, is the lead plaintiff in the case.
Westphal, who has been a professor at Saddleback College since 2001, said the frequency of public prayers at school events began in 2004 when a trustee led a prayer at the beginning of a scholarship ceremony.
To read the entire article, CLICK HERE.
-- From "Prayers land college district in legal dispute" by Lindsey Baguio, The Orange County Register 11/23/09
The federal lawsuit was filed on Thursday by Americans United for Separation of Church and State on behalf of several faculty members and students [against] Saddleback College professors [and more] . . .
They are seeking for a court ruling that finds the district in violation of the First Amendment and an order that prohibits school prayers at events.
One of the incidents outlined in the lawsuit cites a faculty training session in August 2009 in which administrators showed a video titled "God Bless the USA." The video shows religious images and ended with two pictures of military personnel carrying a flag-draped coffin. Superimposed on the image was the quote "Only two defining forces have ever offered to die for you. Jesus Christ and the American G.I. One died for your soul, the other died for your freedom."
[Karla] Westphal, a math professor at Saddleback College, is the lead plaintiff in the case.
Westphal, who has been a professor at Saddleback College since 2001, said the frequency of public prayers at school events began in 2004 when a trustee led a prayer at the beginning of a scholarship ceremony.
To read the entire article, CLICK HERE.
Cardinal to Congress: It's Wrong to Fund Abortion
A top Roman Catholic cardinal told CNSNews.com that there is “no way” Catholic members of Congress can support the Senate health care reform bill as long as it includes a provision that allows tax dollars to go to insurance plans that cover abortion.
-- From "Top Catholic Cardinal Says 'No Way' Catholic Members of Congress Can Support Senate Health Care Bill That Funds Abortion" by Karen Schuberg, CNSNews.com 11/24/09
At the National Press Club on Nov. 20, CNSNews.com asked Cardinal Justin Rigali, the archbishop of Philadelphia: “The Senate health care bill that Majority Leader Reid released this week permits tax dollars to go to insurance plans which cover abortion. And my question is: Would it be a mortal sin for a Catholic member of Congress to vote for this bill knowing that this provision is in it?”
“Well, first of all,” Rigali responded, “the Catholic Church and, therefore, individual Catholics, are completely against abortion. So our position is that, first of all, a health care bill can be a great, great blessing to our country. The bishops of the United States have been in favor, for long years, in favor of universal, affordable health care for everyone. So this, this is something that is extremely important.
“But we make a distinction between health care and killing,” Rigali continued. “So abortion is out of the question--as we’ve spoken about the value of human life. And everyone is called upon to do everything possible to see that when we are trying to get laudable health care—and that’s what we hope to get—laudable health care, but certainly abortion will be excluded from that. So we exhort everyone of good will that this is for the good of our country. This is for the good of individuals. We have to make sure that health care doesn’t end up as killing. So everyone is challenged to make his or her contribution, and we’re counting on legislators to make sure this is not part of what is going to rule the lives of people.”
“People have to follow their conscience, but their conscience has to be well-formed,” said Rigali. “And you have to make sure that when it is a question of doing something that has a provision, if it has a provision in it for abortion, then this is absolutely wrong by every standard and not by the standards of the Catholic Church as you see here today. It’s the standards of Christian, standards of the natural law.
To read the entire article, CLICK HERE.
-- From "Top Catholic Cardinal Says 'No Way' Catholic Members of Congress Can Support Senate Health Care Bill That Funds Abortion" by Karen Schuberg, CNSNews.com 11/24/09
At the National Press Club on Nov. 20, CNSNews.com asked Cardinal Justin Rigali, the archbishop of Philadelphia: “The Senate health care bill that Majority Leader Reid released this week permits tax dollars to go to insurance plans which cover abortion. And my question is: Would it be a mortal sin for a Catholic member of Congress to vote for this bill knowing that this provision is in it?”
“Well, first of all,” Rigali responded, “the Catholic Church and, therefore, individual Catholics, are completely against abortion. So our position is that, first of all, a health care bill can be a great, great blessing to our country. The bishops of the United States have been in favor, for long years, in favor of universal, affordable health care for everyone. So this, this is something that is extremely important.
