Mainstream media ignores arson story of Arizona pregnancy center that served low income residents
-- From "Hope House burns!" by Mike Leiby, The Independent 12/29/09
A fire that looks as though it might be arson at the Living Hope Women's Center Whiteriver clinic on Sunday, Dec. 20, has closed the facility until further notice.
President of the Living Hope Women's Center governing board and former executive director Dinah Monahan said . . . the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms (ATF) is investigating the fire.
Having taken place on Apache tribal lands, the fire, if indeed arson, would be a Federal offense, explaining why federal agencies are involved with the investigation.
Monahan said initial conversations with investigating federal agents asked if the clinic might be involved in anything that certain individuals may not agree with.
"The agent very gingerly asked if we were involved in 'anything controversial' in our ministry," she said. "You can imagine what they hear about Crisis Pregnancy Centers, abortion clinic bombings and the like. I assured him that even though we are a CPC (Certified Professional Consultant), our work was mostly pre-natal and parenting and that the culture in Whiteriver is very pro-life."
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
Thursday, December 31, 2009
Baltimore Law Singles Out Pro-life Counseling
The new city law requires pregnancy resource centers to post services NOT offered so that women considering abortions do not mistakenly enter a pro-life organization.
Who knows, the poor mother-to-be might see her baby's image via ultrasound, and reconsider the abortion!
-- From "Law would require pregnancy centers to post signs if they don't offer abortions" by Julie Scharper, Los Angeles Times 11/24/09
Council President Stephanie Rawlings-Blake, a Democrat who sponsored the bill, called the vote a victory for women's well-being. She cited a study by an advocacy group indicating that women have been misled at pregnancy centers that provide counseling, clothing and food for expectant mothers -- but not abortions.
"It's a step toward making sure that women have the information they need to make the right decision for their health and their future," Rawlings-Blake said.
"At the very least now, these centers will have to put a sign up that lets women know that information about birth control and abortion won't be found within those doors," said Keiren Havens, vice president of communications for Planned Parenthood of Maryland, which supported the bill.
Similar measures have failed in the legislatures of several states, including Oregon and Texas, Meister said.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Baltimore Law Aims to Undermine Charitable Work of Pregnancy Resource Centers, Say Pro-life Activists" by Penny Starr, CNSNews Senior Staff Writer 12/30/09
A bill passed by the Baltimore City Council in November and signed into law on Dec. 4 will require pregnancy resource centers operating within the city to post signs stating what services the facilities do not offer. Signs -- to be posted outside the centers -- must state that they do not provide or give referrals for abortion or contraceptives.
Pro-life activists say this is the first time in the United States that a nonprofit service provider has been required to post such signage. They believe the law is intended to undermine their efforts to help women make an informed decision about an unplanned pregnancy. The signs will turn more women to Planned Parenthood and other abortion providers, they say.
“The passage of this piece of legislation may serve as serious encouragement to those who would like to see our organizations saddled with more laws and restrictions,” Carol Clews, executive director of the Center for Pregnancy Concerns in Baltimore, told the Baltimore Sun after the council passed the bill by a 12-3 vote in November.
Joe Young, vice president at Heartbeat International, a network of pregnancy resource centers around the world . . . who attended the hearings in Baltimore, said that the pregnancy resource centers affected by the new law provided as evidence during hearings the paperwork that clients at the centers must sign to get services, which include a disclaimer that neither abortions nor contraceptive services or referrals are included.
Not one witness at the hearings who had used the services of a pregnancy resource center testified that they felt misled, Young said, adding that groups like NARAL Pro-Choice America and Planned Parenthood have a vested interest in undermining the work done by the centers.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
Who knows, the poor mother-to-be might see her baby's image via ultrasound, and reconsider the abortion!
-- From "Law would require pregnancy centers to post signs if they don't offer abortions" by Julie Scharper, Los Angeles Times 11/24/09
Council President Stephanie Rawlings-Blake, a Democrat who sponsored the bill, called the vote a victory for women's well-being. She cited a study by an advocacy group indicating that women have been misled at pregnancy centers that provide counseling, clothing and food for expectant mothers -- but not abortions.
"It's a step toward making sure that women have the information they need to make the right decision for their health and their future," Rawlings-Blake said.
"At the very least now, these centers will have to put a sign up that lets women know that information about birth control and abortion won't be found within those doors," said Keiren Havens, vice president of communications for Planned Parenthood of Maryland, which supported the bill.
Similar measures have failed in the legislatures of several states, including Oregon and Texas, Meister said.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Baltimore Law Aims to Undermine Charitable Work of Pregnancy Resource Centers, Say Pro-life Activists" by Penny Starr, CNSNews Senior Staff Writer 12/30/09
A bill passed by the Baltimore City Council in November and signed into law on Dec. 4 will require pregnancy resource centers operating within the city to post signs stating what services the facilities do not offer. Signs -- to be posted outside the centers -- must state that they do not provide or give referrals for abortion or contraceptives.
Pro-life activists say this is the first time in the United States that a nonprofit service provider has been required to post such signage. They believe the law is intended to undermine their efforts to help women make an informed decision about an unplanned pregnancy. The signs will turn more women to Planned Parenthood and other abortion providers, they say.
“The passage of this piece of legislation may serve as serious encouragement to those who would like to see our organizations saddled with more laws and restrictions,” Carol Clews, executive director of the Center for Pregnancy Concerns in Baltimore, told the Baltimore Sun after the council passed the bill by a 12-3 vote in November.
Joe Young, vice president at Heartbeat International, a network of pregnancy resource centers around the world . . . who attended the hearings in Baltimore, said that the pregnancy resource centers affected by the new law provided as evidence during hearings the paperwork that clients at the centers must sign to get services, which include a disclaimer that neither abortions nor contraceptive services or referrals are included.
Not one witness at the hearings who had used the services of a pregnancy resource center testified that they felt misled, Young said, adding that groups like NARAL Pro-Choice America and Planned Parenthood have a vested interest in undermining the work done by the centers.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
Wednesday, December 30, 2009
Hallelujah, Obama Almighty! Media Proclaim
. . . we have Jesus’ miracles that everyone still remembers, but which only benefitted a few. . . . it is impossible to give an unequivocal result of his work.-- From "Danish Paper: Obama is Greater than Jesus" by Charles Smith, Examiner 12/30/09
Danish newspaper Politiken is running a print story that seems right ‘for such a time as this.’ The editorial opines that the first black American president is so socially connected and able to empathize with all peoples, that he is desirably deific by nature - in not so few words - magnifying his holiness as “greater than Jesus.”
The writer is so convinced that the preeminent presidential pontiff is “the practical Saviour of our times,” his opinion piece showers the honorable Barack Hussein Obama with amorous affection and attributes that are quite literally - of Biblical proportion.
Proclaiming Obama’s proclivity for peace, in awe of his ornamental oratorical ability and wisdom, touting his humble beginnings and defense of the weak and vulnerable because of his ability to identify with them, the author could possibly be preparing his own gospel of the Obama (ante)Christ.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "'Obama is, of course, greater than Jesus'" by Bob Unruh © 2009 WorldNetDaily 12/29/09
"Obama is, of course, greater than Jesus – if we have to play that absurd Christmas game," opined the unsigned editorial yesterday in Politiken, which boasts of being Denmark's largest newspaper, in publication since 1884.
"He comes from humble beginnings and defends the weak and vulnerable, because he can identify himself with their conditions," the newspaper said. "And no we are not thinking of Jesus Christ, whose birthday has just been celebrated – but rather the President of the United States Barack Hussein Obama."
The editorial noted that "the idea was naturally that the comparison between Jesus and Obama" would be made. "If such a comparison were to be made, it would, of course, inevitably be to Obama's advantage."
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
Idaho Charter School Closure Threatened over Bible
Nampa Classical Academy has, until now, balked at orders from the state Public Charter School Commission to abandon plans to use the Bible and other texts for their literary and historic qualities.
-- From "Charter school abandons Bible plans for now" Associated Press 12/23/09
Eric Makrush is on Nampa Classical Academy's Board of Directors and told The Associated Press on Wednesday that the charter school would comply with the state order until matter is settled in court.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "NCA agrees to not use religious texts - for now, at least" by Mike Butts, Idaho Press-Tribune 12/24/09
The development comes with NCA's response to a Charter Commission request for information about reported religious material used in NCA classrooms. NCA submitted the response Wednesday on its due date to the Commission.
The compliance will assure that the Charter Commission does not begin to take action to revoke the new school's charter, which its chairman had said could happen and which would result in an end to the school's public funding.
Although the Academy said it would comply with the Charter Commission prohibition of the use of religious texts, it stated in its response that it still believes it is legal to do so. NCA has sued the Charter Commission for the right to use the texts.
"We're certainly doing it under protest," NCA acting board chairman Mike Moffett said. "It's clear that statewide we're not the only ones doing it (using religious texts). And it's certainly an issue (where) we're the only ones being singled out."
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
Click for related articles from Texas.
-- From "Charter school abandons Bible plans for now" Associated Press 12/23/09
Eric Makrush is on Nampa Classical Academy's Board of Directors and told The Associated Press on Wednesday that the charter school would comply with the state order until matter is settled in court.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "NCA agrees to not use religious texts - for now, at least" by Mike Butts, Idaho Press-Tribune 12/24/09
The development comes with NCA's response to a Charter Commission request for information about reported religious material used in NCA classrooms. NCA submitted the response Wednesday on its due date to the Commission.
The compliance will assure that the Charter Commission does not begin to take action to revoke the new school's charter, which its chairman had said could happen and which would result in an end to the school's public funding.
Although the Academy said it would comply with the Charter Commission prohibition of the use of religious texts, it stated in its response that it still believes it is legal to do so. NCA has sued the Charter Commission for the right to use the texts.
"We're certainly doing it under protest," NCA acting board chairman Mike Moffett said. "It's clear that statewide we're not the only ones doing it (using religious texts). And it's certainly an issue (where) we're the only ones being singled out."
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
Click for related articles from Texas.
Tuesday, December 29, 2009
Calif. Science Center Sued for Censoring Scientific Inquiry
The airing of opposing theories of the origin of mankind, scheduled by a think tank for the Science Center venue, was abruptly canceled by the Center; the think tank has sued the Center contending that "a broad network of Darwin advocates . . . jointly conspired."
UPDATE 9/1/11: Science Center settles suit by paying American Freedom Alliance $110,000
UPDATE 6/14/10: Discovery Institute wins settlement
-- From "California Science Center is sued for canceling a film promoting intelligent design" by Mike Boehm, Los Angeles Times 12/29/09
A lawsuit alleges that the state-owned center improperly bowed to pressure from the Smithsonian Institution, as well as e-mailed complaints from USC professors and others. It contends that the center violated both the 1st Amendment and a contract to rent the museum's Imax Theater when it canceled the screening of "Darwin's Dilemma: The Mystery of the Cambrian Fossil Record."
The suit was filed in Los Angeles Superior Court by the American Freedom Alliance, an L.A.-based group described by senior fellow Avi Davis as a nonprofit, nonpartisan "think tank and activist network promoting Western values and ideals."
The AFA had planned an Oct. 25 screening of two films at the Exposition Park museum -- one a short Imax movie called "We are Born of Stars," which favors Darwin's theory; the other, "Darwin's Dilemma: The Mystery of the Cambrian Fossil Record," a feature-length documentary that criticizes Darwin and promotes intelligent design.
The AFA's Davis said his group has no position on Darwinism and intelligent design but is concerned that debate is being stifled by the scientific establishment.
. . . e-mails filed as exhibits with its suit: "I'm less troubled by the freedom of speech issues than why my tax dollars which support the California 'Science' Center are being spent on hosting religious propaganda," wrote Hilary Schor, a USC professor of English, comparative literature and gender studies.
But another correspondent, Eugenie Scott, executive director of the National Center for Science Education, which champions evolution in clashes over which theory should be taught in public schools, urged "NOT asking the museum to cancel the showing of the movie. Really -- the story that 'big science is trying to squelch controversy . . . ' is going to be a bigger story and draw more attention to the movie's showing than the showing itself."
To read the entire article, CLICK HERE.
UPDATE 9/1/11: Science Center settles suit by paying American Freedom Alliance $110,000
UPDATE 6/14/10: Discovery Institute wins settlement
-- From "California Science Center is sued for canceling a film promoting intelligent design" by Mike Boehm, Los Angeles Times 12/29/09
A lawsuit alleges that the state-owned center improperly bowed to pressure from the Smithsonian Institution, as well as e-mailed complaints from USC professors and others. It contends that the center violated both the 1st Amendment and a contract to rent the museum's Imax Theater when it canceled the screening of "Darwin's Dilemma: The Mystery of the Cambrian Fossil Record."
The suit was filed in Los Angeles Superior Court by the American Freedom Alliance, an L.A.-based group described by senior fellow Avi Davis as a nonprofit, nonpartisan "think tank and activist network promoting Western values and ideals."
The AFA had planned an Oct. 25 screening of two films at the Exposition Park museum -- one a short Imax movie called "We are Born of Stars," which favors Darwin's theory; the other, "Darwin's Dilemma: The Mystery of the Cambrian Fossil Record," a feature-length documentary that criticizes Darwin and promotes intelligent design.
The AFA's Davis said his group has no position on Darwinism and intelligent design but is concerned that debate is being stifled by the scientific establishment.
. . . e-mails filed as exhibits with its suit: "I'm less troubled by the freedom of speech issues than why my tax dollars which support the California 'Science' Center are being spent on hosting religious propaganda," wrote Hilary Schor, a USC professor of English, comparative literature and gender studies.
