Despite the U.S. Supreme Court decision allowing such prayer, the Democrat-controlled state Senate voted to stop prayers that have always opened each session -- the first state legislature in the nation to do so.
UPDATE 2/9/11: Hawaii House votes to keep prayer in Capitol
UPDATE 1/27/11: Hawaii senators hold prayer despite vote to end it
-- From "Hawaii State Senate bans daily prayer" posted at Ballot News 1/23/11
The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) fired off a letter to the State Senate this past summer after a citizen, “who objected to prayers that reference Jesus Christ,” lodged a complaint against the state governmental body.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Hawaii Senate ends daily chamber prayers" by The Associated Press 1/22/11
[The ACLU complaint] prompted the state attorney general's office to advise the Senate that their handling of prayers — by inviting speakers from various religions to preach before every session — wouldn't survive a likely court challenge, said Democratic Majority Leader Brickwood Galuteria.
"They (the ACLU) continue to threaten governments with lawsuits to try to force them into capitulating to their view of society," said Brett Harvey, an attorney for the Alliance Defense Fund, made up of Christian lawyers to defend free faith speech. "Governments should take a stand for this cherished historical practice."
"They're a legal body, they make the laws, and they ought to follow them," said Mitch Kahle, founder of Hawaii Citizens for the Separation of State and Church, who would have been a plaintiff in a potential ACLU lawsuit.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
Monday, January 24, 2011
Sunday, January 23, 2011
Homosexual Behavior Goes Mainstream Nationwide: Census
The U.S. census data speaks for the success of the Gay Agenda, showing that the deviant behavior is not constricted to affluent whites living in urban areas near either coast. So-called 'churches' that celebrate homosexual behavior are a significant force in the propagation.
-- From "Census finds South hosts more gay families than other regions" by Sabrina Tavernise, New York Times 1/19/11
. . . the data show, child rearing among same-sex couples is more common in the South than in any other region, according to Gary Gates, a demographer at the University of California, Los Angeles. Gay couples in Arkansas, Louisiana, Mississippi and Texas are more likely to be raising children than their counterparts on the West Coast, in New York and in New England.
Black or Latino gay couples are twice as likely as whites to be raising children, according to Gates, who used data from a Census Bureau sampling known as the American Community Survey. They are also more likely than their white counterparts to be struggling economically.
Experts offer theories for the pattern. A large number of gay couples, possibly a majority, entered into their current relationship after first having children with partners in heterosexual relationships, Gates said.
In 2009, the Census Bureau estimated that there were 581,000 same-sex couples in the United States, Gates said; the bureau does not count gay singles.
About a third of lesbians are parents, and a fifth of gay men are.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Church Welcomes Openly Gay Members" posted at News4Jax.com (TV-4 Jacksonville, FL) 1/19/11
[Lesbian Darlene Maffett said,] "(Now) I get to be able to have my relationship with God and my relationship with my wife, and I don't have to separate the two."
Maffett has found a home not only in Jacksonville, but at St. Luke's Community Church, one of several churches in the city that welcome openly gay members.
. . . Valerie Williams, senior pastor at St. Luke's . . . has tailored the congregation to cater to gay families, a strategic move given that the Census Bureau showed that Jacksonville is home to one of the largest populations of gay parents in the country.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
Click here to view the TV news report of this predominantly black "church" and its lesbian "pastor."
Also read, 'Gay Churches' Decline as Mainlines Embrace Homosexuality
-- From "Census finds South hosts more gay families than other regions" by Sabrina Tavernise, New York Times 1/19/11
. . . the data show, child rearing among same-sex couples is more common in the South than in any other region, according to Gary Gates, a demographer at the University of California, Los Angeles. Gay couples in Arkansas, Louisiana, Mississippi and Texas are more likely to be raising children than their counterparts on the West Coast, in New York and in New England.
Black or Latino gay couples are twice as likely as whites to be raising children, according to Gates, who used data from a Census Bureau sampling known as the American Community Survey. They are also more likely than their white counterparts to be struggling economically.
Experts offer theories for the pattern. A large number of gay couples, possibly a majority, entered into their current relationship after first having children with partners in heterosexual relationships, Gates said.
In 2009, the Census Bureau estimated that there were 581,000 same-sex couples in the United States, Gates said; the bureau does not count gay singles.
About a third of lesbians are parents, and a fifth of gay men are.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Church Welcomes Openly Gay Members" posted at News4Jax.com (TV-4 Jacksonville, FL) 1/19/11
[Lesbian Darlene Maffett said,] "(Now) I get to be able to have my relationship with God and my relationship with my wife, and I don't have to separate the two."
Maffett has found a home not only in Jacksonville, but at St. Luke's Community Church, one of several churches in the city that welcome openly gay members.