“But we make a distinction between health care and killing,” Rigali continued. “So abortion is out of the question--as we’ve spoken about the value of human life. And everyone is called upon to do everything possible to see that when we are trying to get laudable health care—and that’s what we hope to get—laudable health care, but certainly abortion will be excluded from that. So we exhort everyone of good will that this is for the good of our country. This is for the good of individuals. We have to make sure that health care doesn’t end up as killing. So everyone is challenged to make his or her contribution, and we’re counting on legislators to make sure this is not part of what is going to rule the lives of people.”
“People have to follow their conscience, but their conscience has to be well-formed,” said Rigali. “And you have to make sure that when it is a question of doing something that has a provision, if it has a provision in it for abortion, then this is absolutely wrong by every standard and not by the standards of the Catholic Church as you see here today. It’s the standards of Christian, standards of the natural law.
To read the entire article, CLICK HERE.
Tuesday, November 24, 2009
Catholic Bishops Turn Their Sights to Senate Bill
Following success on the House health care bill, the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops now intends to exert equal influence during the Senate debate.
-- From "Bishops search for Senate sponsor" by Jeanne Cummings, Politico 11/23/09
Roman Catholic bishops have yet to find a senator willing to sponsor their amendment for a tougher ban on use of taxpayer money for abortion coverage in the Senate health care reform bill.
Among the senators under intense pressure is Bob Casey (D-Pa.), a Catholic and high-profile opponent of abortion rights.
Over the weekend, Casey said “more work” needs to be done to improve the Senate abortion coverage wording.
Church leaders are urging defeat of the [health care] reform measure if the abortion insurance provision [currently in the Senate bill] isn’t changed.
But even if they get what they want, the bishops are unlikely to officially endorse the final package, something that could make lawmakers more accommodating.
According to John Carr, head of the conference’s Justice, Peace and Human Development Office, the bishops typically do not endorse large reform legislation because of their complexity. “We rarely endorse 2,000-page bills,” he said.
But, Carr said, the bishops are holding out one prize: an open letter from the conference to the Senate, saying “very favorable things” about changes in the legislation and that “makes the case that passage of national health care reform is an urgent national priority.”
To read the entire article, CLICK HERE.
-- From "Bishops search for Senate sponsor" by Jeanne Cummings, Politico 11/23/09
Roman Catholic bishops have yet to find a senator willing to sponsor their amendment for a tougher ban on use of taxpayer money for abortion coverage in the Senate health care reform bill.
Among the senators under intense pressure is Bob Casey (D-Pa.), a Catholic and high-profile opponent of abortion rights.
Over the weekend, Casey said “more work” needs to be done to improve the Senate abortion coverage wording.
Church leaders are urging defeat of the [health care] reform measure if the abortion insurance provision [currently in the Senate bill] isn’t changed.
But even if they get what they want, the bishops are unlikely to officially endorse the final package, something that could make lawmakers more accommodating.
According to John Carr, head of the conference’s Justice, Peace and Human Development Office, the bishops typically do not endorse large reform legislation because of their complexity. “We rarely endorse 2,000-page bills,” he said.
But, Carr said, the bishops are holding out one prize: an open letter from the conference to the Senate, saying “very favorable things” about changes in the legislation and that “makes the case that passage of national health care reform is an urgent national priority.”
To read the entire article, CLICK HERE.
Texas Board of Ed Questions American History
Debate is raging over the setting of new social studies standards: Indoctrination of political correctness vs. teaching historical fact to 4.7 million Texas students
-- From "Social studies book panel has hands full" by Gary Scharrer, Austin Bureau, The Houston Chronicle 11/23/09
. . . does Sikhism, the world's fifth most popular religion, deserve more mention, as some adherents advocate?
Have too many women and minorities been included in proposed curriculum standards to appease political correctness? Or are worthy women and minorities lacking in class materials?
What were the religious influences on the Founding Fathers?
. . . “Do you want history presented as a patchwork of minorities and women versus white males — or as a constantly improving homogenous American society working through its problems?”
“History can only be so many pages. Teachers can only get through so much material in a year,” said board member Terri Leo, of Spring. “History has to be historically significant to be included in the history textbooks.”
Some board members want students to learn more about the religious influences on the Founding Fathers. Critics say that is OK as long as the board does not try to suggest the founders set out to develop a Christian nation with laws and government based on a fundamentalist reading of the Bible.
To read the entire article, CLICK HERE.
For background info, click here for previous article.
-- From "Social studies book panel has hands full" by Gary Scharrer, Austin Bureau, The Houston Chronicle 11/23/09
. . . does Sikhism, the world's fifth most popular religion, deserve more mention, as some adherents advocate?