But another correspondent, Eugenie Scott, executive director of the National Center for Science Education, which champions evolution in clashes over which theory should be taught in public schools, urged "NOT asking the museum to cancel the showing of the movie. Really -- the story that 'big science is trying to squelch controversy . . . ' is going to be a bigger story and draw more attention to the movie's showing than the showing itself."
To read the entire article, CLICK HERE.
Monday, December 28, 2009
IL GOP Senate Candidate Kirk Reportedly Homosexual
Illinois Congressman Mark Kirk, who resigned his seat to run for Barack Obama's former Senate seat, has long been targeted by Democrats to be outed as a homosexual AFTER he's on the Senate Republican ticket, but in a surprise move, GOP "renegades" have outed Kirk in advance of the February primary election.
UPDATE 4/2/13 - Washington Post: Mark Kirk joins gay marriage parade
UPDATE 5/9/11: Congressman Aaron Schock photo spread admired by gay publications
UPDATE 8/25/10: Gay Mark Kirk & Gay Aaron Schock subject to blackmail by both GOP & Dems
UPDATE 6/3/10: (Video) Mark Kirk says "I hope to remarry one day" (to a woman).
UPDATE 6/2/10 Dem gay activists out Mark Kirk: Huffington Post -- NBC Chicago
UPDATE 5/31/10: Once he is outed, "Republicans will abandon Kirk not because he is gay, oddly enough, but because he is a liar and a hypocrite."
UPDATE 5/28/10: Kirk votes AGAINST gays in military.
UPDATE 2/12/10: Primary Winner Mark Kirk Backed by John McCain
UPDATE 1/7/10: Mark Kirk says he's not gay; mainstream media "closes book" on issue
UPDATE 1/8/10: "It depends on what the meaning of the word 'is' is"
UPDATE 12/28/09: Chicago Tribune 'blames messenger' for questioning Kirk's honesty
UPDATE 12/29/09: Ramification of the accusation
-- From "GOP opponent claims front-runner Mark Kirk is gay in attack ad" by Abdon M. Pallasch, Political Reporter, Chicago Sun-Times 12/28/09
U.S. Rep. Mark Kirk, the front-runner in the Republican primary election for U.S. Senate, finds himself the object of an unusual attack ad from one of his lesser-known opponents.
"Illinois Republican leader Jack Roeser says there is a 'solid rumor that Kirk is a homosexual,'" [GOP Senate primary candidate Andy] Martin says in [a political] ad. "Roeser suggests that Kirk is part of a Republican Party homosexual club. Lake County Illinois Republican leader Ray True says Kirk has surrounded himself with homosexuals. Mark Kirk should tell Republican voters the truth."
Kirk, a U.S. Naval Intelligence officer, was unavailable for comment because he is on active duty over the holidays, said spokesman Eric Elk.
But Elk issued this statement on his behalf: "The ad is not true and is degrading to the political process. The people of Illinois deserve better."
"You've got Mark Kirk, who's been so strong on his homosexuals so long that the solid rumor is that he himself is a homosexual," Roeser said on the [radio] program, adding, "Who, in Christ's name, needs to get themselves identified as a freak in the sexual department?" They named other Illinois Republicans they suspect are gay.
Illinois Republican Party Chairman Patrick Brady blasted Martin and the ad, saying, "The Illinois Republican Party disavows the statements made today by Mr. Andrew Martin [who] will no longer be recognized as a legitimate Republican candidate by the Illinois Republican Party."
Another candidate in the crowded Republican primary for senate, Patrick Hughes, denounced Martin's ad, saying, "Republican voters will not support Mark Kirk in the primary because of his liberal voting record, in particular his vote on cap-and-trade. This morning's controversial radio ad is just another personal attack that has no place in this primary and should not be taken seriously by voters."
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "What Chicago Democrats are planning to do to out Republicans Mark Kirk and Aaron Schock" posted by [pro-homosexual] "hillbuzz" 12/18/09
We are giving you clear and present warnings of what Democrats are going to do to bring down two Republicans in the future — one next year, and the other when he himself tries to run for the Senate. Both of these disasters can be avoided if these two men just came out of the closet.
We are, of course, talking about Mark Kirk and [Illinois Congressman] Aaron Schock.
Kirk’s case is more pressing because Alexi Giannoulias, the scion of the Broadway Bank mob banking family, is poised to win the Democrats’ nomination. The plan is to out Kirk during the general election to suppress conservative vote, and thus ensure Giannoulias carries the state. One of the key factors being considered is that, while Giannoulias is not black, and the black community will be upset a black candidate is not replacing [current Senator Roland] Burris, [the controversial appointment to the vacated Obama Senate seat,] black voters will turn out to keep a gay man from being elected to the Senate. They will turn out to vote AGAINST Kirk, not FOR Giannoulias. Homophobia will help drive their vote, the same way it did in California to pass Prop-8. There is nobody on Earth the black community loves to stick it to more than a white gay man. They will vote gleefuly, and thanks to ACORN, often.
We were told that during the general election the Giannoulias campaign will release, through surrogates, lurid details of exactly what goes on at the home Kirk shares with this other man in Washington. It was implied this other man is in fact another gay Illinois Congressman. Apparently, it’s all between consenting adult males, so there are no Mark Foley scandals heading Kirk’s way, but he’s going to be painted as an untrustworthy liar…he’ll be ridiculed and mocked for his dishonesty, and his marital failings…and Republican voters that need to turn out to defeat Giannoulias will sit their butts home, the way they enjoy doing when they think they are “teaching the GOP a lesson”. It is exactly what happened with Jack Ryan all over again.
We have no idea who Kirk’s “roommate” is in Washington, DC. It sure would be interesting to chime in if you know — because in a few months, this is all people will be talking about.
It is an open secret [Congressman Aaron Schock] is gay…and we finally got confirmation that Democrats do, indeed, have photos of Schock out in Chicago with other men. We’ve been hearing for months this was true, and we’ve seen Schock with our own eyes out in Boystown, having very indiscrete times with Aberzombie sorts of guys. Apparently, he has a boyfriend back in Peoria everyone knows about too. Dems we know here in Chicago had asked us to try to get pics of Schock in MiniBar or other spots in Boystown, but we never got pictures of him. Well, we found out on Wednesday that others do have the pictures. But, they will be held for years until Schock tries to run for Senate himself.
It is widely expected Schock will run for Senate in 2014, to challenge Dick Durbin.
We believe if Schock comes out now…or even waits until just after the 2010 election, he can run in 2014 as an out and proud gay man and win that Senate seat. We promise you, if he does this, we will personally campaign for him. By all accounts, he is a decent and smart guy, and is certainly hard-working.
Schock needs to come clean and not lie to voters.
. . . some of you out there say “that’s none of anyone’s business”. Well, it is indeed everyone’s business because these men are all deceiving the people they are asking to vote for them. They say they are one thing, but then they do another.
These are all open secrets in Chicago . . .
To read the entire post above, CLICK HERE.
Click headlines below for background on Congressman Mark Kirk:
Pro-abortion: Mark Kirk and All Illinois Dem. Senate Candidates Agree
Illinois Pro-abortion Congressmen Snub Citizens' Public Questions
Republican-in-name-only Senate candidate, whose House voting record is virtually 100% liberal on social issues, is now masquerading as a conservative.
Mark Kirk sponsors pro-homosexual H.R. 3017 Employment Non-discrimination Act
New Pro-homosexual Hate Crimes Bill by IL Congressman Mark Kirk
UPDATE 4/2/13 - Washington Post: Mark Kirk joins gay marriage parade
UPDATE 5/9/11: Congressman Aaron Schock photo spread admired by gay publications
UPDATE 8/25/10: Gay Mark Kirk & Gay Aaron Schock subject to blackmail by both GOP & Dems
UPDATE 6/3/10: (Video) Mark Kirk says "I hope to remarry one day" (to a woman).
UPDATE 6/2/10 Dem gay activists out Mark Kirk: Huffington Post -- NBC Chicago
UPDATE 5/31/10: Once he is outed, "Republicans will abandon Kirk not because he is gay, oddly enough, but because he is a liar and a hypocrite."
UPDATE 5/28/10: Kirk votes AGAINST gays in military.
UPDATE 2/12/10: Primary Winner Mark Kirk Backed by John McCain
UPDATE 1/7/10: Mark Kirk says he's not gay; mainstream media "closes book" on issue
UPDATE 1/8/10: "It depends on what the meaning of the word 'is' is"
UPDATE 12/28/09: Chicago Tribune 'blames messenger' for questioning Kirk's honesty
UPDATE 12/29/09: Ramification of the accusation
-- From "GOP opponent claims front-runner Mark Kirk is gay in attack ad" by Abdon M. Pallasch, Political Reporter, Chicago Sun-Times 12/28/09
U.S. Rep. Mark Kirk, the front-runner in the Republican primary election for U.S. Senate, finds himself the object of an unusual attack ad from one of his lesser-known opponents.
"Illinois Republican leader Jack Roeser says there is a 'solid rumor that Kirk is a homosexual,'" [GOP Senate primary candidate Andy] Martin says in [a political] ad. "Roeser suggests that Kirk is part of a Republican Party homosexual club. Lake County Illinois Republican leader Ray True says Kirk has surrounded himself with homosexuals. Mark Kirk should tell Republican voters the truth."
Kirk, a U.S. Naval Intelligence officer, was unavailable for comment because he is on active duty over the holidays, said spokesman Eric Elk.
But Elk issued this statement on his behalf: "The ad is not true and is degrading to the political process. The people of Illinois deserve better."
"You've got Mark Kirk, who's been so strong on his homosexuals so long that the solid rumor is that he himself is a homosexual," Roeser said on the [radio] program, adding, "Who, in Christ's name, needs to get themselves identified as a freak in the sexual department?" They named other Illinois Republicans they suspect are gay.
Illinois Republican Party Chairman Patrick Brady blasted Martin and the ad, saying, "The Illinois Republican Party disavows the statements made today by Mr. Andrew Martin [who] will no longer be recognized as a legitimate Republican candidate by the Illinois Republican Party."
Another candidate in the crowded Republican primary for senate, Patrick Hughes, denounced Martin's ad, saying, "Republican voters will not support Mark Kirk in the primary because of his liberal voting record, in particular his vote on cap-and-trade. This morning's controversial radio ad is just another personal attack that has no place in this primary and should not be taken seriously by voters."
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "What Chicago Democrats are planning to do to out Republicans Mark Kirk and Aaron Schock" posted by [pro-homosexual] "hillbuzz" 12/18/09
We are giving you clear and present warnings of what Democrats are going to do to bring down two Republicans in the future — one next year, and the other when he himself tries to run for the Senate. Both of these disasters can be avoided if these two men just came out of the closet.
We are, of course, talking about Mark Kirk and [Illinois Congressman] Aaron Schock.
Kirk’s case is more pressing because Alexi Giannoulias, the scion of the Broadway Bank mob banking family, is poised to win the Democrats’ nomination. The plan is to out Kirk during the general election to suppress conservative vote, and thus ensure Giannoulias carries the state. One of the key factors being considered is that, while Giannoulias is not black, and the black community will be upset a black candidate is not replacing [current Senator Roland] Burris, [the controversial appointment to the vacated Obama Senate seat,] black voters will turn out to keep a gay man from being elected to the Senate. They will turn out to vote AGAINST Kirk, not FOR Giannoulias. Homophobia will help drive their vote, the same way it did in California to pass Prop-8. There is nobody on Earth the black community loves to stick it to more than a white gay man. They will vote gleefuly, and thanks to ACORN, often.
We were told that during the general election the Giannoulias campaign will release, through surrogates, lurid details of exactly what goes on at the home Kirk shares with this other man in Washington. It was implied this other man is in fact another gay Illinois Congressman. Apparently, it’s all between consenting adult males, so there are no Mark Foley scandals heading Kirk’s way, but he’s going to be painted as an untrustworthy liar…he’ll be ridiculed and mocked for his dishonesty, and his marital failings…and Republican voters that need to turn out to defeat Giannoulias will sit their butts home, the way they enjoy doing when they think they are “teaching the GOP a lesson”. It is exactly what happened with Jack Ryan all over again.
We have no idea who Kirk’s “roommate” is in Washington, DC. It sure would be interesting to chime in if you know — because in a few months, this is all people will be talking about.
It is an open secret [Congressman Aaron Schock] is gay…and we finally got confirmation that Democrats do, indeed, have photos of Schock out in Chicago with other men. We’ve been hearing for months this was true, and we’ve seen Schock with our own eyes out in Boystown, having very indiscrete times with Aberzombie sorts of guys. Apparently, he has a boyfriend back in Peoria everyone knows about too. Dems we know here in Chicago had asked us to try to get pics of Schock in MiniBar or other spots in Boystown, but we never got pictures of him. Well, we found out on Wednesday that others do have the pictures. But, they will be held for years until Schock tries to run for Senate himself.
It is widely expected Schock will run for Senate in 2014, to challenge Dick Durbin.
We believe if Schock comes out now…or even waits until just after the 2010 election, he can run in 2014 as an out and proud gay man and win that Senate seat. We promise you, if he does this, we will personally campaign for him. By all accounts, he is a decent and smart guy, and is certainly hard-working.
Schock needs to come clean and not lie to voters.
. . . some of you out there say “that’s none of anyone’s business”. Well, it is indeed everyone’s business because these men are all deceiving the people they are asking to vote for them. They say they are one thing, but then they do another.
These are all open secrets in Chicago . . .
To read the entire post above, CLICK HERE.
Click headlines below for background on Congressman Mark Kirk:
Pro-abortion: Mark Kirk and All Illinois Dem. Senate Candidates Agree
Illinois Pro-abortion Congressmen Snub Citizens' Public Questions
Republican-in-name-only Senate candidate, whose House voting record is virtually 100% liberal on social issues, is now masquerading as a conservative.
