Time Magazine interviewed Stanford Law professor Ralph Richard Banks about his new book Is Marriage for White People? that documents the consequences of a marriageless culture.
Researched and written over the past 10 years, Banks' book explores the unpleasant — and often unspoken — contributors to and consequences of declining marriage rates among African Americans. With 70% of all black children now born to unwed mothers, the consequences have never been clearer. . . .
Time: At a time when marriage is becoming less popular among all ethnicities, why such a strong focus on wedded bliss?
Banks: I'm not necessarily speaking of a physical marriage license, but rather the importance of a stable committed relationship — and there is a serious decline of committed stable relationships in black America today. This has many undesirable outcomes not just for adults, but also for children who are the most vulnerable parties here. Seventy percent of black children today are born to non-married partners; most of these relationships do not last, which means most of these kids grow up with just one parent and this is not an optimal situation for child-rearing.
Time: Your book almost exclusively focuses on the experiences of African Americans. Why should white people read it?
Banks: Sure, the book is rooted in the black community, but the themes — marriage, children, inter-marriage — resonate across group lines. Plus, there are many white people who have black friends or co-workers who see that their lives are different from their own, but aren't sure how to talk about those differences. They see unmarried black women around them and wonder why they are single. These are topics that black women regularly speak of amongst themselves, but would never discuss in front white people.
Time: With so much talk of unmarried women, fatherless children, economic insecurity, your book feels kind of grim. Where is the hope here for the women you claim to care about?
Banks: The hope here is that black women will be able to shape their own lives and not be victims of circumstance. . . . This is a hopeful book, but not a relentlessly upbeat book because that would have not been true to reality.
ABC News is exploring the lives of people struggling with sexual identity disorder, and how society is normalizing this mental health condition and even celebrating sexual mutilation, under the moniker "transgender."
It should be noted that a person's DNA cannot be changed; biologically, there's no such thing as a "sex change."
From a 10-year-old who has felt trapped in the wrong body for years to a "trans-regret," a man who is one of the few people in the world to have changed his gender from a man to a woman and back again, "Primetime Nightline" looks at the issues surrounding transgender.
Jackie is a 10-year-old from Ohio who was originally born as Jack. As a toddler, Jack was drawn to his sister's dolls and clothes, and enjoyed dressing up in tutus and ballerina outfits. At 10 years old, with tears in his eyes, he told his parents "I'm a girl and I can't do this anymore." Within months, with his parents help, Jack becomes Jackie.
She now attends school as a girl, wearing girl's clothing and makeup. We watch as Jackie navigates her transition and meets relatives for the first time as a girl. Soon Jackie will begin taking puberty blockers, a controversial treatment, which will prevent her from going through male puberty.
Three local veterans groups have accused VA officials at the Houston National Cemetery of banning such religious words as "God" and censoring their prayers at soldiers' funerals.
The [Veterans Affairs'] new enforcement outraged members of local veterans organizations who have long infused their ceremonies with references to God. This summer, they filed a lawsuit against the Department of Veterans Affairs that has turned the national cemetery into a battleground over the role of prayer in veterans’ burials.
The plaintiffs, aided by a conservative legal group, the Liberty Institute, contend they should be allowed to use a Veterans of Foreign Wars script dating from World War I that refers to the deceased as “a brave man” with an “abiding faith in God” and that seeks comfort from an “almighty and merciful God.” The institute has publicized the dispute nationwide with slick videos and a Web site declaring that “Jesus is not welcome at gravesides.”
The lawsuit, which alleges religious discrimination by the government, and the videos have generated angry letters and Internet commentary against the Department of Veterans Affairs, as well as demands from members of the Texas Congressional delegation, mostly Republicans, that the Obama administration fire the Houston cemetery director, Arleen Ocasio.
The lawsuit filed by the Veterans of Foreign Wars District 4, the American Legion Post 586 and the National Memorial Ladies says VA officials barred prayer and religious speech in burials at the Houston cemetery unless families submit a specific prayer or message in writing to the cemetery's director. The lawsuit also accuses VA officials of not allowing them to use religious words such as "God" or "Jesus."
During a hearing on the lawsuit, U.S. District Judge Lynn Hughes . . . criticized what he believed were efforts by the VA to portray members of the National Memorial Ladies, a local nonprofit that honors veterans and their families, as "old ladies ... attacking people" with religious messages.