Have too many women and minorities been included in proposed curriculum standards to appease political correctness? Or are worthy women and minorities lacking in class materials?
What were the religious influences on the Founding Fathers?
. . . “Do you want history presented as a patchwork of minorities and women versus white males — or as a constantly improving homogenous American society working through its problems?”
“History can only be so many pages. Teachers can only get through so much material in a year,” said board member Terri Leo, of Spring. “History has to be historically significant to be included in the history textbooks.”
Some board members want students to learn more about the religious influences on the Founding Fathers. Critics say that is OK as long as the board does not try to suggest the founders set out to develop a Christian nation with laws and government based on a fundamentalist reading of the Bible.
To read the entire article, CLICK HERE.
For background info, click here for previous article.
Monday, November 23, 2009
ABC Broadcasts Homosexual/Sadomasochistic Music Video
Openly homosexual former "American Idol" performer Adam Lambert shocked the American Music Awards audience last night by shoving dance team members' faces into his crotch, leading others around on dog leashes and delivering a passionate on-stage kiss to his male keyboard player during the ABC broadcast.
UPDATE 11/24/09: Flooded with complaints, ABC cancels Lambert's followup appearance.
-- From "To the extreme: Adam Lambert's AMA performance shocks" by Chris Richards, Washington Post Staff Writer 11/23/09
Adam Lambert closed Sunday's AMAs -- usually one of the year's sleepiest of awards shows -- with a stunt-laden performance of "For Your Entertainment," the sexed-up title track of his debut album, landing in stores Monday.
"I'm about to turn up the heat," Lambert promised during the song's chorus, after a male dancer simulated oral sex on the "American Idol" alum. Moments later, Lambert grabbed one of his backing musicians by the nape of the neck and gave him an open-mouthed kiss.
With a gaggle of scantily clad dancers writhing in S&M get-ups, the performance at Los Angeles's Nokia Theatre effectively erased the prior events of the evening . . .
Reports say ABC did not edit out any portions of the performance from the West Coast feed. And the network can't say they didn't see it coming. On Friday, Lambert was boasting about leather, chains and copious writhing to come, saying the same thing as he did Sunday night.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "American Music Awards become 'modern Sodom'" © 2009 WorldNetDaily 11/23/09
Lyrics of the song included: "Hold on until it's over. Can you handle what I'm about to do. It's about to get rough with you."
Immediately following the performance, Adam Lambert was the most trending topic on Twitter. Lambert was defiant on his Twitter page, proclaiming, "All hail freedom of expression and artistic integrity. ... fans: I adore u."
ABC producers were unaware of the planned same-sex make-out session, reports Rolling Stone. However, Lambert's performance was advertised as "eye-popping" and something "you'd be talking about tomorrow."
Lambert told Rolling Stone he didn't do anything female performers haven't done on television already – and that if ABC censored any part of his performance for the West Coast rebroadcast, it would amount to "discrimination."
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
UPDATE 11/24/09: Flooded with complaints, ABC cancels Lambert's followup appearance.
-- From "To the extreme: Adam Lambert's AMA performance shocks" by Chris Richards, Washington Post Staff Writer 11/23/09
Adam Lambert closed Sunday's AMAs -- usually one of the year's sleepiest of awards shows -- with a stunt-laden performance of "For Your Entertainment," the sexed-up title track of his debut album, landing in stores Monday.
"I'm about to turn up the heat," Lambert promised during the song's chorus, after a male dancer simulated oral sex on the "American Idol" alum. Moments later, Lambert grabbed one of his backing musicians by the nape of the neck and gave him an open-mouthed kiss.
With a gaggle of scantily clad dancers writhing in S&M get-ups, the performance at Los Angeles's Nokia Theatre effectively erased the prior events of the evening . . .
Reports say ABC did not edit out any portions of the performance from the West Coast feed. And the network can't say they didn't see it coming. On Friday, Lambert was boasting about leather, chains and copious writhing to come, saying the same thing as he did Sunday night.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "American Music Awards become 'modern Sodom'" © 2009 WorldNetDaily 11/23/09
Lyrics of the song included: "Hold on until it's over. Can you handle what I'm about to do. It's about to get rough with you."
Immediately following the performance, Adam Lambert was the most trending topic on Twitter. Lambert was defiant on his Twitter page, proclaiming, "All hail freedom of expression and artistic integrity. ... fans: I adore u."