Mark Kirk sponsors pro-homosexual H.R. 3017 Employment Non-discrimination Act
New Pro-homosexual Hate Crimes Bill by IL Congressman Mark Kirk
Teens Use Abortion in Place of Contraception: UK
Teenagers are using repeat abortions as a form of birth control, with some girls having four or more terminations by the age of 18, it has been claimed.
-- From "Girls using abortion as birth control and having up to FOUR terminations by the age of 18" by Beezy Marsh, London Daily Mail 12/27/09
Nearly 1,500 of the 19,000 girls under 18 who had a termination last year had previously undergone one earlier abortion for an unwanted pregnancy – and in at least one case a teenage girl had her eighth abortion.
Department of Health data for 2008 reveals 74 teenagers had their third abortion and a further 15 girls under the age of 18 had previously had between three and six earlier abortions.
Campaigners say the figures raise the possibility that for some girls abortion is not seen as a traumatic life event, but a routine way of dispensing with an unwanted pregnancy, even though it carries health risks that can harm fertility later in life.
Pro-life campaigners argue that increasing availability of early medical abortion, by allowing it to take place in GPs’ surgeries, has served only to further promiscuity among teenagers who are ignorant of the health and emotional risks that may ensue.
To read the entire article, CLICK HERE.
-- From "Girls using abortion as birth control and having up to FOUR terminations by the age of 18" by Beezy Marsh, London Daily Mail 12/27/09
Nearly 1,500 of the 19,000 girls under 18 who had a termination last year had previously undergone one earlier abortion for an unwanted pregnancy – and in at least one case a teenage girl had her eighth abortion.
Department of Health data for 2008 reveals 74 teenagers had their third abortion and a further 15 girls under the age of 18 had previously had between three and six earlier abortions.
Campaigners say the figures raise the possibility that for some girls abortion is not seen as a traumatic life event, but a routine way of dispensing with an unwanted pregnancy, even though it carries health risks that can harm fertility later in life.
Pro-life campaigners argue that increasing availability of early medical abortion, by allowing it to take place in GPs’ surgeries, has served only to further promiscuity among teenagers who are ignorant of the health and emotional risks that may ensue.
To read the entire article, CLICK HERE.
Sunday, December 27, 2009
First Family (Church) Homeless for Christmas
Unlike virtually every past White House family, the Obamas have been absent a church home (since abandoning Chicago's Rev. Jeremiah Wright)
UPDATE 12/27/10: Obama family makes rare appearance in church Sunday
-- From "No Churchgoing Christmas for the First Family" by Amy Sullivan, Time Magazine 12/23/09
Church, in fact, has been a surprisingly tough issue for the Obamas. They resigned their membership with Trinity United Church of Christ in Chicago in 2008 after Obama renounced the church's controversial former pastor, Jeremiah Wright. And while the First Family intended to find a local church to attend when they moved to Washington, concerns about crowds and displacing regular worshippers has prevented them from finding a new religious home during their first year here.
The Obamas have attended Sunday services in Washington three times this year — once at the predominantly African-American 19th Street Baptist Church, and twice at St. John's Episcopal Church across Lafayette Square from the White House.
The Obamas have celebrated Christmas in Hawaii, where the President grew up, nearly every year since the girls were born. But while Obama can still visit his favorite shaved ice joint and body-surfing spots, he doesn't have a childhood church home to attend. His mother wasn't a churchgoer, and Obama writes in "Dreams of My Father" that his grandparents took him to church infrequently.
As a child, Obama occasionally attended Sunday school classes at the First Unitarian Church of Honolulu, and his family held a memorial service there for his grandmother last Christmas. Conservative critics were quick to point out that the First Unitarian Church has a controversial history — in 1969, the church offered sanctuary to servicemen who refused to go to Vietnam. The refuge was brief, however, as military police invaded church grounds to arrest the soldiers.
To read the entire article, CLICK HERE.
UPDATE 12/27/10: Obama family makes rare appearance in church Sunday
-- From "No Churchgoing Christmas for the First Family" by Amy Sullivan, Time Magazine 12/23/09
Church, in fact, has been a surprisingly tough issue for the Obamas. They resigned their membership with Trinity United Church of Christ in Chicago in 2008 after Obama renounced the church's controversial former pastor, Jeremiah Wright. And while the First Family intended to find a local church to attend when they moved to Washington, concerns about crowds and displacing regular worshippers has prevented them from finding a new religious home during their first year here.
The Obamas have attended Sunday services in Washington three times this year — once at the predominantly African-American 19th Street Baptist Church, and twice at St. John's Episcopal Church across Lafayette Square from the White House.
The Obamas have celebrated Christmas in Hawaii, where the President grew up, nearly every year since the girls were born. But while Obama can still visit his favorite shaved ice joint and body-surfing spots, he doesn't have a childhood church home to attend. His mother wasn't a churchgoer, and Obama writes in "Dreams of My Father" that his grandparents took him to church infrequently.
As a child, Obama occasionally attended Sunday school classes at the First Unitarian Church of Honolulu, and his family held a memorial service there for his grandmother last Christmas. Conservative critics were quick to point out that the First Unitarian Church has a controversial history — in 1969, the church offered sanctuary to servicemen who refused to go to Vietnam. The refuge was brief, however, as military police invaded church grounds to arrest the soldiers.
To read the entire article, CLICK HERE.
Saturday, December 26, 2009
Catholic Hospitals Split with Bishops on ObamaCare Abortion
. . . Catholic hospitals have signaled that they back the Senate’s compromise on the issue, raising hopes of breaking an impasse in Congress and stirring controversy within the church.
Dem. Rep. Stupak holds firm against abortion funding, as do bishops
-- From "Catholic Group Supports Senate on Abortion Aid" by David D. Kirkpatrick, New York Times 12/25/09
The Senate bill, approved Thursday morning, allows any state to bar the use of federal subsidies for insurance plans that cover abortion and requires insurers in other states to divide subsidy money into separate accounts so that only dollars from private premiums would be used to pay for abortions.
Just days before the bill passed, the Catholic Health Association, which represents hundreds of Catholic hospitals across the country, said in a statement that it was “encouraged” and “increasingly confident” that such a compromise “can achieve the objective of no federal funding for abortion.” An umbrella group for nuns followed its lead.
The same day, the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops called the proposed compromise “morally unacceptable.”
Catholic scholars say [the Catholic Health Association] statement reflects a different application of church teachings against “cooperation with evil,” a calculus that the legislation offers a way to extend health insurance to millions of Americans. For the Catholic hospitals, that it is both a moral and financial imperative, since like other hospitals they stand to gain from reducing the number of uninsured patients.
And in practical political terms, some Democrats — including some opponents of abortion rights — say that the Catholic hospitals’ relative openness to a compromise could play a pivotal role by providing political cover for Democrats who oppose abortion to support the health bill. Democrats and liberal groups quickly disseminated the association’s endorsement along with others from the nuns’ group, other Catholics and evangelicals.
Other abortion opponents argue that liberals are overstating the hospital association’s influence. “They don’t carry the same sway,” said Representative Bart Stupak, the Michigan Democrat who led the effort that resulted in the House bill’s including a full ban on abortion coverage in any subsidized health insurance plan.
Mr. Stupak said he still had commitments from at least 10 Democrats who voted for the House bill and pledged to vote against the final legislation if it loosened the abortion restrictions — enough to keep the bill from being approved. “At the end of the day we are going to have something along the lines of my language,” he said.
To read the entire article, CLICK HERE.
Dem. Rep. Stupak holds firm against abortion funding, as do bishops
-- From "Catholic Group Supports Senate on Abortion Aid" by David D. Kirkpatrick, New York Times 12/25/09
The Senate bill, approved Thursday morning, allows any state to bar the use of federal subsidies for insurance plans that cover abortion and requires insurers in other states to divide subsidy money into separate accounts so that only dollars from private premiums would be used to pay for abortions.
Just days before the bill passed, the Catholic Health Association, which represents hundreds of Catholic hospitals across the country, said in a statement that it was “encouraged” and “increasingly confident” that such a compromise “can achieve the objective of no federal funding for abortion.” An umbrella group for nuns followed its lead.
The same day, the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops called the proposed compromise “morally unacceptable.”
Catholic scholars say [the Catholic Health Association] statement reflects a different application of church teachings against “cooperation with evil,” a calculus that the legislation offers a way to extend health insurance to millions of Americans. For the Catholic hospitals, that it is both a moral and financial imperative, since like other hospitals they stand to gain from reducing the number of uninsured patients.
And in practical political terms, some Democrats — including some opponents of abortion rights — say that the Catholic hospitals’ relative openness to a compromise could play a pivotal role by providing political cover for Democrats who oppose abortion to support the health bill. Democrats and liberal groups quickly disseminated the association’s endorsement along with others from the nuns’ group, other Catholics and evangelicals.
Other abortion opponents argue that liberals are overstating the hospital association’s influence. “They don’t carry the same sway,” said Representative Bart Stupak, the Michigan Democrat who led the effort that resulted in the House bill’s including a full ban on abortion coverage in any subsidized health insurance plan.
Mr. Stupak said he still had commitments from at least 10 Democrats who voted for the House bill and pledged to vote against the final legislation if it loosened the abortion restrictions — enough to keep the bill from being approved. “At the end of the day we are going to have something along the lines of my language,” he said.
To read the entire article, CLICK HERE.
Friday, December 25, 2009
Mass. Court Rules Against Christian Free Speech
Appeals court upholds arrest and conviction of Christians preaching repentance from homosexual behavior
-- From "Court upholds conviction in Halloween preacher case" by Julie Manganis, Staff Writer, The Salem News 12/24/09
Michael Marcavage runs an organization called Repent America and has been visiting Salem every Halloween for the past six years to preach to revelers.
Police arrested Marcavage during the festivities two years ago after he disobeyed an order to stop using the megaphone and then got into a shoving match with officers.
Marcavage's conduct, Justice David Mills wrote, created the kind of hazardous or physically offensive condition affecting the public that the disorderly conduct law was intended to address.
Mills said that by disobeying police orders, Marcavage was engendering hostility toward police and disrespect for authority among the crowd, creating a dangerous situation for officers trying to deal with upwards of 100,000 people crowding into the city that night.
"While his underlying conduct, particularly dissemination of his religious message, may have enjoyed First Amendment protection, that protection did not entitle him to disregard police commands reasonably calculated at ensuring public safety amid potentially dangerous circumstances," Mills wrote. "Moreover, the police-imposed limits were content neutral, and no more restrictive than necessary to protect the public. The defendant's conviction, therefore, transgressed no constitutional limits, and was otherwise proper in all respects."
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Oral Arguments Before Appeals Court Of Massachusetts" Foundation for Moral Law 5/6/09
In legal briefs submitted in the case, Commonwealth v. Marcavage, No. 2008-P-1294, the Foundation argued that under the Salem city code Marcavage had a right to use a megaphone until 10:00 p.m., as other businesses and street performers were being allowed to do. The Salem Police Department's decision to shut him down and arrest him at 8:30 p.m. was completely unwarranted and a violation of Marcavage's constitutional rights to free speech, free exercise of religion, and equal protections of the laws.
Attorney [Ben] DuPré said, “It should not be up to the Salem Police Department to decide when the Constitution protects the rights to free speech and freedom of religion.”
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
-- From "Court upholds conviction in Halloween preacher case" by Julie Manganis, Staff Writer, The Salem News 12/24/09
Michael Marcavage runs an organization called Repent America and has been visiting Salem every Halloween for the past six years to preach to revelers.
Police arrested Marcavage during the festivities two years ago after he disobeyed an order to stop using the megaphone and then got into a shoving match with officers.
Marcavage's conduct, Justice David Mills wrote, created the kind of hazardous or physically offensive condition affecting the public that the disorderly conduct law was intended to address.
Mills said that by disobeying police orders, Marcavage was engendering hostility toward police and disrespect for authority among the crowd, creating a dangerous situation for officers trying to deal with upwards of 100,000 people crowding into the city that night.
"While his underlying conduct, particularly dissemination of his religious message, may have enjoyed First Amendment protection, that protection did not entitle him to disregard police commands reasonably calculated at ensuring public safety amid potentially dangerous circumstances," Mills wrote. "Moreover, the police-imposed limits were content neutral, and no more restrictive than necessary to protect the public. The defendant's conviction, therefore, transgressed no constitutional limits, and was otherwise proper in all respects."
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Oral Arguments Before Appeals Court Of Massachusetts" Foundation for Moral Law 5/6/09
In legal briefs submitted in the case, Commonwealth v. Marcavage, No. 2008-P-1294, the Foundation argued that under the Salem city code Marcavage had a right to use a megaphone until 10:00 p.m., as other businesses and street performers were being allowed to do. The Salem Police Department's decision to shut him down and arrest him at 8:30 p.m. was completely unwarranted and a violation of Marcavage's constitutional rights to free speech, free exercise of religion, and equal protections of the laws.
Attorney [Ben] DuPré said, “It should not be up to the Salem Police Department to decide when the Constitution protects the rights to free speech and freedom of religion.”
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
Thursday, December 24, 2009
Calif. County Strips Christmas Trees of Stars & Angels
After the successful complaints, the atheist said, “I don't believe government has the right to use tax dollars to show favoritism to any particular cult like Christianity. It's just wrong. That's why we have the Constitution . . .”
-- From "California County Orders Religious Symbols Removed" by Staff, Associated Press 12/22/09
County Administrator Chris Thomas issued the order Monday [to remove angels, stars and other religious symbols] to managers of all 26 county departments, saying it is not the government's role to endorse religion.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Ban on angels, stars on county Christmas trees" by Derek Moore, The Press Democrat 12/21/09
The complaint was lodged by Irv Sutley of Santa Rosa, a 65-year-old disabled veteran who has a long history of protesting the use of religious symbols in government settings.