Hughes also [said] that attorneys for the veterans groups have continued to amplify their claims by "supplying excruciating detail," including affidavits by veterans and relatives who believe they have been discriminated against by VA officials.
A new demographic study shows that the nation's largest abortion corporation locates its clinics in mostly black and hispanic areas in order to maximize abortions performed -- areas that perpetually have the highest rates of unintended pregnancies, thus disproving the corporation's mission claims to the contrary.
A new reported issued by the pro-life group Life Dynamics . . . Titled, “Racial Targeting and Population Control,” . . . validates the claims pro-life advocates have made for years — and that Life Dynamics made in its groundbreaking Maafa21 video released two years ago — showing that abortion advocates have purposefully placed abortion centers in urban areas with high percentages of black and Hispanic residents.
Mark Crutcher and Carole Novielli conducted the research in the 24-page report and they say the location of abortion centers is the modern equivalent of the population control policies against minorities, especially African-Americans, that Planned Parenthood has supported since Margaret Sanger founded it. The researchers say they prepared the new report to respond to the criticism of the claims abortion advocates have made to the racial charges — and to point out a hypocrisy.
. . . as far back as the mid 1900s, some wellknown eugenicists were arguing that the most effective way they could advance their agenda would be to concentrate population control facilities within the targeted communities. . . .
. . . Planned Parenthood and others within the abortion and family planning lobby took this approach when choosing locations for their facilities and that this practice continues to this day.
. . . ["Family planning" defenders] have consistently argued that the most effective way to reduce the number of abortions is to prevent unplanned pregnancies by making birth control chemicals, devices and information widely available. If that is true, in light of their concession that they have focused these things on the minority community, the obvious result should be that black women have the lowest pregnancy and abortion rates in the country.
But to the contrary, in contemporary America, the rate of pregnancy among black women is almost three times as high as it is for white women and, though they make up less than 13% of the female population, black women have about 37% of the abortions. In other words, the family planning lobby’s argument that they concentrate their facilities in minority communities because that is where the need is, cannot be reconciled with their long espoused claim about the connection between contraception, pregnancy and abortion.
Virtually overnight, they went from claiming that they target minority communities with noble intentions to claiming that they don’t target them at all. Then, to support this revised strategy, they began quoting a new report by the Alan Guttmacher Institute (AGI) showing that only one in 10 Planned Parenthood clinics is located in a minority community.
The reality is, the research in AGI’s report had been manipulated to yield pre-determined results.
Fifty-five percent of participants in the survey said abortion was morally wrong in most cases, while 30 percent called it mostly acceptable, with 15 percent unsure. The pollster notes that the numbers are little changed since April 2007.
The survey, released Friday, supports a long-term trend in feelings about the moral acceptability of abortion, as well as the dividedness of voters on “pro-choice” and “pro-life” labeling.
Among those surveyed 48 percent considered themselves pro-choice, while 43 percent called themselves pro-life.
Seventy-two percent (72%) of GOP voters and 60% of unaffiliateds think abortion is morally wrong most of the time. The plurality (46%) of Democrats disagree and feel abortion is not morally wrong in most instances.
Despite that pro-life response, 48 percent of likely voters classify themselves as “pro-choice” on abortion while 43 percent say they are pro-life. Fifty-one percent (51%) of female voters say they’re pro-choice, but just 44% of male voters say the same. Voters under the age of 40 are more likely to be pro-choice than their elders, the survey shows, which is also at odds with most polls.
Most Democrats (70%) are pro-choice, while the majority (62%) of Republicans and a plurality (47%) of voters not affiliated with either major party are pro-life.
The poll also found a majority of voters say abortion will affect how they vote in the next election . . .
When Massachusetts parents learned of Fitchburg School Committee surveying their pre-teens about their oral sex experiences in a quest for government grants, they filed a complaint with U.S. Dept. of Education. Now, the school has agreed that no such surveys will be administered without parental consent.
John W. Whitehead, president of The Rutherford Institute and who represented a concerned mother, called the new policy a victory for parental rights.
The surveys that caused concern for Arlene Tessitore, mother of two middle school daughters, were the Youth Risk Behavior Survey and the Youth Program Survey.
While the daughters tried to be excused from taking the surveys, they were told by their instructors that they had to take it.
In response, the school agreed to eliminate the "passive consent" system, in which it is presumed that the parents have given consent if they do not complete a form that students are sent home with. Only when parents give written consent will students receive surveys to complete.