ABC producers were unaware of the planned same-sex make-out session, reports Rolling Stone. However, Lambert's performance was advertised as "eye-popping" and something "you'd be talking about tomorrow."
Lambert told Rolling Stone he didn't do anything female performers haven't done on television already – and that if ABC censored any part of his performance for the West Coast rebroadcast, it would amount to "discrimination."
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
Iowa Library Defies Parents to Keep Sex in Library
A teen sex magazine will stay on the shelves at the Ames Public Library despite a petition signed by more than 100 parents objecting to the publication.-- From "Teen Sex Magazine to Stay on Shelves at Iowa Library" Associated Press 11/22/09
The Ames Library Board voted 6-1 to support library Director Art Weeks' recommendation to keep the magazine Sex, Etc., in the teen section.
From "Trustees to decide fate of Sex, Etc." by Jennifer Meyer, Staff Writer, The Tribune (Ames, Iowa) 11/18/09
Joyce Bannantine presented a petition with 118 signatures to the Library Board of Trustees last month objecting to the open display in the teen area and offering free copies of the magazine Sex, Etc.
The magazine is written for teens by teens under the oversight of Answer, a national sexuality organization at Rutgers University.
“We get this journal Sex, Etc. to provide authoritative information that teens would likely be curious about,” Library Director Art Weeks said.
Sex, Etc. is displayed in a stand with about a dozen other magazines. Teens can also take home for free one of the 10 extra copies the library subscribes to for $15.
“Kids might not intuitively surmise that we have this information, so we wanted to make sure to communicate to them, ‘Yes, this information is available here,’” Weeks said. “The other thing is that this is a topic they may not always feel comfortable going to the librarian or information desk and requesting information, so we make it available for them to get without having an adult intermediary.”
. . . an article describing lesbian sex, for example, may be “putting ideas into their heads that some of them may not have even thought about yet. And then, whoa, this is being thrown at them” by displaying it where teens who are not actively seeking that information might find it, Bannantine said.
Weeks recommended to the Library Board of Trustees to continue its display and distribution of Sex, Etc. based on principals of the American Library Association and Ames library to promote access without age restrictions.
To read the entire article, CLICK HERE.
Sunday, November 22, 2009
Bishop Bars Kennedy from Communion
Providence Bishop Thomas J. Tobin has forbidden Rep. Patrick J. Kennedy to receive the Roman Catholic sacrament of Holy Communion because of his advocacy of abortion rights . . .
UPDATE 11/24/09: Two Massachusetts U.S. Senate candidates slam Catholic Church as hypocritic
-- From "Bishop confirms banning Kennedy from receiving communion" by John Moroney, NECN 11/22/09
Bishop Thomas Tobin say he made his request public after Kennedy revealed it to the Providence Journal. Tobin released a letter he wrote to Kennedy in 2007. The letter read in part:
"In light of the Church's clear teaching, and your consistent actions, therefore, I believe it is inappropriate for you to be receiving Holy Communion and I now ask respectfully that you refrain from doing so."
The bishop said he did not want to make this issue public, but felt he was forced to by Kennedy's actions.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Kennedy: Barred from Communion" by John E. Mulligan, The Providence Journal Washington Bureau 11/22/09
“The bishop instructed me not to take Communion and said that he has instructed the diocesan priests not to give me Communion,” Kennedy said in a telephone interview.
Kennedy said the bishop had explained the penalty by telling him “that I am not a good practicing Catholic because of the positions that I’ve taken as a public official,” particularly on abortion. He declined to say when or how Bishop Tobin told him not to take the sacrament. And he declined to say whether he has obeyed the bishop’s injunction.
Their dispute comes against the backdrop of the national debate about whether U.S. taxpayers should subsidize abortions in the new health-care system that President Obama and the Democrat-controlled Congress have labored for months to create.
Because every bishop has wide latitude in his own diocese, the controversy between Kennedy and Bishop Tobin is likely to be greeted with silence from other bishops — even if most would disagree with action to deny Communion to a Catholic legislator, according to Father Reese.