Sutley, an atheist and chairman of the county's central committee for the Peace and Freedom Party, said he spotted an angel on a tree in the lobby of the county Recorder's Office on Friday while gathering voter information for his bid for re-election in the June primary.
Sutley previously was successful in halting prayers at government meetings in several local cities and having Rohnert Park redesign its city emblem because it featured what appeared to be the Star of David and a church.
The U.S. Supreme Court in 1989 ruled in a case brought by the American Civil Liberties Union that government may celebrate Christmas in some form but not if it endorses Christian doctrine.
The court found that while a Christmas tree is not a religious symbol, it can take on that meaning if it is decorated with such symbols.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
-- From "California County Orders Religious Symbols Removed" by Staff, Associated Press 12/22/09
County Administrator Chris Thomas issued the order Monday [to remove angels, stars and other religious symbols] to managers of all 26 county departments, saying it is not the government's role to endorse religion.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Ban on angels, stars on county Christmas trees" by Derek Moore, The Press Democrat 12/21/09
The complaint was lodged by Irv Sutley of Santa Rosa, a 65-year-old disabled veteran who has a long history of protesting the use of religious symbols in government settings.
Sutley, an atheist and chairman of the county's central committee for the Peace and Freedom Party, said he spotted an angel on a tree in the lobby of the county Recorder's Office on Friday while gathering voter information for his bid for re-election in the June primary.
Sutley previously was successful in halting prayers at government meetings in several local cities and having Rohnert Park redesign its city emblem because it featured what appeared to be the Star of David and a church.
The U.S. Supreme Court in 1989 ruled in a case brought by the American Civil Liberties Union that government may celebrate Christmas in some form but not if it endorses Christian doctrine.
The court found that while a Christmas tree is not a religious symbol, it can take on that meaning if it is decorated with such symbols.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
Wednesday, December 23, 2009
Porn Stars' STDs Blamed on County Health Officials
An AIDS advocacy group argued that L.A. County 'has passively observed an ever-growing epidemic' in the industry.
"For over a decade, county health officials have talked, watched, written and analyzed. What county health officials have not done is act."
UPDATE 3/18/10: Cal/OSHA votes unanimously to create committee to study proposal requiring condoms
UPDATE 2/3/10: L.A. County won't force condoms on porn stars
-- From "Judge dismisses petition requiring the use of condoms in porn films" by Kimi Yoshino, Los Angeles Times 12/23/09
A Los Angeles County Superior Court judge Tuesday dismissed a petition seeking a court order to compel county public health officials to require condom use on porn sets or take other reasonable steps to stem the spread of disease.
Judge David P. Yaffe rejected the petition, noting that the county has broad discretion in how it oversees public health.
The AIDS advocacy group sued the county in July. The action came weeks after an adult-film actress tested positive for HIV and county health officials released data that showed 18 HIV cases and more than 3,700 cases of chlamydia, gonorrhea and syphilis had been reported since 2004 by a San Fernando Valley-based clinic that mainly serves the porn industry. Adult Industry Medical Healthcare Foundation officials said at the time that the majority of the cases did not involve working adult film performers.
Last week, the group delivered a petition to the state Occupational Safety and Health Standards Board, asking for a change in regulations to explicitly address adult film production. The petition seeks to require condom use or other methods, including simulated sex acts. If adopted, the regulation would effectively ban "bareback" scenes, or those without condoms, which make up the majority of porn production. The department will review the matter, then make a recommendation to the board early next year on whether the regulations should be amended.
Current state regulations require employers to protect workers from blood-borne pathogens and other bodily fluids.
To read the entire article, CLICK HERE.
"For over a decade, county health officials have talked, watched, written and analyzed. What county health officials have not done is act."
UPDATE 3/18/10: Cal/OSHA votes unanimously to create committee to study proposal requiring condoms
UPDATE 2/3/10: L.A. County won't force condoms on porn stars
-- From "Judge dismisses petition requiring the use of condoms in porn films" by Kimi Yoshino, Los Angeles Times 12/23/09
A Los Angeles County Superior Court judge Tuesday dismissed a petition seeking a court order to compel county public health officials to require condom use on porn sets or take other reasonable steps to stem the spread of disease.
Judge David P. Yaffe rejected the petition, noting that the county has broad discretion in how it oversees public health.
The AIDS advocacy group sued the county in July. The action came weeks after an adult-film actress tested positive for HIV and county health officials released data that showed 18 HIV cases and more than 3,700 cases of chlamydia, gonorrhea and syphilis had been reported since 2004 by a San Fernando Valley-based clinic that mainly serves the porn industry. Adult Industry Medical Healthcare Foundation officials said at the time that the majority of the cases did not involve working adult film performers.
Last week, the group delivered a petition to the state Occupational Safety and Health Standards Board, asking for a change in regulations to explicitly address adult film production. The petition seeks to require condom use or other methods, including simulated sex acts. If adopted, the regulation would effectively ban "bareback" scenes, or those without condoms, which make up the majority of porn production. The department will review the matter, then make a recommendation to the board early next year on whether the regulations should be amended.
Current state regulations require employers to protect workers from blood-borne pathogens and other bodily fluids.
To read the entire article, CLICK HERE.
By 3 to 1 Americans Oppose ObamaCare Abortion Funding
As the Senate prepares to vote on health care reform, American voters "mostly disapprove" of the plan 53 - 36 percent and disapprove 56 - 38 percent of President Barack Obama's handling of the health care issue, according to a Quinnipiac University poll released today.
-- From "U.S. Voters Oppose Health Care Plan By Wide Margin, Quinnipiac University National Poll Finds; Voters Say 3-1, Plan Should Not Pay For Abortions" 12/22/09
Voters also oppose 72 - 23 percent using any public money in the health care overhaul to pay for abortions, the independent Quinnipiac (KWIN-uh-pe-ack) University poll finds.
American voters also disapprove 51 - 44 percent of President Obama's handling of the economy and disapprove 56 - 37 percent of the way he is creating jobs.
On the timing of action of health care, 31 percent support the proposals "currently being considered" and want Congress and the President to take action now; 28 percent oppose those proposals but want action on the issue now, while 36 percent don't want action on the issue now.
By 73 - 18 percent, voters don't believe President Obama will be able to keep his promise to overhaul health care without increasing the federal deficit and by 56 - 37 percent they don't want the overhaul if it will increase the deficit.
A total of 91 percent of American voters describe the economy as "not so good" or "poor." Voters split 28 - 28 percent on whether it is getting better or worse with 43 percent seeing no change. The results on both questions are virtually identical to when Quinnipiac University asked them in July.
To read the entire report, CLICK HERE.
-- From "U.S. Voters Oppose Health Care Plan By Wide Margin, Quinnipiac University National Poll Finds; Voters Say 3-1, Plan Should Not Pay For Abortions" 12/22/09
Voters also oppose 72 - 23 percent using any public money in the health care overhaul to pay for abortions, the independent Quinnipiac (KWIN-uh-pe-ack) University poll finds.
American voters also disapprove 51 - 44 percent of President Obama's handling of the economy and disapprove 56 - 37 percent of the way he is creating jobs.
On the timing of action of health care, 31 percent support the proposals "currently being considered" and want Congress and the President to take action now; 28 percent oppose those proposals but want action on the issue now, while 36 percent don't want action on the issue now.
By 73 - 18 percent, voters don't believe President Obama will be able to keep his promise to overhaul health care without increasing the federal deficit and by 56 - 37 percent they don't want the overhaul if it will increase the deficit.
A total of 91 percent of American voters describe the economy as "not so good" or "poor." Voters split 28 - 28 percent on whether it is getting better or worse with 43 percent seeing no change. The results on both questions are virtually identical to when Quinnipiac University asked them in July.
To read the entire report, CLICK HERE.
Tuesday, December 22, 2009
New Homosexual Benefits Will Add to America's Debt
Gay Agenda fallback position: Just in case Obama fails on same-sex "marriage," Congress is moving legislation to transfer millions of dollars to homosexuals in "domestic partnerships."
UPDATE 12/26/09: CBO estimates taxpayer cost at nearly a billion dollars (includes link to CBO report)
-- From "Benefits for same-sex partners are expanding" by Ashley Surdin, Washington Post Staff Writer 11/27/09
With public attention focused largely on battles over whether gay couples should be able to marry, a less-noticed movement to grant health and other benefits to same-sex partners is gaining significant ground across the country in courtrooms, in legislatures and at the ballot box.
. . . in Congress last week, a House committee approved legislation that would provide benefits, including health insurance, retirement and disability, to same-sex partners of federal employees.
"The picture on benefits and domestic partnerships has moved quite dramatically for same-sex couples, but marriage is the issue that has gotten all the attention and energy, so some of that progress has been eclipsed," said Jane Schacter, a law professor at Stanford University. "Certainly, there has been movement on marriage as well, but nothing as much as domestic partnerships."
About 57 percent of Americans oppose granting same-sex marriages legal status, compared with 40 percent who support it, according to a May Gallup poll. But 67 percent of Americans say same-sex domestic partners should have access to health insurance and other benefits, the same poll found.
Even one of the most prominent opponents of same-sex marriage, the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, has shown willingness to support rights outside of marriage. This month, in a surprise move, the church backed proposed Salt Lake City laws that would prohibit discrimination against gays in housing and employment.
. . . President Obama's memorandum in June that extended a limited set of benefits to same-sex partners, allowing them to be added to long-term-care insurance policies and to use sick leave to care for partners.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Federal Same-Sex Benefits Would Cost Taxpayers $898 Million Over Next Decade" by Fred Lucas, CNSNews Staff Writer 12/22/09
Taxpayers will pay almost $900 million over the next 10 years to extend federal employee benefits to homosexual couples, according to an analysis of “domestic partners” legislation by the Congressional Budget Office. However, supporters of the bill say the costs will be offset in other areas.
President Barack Obama has voiced support for the measure. The Senate Homeland Security and Government Affairs Committee approved the measure last Wednesday, while the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee approved a measure last month. The bill still awaits a vote on the floor of both chambers.
The benefits for same-sex couples would include health insurance, survivor annuities, compensation for work-related injuries, disability, family leave, life insurance, dental benefits and travel and relocation benefits that affect the federal budget.
“CBO estimates that enacting H.R. 2517 [the House version] would increase direct spending by $596 million through 2019, and that enacting the bill would not have any direct impact on federal revenues,” the CBO estimate released on Thursday said. “Over the same period, CBO estimates that discretionary spending would also increase by $302 million, assuming appropriation of the necessary funds.”
The CBO assumes about 0.33 percent of the federal workforce would choose to register a same-sex domestic partnership if they were given the chance.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
UPDATE 12/26/09: CBO estimates taxpayer cost at nearly a billion dollars (includes link to CBO report)
-- From "Benefits for same-sex partners are expanding" by Ashley Surdin, Washington Post Staff Writer 11/27/09
With public attention focused largely on battles over whether gay couples should be able to marry, a less-noticed movement to grant health and other benefits to same-sex partners is gaining significant ground across the country in courtrooms, in legislatures and at the ballot box.
. . . in Congress last week, a House committee approved legislation that would provide benefits, including health insurance, retirement and disability, to same-sex partners of federal employees.
"The picture on benefits and domestic partnerships has moved quite dramatically for same-sex couples, but marriage is the issue that has gotten all the attention and energy, so some of that progress has been eclipsed," said Jane Schacter, a law professor at Stanford University. "Certainly, there has been movement on marriage as well, but nothing as much as domestic partnerships."
About 57 percent of Americans oppose granting same-sex marriages legal status, compared with 40 percent who support it, according to a May Gallup poll. But 67 percent of Americans say same-sex domestic partners should have access to health insurance and other benefits, the same poll found.
Even one of the most prominent opponents of same-sex marriage, the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, has shown willingness to support rights outside of marriage. This month, in a surprise move, the church backed proposed Salt Lake City laws that would prohibit discrimination against gays in housing and employment.
. . . President Obama's memorandum in June that extended a limited set of benefits to same-sex partners, allowing them to be added to long-term-care insurance policies and to use sick leave to care for partners.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Federal Same-Sex Benefits Would Cost Taxpayers $898 Million Over Next Decade" by Fred Lucas, CNSNews Staff Writer 12/22/09
Taxpayers will pay almost $900 million over the next 10 years to extend federal employee benefits to homosexual couples, according to an analysis of “domestic partners” legislation by the Congressional Budget Office. However, supporters of the bill say the costs will be offset in other areas.
President Barack Obama has voiced support for the measure. The Senate Homeland Security and Government Affairs Committee approved the measure last Wednesday, while the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee approved a measure last month. The bill still awaits a vote on the floor of both chambers.
The benefits for same-sex couples would include health insurance, survivor annuities, compensation for work-related injuries, disability, family leave, life insurance, dental benefits and travel and relocation benefits that affect the federal budget.
“CBO estimates that enacting H.R. 2517 [the House version] would increase direct spending by $596 million through 2019, and that enacting the bill would not have any direct impact on federal revenues,” the CBO estimate released on Thursday said. “Over the same period, CBO estimates that discretionary spending would also increase by $302 million, assuming appropriation of the necessary funds.”
The CBO assumes about 0.33 percent of the federal workforce would choose to register a same-sex domestic partnership if they were given the chance.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
Pro-life Dem. Congressmen Oppose Senate Health Care Bill
For months, the House leadership ignored the Bart Stupak pro-life Dem. caucus, which nearly tanked the health care push. Now, Stupak is again speaking up against the abortion-funding Senate compromise bill, and so is the influential U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops.