Rutherford [Institute] officials said the Fitchburg School Committee recently adopted a new policy that will allow students to be given intrusive surveys only after their parents have given their written consent. The change brings the school into compliance with the federal Protection of Pupil Rights Amendment by eliminating the school's previous practice of assuming the parents consented if they didn't specifically object.
At issue were several surveys given to students. They included questions such as "I have had oral sex at some point in my life."
The letter to Ellen Campbell of the U.S. Department of Education's Family Policy Compliance Office from Rita Dunaway, representing the Rutherford Institute, said parents "send their children to public schools to receive an education; not to become subjects of governmental data mining."
The Virginia Department of Health has released temporary/emergency regulations as a result of a new law passed this year that requires abortion clinics to meet many hospital-level standards. Abortionists anticipate that over half of the state's abortion clinics will be forced to close due to their unwillingness to make the financial commitment to comply.
The department released the proposed temporary emergency regulations late Friday afternoon. The State Board of Health will vote on the regulations Sept. 15, and they will remain in place while permanent ones are drafted under the state's normal regulatory process.
The General Assembly last winter passed legislation requiring that all clinics performing at least five first-trimester abortions per month be regulated like hospitals. Supporters of the regulations say the goal is ensuring safety. Opponents argue that abortion opponents and elected officials who have pushed for the regulations are trying to put clinics out of business.
Abortion-rights advocates said their worst fears were confirmed when they discovered that clinics could be held to what they consider onerous hospital architectural standards under proposed regulations released Friday by state health officials.
Planned Parenthood lobbyist Jessica Honke expressed disappointment after her initial review of the draft regulations, saying, "The Board of Health apparently ignored sound science and drafted regulations designed to limit access to safe, legal abortion services."
But social conservatives who favor limiting abortions see the regulations as a way to better ensure the safety of abortion procedures at clinics, which haven't been regulated for licensure in this way since previous standards were repealed in 1983.
Clinics in Virginia are currently treated like other physicians' offices where outpatient procedures such as cosmetic surgery are performed.
The new rules follow an amended Republican-backed bill, Senate Bill 924, which narrowly passed the General Assembly this year on a tie-breaking vote cast by Lt. Gov. Bill Bolling.
[Family] Foundation President Victoria Cobb had said in a statement Thursday, "While the abortion industry alleges that regulations will close down clinics, Virginians understand that Planned Parenthood, the nation's largest private abortion provider, is a $1 billion business.
"They have the money to ensure that their abortion centers are safe for women, now they'll have to decide whether they want to spend their money on women's safety or continue spending it on trying to get pro-abortion politicians elected."
If a majority of the board approves the regulations, the rules will be subject to executive review by the attorney general, the secretary of health and human services, the Department of Planning and Budget, and the governor. Board members also have the option of approving the regulations conditioned upon making certain changes.
The recent atheists' legal threat demanding an end to prayer at sporting events in DeSoto County, Mississippi and the acquiescence of school administrators, has lit a firestorm of Christian activism at schools across the county. Parents and students alike organized a variety of public prayer events, including The Lord's Prayer recited in unison at the football game immediately following the National Anthem.
"All they've done is increased the awareness, as Christians, of what we need to do to step it up and bring revival to DeSoto County."
"It is important to us to express our freedom of speech for our children, to let them know that it is more than all right to pray in their community," said Carmen Kyle, one of the organizers of the DeSoto County 4 Prayer Facebook page.
The group also spent 42 hours printing 250 T-shirts that people pre-ordered for $7. They have 200 more orders for next week's games.
The T-shirts have the group's logo, DeSoto County 4 Prayer, printed on the front and the Lord's Prayer on the back.
Meanwhile, Freedom From Religion Foundation officials faxed a letter Friday to DeSoto County Schools Supt. Milton Kuykendall, charging that comments he made about the group in some local media outlets were defamatory and untrue.
Predictably, the New York Times Magazine printed an inquisitory piece by Bill Keller arguing that presidential candidates ought to be grilled, and severely, about their religious theology if they are conservative Christians.
If a candidate for president said he believed that space aliens dwell among us, would that affect your willingness to vote for him? Personally, I might not disqualify him out of hand; one out of three Americans believe we have had Visitors and, hey, who knows? But I would certainly want to ask a few questions. Like, where does he get his information? Does he talk to the aliens? Do they have an economic plan?