. . . Valerie Williams, senior pastor at St. Luke's . . . has tailored the congregation to cater to gay families, a strategic move given that the Census Bureau showed that Jacksonville is home to one of the largest populations of gay parents in the country.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
Click here to view the TV news report of this predominantly black "church" and its lesbian "pastor."
Also read, 'Gay Churches' Decline as Mainlines Embrace Homosexuality
Government Keeps List of 'Homophobic Kids'
President Obama having enacted the Hate Crimes law, can now see the American future in the United Kingdom where 30,000 students per year, including toddlers, are being permanently branded as bigots based on playground squabbles.
Solution: A £35,000 grant will enable public schools to teach "gay issues" in core curricula, with a gala launch celebrating LGBT History Month.
-- From "Thousands of schoolchildren branded 'racist' and 'homophobic' during playground squabbles" by Andrew Hough, London Telegraph 1/18/11
Teachers logged more than 10,000 confrontations involving primary school students making racist insults or derogatory comments about homosexuals in 12 months.
A further 20,000 “hate crimes” were recorded against secondary school students such as using the phrases “white trash” or “gaylord” during playground squabbles.
And nursery school staff reported several dozen such bullying incidents involving young children despite most not understanding the meaning of what they were saying.
After the introduction of the Race Relations (Amendment) Act 2000, which put public bodies under a duty to eliminate discrimination, schools were told they had to monitor the impact of their policies on the educational attainment of pupils of different races.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "30,000 pupils branded as bigots: Teachers log 'racist' and 'homophobic' jibes in playground squabbles, even at nursery" by Sarah Harris, UK Daily Mail 1/17/11
The school can also keep the pupil’s name and ‘offence’ on file. The record can be passed from primaries to secondaries or when a pupil moves between schools at the request of the new head.
And if schools are asked for a pupil reference by a future employer or a university, the record could be used as the basis for it, meaning the pettiest of incidents has the potential to blight a child for life.
In the majority of cases, the ‘racist’ spats involved mere name-calling.
At one primary, teachers filled out an incident form after three Year Four pupils, aged eight or nine, told a classmate he was ‘gay’ and could not play with them.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Children as young as FOUR to be taught about homosexuality under plans to 'celebrate gay community'" by Kate Loveys, UK Daily Mail 1/23/11
Children as young as four are to be taught about homosexuality in maths, geography, science and English lessons.
In a Government-backed drive to ‘celebrate the gay community’, lesson plans for pupils have been drawn-up to raise awareness about lesbian, gay, bisexual and transsexual issues.
And youngsters aged four will be exposed to images of same-sex couples and books such as ‘And Tango Makes Three’ which is about two male penguins raising a chick, inspired by events at New York’s Central Park Zoo.
David Watkins, a teacher involved in the scheme, said: ‘when you have a maths problem, why does it have to involve a straight family or a boyfriend and girlfriend? Why not two boys or two girls?
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
Solution: A £35,000 grant will enable public schools to teach "gay issues" in core curricula, with a gala launch celebrating LGBT History Month.
-- From "Thousands of schoolchildren branded 'racist' and 'homophobic' during playground squabbles" by Andrew Hough, London Telegraph 1/18/11
Teachers logged more than 10,000 confrontations involving primary school students making racist insults or derogatory comments about homosexuals in 12 months.
A further 20,000 “hate crimes” were recorded against secondary school students such as using the phrases “white trash” or “gaylord” during playground squabbles.
And nursery school staff reported several dozen such bullying incidents involving young children despite most not understanding the meaning of what they were saying.
After the introduction of the Race Relations (Amendment) Act 2000, which put public bodies under a duty to eliminate discrimination, schools were told they had to monitor the impact of their policies on the educational attainment of pupils of different races.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "30,000 pupils branded as bigots: Teachers log 'racist' and 'homophobic' jibes in playground squabbles, even at nursery" by Sarah Harris, UK Daily Mail 1/17/11
The school can also keep the pupil’s name and ‘offence’ on file. The record can be passed from primaries to secondaries or when a pupil moves between schools at the request of the new head.
And if schools are asked for a pupil reference by a future employer or a university, the record could be used as the basis for it, meaning the pettiest of incidents has the potential to blight a child for life.
In the majority of cases, the ‘racist’ spats involved mere name-calling.
At one primary, teachers filled out an incident form after three Year Four pupils, aged eight or nine, told a classmate he was ‘gay’ and could not play with them.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Children as young as FOUR to be taught about homosexuality under plans to 'celebrate gay community'" by Kate Loveys, UK Daily Mail 1/23/11
Children as young as four are to be taught about homosexuality in maths, geography, science and English lessons.
In a Government-backed drive to ‘celebrate the gay community’, lesson plans for pupils have been drawn-up to raise awareness about lesbian, gay, bisexual and transsexual issues.
And youngsters aged four will be exposed to images of same-sex couples and books such as ‘And Tango Makes Three’ which is about two male penguins raising a chick, inspired by events at New York’s Central Park Zoo.