UPDATE 12/23/09: Stupak predicts Senate version of the bill will 'go down in flames' in the House
UPDATE 12/22/09: Obama administration wants Stupak to shut up, but Congressman says he'll hold firm against abortion funding.
-- From "Abortion deal may be hard to keep in health bill" by Ricardo Alonso-Zaldivar, Associated Press 12/21/09
Abortion is an issue that doesn't usually lead to common ground, since interested groups have radically opposed views. That makes the Senate compromise — which seeks to prohibit the use of tax dollars for abortions — rare, even surprising. It's also why, as Senate Democrats move to negotiations with the House, other deals in their bill may stick more easily.
House liberals are starting to accept that they probably won't get a government insurance plan. But abortion opponents in the House nearly stopped health care once before, and they are poised to try again to preserve their more restrictive approach. It could be a dealbreaker.
To read a lengthy report on the blow-by-blow details of the "sausage making" on the abortion compromise from the article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Stupak to vote against Senate bill" by Caleb Soptelean, Newport News Conservative Examiner 12/21/09
Despite the impending approval of a Senate health care reform bill by Christmas Eve, Michigan Rep. Bart Stupak said he will vote against the bill if it contains the abortion compromise language.
Stupak said during the weekend, “While I and many other pro-life Democratic House members wish to see health care coverage for all Americans, the proposed Senate language is unacceptable.”
After the Senate passes its bill and it comes out of the House-Senate Conference Committee, it remains to be seen how many pro-life Democrats will join with Stupak to vote against the bill.
Just how many pro-life Democrats stand firm against any abortion funding compromise could determine if the bill passes the House.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Senate Abortion Language is No Compromise, Pro-Life Dem Says" by Matt Cover, CNSNews.com Staff Writer 12/21/09
Stupak, who succeeded in getting a pro-life amendment attached to the House version of the bill which bars federal taxpayer support of abortion except in cases of rape, incest or when the life of the mother is at stake, held out hope that fellow Democrats would again acquiesce to his demands and produce a health-care bill he can support, saying he hoped their differences on abortion could be resolved in conference.
Republican Party leader Michael Steele cast doubt on that idea, however, declaring that “the fix is in” and that Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) would forgo conference negotiations and instead opt to push the Senate bill through the House.
The controversial compromise involves a Democratic plan to try and segregate federal health insurance subsidies from private insurance premiums, mandating that only the latter can be used to pay for abortions.
House Republican Leader John Boehner (R-Ohio) called this provision an “accounting gimmick” on Saturday.
“Under Reid’s ‘manager’s amendment,’ there is no prohibition on abortion coverage in federally subsidized plans participating in the Exchange. Instead the amendment includes layers of accounting gimmicks that demand that plans participating in the Exchange or the new government-run plan that will be managed by the Office of Personnel Management must establish “allocation accounts” when elective abortion is a covered benefit,” Boehner wrote on the “Republican Leader” blog.
Tony Perkins, president of the Family Research Council in Washington, D.C., said the provision would put the federal government in the business of subsidizing elective abortions,” Perkins told CNSNews.com on Monday. “Anytime the government provides money, you see an expansion of it.
To read details of the abortion funding language from the article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Catholic Bishops Oppose New Abortion Restrictions in Senate Health Bill" FOXNews.com 12/21/09
The U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, one of the most important anti-abortion voices in the country, continues to oppose the Senate health care bill despite additional restrictions included to segregate taxpayer money from abortion coverage.
"The Senate health reform bill should not move forward in its current form," the bishops' conference said in a written statement Saturday, adding that the legislation should be "opposed" until the conference's concerns are addressed.
. . . the Conference of Catholic Bishops expressed concern that individuals would not be able to "opt out" of paying abortion coverage in most of the subsidized plans.
"Instead it will require purchasers of such plans to pay a distinct fee or surcharge which is extracted solely to help pay for other people's abortions," the organization said." Further the government agency that currently manages health coverage for federal employees will promote and help subsidize multi-state health plans that include elective abortions, contrary to longstanding law governing this agency."
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
UPDATE 12/23/09: Stupak predicts Senate version of the bill will 'go down in flames' in the House
UPDATE 12/22/09: Obama administration wants Stupak to shut up, but Congressman says he'll hold firm against abortion funding.
-- From "Abortion deal may be hard to keep in health bill" by Ricardo Alonso-Zaldivar, Associated Press 12/21/09
Abortion is an issue that doesn't usually lead to common ground, since interested groups have radically opposed views. That makes the Senate compromise — which seeks to prohibit the use of tax dollars for abortions — rare, even surprising. It's also why, as Senate Democrats move to negotiations with the House, other deals in their bill may stick more easily.
House liberals are starting to accept that they probably won't get a government insurance plan. But abortion opponents in the House nearly stopped health care once before, and they are poised to try again to preserve their more restrictive approach. It could be a dealbreaker.
To read a lengthy report on the blow-by-blow details of the "sausage making" on the abortion compromise from the article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Stupak to vote against Senate bill" by Caleb Soptelean, Newport News Conservative Examiner 12/21/09
Despite the impending approval of a Senate health care reform bill by Christmas Eve, Michigan Rep. Bart Stupak said he will vote against the bill if it contains the abortion compromise language.
Stupak said during the weekend, “While I and many other pro-life Democratic House members wish to see health care coverage for all Americans, the proposed Senate language is unacceptable.”
After the Senate passes its bill and it comes out of the House-Senate Conference Committee, it remains to be seen how many pro-life Democrats will join with Stupak to vote against the bill.
Just how many pro-life Democrats stand firm against any abortion funding compromise could determine if the bill passes the House.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Senate Abortion Language is No Compromise, Pro-Life Dem Says" by Matt Cover, CNSNews.com Staff Writer 12/21/09
Stupak, who succeeded in getting a pro-life amendment attached to the House version of the bill which bars federal taxpayer support of abortion except in cases of rape, incest or when the life of the mother is at stake, held out hope that fellow Democrats would again acquiesce to his demands and produce a health-care bill he can support, saying he hoped their differences on abortion could be resolved in conference.
Republican Party leader Michael Steele cast doubt on that idea, however, declaring that “the fix is in” and that Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) would forgo conference negotiations and instead opt to push the Senate bill through the House.
The controversial compromise involves a Democratic plan to try and segregate federal health insurance subsidies from private insurance premiums, mandating that only the latter can be used to pay for abortions.
House Republican Leader John Boehner (R-Ohio) called this provision an “accounting gimmick” on Saturday.
“Under Reid’s ‘manager’s amendment,’ there is no prohibition on abortion coverage in federally subsidized plans participating in the Exchange. Instead the amendment includes layers of accounting gimmicks that demand that plans participating in the Exchange or the new government-run plan that will be managed by the Office of Personnel Management must establish “allocation accounts” when elective abortion is a covered benefit,” Boehner wrote on the “Republican Leader” blog.
Tony Perkins, president of the Family Research Council in Washington, D.C., said the provision would put the federal government in the business of subsidizing elective abortions,” Perkins told CNSNews.com on Monday. “Anytime the government provides money, you see an expansion of it.
To read details of the abortion funding language from the article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Catholic Bishops Oppose New Abortion Restrictions in Senate Health Bill" FOXNews.com 12/21/09
The U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, one of the most important anti-abortion voices in the country, continues to oppose the Senate health care bill despite additional restrictions included to segregate taxpayer money from abortion coverage.
"The Senate health reform bill should not move forward in its current form," the bishops' conference said in a written statement Saturday, adding that the legislation should be "opposed" until the conference's concerns are addressed.
. . . the Conference of Catholic Bishops expressed concern that individuals would not be able to "opt out" of paying abortion coverage in most of the subsidized plans.
"Instead it will require purchasers of such plans to pay a distinct fee or surcharge which is extracted solely to help pay for other people's abortions," the organization said." Further the government agency that currently manages health coverage for federal employees will promote and help subsidize multi-state health plans that include elective abortions, contrary to longstanding law governing this agency."
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
Monday, December 21, 2009
Promiscuous Girls at Higher Cervical Cancer Risk
Having sex at an early age can double the risk of developing cervical cancer, a study of 20,000 women suggests.
-- From "Cervical cancer link to early sex" BBC News 12/21/09
The investigation into why poorer women have a higher risk of the disease found they tended to have sex about four years earlier than more affluent women.
Previously, it had been thought the disparity was the result of low screening uptake in poorer areas.
The International Agency for Research on Cancer findings are published in the British Journal of Cancer.
The age at which a woman had her first baby was also an important factor.
To read the entire article, CLICK HERE.
-- From "Cervical cancer link to early sex" BBC News 12/21/09
The investigation into why poorer women have a higher risk of the disease found they tended to have sex about four years earlier than more affluent women.
Previously, it had been thought the disparity was the result of low screening uptake in poorer areas.
The International Agency for Research on Cancer findings are published in the British Journal of Cancer.
The age at which a woman had her first baby was also an important factor.
To read the entire article, CLICK HERE.
Vermont Student Sues over Co-ed Showers & Toilets
The female Green Mountain College student claims state building codes require restroom privacy, which is not provided to her with "flimsy plastic curtains" and men urinating in her view.
-- From "Suit filed over Green Mountain College co-ed bathrooms" by Tim Johnson, Burlington Free Press Staff Writer, 12/19/09
Jennifer Weiler, 19, a first-year student from Sandgate, contends that the college’s failure to designate separate bathrooms for males and females violates state-adopted building and plumbing codes that the Department of Public Safety is charged with enforcing. DPS is listed as the defendant in the civil complaint, filed Monday in Washington County Superior Court.
DPS has reportedly taken the position that the code requirements don’t apply to existing buildings in which the plumbing hasn’t been changed or altered, as is apparently the case with the college’s dorms. A Green Mountain College spokesman declined comment on the suit Friday.
Green Mountain College, a private institution in Poultney, was all-female until it went co-ed in 1975. Today, it, has 820 undergraduates and seven residence halls. All the dorms are co-ed — some floors are single-gender, some are mixed.
Most dormitories across the country, including those at the University of Vermont and at Champlain College, are co-ed. St. Michael’s College, however, does not have co-ed dorms.
“The co-ed bathrooms have no doors on the showers, just flimsy plastic curtains,” the suit states. “Men will use the toilets without closing the door. Plaintiff and others are uncomfortable under these circumstances.”
“I can’t think of a single public building (other than a dorm) that has a co-ed bathrooms where men and women co-mingle,” said Pamela Moreau, Weiler’s lawyer, in an e-mail. “We understand that some people are fine with co-ed bathrooms, but we don’t think it should be forced on people who object to them, for whatever reason.”
To read the entire article, CLICK HERE.
-- From "Suit filed over Green Mountain College co-ed bathrooms" by Tim Johnson, Burlington Free Press Staff Writer, 12/19/09
Jennifer Weiler, 19, a first-year student from Sandgate, contends that the college’s failure to designate separate bathrooms for males and females violates state-adopted building and plumbing codes that the Department of Public Safety is charged with enforcing. DPS is listed as the defendant in the civil complaint, filed Monday in Washington County Superior Court.
DPS has reportedly taken the position that the code requirements don’t apply to existing buildings in which the plumbing hasn’t been changed or altered, as is apparently the case with the college’s dorms. A Green Mountain College spokesman declined comment on the suit Friday.
Green Mountain College, a private institution in Poultney, was all-female until it went co-ed in 1975. Today, it, has 820 undergraduates and seven residence halls. All the dorms are co-ed — some floors are single-gender, some are mixed.
Most dormitories across the country, including those at the University of Vermont and at Champlain College, are co-ed. St. Michael’s College, however, does not have co-ed dorms.
“The co-ed bathrooms have no doors on the showers, just flimsy plastic curtains,” the suit states. “Men will use the toilets without closing the door. Plaintiff and others are uncomfortable under these circumstances.”
“I can’t think of a single public building (other than a dorm) that has a co-ed bathrooms where men and women co-mingle,” said Pamela Moreau, Weiler’s lawyer, in an e-mail. “We understand that some people are fine with co-ed bathrooms, but we don’t think it should be forced on people who object to them, for whatever reason.”
To read the entire article, CLICK HERE.
Sunday, December 20, 2009
One-world Government Police Required: British Prime Minister
A new global body dedicated to environmental stewardship is needed to prevent a repeat of the deadlock which undermined the Copenhagen climate change summit, Gordon Brown will say tomorrow.
-- From "Gordon Brown calls for new group to police global environment issues" by Ben Webster & Francis Elliott, London TimesOnLine 12/21/09
The UN’s consensual method of negotiation, which requires all 192 countries to reach agreement, needs to be reformed to ensure that the will of the majority prevails, he feels.
The Prime Minister will say: “Never again should we face the deadlock that threatened to pull down those talks. Never again should we let a global deal to move towards a greener future be held to ransom by only a handful of countries. One of the frustrations for me was the lack of a global body with the sole responsibility for environmental stewardship.
“I believe that in 2010 we will need to look at reforming our international institutions to meet the common challenges we face as a global community.”
Ed Miliband, the Climate Change Secretary, admitted today that the results of the Copenhagen conference were “disappointing” because of the absence of agreement on emissions targets or a deadline for turning the accord into a legally binding treaty.
To read the entire article, CLICK HERE.
-- From "Gordon Brown calls for new group to police global environment issues" by Ben Webster & Francis Elliott, London TimesOnLine 12/21/09
The UN’s consensual method of negotiation, which requires all 192 countries to reach agreement, needs to be reformed to ensure that the will of the majority prevails, he feels.