This year’s Republican primary season offers us an important opportunity to confront our scruples about the privacy of faith in public life — and to get over them. We have an unusually large number of candidates, including putative front-runners, who belong to churches that are mysterious or suspect to many Americans. . . .
I honestly don’t care . . . [after all,] I grew up believing that a priest could turn a bread wafer into the actual flesh of Christ.
But I do want to know if a candidate places fealty to the Bible . . . or some other authority higher than the Constitution and laws of this country. . . .
To read the entire opinion column above, CLICK HERE.
. . . Here’s the general questionnaire I sent to the candidates [excerpts below]:
. . . (a) Do you agree with those religious leaders who say that America is a “Christian nation” or “Judeo-Christian nation?” (b) What does that mean in practice?
. . . What do you think of the evangelical Christian movement known as Dominionism and the idea that Christians, and only Christians, should hold dominion over the secular institutions of the earth?
For Congresswoman Michele Bachmann:
. . . You have said that watching the film series “How Should We Then Live?” by the evangelist Francis Schaeffer was a life-altering event for you. That series stresses the “inerrancy” — the literal truth — of the Bible. Do you believe the Bible consists of literal truths, or that it is to be taken more metaphorically?
. . . One of your mentors at Oral Roberts University, John Eidsmoe, teaches that when biblical law conflicts with American law, a Christian must work to change the law. Do you agree? Are there examples where the Bible guides you to challenge existing secular law?
For Governor Rick Perry:
. . . You have been close to David Barton, founder of WallBuilders, who has endorsed your campaign. He preaches that America is a Christian nation, that we should have a government “firmly rooted in biblical principles” and that the Bible offers explicit guidance on public policy — for example, tax policy. Do you disagree with him on any of these points?
To read the entire opinion column above, CLICK HERE.
Rick Perry's overt Christianity horrifies many of his liberal critics. . . .
Let's cut through the clutter: A lot of people on the East and West coasts are bigots and snobs about "flyover types." They equate funny accents with stupidity, and they automatically assume someone who went to Texas A&M must be dumber than someone who went to Yale. Overt displays of religion trigger their fight-or-flight instincts, causing them to lash out irrationally.
To read the entire opinion column above, CLICK HERE.
[Bill Keller's] latest column for the magazine is interesting, provocative and quite possibly the result of a writer ignoring his own blinders. . . .
. . . As to your specific questions to the candidates, sure, they should be asked. However, I sense a loathing of the right and Christianity. Is that the impression you intend to leave?
[Perry has] been the governor of Texas for going on a hundred years. Surely there's something in his historical actions that would prove (or, unfortunately, disprove) your premise.
To read the entire opinion column above, CLICK HERE.
. . . to the extent that reporters put any of Keller’s questions — or similar such questions — to the Republican candidates, they ought also to put the questions listed below to President Obama . . . To maintain a rough parallel with Keller, I will illustrate by showing the sort of unanswered questions that could still be addressed by reporters to Obama regarding his own political development [excerpts below:]
. . . You note in Dreams from My Father that you attended socialist conferences in New York when you lived there in the mid-1980's. Archival evidence indicates that you attended the New York Socialist Scholars Conferences of 1983, 1984, and possibly 1985. Please confirm which socialist conferences you attended, and indicate whether you were present at, or were aware of, the talks by James Cone, the founder of Black Liberation Theology, and other Black Liberation Theologians at those conferences.
. . . Two of your key organizing mentors, Greg Galluzzo and Mary Gonzales, founded a group called UNO of Chicago, which you worked with closely during your early organizing years. Your other key organizing mentor, Gerald Kellman, worked with UNO just before hiring you. He specialized in linking community organizations to churches. UNO of Chicago engaged in deeply controversial Alinskyite confrontation tactics, including aggressive moves to seize control of churches against the wishes of their priests. What, precisely, was your relationship with UNO of Chicago? Were you aware of UNO’s controversial techniques for taking control of churches, as your memoir seems to indicate you were? What do you think of these tactics? How has your view on that issue affected your years of subsequent support for the work of Galluzzo, Gonzales, and Kellman?
To read the entire opinion column above, CLICK HERE.
New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg has pleased secular America and angered some members of religious communities by excluding any and all religious leaders from participating in a ceremony marking the 10 year anniversary of the 9/11 terrorist attacks.