Orders by bishops to deny Communion to Catholic public officials are very unusual but not unprecedented. In 2003, another prominent Catholic Democrat with a mixed voting record on abortion, Rep. David Obey of Wisconsin, was admonished not to take Communion in his congressional district by Bishop Raymond Burke of LaCrosse.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
UPDATE 11/24/09: Two Massachusetts U.S. Senate candidates slam Catholic Church as hypocritic
-- From "Bishop confirms banning Kennedy from receiving communion" by John Moroney, NECN 11/22/09
Bishop Thomas Tobin say he made his request public after Kennedy revealed it to the Providence Journal. Tobin released a letter he wrote to Kennedy in 2007. The letter read in part:
"In light of the Church's clear teaching, and your consistent actions, therefore, I believe it is inappropriate for you to be receiving Holy Communion and I now ask respectfully that you refrain from doing so."
The bishop said he did not want to make this issue public, but felt he was forced to by Kennedy's actions.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Kennedy: Barred from Communion" by John E. Mulligan, The Providence Journal Washington Bureau 11/22/09
“The bishop instructed me not to take Communion and said that he has instructed the diocesan priests not to give me Communion,” Kennedy said in a telephone interview.
Kennedy said the bishop had explained the penalty by telling him “that I am not a good practicing Catholic because of the positions that I’ve taken as a public official,” particularly on abortion. He declined to say when or how Bishop Tobin told him not to take the sacrament. And he declined to say whether he has obeyed the bishop’s injunction.
Their dispute comes against the backdrop of the national debate about whether U.S. taxpayers should subsidize abortions in the new health-care system that President Obama and the Democrat-controlled Congress have labored for months to create.
Because every bishop has wide latitude in his own diocese, the controversy between Kennedy and Bishop Tobin is likely to be greeted with silence from other bishops — even if most would disagree with action to deny Communion to a Catholic legislator, according to Father Reese.
Orders by bishops to deny Communion to Catholic public officials are very unusual but not unprecedented. In 2003, another prominent Catholic Democrat with a mixed voting record on abortion, Rep. David Obey of Wisconsin, was admonished not to take Communion in his congressional district by Bishop Raymond Burke of LaCrosse.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
Saturday, November 21, 2009
Will Palin Lead a 21st Century Reaganesque Grassroots Movement?
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.
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.
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.
Click here to E-mail the writers of the declaration and signers (automated E-mail system takes less than 60 seconds).
-- 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.
Click here to E-mail the writers of the declaration and signers (automated E-mail system takes less than 60 seconds).
-- 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.
UPDATE 4/21/10: U.S. Rep. Steve King (R-Iowa) announces support of challenge. “Like you, I believe this ‘Hate Crimes’ Act is unconstitutional and marks an unprecedented move to regulate and criminalize our thoughts."
-- 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.
UPDATE 4/21/10: U.S. Rep. Steve King (R-Iowa) announces support of challenge. “Like you, I believe this ‘Hate Crimes’ Act is unconstitutional and marks an unprecedented move to regulate and criminalize our thoughts."
-- 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.
UPDATE 11/26/09: Still waiting for CDC to disclose data
-- 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.
UPDATE 11/26/09: Still waiting for CDC to disclose data
-- 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
UPDATE 1/21/11: Abby Johnson leaves her pro-choice Episcopal church
-- 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
UPDATE 1/21/11: Abby Johnson leaves her pro-choice Episcopal church
-- 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.
Saturday, November 14, 2009
Washington Post: Porn is Everywhere
Oh, how American society has changed! Such a writing as this would be unimaginable not many years ago -- it used to be that "consuming" porn was relegated to creepy, back alley shops.
-- From "Publicly, a whole new lewdness" by Monica Hesse, Washington Post Staff Writer 11/12/09
. . . the increasing popularity of laptops and handheld devices, and the prevalence of wireless Internet access, means there's a greater chance of becoming a bystander to a complete stranger's viewing proclivities. Like being exposed to the cigarette smoke of a nicotine addict on the street, people are inhaling secondhand smut.
Last fall, some airlines announced they would work on filtering in-flight Internet access to prevent the surfing of inappropriate content (dirty DVDs brought on by passengers, however, would be nearly impossible to filter). But this secondhand smut can also happen on the ground. On buses. In gyms. In movie theaters.
Perhaps this is the real problem: the increasingly blurred boundary between public and private. If we are so accustomed to burying our noses in tiny screens, carrying our entertainment in and out of the house, perhaps people are simply getting confused as to where they are.
Those afflicted with secondhand porn say it's not that they oppose adult entertainment. The trouble was knowing that they couldn't escape it, not until the plane landed or the Metro doors opened.
To read the entire article, CLICK HERE.