The Prime Minister will say: “Never again should we face the deadlock that threatened to pull down those talks. Never again should we let a global deal to move towards a greener future be held to ransom by only a handful of countries. One of the frustrations for me was the lack of a global body with the sole responsibility for environmental stewardship.
“I believe that in 2010 we will need to look at reforming our international institutions to meet the common challenges we face as a global community.”
Ed Miliband, the Climate Change Secretary, admitted today that the results of the Copenhagen conference were “disappointing” because of the absence of agreement on emissions targets or a deadline for turning the accord into a legally binding treaty.
To read the entire article, CLICK HERE.
So-called Evangelical Church Glorifies Homosexual Behavior
[Highlands Church Denver is] an evangelical Christian church [sic] guided both by the Apostle's Creed and the belief that gay people can embrace their sexual orientation as God-given and seek fulfillment in committed same-sex relationships.
-- From "Evangelical church opens doors fully to gays" by Eric Gorski, Associated Press 12/19/09
. . . the 55-year-old pastor [Rev. Mark Tidd] with spiked gray hair and blue jeans launches into his weekly welcome, a poem-like litany that includes the line "queer or straight here, there's no hate here."
. . . with younger evangelicals and broader society showing greater acceptance of homosexuality, many evangelical churches can expect, at the least, a deeper exploration of the issue.
Tidd said Highlands is not a one-issue church but one committed to social justice. He describes it as "radically inclusive but still rooted in the essentials of the Gospel." The church discourages promiscuity and encourages healthy lifelong relationships.
Tidd said he supports gay marriage and would perform same-sex blessings if asked. A gay man in a committed relationship sits on the church's board of trustees.
If evangelicals can disagree about end-times theology and baptism methods and still be considered authentic Christians, [Tidd] thought, why can't the same tent hold disagreements about homosexuality?
To read the entire article, CLICK HERE.
-- From "Evangelical church opens doors fully to gays" by Eric Gorski, Associated Press 12/19/09
. . . the 55-year-old pastor [Rev. Mark Tidd] with spiked gray hair and blue jeans launches into his weekly welcome, a poem-like litany that includes the line "queer or straight here, there's no hate here."
. . . with younger evangelicals and broader society showing greater acceptance of homosexuality, many evangelical churches can expect, at the least, a deeper exploration of the issue.
Tidd said Highlands is not a one-issue church but one committed to social justice. He describes it as "radically inclusive but still rooted in the essentials of the Gospel." The church discourages promiscuity and encourages healthy lifelong relationships.
Tidd said he supports gay marriage and would perform same-sex blessings if asked. A gay man in a committed relationship sits on the church's board of trustees.
If evangelicals can disagree about end-times theology and baptism methods and still be considered authentic Christians, [Tidd] thought, why can't the same tent hold disagreements about homosexuality?
To read the entire article, CLICK HERE.
So-called Evangelicals Support Abortion Language in Senate Bill
Thirty-nine pro-life [sic] Christian pastors and leaders released a statement Dec. 18 applauding alternative language aimed at preventing health-care reform from being derailed by debate over abortion.
-- From "Evangelical leaders support abortion compromise in health-care plan" by Bob Allen, Associated Baptist Press 12/18/09
Evangelical leaders including Ron Sider of Evangelicals for Social Action, Florida mega-pastor Joel Hunter and Christianity Today Editor David Neff applauded Casey's effort to move debate over health-care beyond abortion.
Baptist signers included David Gushee, a professor of Christian Ethics at Mercer University who writes a regular column for Associated Baptist Press, and Glen Stassen, a former Southern Baptist Theological Seminary professor who now teaches Christian ethics at Fuller Theological Seminary.
The evangelical leaders also welcomed expansion of economic-support measures in the legislation, citing statistics that 73 percent of women who have an abortion say they cannot afford to have a child.
"Given the complicated set of concerns surrounding abortion funding and coverage in health care reform, this alternative language ... is a way forward," the leaders said. "We urge all other pro-life people of good will to give it the careful consideration it deserves."
To read the entire article, CLICK HERE.
Compare to liberal 'christians' supporting taxpayer-funded abortion.
-- From "Evangelical leaders support abortion compromise in health-care plan" by Bob Allen, Associated Baptist Press 12/18/09
Evangelical leaders including Ron Sider of Evangelicals for Social Action, Florida mega-pastor Joel Hunter and Christianity Today Editor David Neff applauded Casey's effort to move debate over health-care beyond abortion.
Baptist signers included David Gushee, a professor of Christian Ethics at Mercer University who writes a regular column for Associated Baptist Press, and Glen Stassen, a former Southern Baptist Theological Seminary professor who now teaches Christian ethics at Fuller Theological Seminary.
The evangelical leaders also welcomed expansion of economic-support measures in the legislation, citing statistics that 73 percent of women who have an abortion say they cannot afford to have a child.
"Given the complicated set of concerns surrounding abortion funding and coverage in health care reform, this alternative language ... is a way forward," the leaders said. "We urge all other pro-life people of good will to give it the careful consideration it deserves."
To read the entire article, CLICK HERE.
Compare to liberal 'christians' supporting taxpayer-funded abortion.
Saturday, December 19, 2009
Christians Challenge Calif. School Gay Agenda
The vote by the Alameda Board of Education on Tuesday did little to ease tensions in the island city near Oakland. A lawsuit and threats of recalling school board members accompanied debate over the so-called Lesson 9 curriculum adopted in May to prevent anti-gay bullying.
UPDATE 5/21/10: School Board drops homosexual indoctrination curriculum
-- From "SF Bay schools phase out gay-friendly curriculum" by Lisa Leff, Associated Press 12/10/09
A San Francisco Bay area school board will use broad lessons against bias to replace a curriculum against bullying gay people that had become a national centerpiece in the opposition to same-sex marriage.
Gay parents in the community wanted their children protected from bullying, while other parents argued that elementary school is too early to talk to students about gay people.
The 45-minute Lesson 9, which was to be taught once a year in each grade starting with kindergarten, sparked a lawsuit, accusations that religious families were being discriminated against and threats of a recall election against the three board members who approved it.
A dozen Alameda families sued the school district earlier this year over its contention that parents did not have to be notified in advance when teachers planned to give the lessons so they could keep their children from receiving them. Last week, an Alameda Superior Court judge sided with the school district, ruling that a state law allowing parents to have their "opt-out" of discussions about human sexuality did not apply to Lesson 9.
Kevin Snider, a lawyer with the conservative Pacific Justice Institute who represented the Alameda families, said before the school board's vote that his clients would not appeal the judge's ruling if the school board eliminated Lesson 9. He did not immediately return a call Wednesday for clarification on whether the board's action satisfied that condition.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
UPDATE 5/21/10: School Board drops homosexual indoctrination curriculum
-- From "SF Bay schools phase out gay-friendly curriculum" by Lisa Leff, Associated Press 12/10/09
A San Francisco Bay area school board will use broad lessons against bias to replace a curriculum against bullying gay people that had become a national centerpiece in the opposition to same-sex marriage.
Gay parents in the community wanted their children protected from bullying, while other parents argued that elementary school is too early to talk to students about gay people.
The 45-minute Lesson 9, which was to be taught once a year in each grade starting with kindergarten, sparked a lawsuit, accusations that religious families were being discriminated against and threats of a recall election against the three board members who approved it.
A dozen Alameda families sued the school district earlier this year over its contention that parents did not have to be notified in advance when teachers planned to give the lessons so they could keep their children from receiving them. Last week, an Alameda Superior Court judge sided with the school district, ruling that a state law allowing parents to have their "opt-out" of discussions about human sexuality did not apply to Lesson 9.
Kevin Snider, a lawyer with the conservative Pacific Justice Institute who represented the Alameda families, said before the school board's vote that his clients would not appeal the judge's ruling if the school board eliminated Lesson 9. He did not immediately return a call Wednesday for clarification on whether the board's action satisfied that condition.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
Friday, December 18, 2009
Americans Flee California's Socialist Trends
"People coming to California in general do not have resources, and the people who do have resources and wealth are leaving the state."
Compare to the phenomenon common in Europe.
-- From "California population growth slows" by Wyatt Buchanan, San Francisco Chronicle Sacramento Bureau 12/18/09
More people left the state for other parts of the country than moved here, a difference of about 142,000 people. While that number is outweighed by people moving from other countries to California, it continues a trend of migration to other states that began in 2005.
Since that year, more than half a million more people have left California than have moved to the state. They mainly have moved to neighboring Western states, said Mary Heim, chief of the demographic research unit at the Department of Finance. In past years, more of those people moved to Nevada, but last year saw an increase in people moving to Oregon and Washington, she said. Texas also attracts a large number of Californians.
Hans Johnson, a demographer at the Public Policy Institute of California, said he is not surprised by the data.
"Most people who move to or from California do so for economic reasons, specifically jobs. Our unemployment rate is significantly higher than the rest of the country and when that happens, California tends to send more migrants to other states than we receive," Johnson said.
California's birthrate and immigration from outside the United States, both legal and illegal, kept the state's growth rate positive at 0.92 percent.
Stemming the loss of population to other states has been a priority for Republicans at the state Capitol, who blame California's regulatory climate for pushing jobs, and thus residents, to other states.
To read the entire article, CLICK HERE.
Compare to the phenomenon common in Europe.
-- From "California population growth slows" by Wyatt Buchanan, San Francisco Chronicle Sacramento Bureau 12/18/09
More people left the state for other parts of the country than moved here, a difference of about 142,000 people. While that number is outweighed by people moving from other countries to California, it continues a trend of migration to other states that began in 2005.
Since that year, more than half a million more people have left California than have moved to the state. They mainly have moved to neighboring Western states, said Mary Heim, chief of the demographic research unit at the Department of Finance. In past years, more of those people moved to Nevada, but last year saw an increase in people moving to Oregon and Washington, she said. Texas also attracts a large number of Californians.
Hans Johnson, a demographer at the Public Policy Institute of California, said he is not surprised by the data.
"Most people who move to or from California do so for economic reasons, specifically jobs. Our unemployment rate is significantly higher than the rest of the country and when that happens, California tends to send more migrants to other states than we receive," Johnson said.
California's birthrate and immigration from outside the United States, both legal and illegal, kept the state's growth rate positive at 0.92 percent.
Stemming the loss of population to other states has been a priority for Republicans at the state Capitol, who blame California's regulatory climate for pushing jobs, and thus residents, to other states.
To read the entire article, CLICK HERE.
Media Cheer Non-existent Same-sex 'Marriage' in D.C.
As the D.C. mayor signs the homosexualists' bill passed by the city council, the media are hailing this wondrous advancement in 'civil rights' . . . but . . . the measure must now pass Congress, a body currently in disarray.
-- From "Fenty signs bill legalizing same-sex marriage in D.C." by Tim Craig and Nikita Stewart, Washington Post 12/18/09
Mayor Adrian M. Fenty on Friday signed the bill legalizing same-sex marriage in the District, clearing the way for the law to take effect in mid-spring after a congressional review period.
Fenty signed in front of 150 activists and same-sex couples -- many of whom say they plan to marry -- in the sanctuary of All Souls Unitarian in Mount Pleasant.
Before he signed the bill, Fenty spoke of his interracial upbringing, noting it was illegal for his parents to get married 40 years ago.
The measure was opposed by other religious leaders. The Catholic Archdiocese of Washington, for instance, has strongly opposed the bill, saying that its charitable arm might have to cancel its contract with the city to deliver social services.
To read the entire article, CLICK HERE.
-- From "Fenty signs bill legalizing same-sex marriage in D.C." by Tim Craig and Nikita Stewart, Washington Post 12/18/09
Mayor Adrian M. Fenty on Friday signed the bill legalizing same-sex marriage in the District, clearing the way for the law to take effect in mid-spring after a congressional review period.
Fenty signed in front of 150 activists and same-sex couples -- many of whom say they plan to marry -- in the sanctuary of All Souls Unitarian in Mount Pleasant.
Before he signed the bill, Fenty spoke of his interracial upbringing, noting it was illegal for his parents to get married 40 years ago.
The measure was opposed by other religious leaders. The Catholic Archdiocese of Washington, for instance, has strongly opposed the bill, saying that its charitable arm might have to cancel its contract with the city to deliver social services.
To read the entire article, CLICK HERE.
Thursday, December 17, 2009
School Customizes Lesson for Lone Atheist Student
[Massachusetts] Newton South High School officials dropped a requirement to read excerpts from the Bible for one student last month, after he refused to read the Biblical passages as a literature assignment because he is an atheist.
Yet, when parents protest homosexual indoctrination in this state, the court mandates no opt-out nor advance notification.
-- From "Student Refuses To Study Bible As Literature" WCVB ABC TV5 Boston 12/16/09
Officials said the school doesn't read from actual Bibles and instead distributes handouts with the Biblical passages. After [one student] refused to read the passages and failed quizzes on the subject, his mother went to school officials with concerns, the newspaper reported.
The school said it would drop the failing quizzes and allow [the student] to complete a project that doesn't use the Bible.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Newton South officials give in to student's refusal to study Bible as literature" by John Hilliard, The Daily News Tribune 12/16/09
Jack Summers, a 15-year-old sophomore, said he objected to reading the religious text as part of an honors English class that also includes writings by William Shakespeare and Charles Dickens, among others.
“This is the word of God. People take this literally ... I don’t want to read about what they believe to be true,” said Summers, who described himself as an atheist.
South Principal Joel Stembridge wouldn’t comment on Summers’ case, but said the school uses the Bible to introduce students to the cultural traditions and allusions found in much of Western literature.
“The greatest difficulty I have with someone is when they say, ‘I don’t even want to read a subject matter,’ [and] lose the opportunity to understand others,” said Stembridge.