Current plans call for the 9/11 ceremony to exclude prayers and explicit political speech. Elected officials participating in the ceremony will not be giving political speeches, but will instead read lines of preselected poetry.
The ceremony will include President Obama, former President George W. Bush, NY Governor Andrew Cuomo, New Jersey Governor Chris Christie, former NY Governor George Pataki, NY Mayor Bloomberg and former NY Mayor Rudy Giuliani.
"Utterly disappointed and surprised," Fernado Cabrera a New York City councilman and the pastor of New Life Outreach International church in the Bronx, said over the decision not to include any clergy in the ceremony.
"There's certain things that government cannot do, and answering questions of meaning of 'Why are we going through this?' and 'Where am I going to get strength from?' - those are existential questions that can only be answered from a spiritual aspect," Cabrera said.
"I'm telling you I saw it first hand, the power of prayer," he added of his time at ground zero on September 11, 2001.
Bill Donahue of the Catholic League rejected the mayor's office explanation of potential religious infighting over who would get to pray, saying the issue is sorted out all the time for presidential inaugurations and other major events.
"This is America, and to have a memorial service where there's no prayer, this appears to be insanity to me," Rudy Washington, former Deputy Mayor to Rudy Giuliani who organized an interfaith ceremony at Yankee Stadium shorty after the 9/11 attacks, told the Journal. "I feel like America has lost its way."
During the 2001 "Prayer for America" service at Yankee Stadium, organized by Rudy Washington, leaders representing all of the major religions addressed a large crowd and even larger TV audience.
An interfaith ceremony will be held this September 6 to honor 9/11 first responders, another group that decried their exclusion from the ceremony.
Mike Bloomberg still isn't running in the 2012 presidential race. Nonetheless, he's the subject of a slam from Rick Santorum, who uses New York City's 9/11 tenth anniversary ceremony and the reports about clergy being excluded to slam him:
"James Madison called our nation's vibrant public expression of faith the 'perfect remedy' and if there was ever a day in recent history that our nation needed such a remedy it was September 11th, 2001. It is disconcerting that Mayor Bloomberg decided to exclude clergy from the ceremony commemorating the 10th anniversary of this horrific attack. I urge Mayor Bloomberg to reconsider his unfortunate decision. It is important to allow clergy to attend and take part in the memorial intended to bind the wounds of a still healing nation."
The Chicago suburban college, of the gay-affirming United Church of Christ, has become the first institution of "higher learning" to categorize incoming students by sexually-deviant behavior. Students who accept the "gay label" may be eligible for special homosexual scholarships.
The application asks: "Would you consider yourself to be a member of the LGBT (lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgendered) community?"
Elmhurst College admissions dean Gary Rold says students who answer "yes" may be eligible for a scholarship that will pay up to a third of tuition. He says the information also will help officials direct incoming students to services and groups that could help them on campus.
“Increasing diversity is part of our mission statement,” said Gary Rold, Elmhurst’s dean of admissions. “This is simply closing the loop, in many ways, of another group who has a very strong identity. It may not be race and religion but it’s an important part of who they are.”
Those who answer “yes” may be eligible for a scholarship worth up to one-third of tuition, not unusual because about 60 percent of incoming students receive some type of scholarship aid, Rold said. More importantly, he said, knowing students’ sexual orientation will help officials direct incoming students toward services or groups that might help them make an easier transition to college life.
And while the question might attract more applicants, he thinks that number will balance out with students who do not apply because of the question.
The question is the first of its kind according to Campus Pride, a national advocacy group working to foster more LGBT-inclusive college settings, whose executive director Shane Windmeyer described the move as "a distinct and unique paradigm shift in higher education" in a statement Tuesday.
"For the first time, an American college has taken efforts to identify their LGBT students from the very first moment those students have official contact with them. This is definite progress in the right direction -- and deserves praise," Windmeyer said.
The question is an optional one for prospective students to fill out on the newly designed application, and also offers a "prefer not to say" option. It appears in a series of questions asking applicants about their religious affiliation, languages other than English spoken in their home and other questions school administrators hope will help identify students' needs and potential interest in campus programs and resources, according to Campus Pride. In this case, students could be put in touch with a student club called Straights and Gays for Equality (SAGE).