-- From "Publicly, a whole new lewdness" by Monica Hesse, Washington Post Staff Writer 11/12/09
. . . the increasing popularity of laptops and handheld devices, and the prevalence of wireless Internet access, means there's a greater chance of becoming a bystander to a complete stranger's viewing proclivities. Like being exposed to the cigarette smoke of a nicotine addict on the street, people are inhaling secondhand smut.
Last fall, some airlines announced they would work on filtering in-flight Internet access to prevent the surfing of inappropriate content (dirty DVDs brought on by passengers, however, would be nearly impossible to filter). But this secondhand smut can also happen on the ground. On buses. In gyms. In movie theaters.
Perhaps this is the real problem: the increasingly blurred boundary between public and private. If we are so accustomed to burying our noses in tiny screens, carrying our entertainment in and out of the house, perhaps people are simply getting confused as to where they are.
Those afflicted with secondhand porn say it's not that they oppose adult entertainment. The trouble was knowing that they couldn't escape it, not until the plane landed or the Metro doors opened.
To read the entire article, CLICK HERE.
Bishop Tobin Preaches Catholicism to Kennedy
Representative Patrick J. Kennedy of Rhode Island was to meet Thursday with Thomas J. Tobin, the Roman Catholic bishop of Providence, and perhaps start healing a bitter rift over whether health care legislation now before Congress should restrict abortion coverage.
-- From "Patrick Kennedy clashes with outspoken RI bishop" by Ray Henry, Associated Press 11/12/09
Their feud over a proposal expanding the nation's health insurance system has escalated to the point where Tobin has publicly questioned Kennedy's faith and membership in the church and said he should not receive communion, the central sacrament in Catholic worship.
Patrick Kennedy is among several Catholic politicians to clash with their bishops over abortion, which the church considers a paramount moral evil not open for negotiation. Fewer than 20 of the roughly 200 bishops overseeing U.S. dioceses have threatened to deny communion to Catholic politicians who support abortion, [said the Rev. Thomas Reese, a church observer and senior fellow at the Woodstock Theological Center at Georgetown University.]
"I don't think you'll find widespread support among Catholics for this," he said. [Oh really? Check out these statements.]
Archbishop Joseph Naumann of Kansas City, Kan., has said that U.S. Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius, a Catholic Democrat who supports abortion rights, should stop taking communion until she changes her stance.
Former Archbishop Raymond Burke of St. Louis has said he would withhold communion from politicians who support abortion, such as former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani, a Republican who also ran afoul of the church because he is divorced.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Verbally, bishop isn’t turning cheek" by Noah Bierman, Boston Globe Staff 11/12/09
The bishop from America’s most Catholic state, and increasingly one of the church’s most provocative prelates, has provided a rather concise explanation for his willingness to clash with politicians: Christians are not supposed to be nice, at least not all the time.
"In confronting moral evil, Jesus wasn’t nice, kind, gentle, and sweet," Thomas J. Tobin, the bishop of Providence, wrote in his diocesan newspaper column earlier this year. "He lived in a rough and tumble world and He took His message to the streets."
Tobin has followed his interpretation of Jesus’ demeanor most devoutly, and he is quickly positioning himself at the national forefront of a renewed debate over the role of Catholic orthodoxy in the public square, most recently in a very personal feud with Representative Patrick Kennedy. As the abortion issue has taken on prominence in the national health care debate, Tobin has insisted Catholics get involved in the rough world of politics - even if it means tangling with prochoice Catholic legislators. And he has led by example.
Tobin wrote [to Patrick Kennedy], "Your position is unacceptable to the church and scandalous to many of our members. It absolutely diminishes your communion with the church."
Earlier, Kennedy had questioned why church leaders would oppose the opportunity to insure millions of poor Americans because the bill could possibly provide coverage for abortions.
"You mean to tell me the Catholic Church is going to be denying those people life-saving health care?" Kennedy told the Catholic News Service last month. A health care bill was passed by the US House of Representatives over the weekend, with a controversial amendment restricting federal funding for abortion - considered a major victory for the nation’s Catholic bishops and other abortion opponents. Kennedy voted against the amendment but supported the final bill.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Rep. Kennedy and Bishop in Bitter Rift on Abortion" by Abby Goodnough, New York Times 11/12/09
. . . Bishop Tobin stepped up his public rebuke of Mr. Kennedy, accusing him Wednesday of “false advertising” for describing himself as a Catholic and saying he should not receive holy communion because he supports using taxpayer money for abortions.