All sophomores study parts of the Bible as literature as part of 10th-grade English classes, along with Dickens’ “A Tale of Two Cities,” “Antigone” and works by Shakespeare.
South’s freshman curriculum lists the Book of Genesis from the Bible as a required academic subject in ninth-grade English courses, alongside “Lord of the Flies,” “Catcher in the Rye” and “House on Mango Street,” plus passages from “Romeo and Juliet.”
In the 1963 United States Supreme Court case School District of Abington Township v. Schempp, the court ruled that schools can use the Bible and other religious works for studying literature and culture, so long as it’s not used to proselytize.
But Jack’s mother, Marjorie Summers, said her son told his teacher about his concerns about studying the Bible. After her son refused to read Biblical texts, and failed two quizzes on the subject, she went to South officials to discuss her son’s position.
. . . Jack Summers said he would not take a class on world religions in school, either. He said he isn’t opposed to learning about religion, but would rather get his information on religions from media sources such as the BBC and NPR, plus a friend who practices Islam.
He compared reading a religious text in a classroom setting to reading a Bible in a church.
Sarah Wunsch, staff attorney for the American Civil Liberties Union of Massachusetts, said Newton schools haven’t violated Summers’ rights, though their decision to accommodate him was “a good idea.”
“In general, the Bible can be taught as part of a literature class,” said Wunsch, who also noted that “mere exposure of a child to ideas that are offensive is not a constitutional violation.”
She pointed to a January 2008 federal appeals court decision in favor of Lexington public schools for using books in the classroom that included references to homosexuality.
In that case, two families had filed suit against that district because of their opposition to discussion of homosexuality in the classroom. But the court decided that schools didn’t need parental consent before referring to homosexuality in classroom discussions.
“Kids need to learn to grapple with things like that,” said Wunsch.
JC Considine, a spokesman for the state Department of Elementary and Secondary Education, said the state has a suggested book list that includes religious texts such as the Bible, the Koran and Buddhist scriptures, but local districts decide which books to use in classrooms.
However, religious texts are “not something that we’re mandating” in classrooms, said Considine.
No, only homosexual indoctrination is mandatory, per the highest court in the state.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
Yet, when parents protest homosexual indoctrination in this state, the court mandates no opt-out nor advance notification.
-- From "Student Refuses To Study Bible As Literature" WCVB ABC TV5 Boston 12/16/09
Officials said the school doesn't read from actual Bibles and instead distributes handouts with the Biblical passages. After [one student] refused to read the passages and failed quizzes on the subject, his mother went to school officials with concerns, the newspaper reported.
The school said it would drop the failing quizzes and allow [the student] to complete a project that doesn't use the Bible.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Newton South officials give in to student's refusal to study Bible as literature" by John Hilliard, The Daily News Tribune 12/16/09
Jack Summers, a 15-year-old sophomore, said he objected to reading the religious text as part of an honors English class that also includes writings by William Shakespeare and Charles Dickens, among others.
“This is the word of God. People take this literally ... I don’t want to read about what they believe to be true,” said Summers, who described himself as an atheist.
South Principal Joel Stembridge wouldn’t comment on Summers’ case, but said the school uses the Bible to introduce students to the cultural traditions and allusions found in much of Western literature.
“The greatest difficulty I have with someone is when they say, ‘I don’t even want to read a subject matter,’ [and] lose the opportunity to understand others,” said Stembridge.
All sophomores study parts of the Bible as literature as part of 10th-grade English classes, along with Dickens’ “A Tale of Two Cities,” “Antigone” and works by Shakespeare.
South’s freshman curriculum lists the Book of Genesis from the Bible as a required academic subject in ninth-grade English courses, alongside “Lord of the Flies,” “Catcher in the Rye” and “House on Mango Street,” plus passages from “Romeo and Juliet.”
In the 1963 United States Supreme Court case School District of Abington Township v. Schempp, the court ruled that schools can use the Bible and other religious works for studying literature and culture, so long as it’s not used to proselytize.
But Jack’s mother, Marjorie Summers, said her son told his teacher about his concerns about studying the Bible. After her son refused to read Biblical texts, and failed two quizzes on the subject, she went to South officials to discuss her son’s position.
. . . Jack Summers said he would not take a class on world religions in school, either. He said he isn’t opposed to learning about religion, but would rather get his information on religions from media sources such as the BBC and NPR, plus a friend who practices Islam.
He compared reading a religious text in a classroom setting to reading a Bible in a church.
Sarah Wunsch, staff attorney for the American Civil Liberties Union of Massachusetts, said Newton schools haven’t violated Summers’ rights, though their decision to accommodate him was “a good idea.”
“In general, the Bible can be taught as part of a literature class,” said Wunsch, who also noted that “mere exposure of a child to ideas that are offensive is not a constitutional violation.”
She pointed to a January 2008 federal appeals court decision in favor of Lexington public schools for using books in the classroom that included references to homosexuality.
In that case, two families had filed suit against that district because of their opposition to discussion of homosexuality in the classroom. But the court decided that schools didn’t need parental consent before referring to homosexuality in classroom discussions.
“Kids need to learn to grapple with things like that,” said Wunsch.
JC Considine, a spokesman for the state Department of Elementary and Secondary Education, said the state has a suggested book list that includes religious texts such as the Bible, the Koran and Buddhist scriptures, but local districts decide which books to use in classrooms.
However, religious texts are “not something that we’re mandating” in classrooms, said Considine.
No, only homosexual indoctrination is mandatory, per the highest court in the state.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
Principal Apologizes for Teacher Banning Bible
A third-grade New Jersey girl is once again allowed to read her Bible during classroom "quiet time" after her teacher ordered her to stop reading the Good Book.
Video from FOX TV New York
-- From "New Jersey teacher told student to put Bible away" Associated Press 12/16/09
Her parents say a New Jersey elementary school teacher told a third-grader the Bible was inappropriate reading material for quiet time.
The principal at Madison Park Elementary School in Old Bridge apologized and said the teacher made a mistake. The principal says school policy allows children to read the Bible or any other religious book during quiet time.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Teacher orders 3rd-grader: Put Bible away!" © 2009 WorldNetDaily 12/16/09
A dispute developed after Michelle Jordat learned her daughter, Mariah, was told to put the Bible completely out of sight at Madison Park Elementary School in Old Bridge, N.J.
"Her teacher told her to put it away, and she put it in her desk. And then the teacher told her, 'No, put that in your backpack. I told you to put it away.' And it hurt her feelings and confused her. Why would my teacher say that I can't read the Bible when I'm not bothering anybody else?"
Although Jordat accepted the principal's apology, she is looking for something in writing confirming that reading the Bible is permissible during personal reading time. She also indicated she'll be seeking legal counsel.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
Video from FOX TV New York
-- From "New Jersey teacher told student to put Bible away" Associated Press 12/16/09
Her parents say a New Jersey elementary school teacher told a third-grader the Bible was inappropriate reading material for quiet time.
The principal at Madison Park Elementary School in Old Bridge apologized and said the teacher made a mistake. The principal says school policy allows children to read the Bible or any other religious book during quiet time.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Teacher orders 3rd-grader: Put Bible away!" © 2009 WorldNetDaily 12/16/09
A dispute developed after Michelle Jordat learned her daughter, Mariah, was told to put the Bible completely out of sight at Madison Park Elementary School in Old Bridge, N.J.
"Her teacher told her to put it away, and she put it in her desk. And then the teacher told her, 'No, put that in your backpack. I told you to put it away.' And it hurt her feelings and confused her. Why would my teacher say that I can't read the Bible when I'm not bothering anybody else?"
Although Jordat accepted the principal's apology, she is looking for something in writing confirming that reading the Bible is permissible during personal reading time. She also indicated she'll be seeking legal counsel.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
Wednesday, December 16, 2009
Chicago Cop Pulls Gun on Pro-Life Sidewalk Counselor
A Chicago police officer was cited in a report for intimidating a pro-life advocate helping counsel women outside a Planned Parenthood abortion business in Aurora. The officer was written up for disorderly conduct after flashing his badge at the pro-life sidewalk counselor, who says he also brandished his gun.-- From "Off-duty Chicago cop cited for flashing badge at Aurora abortion clinic" Chicago Sun-Times Media Wire 12/16/09
The incident happened about 9:15 a.m. Wednesday, according to a release from Aurora police.
The off-duty officer and a 30-year-old woman were approached by a 31-year-old woman as they sat in a car in a parking lot adjacent to the clinic in the 3000 block of East New York Street in Aurora. The woman outside the car apparently intended to hand the couple some pieces of literature, when, according to the officer, he displayed his police badge and the woman backed off, the release said.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Cop Cited for Intimidating Pro-Life Advocate at Chicago-Area Planned Parenthood" by Steven Ertelt, LifeNews.com Editor 12/16/09
Rachelle Crile, a 31-year-old Naperville woman had been outside the abortion center for about an hour when saw a car with two people that appeared to be heading to the facility.
Crile told the Fox Valley Sun newspaper that she approached the car with pro-life literature and that the man driving the car threatened her with a handgun.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
Student Reportedly Suspended for Associating Christmas with Jesus
The Massachusetts school sent home the second-grade boy, who drew Jesus Christ for the assignment to draw a Christmas picture, and mandated a psychiatric exam as a precondition for readmittance. The Boston liberal media has now scurried to the defense of the school.
Video from FOX TV Boston
-- From "Mayor requests schools superintendent apologize for Jesus-drawing incident" by Dino F. Ciliberti, GateHouse News Service, Taunton Massachusetts Daily Gazette 12/15/09
Taunton Mayor Charles Crowley has asked School Superintendent Dr. Julie Hackett to apologize to the family and to issue a public apology and to develop a school-wide policy to prevent this from happening again.
He has also ordered the schools to pay for the psychiatric exam the child had to undergo as a condition of returning to school.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Editorial: Student didn’t deserve punishment for Jesus drawing" GateHouse News Service, Taunton Massachusetts Daily Gazette 12/15/09
The picture was supposed to be something that reminded children of Christmas, according to the assignment given by the teacher.
So this 8-year-old second-grader at the Maxham Elementary School in Taunton, Mass., did what he was supposed to do.
He drew a picture, a picture that wound up getting him into trouble for no reason at all.
The student and his family recently had visited the Christmas display at the National Shrine of Our Lady of La Salette, a Christian retreat center.
So the student drew a picture of Jesus on a cross.
. . . school officials took offense, dragged the student into the principal’s office, had him undergo a psychiatric evaluation and then suspended him.
Now the poor child is traumatized and doesn’t want to return to school.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Taunton officials dispute reports on Jesus sketch" by David Abel, Boston Globe Staff 12/15/09
City officials sharply disputed yesterday widely distributed reports that a local elementary school suspended a second-grader and required the boy to undergo a psychological evaluation for drawing a picture of Jesus on the cross.
The story, initially reported by the local newspaper, raised questions of religious bias days before Christmas and was broadcast by local television stations and other news media.
But school officials say that the account in yesterday’s Taunton Daily Gazette was rife with errors and that the father’s description of what happened is untrue.
[Julie Hackett, superintendent of the Taunton public schools] said the student, age 9, was never suspended and that neither he nor other students at the Maxham Elementary School were asked by the teacher to sketch something that reminded them of Christmas or any religious holiday, as the Gazette and other media reported and the father suggested, although his story changed as he explained it.
She said it was unclear whether the boy, who put his name above a stick figure portrait of Christ on the cross, had drawn the picture in school, which his teacher discovered Dec. 2.
She said the drawing was seen as a potential cry for help when the student identified himself, rather than Jesus, on the cross, which prompted the teacher to alert the school’s principal and staff psychologist. As a result, the boy underwent a psychological evaluation.
She declined to comment on the results of the evaluation or whether the teacher had reason to believe that the student was crying out for help. The boy’s father showed reporters a report indicating his son was not a threat to himself or others and could return to school.
"In this case, as in any other case involving the well-being of a student, the administration acted in accordance with the School Department’s well-established protocol," she said in a statement. "This protocol is centered upon the student’s care, well-being, and educational success. The protocol includes a review of the student’s records."
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
Video from FOX TV Boston
-- From "Mayor requests schools superintendent apologize for Jesus-drawing incident" by Dino F. Ciliberti, GateHouse News Service, Taunton Massachusetts Daily Gazette 12/15/09
Taunton Mayor Charles Crowley has asked School Superintendent Dr. Julie Hackett to apologize to the family and to issue a public apology and to develop a school-wide policy to prevent this from happening again.
He has also ordered the schools to pay for the psychiatric exam the child had to undergo as a condition of returning to school.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Editorial: Student didn’t deserve punishment for Jesus drawing" GateHouse News Service, Taunton Massachusetts Daily Gazette 12/15/09
The picture was supposed to be something that reminded children of Christmas, according to the assignment given by the teacher.
So this 8-year-old second-grader at the Maxham Elementary School in Taunton, Mass., did what he was supposed to do.
He drew a picture, a picture that wound up getting him into trouble for no reason at all.
The student and his family recently had visited the Christmas display at the National Shrine of Our Lady of La Salette, a Christian retreat center.
So the student drew a picture of Jesus on a cross.
. . . school officials took offense, dragged the student into the principal’s office, had him undergo a psychiatric evaluation and then suspended him.
Now the poor child is traumatized and doesn’t want to return to school.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Taunton officials dispute reports on Jesus sketch" by David Abel, Boston Globe Staff 12/15/09
City officials sharply disputed yesterday widely distributed reports that a local elementary school suspended a second-grader and required the boy to undergo a psychological evaluation for drawing a picture of Jesus on the cross.
The story, initially reported by the local newspaper, raised questions of religious bias days before Christmas and was broadcast by local television stations and other news media.