Elmhurst College, by asking students who apply whether they consider themselves “to be a member of the LGBT (lesbian, gay, bisexual, trangendered) community” is taking us in a very different direction, from equal treatment to affirmative action. Of course, members of the LGBT community should not be discriminated against in admissions, should be welcomed and supported once on campus, and the diversity they bring should be celebrated. But the purpose of asking individuals to identify themselves at the application stage, as part of a process designed to promote greater diversity, signals that identity will be a factor in admissions and scholarships, a line not to be crossed casually.
Affirmative action presents difficult policy questions. I respect supporters of racial preferences though I ultimately have come down instead in favor of considerations of economic disadvantage in admissions. But advocates of gay rights need to think long and hard before they decide to break with the long-advocated—and increasingly popular—principle of nondiscrimination in favor of something quite different.
To read the entire opinion column above, CLICK HERE.
Although the intention of the Wisconsin atheist organization is to eliminate public prayer at the high school football games, the legal threat issued has resulted in an awakening of the public to the threats of religious liberty, and more deliberate and heart-felt prayer at football games.
Recently, school administrations in Kentucky and Mississippi heeded the atheists' threat, but residents refuse to buckle.
There was no prayer uttered at the home opener for Bell County High School [in Pineville, KY] on Friday night after the school system received a complaint from the Freedom From Religion Foundation this month.
Schools Superintendent George Thompson said the practice of having a local pastor offer prayer over loudspeakers was halted because previous court rulings indicated the county would lose a court battle, according to WYMT-TV in Hazard.
"People were kind of jolted when we did the National Anthem and then kicked off" without the prayer, [Bell County Superintendent George] Thompson said.
"Folks were pretty upset about it," he said. "Facebook has gone wild."
The Rev. Ray Stepp, pastor of Molus Pentecostal Church in neighboring Harlan County, had led the pre-game public prayer for 18 to 20 years, said his wife, Sandra Stepp.
Stepp prayed for the players to have a safe game and for protection for U.S. troops, and he usually prayed for everyone in the audience to attend church, his wife said.
The Freedom From Religion Foundation has applauded the DeSoto County school district for responding promptly to a call to halt prayers over the public address system at football games and other school functions.
The Commercial Appeal reports the Madison, Wis.-based organization, which has challenged prayers in other districts around the country, had complained by letter to school district officials that Supreme Court decisions prohibiting school-sponsored prayer were being violated.
In response, the school board said on Monday that the system would enforce an existing policy prohibiting use of the public address system to broadcast prayers before football games.
In response to numerous phone calls, Facebook messages and emails, DeSoto County Schools Superintendent Milton Kuykendall released additional information on Tuesday, giving the reason for the school board's stance on prayer at football games.
"In my opinion, most people do not realize that this organization out of Wisconsin doesn't really care if we have prayer in our schools," Kuykendall said. "They see an opportunity to try and accuse us of breaking the law and therefore give them a chance to sue our district and win a law suit and take millions of our funds. This is money that is needed to pay teachers and educate our students."
The Freedom From Religion Foundation has sued more than 50 school districts.
The School Board, Monday night, announced they will stand by their current policy that says:
"School administrators, teachers and staff shall take a neutral approach regarding the promotion of prayer or other religious activities in schools or at school-sponsored events. They cannot interfere with students exercising their religious rights as permitted by law and they cannot tell or suggest to students that they should pray or participate in religious activities. Prayer over the intercom or at school-related activities shall not be allowed except as specifically stated above."
"I don't think we have the authority to prohibit people from praying, they have first amendment rights," said Keith Treadway, attorney for the DeSoto County School Board. "It just prevents us from leading the prayer and from using our P.A."
The decisions by the two school districts to abandon local high school traditions that date back as far as a half-century were prompted by legal threats from the foundation, which describes itself as the nation’s largest association of “freethinkers,” including atheists, agnostics and skeptics.
“This is the kind of thing,” [Annie Laurie Gaylor, president of The Freedom From Religion Foundation] said, “that if we sued over it we would win.” The school districts almost certainly would be compelled to pay the Madison, Wisc.-based foundation’s court costs, she added, which “would cost taxpayers money that should not be wasted.”
Most Americans, meanwhile, support prayer. Nearly two-thirds of Americans said they favor prayer in schools, according to a Rasmussen poll earlier this year. Only 24 percent of surveyed adults said they opposed it.
Responding to parental complaints, a New Jersey public school superintendent admitted that the books chosen by teachers and librarians for the summer reading list for middle and high schools are inappropriate for any age child due to homosexual behavior, pedophilia, and illegal drug usage.