“If you freely choose to be a Catholic, it means you believe certain things, you do certain things,” Bishop Tobin said on WPRO, a Providence radio station. “If you cannot do all that in conscience, then you should perhaps feel free to go somewhere else.”
“It’s not too late for you to repair your relationship with the Church,” he wrote, “redeem your public image, and emerge as an authentic ‘profile in courage,’ especially by defending the sanctity of human life for all people, including unborn children.”
The United States Conference of Catholic Bishops has lobbied forcefully against including federal financing for abortion in the health care legislation, and Bishop Tobin, who has led the Catholic Church in Rhode Island since 2005, has been a vocal participant.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
-- From "Patrick Kennedy clashes with outspoken RI bishop" by Ray Henry, Associated Press 11/12/09
Their feud over a proposal expanding the nation's health insurance system has escalated to the point where Tobin has publicly questioned Kennedy's faith and membership in the church and said he should not receive communion, the central sacrament in Catholic worship.
Patrick Kennedy is among several Catholic politicians to clash with their bishops over abortion, which the church considers a paramount moral evil not open for negotiation. Fewer than 20 of the roughly 200 bishops overseeing U.S. dioceses have threatened to deny communion to Catholic politicians who support abortion, [said the Rev. Thomas Reese, a church observer and senior fellow at the Woodstock Theological Center at Georgetown University.]
"I don't think you'll find widespread support among Catholics for this," he said. [Oh really? Check out these statements.]
Archbishop Joseph Naumann of Kansas City, Kan., has said that U.S. Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius, a Catholic Democrat who supports abortion rights, should stop taking communion until she changes her stance.
Former Archbishop Raymond Burke of St. Louis has said he would withhold communion from politicians who support abortion, such as former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani, a Republican who also ran afoul of the church because he is divorced.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Verbally, bishop isn’t turning cheek" by Noah Bierman, Boston Globe Staff 11/12/09
The bishop from America’s most Catholic state, and increasingly one of the church’s most provocative prelates, has provided a rather concise explanation for his willingness to clash with politicians: Christians are not supposed to be nice, at least not all the time.
"In confronting moral evil, Jesus wasn’t nice, kind, gentle, and sweet," Thomas J. Tobin, the bishop of Providence, wrote in his diocesan newspaper column earlier this year. "He lived in a rough and tumble world and He took His message to the streets."
Tobin has followed his interpretation of Jesus’ demeanor most devoutly, and he is quickly positioning himself at the national forefront of a renewed debate over the role of Catholic orthodoxy in the public square, most recently in a very personal feud with Representative Patrick Kennedy. As the abortion issue has taken on prominence in the national health care debate, Tobin has insisted Catholics get involved in the rough world of politics - even if it means tangling with prochoice Catholic legislators. And he has led by example.
Tobin wrote [to Patrick Kennedy], "Your position is unacceptable to the church and scandalous to many of our members. It absolutely diminishes your communion with the church."
Earlier, Kennedy had questioned why church leaders would oppose the opportunity to insure millions of poor Americans because the bill could possibly provide coverage for abortions.
"You mean to tell me the Catholic Church is going to be denying those people life-saving health care?" Kennedy told the Catholic News Service last month. A health care bill was passed by the US House of Representatives over the weekend, with a controversial amendment restricting federal funding for abortion - considered a major victory for the nation’s Catholic bishops and other abortion opponents. Kennedy voted against the amendment but supported the final bill.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Rep. Kennedy and Bishop in Bitter Rift on Abortion" by Abby Goodnough, New York Times 11/12/09
. . . Bishop Tobin stepped up his public rebuke of Mr. Kennedy, accusing him Wednesday of “false advertising” for describing himself as a Catholic and saying he should not receive holy communion because he supports using taxpayer money for abortions.
“If you freely choose to be a Catholic, it means you believe certain things, you do certain things,” Bishop Tobin said on WPRO, a Providence radio station. “If you cannot do all that in conscience, then you should perhaps feel free to go somewhere else.”
“It’s not too late for you to repair your relationship with the Church,” he wrote, “redeem your public image, and emerge as an authentic ‘profile in courage,’ especially by defending the sanctity of human life for all people, including unborn children.”
The United States Conference of Catholic Bishops has lobbied forcefully against including federal financing for abortion in the health care legislation, and Bishop Tobin, who has led the Catholic Church in Rhode Island since 2005, has been a vocal participant.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.