But school officials say that the account in yesterday’s Taunton Daily Gazette was rife with errors and that the father’s description of what happened is untrue.
[Julie Hackett, superintendent of the Taunton public schools] said the student, age 9, was never suspended and that neither he nor other students at the Maxham Elementary School were asked by the teacher to sketch something that reminded them of Christmas or any religious holiday, as the Gazette and other media reported and the father suggested, although his story changed as he explained it.
She said it was unclear whether the boy, who put his name above a stick figure portrait of Christ on the cross, had drawn the picture in school, which his teacher discovered Dec. 2.
She said the drawing was seen as a potential cry for help when the student identified himself, rather than Jesus, on the cross, which prompted the teacher to alert the school’s principal and staff psychologist. As a result, the boy underwent a psychological evaluation.
She declined to comment on the results of the evaluation or whether the teacher had reason to believe that the student was crying out for help. The boy’s father showed reporters a report indicating his son was not a threat to himself or others and could return to school.
"In this case, as in any other case involving the well-being of a student, the administration acted in accordance with the School Department’s well-established protocol," she said in a statement. "This protocol is centered upon the student’s care, well-being, and educational success. The protocol includes a review of the student’s records."
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
Tuesday, December 15, 2009
Obama Education Adviser Recommends Pornography to Children
President Obama's "Safe Schools Czar" [Kevin Jennings], already a target of social conservatives for his past drug abuse and what they say is his promotion of homosexuality in schools, is under fresh attack after it was revealed that the pro-gay group he formerly headed recommends books his critics say are pornographic.
-- From "Obama's Safe Schools Czar Tied to Lewd Readings for 7th Graders" by Maxim Lott, FOXNews.com 12/14/09
The group under fire is the Gay, Lesbian and Straight Education Network (GLSEN), which Kevin Jennings, now the assistant deputy secretary for safe and drug-free schools in the Department of Education, founded and ran from 1990 to 2008.
GLSEN says it works to create a welcoming atmosphere for homosexual students in schools, and that effort includes recommending books for students of all ages.
But critics say many of the books, particularly some that are targeted for children between Grades 7 to 12, are inappropriately explicit. A full list is available at the blog Gateway Pundit, which has published dozens of controversial passages from the books.
"Reflections of a Rock Lobster" was recommended in 1995, the year Jennings became GLSEN's first executive director; "Passages of Pride" made the list in 1997 and "Queer 13" in 1999. Those are just three out of over 100 books that GLSEN has recommended for students in grades 7-12 since 1990, and all three remain on GLSEN's recommended reading list.
. . . guidelines, listed on each book recommendation page, read: "All BookLink items are reviewed by GLSEN staff for quality and appropriateness of content. However, some titles for adolescent readers contain mature themes. We recommend that adults selecting books for youth review content for suitability."
But critics say the guidelines themselves are damning, because they confirm that GLSEN staff have checked the books for appropriateness. And Jennings, they point out, was in charge at the time.
Department of Education spokesman Justin Hamilton declined to comment about Jennings' role in recommending the books.
To read the entire article, CLICK HERE.
-- From "Obama's Safe Schools Czar Tied to Lewd Readings for 7th Graders" by Maxim Lott, FOXNews.com 12/14/09
The group under fire is the Gay, Lesbian and Straight Education Network (GLSEN), which Kevin Jennings, now the assistant deputy secretary for safe and drug-free schools in the Department of Education, founded and ran from 1990 to 2008.
GLSEN says it works to create a welcoming atmosphere for homosexual students in schools, and that effort includes recommending books for students of all ages.
But critics say many of the books, particularly some that are targeted for children between Grades 7 to 12, are inappropriately explicit. A full list is available at the blog Gateway Pundit, which has published dozens of controversial passages from the books.
"Reflections of a Rock Lobster" was recommended in 1995, the year Jennings became GLSEN's first executive director; "Passages of Pride" made the list in 1997 and "Queer 13" in 1999. Those are just three out of over 100 books that GLSEN has recommended for students in grades 7-12 since 1990, and all three remain on GLSEN's recommended reading list.
. . . guidelines, listed on each book recommendation page, read: "All BookLink items are reviewed by GLSEN staff for quality and appropriateness of content. However, some titles for adolescent readers contain mature themes. We recommend that adults selecting books for youth review content for suitability."
But critics say the guidelines themselves are damning, because they confirm that GLSEN staff have checked the books for appropriateness. And Jennings, they point out, was in charge at the time.
Department of Education spokesman Justin Hamilton declined to comment about Jennings' role in recommending the books.
To read the entire article, CLICK HERE.
School Retracts Christmas Program of Religious Pluralism Indoctrination
A battle over religion is brewing in central Indiana after a public school wanted second graders to sing a song declaring, “Allah is God.” The phrase was removed just before the performance after a national conservative group launched a protest.
-- From "Fishers school adjusts holiday program after conservative group protests" by Chris Sikich and Vic Ryckaert, IndyStar.com 12/12/09
A Hamilton Southeastern elementary removed a mention of Allah in its holiday show after it drew the anger of a national conservative Christian group.
Lantern Road Elementary Principal Danielle Thompson said school leaders sought to teach inclusiveness through the second-grade program, which included pieces about Christmas, Hanukkah, Ramadan, Las Posadas and Kwanzaa.
School officials removed a phrase saying "Allah is God" after the American Family Association launched a protest of the program on its electronic newsletter.
The change was made, Thompson said, because no other deities were directly named in the program.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Second Graders Sing About Allah? " by Todd Starnes, FOX News Radio 12/14/09
. . . David Hogan['s]. . . daughter came home with a copy of the lyrics just days before the production. Hogan, a Christian, told the American Family Association, a conservative advocacy group, that he was deeply concerned to learn that his daughter had been singing, “Allah is God.”
Here’s what the children were assigned to sing:
But when it came time to perform the “Christian” part of Christmas, children were assigned to say:
Micah Clark, executive director of the Indiana AFA, launched an Internet protest once he heard about the allegations. “What surprised me here is that we’ve had a secular scrubbing of Christmas for so long and the school apparently didn’t see the problem with kids singing to Allah,” he told FOX News Radio. “You won’t even mention Jesus and you’re going to force my child to sing about Allah?”
In email correspondence the school initially defended the reference as a way to be inclusive of all religions. However, once complaints starting rolling in, school leaders decided to eliminate the Allah reference.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
-- From "Fishers school adjusts holiday program after conservative group protests" by Chris Sikich and Vic Ryckaert, IndyStar.com 12/12/09
A Hamilton Southeastern elementary removed a mention of Allah in its holiday show after it drew the anger of a national conservative Christian group.
Lantern Road Elementary Principal Danielle Thompson said school leaders sought to teach inclusiveness through the second-grade program, which included pieces about Christmas, Hanukkah, Ramadan, Las Posadas and Kwanzaa.
School officials removed a phrase saying "Allah is God" after the American Family Association launched a protest of the program on its electronic newsletter.
The change was made, Thompson said, because no other deities were directly named in the program.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Second Graders Sing About Allah? " by Todd Starnes, FOX News Radio 12/14/09
. . . David Hogan['s]. . . daughter came home with a copy of the lyrics just days before the production. Hogan, a Christian, told the American Family Association, a conservative advocacy group, that he was deeply concerned to learn that his daughter had been singing, “Allah is God.”
Here’s what the children were assigned to sing:
“Allah is God, we recall at dawn,
Praying ‘til night during Ramadan
At this joyful time we pray happiness for you,
Allah be with you all your life through.”
But when it came time to perform the “Christian” part of Christmas, children were assigned to say:
“I didn’t know there was a little boy at the manger. What child is this?
I’m not sure if there was a little boy or not.
Then why did you paint one on your nativity window?
I just thought if there was a little boy, I’d like to know exactly what he (sic) say.”
Micah Clark, executive director of the Indiana AFA, launched an Internet protest once he heard about the allegations. “What surprised me here is that we’ve had a secular scrubbing of Christmas for so long and the school apparently didn’t see the problem with kids singing to Allah,” he told FOX News Radio. “You won’t even mention Jesus and you’re going to force my child to sing about Allah?”
In email correspondence the school initially defended the reference as a way to be inclusive of all religions. However, once complaints starting rolling in, school leaders decided to eliminate the Allah reference.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
Monday, December 14, 2009
Near-death Abortion Settled for $1.9 Million
New Jersey officials temporarily closed an abortion clinic because of ‘dirt and debris’ but only after an abortion victim was hospitalized and required a hysterectomy, after being sent home by the abortionist.
-- From "$1.9M settlement in botched abortion" by James M. O'Neill, staff writer, The Record - North Jersey Media Group 12/13/09
Metropolitan Medical Associates in Englewood, among the state’s largest abortion clinics, reached a $1.9 million settlement with a woman who suffered massive hemorrhaging, a coma, a stroke and a hysterectomy after she had an abortion at the facility in 2007.
The incident led to an inspection by the state, which shut the facility down for more than a month until improvements were made.
The settlement includes $1 million from the facility, $575,000 from one of the doctors involved in the case and $325,000 from another doctor who had assisted. The settlement was first reported in the New Jersey Law Journal.
Rasheedah Dinkins filed the suit in 2007 against the facility and two doctors, Keith Gresham, who was Dinkins’ attending physician, and Nicholas Kotopoulos, who assisted after Dinkins started to bleed excessively.
The suit also named the National Abortion Federation, a group that Metropolitan Medical Associates belongs to.
Dinkins, then 20, visited the clinic in January of that year for a second-trimester abortion. The Englewood clinic is one of only a few in the state to perform second-trimester abortions.
Hours after the procedure, Dinkins, back at home in Newark, became sluggish, then was unable to walk or talk. Her mother called for an ambulance, and, by the time it arrived, Dinkins had passed out.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Woman Comatose Month After Botched Abortion Gets $1.9 Million Settlement" by Steven Ertelt, LifeNews.com Editor 12/13/09
Dinkins, who is now 22, became severely ill following the abortion and was transferred to Newark Beth Israel Medical Center where she needed blood transfusions and had her uterus removed. She also suffered a stroke due to the serious blood loss and had one of her lungs collapse.
Dinkins said her mother and hospital officials told her she died en route to the medical facility from the abortion center but medical personnel were able to revive her. She told AP she regards her decision to have an abortion as a bad one, saying "I probably wouldn't have made this choice."
. . . the botched abortion caused so many medical complications that Newark Beth Israel Medical Center filed a complaint with state officials.
The Department of Health and Senior Services investigated the abortion facility and found dirty forceps, rusty crochet hooks used to remove IUDs, and a quarter-inch of dirt and debris under an examining table.
In ordering the abortion business to close, the Department said the abortion facility had poor infection control, and did not properly sterilize instruments and equipment.
Health inspectors said the violations at the abortion business pose "immediate and serious risk of harm to patients."
It was only the second time state health officials ordered one of the state's 650 ambulatory health centers closed.
Dinkins isn't the only woman who had an abortion at MMA and experienced problems.
Metropolitan Medical Associates is one of the biggest abortion facilities in the nation, having done 10,000 abortions last year alone. It was also closed down in 1993 for health and safety issues.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
-- From "$1.9M settlement in botched abortion" by James M. O'Neill, staff writer, The Record - North Jersey Media Group 12/13/09
Metropolitan Medical Associates in Englewood, among the state’s largest abortion clinics, reached a $1.9 million settlement with a woman who suffered massive hemorrhaging, a coma, a stroke and a hysterectomy after she had an abortion at the facility in 2007.
The incident led to an inspection by the state, which shut the facility down for more than a month until improvements were made.
The settlement includes $1 million from the facility, $575,000 from one of the doctors involved in the case and $325,000 from another doctor who had assisted. The settlement was first reported in the New Jersey Law Journal.
Rasheedah Dinkins filed the suit in 2007 against the facility and two doctors, Keith Gresham, who was Dinkins’ attending physician, and Nicholas Kotopoulos, who assisted after Dinkins started to bleed excessively.
The suit also named the National Abortion Federation, a group that Metropolitan Medical Associates belongs to.
Dinkins, then 20, visited the clinic in January of that year for a second-trimester abortion. The Englewood clinic is one of only a few in the state to perform second-trimester abortions.
Hours after the procedure, Dinkins, back at home in Newark, became sluggish, then was unable to walk or talk. Her mother called for an ambulance, and, by the time it arrived, Dinkins had passed out.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Woman Comatose Month After Botched Abortion Gets $1.9 Million Settlement" by Steven Ertelt, LifeNews.com Editor 12/13/09
Dinkins, who is now 22, became severely ill following the abortion and was transferred to Newark Beth Israel Medical Center where she needed blood transfusions and had her uterus removed. She also suffered a stroke due to the serious blood loss and had one of her lungs collapse.
Dinkins said her mother and hospital officials told her she died en route to the medical facility from the abortion center but medical personnel were able to revive her. She told AP she regards her decision to have an abortion as a bad one, saying "I probably wouldn't have made this choice."
. . . the botched abortion caused so many medical complications that Newark Beth Israel Medical Center filed a complaint with state officials.
The Department of Health and Senior Services investigated the abortion facility and found dirty forceps, rusty crochet hooks used to remove IUDs, and a quarter-inch of dirt and debris under an examining table.
In ordering the abortion business to close, the Department said the abortion facility had poor infection control, and did not properly sterilize instruments and equipment.
Health inspectors said the violations at the abortion business pose "immediate and serious risk of harm to patients."
It was only the second time state health officials ordered one of the state's 650 ambulatory health centers closed.
Dinkins isn't the only woman who had an abortion at MMA and experienced problems.
Metropolitan Medical Associates is one of the biggest abortion facilities in the nation, having done 10,000 abortions last year alone. It was also closed down in 1993 for health and safety issues.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.