Chuck Earling, superintendent of Monroe Township Schools in Williamstown, N.J. . . . [said] “There were some words and language that seemed to be inappropriate as far as the parents and some of the kids were concerned.”
One book, “Norwegian Wood,” was on a list for incoming sophomores in an honors English class. The book includes a graphic depiction of a lesbian sex scene between a 31-year-old woman and a 13-year old girl, according to a report first published in the Gloucester County Times.
The other book in question was “Tweak (Growing up on Methamphetamines).” That book included depictions of drug usage and a homosexual orgy.
“That has created a controversy,” Earling told Fox News Radio, referring to the drug usage – along with the lesbian and gay sex scenes. “We’ve pulled them from our summer reading list.”
The school board received multiple complaints from parents at its board meeting Thursday, and the school’s administration has since removed the books from the list.
At Gateway Regional High School, the required reading lists for its students includes a multitude of choices, some of which could possibly include questionable material. But the school details that information in the summer work packet that is sent home and available online.
. . . Gateway High School’s Principal Steven Hindman [said] “I think it’s important that kids have some choice sometimes and our list allows them to.”
The school has decided to use this negative incident as a learning experience, according to Earling. For next year’s reading list, the school hopes to add some parents to the committee that chooses summer reading selections, which currently consists of staff members and administrators, and to utilize software that can scan books for inappropriate material.”
“Norwegian Wood” [is] by acclaimed Japanese author Haruki Murakami. Murakami is a major figure in in postmodern literature – he has been awarded both the Franz Kafka and the Jerusalem Prize – but that didn't necessarily weigh heavily with parents, some of whom were very upset to discover that "Norwegian Wood" includes a graphic lesbian sex scene. . . .
The summer reading list was put together by a committee made up of teachers, librarians, and school administrators. And the board of education approved the list.
After a slew of perplexing book bannings across the country including a Missouri school that pulled Kurt Vonnegut and a Virginia school that pulled Sherlock Holmes, some are seeing this one as a case where better judgment should have prevailed at the outset.
If you're a Christian who desires to follow God's commands, same-sex "marriage" is proving to diminish your religious liberty with regard to the public schooling of your children, getting a job, keeping your job, as well as the freedom to own and operate a business.
The Wildflower Inn is owned by a "devout, practicing Catholic family who believes in the sanctity of marriage between one man and one woman," its Facebook page says. "We have never refused rooms or dining or employment to gays and lesbians."
The lesbian couple, Kate Baker and Ming Linsley, plan to marry in Vermont -- one of six states where homosexual marriage is legal -- this fall. Last October, Ming's mother, Channie Peters, said she contacted the Vermont Convention Bureau, looking for a place to host the reception. The Wildflower Inn in Lydonville, Vermont, was on the list.
According to the ACLU, "On November 5, Channie spoke by telephone with a representative of the Wildflower Inn to discuss details about planning the reception. During the conversation, the Wildflower Inn employee made a reference to 'the bride and groom,' and Channie clarified that the reception would involve two brides."
Shortly after getting off the phone, Channie says she received an email from an employee at the inn, telling her in part, "After our conversation, I checked in with my Innkeepers and unfortunately due to their personal feelings, they do not host gay receptions at our facility.”
In a court filing Tuesday, a lawyer for Wildflower Inn owners Jim and Mary O'Reilly said that they were never told about the lesbian couple's request to hold their wedding reception and that the inn's meeting and events director wasn't authorized to reject requests from same-sex couples.
Baker and Linsley, who live in Brooklyn, said at least two other same-sex couples also were refused because of the "no-gay-reception policy" at the inn in Lyndonville, a scenic village of about 1,500 residents in the state's Northeast Kingdom, a popular recreation destination between the Green Mountains and the Connecticut River.
"We have never refused rooms or dining or employment to gays or lesbians," [the O'Reillys] said in a statement released in response to media inquiries. "Many of our guests have been same-sex couples. We welcome and treat all people with respect and dignity. We do not, however, feel that we can offer our personal services wholeheartedly to celebrate the marriage between same-sex couples because it goes against everything that we as Catholics believe in."
In their first court filing to answer the suit, the inn's owners insisted that applying Vermont's Fair Housing and Public Accommodations Act would violate their right to free speech and freedom of association by forcing them to hold "expressive events."