David Watkins, a teacher involved in the scheme, said: ‘when you have a maths problem, why does it have to involve a straight family or a boyfriend and girlfriend? Why not two boys or two girls?
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
Saturday, January 22, 2011
Obama Celebrates Roe v. Wade Anniversary
In a statement today, President Obama said that he will ensure that abortion remains legal and readily accessible, as ". . . our daughters have the same rights, the same freedoms, and the same opportunities as our sons to fulfill their dreams."
-- From "Obama marks anniversary of abortion rights case" by The Associated Press 1/22/11
President Barack Obama is marking the 38th anniversary of the Supreme Court's landmark decision on abortion by calling the procedure a constitutional right he's committed to protecting.
Obama said the 1973 Roe v. Wade decision that legalized abortion affirmed what he called a "fundamental principle: that government should not intrude on private family matters."
Anti-abortion activists will participate in an annual "March for Life" in Washington on Monday.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Obama recalls Roe v. Wade, backs abortion rights" by David Jackson, USA TODAY 1/22/11
President Obama echoed his support for abortion rights today, the 38th anniversary of the Supreme Court's pro-choice decision in Roe v. Wade.
The president made his statement as thousands of abortion opponents planned annual March for Life rallies, with many hoping that the new Republican-run House will enact new restrictions on the practice.
"We are seeing a cultural shift toward protecting life and rolling back the tide of unrestricted abortions," said Charmaine Yoest, president of Americans United for Life.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Obama Marks Anniversary of Roe v. Wade" by Ashley Southall, New York Times 1/22/11
Saturday’s anniversary of Roe comes as conservative lawmakers, bolstered by the results of the midterm elections and looking for a Republican takeover of the White House and Senate 2012, are introducing legislation that would restrict or ban abortion procedures.
State lawmakers are pushing bills that would ban most abortions at 20 weeks after conception, require women considering abortions to view a live ultrasound of the fetus, or curb insurance coverage, among other proposals.
In Congress, Republicans have included a ban on using federal funds for abortions in their efforts to dismantle Democrats’ health care overhaul.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
Click headlines below to read previous articles:
Report: Not Enough Abortions - ObamaCare the Answer
Abortion NOT Rare - Rate is Increasing
Black Genocide in New York City: Abortion
Obama to Force Abortion on all Health Professionals
Obama Cabinet Pick Vetos Partial-birth Abortion Restrictions
Obama Advocates Abortion in Kenya with 'Incentives'
President Bush Declares Sanctity of Life, President Obama Doesn't
-- From "Obama marks anniversary of abortion rights case" by The Associated Press 1/22/11
President Barack Obama is marking the 38th anniversary of the Supreme Court's landmark decision on abortion by calling the procedure a constitutional right he's committed to protecting.
Obama said the 1973 Roe v. Wade decision that legalized abortion affirmed what he called a "fundamental principle: that government should not intrude on private family matters."
Anti-abortion activists will participate in an annual "March for Life" in Washington on Monday.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Obama recalls Roe v. Wade, backs abortion rights" by David Jackson, USA TODAY 1/22/11
President Obama echoed his support for abortion rights today, the 38th anniversary of the Supreme Court's pro-choice decision in Roe v. Wade.
The president made his statement as thousands of abortion opponents planned annual March for Life rallies, with many hoping that the new Republican-run House will enact new restrictions on the practice.
"We are seeing a cultural shift toward protecting life and rolling back the tide of unrestricted abortions," said Charmaine Yoest, president of Americans United for Life.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Obama Marks Anniversary of Roe v. Wade" by Ashley Southall, New York Times 1/22/11
Saturday’s anniversary of Roe comes as conservative lawmakers, bolstered by the results of the midterm elections and looking for a Republican takeover of the White House and Senate 2012, are introducing legislation that would restrict or ban abortion procedures.
State lawmakers are pushing bills that would ban most abortions at 20 weeks after conception, require women considering abortions to view a live ultrasound of the fetus, or curb insurance coverage, among other proposals.
In Congress, Republicans have included a ban on using federal funds for abortions in their efforts to dismantle Democrats’ health care overhaul.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
Click headlines below to read previous articles:
Report: Not Enough Abortions - ObamaCare the Answer
Abortion NOT Rare - Rate is Increasing
Black Genocide in New York City: Abortion
Obama to Force Abortion on all Health Professionals
Obama Cabinet Pick Vetos Partial-birth Abortion Restrictions
Obama Advocates Abortion in Kenya with 'Incentives'
President Bush Declares Sanctity of Life, President Obama Doesn't
Judge Rules Against Federal Marriage Defense
Oakland's U.S. District Judge Claudia Wilken will allow same-sex couples to sue against the 1996 Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) saying it is "robbing states of the power to allow same-sex civil marriages that will be recognized under federal law."
For background on the DOMA battle, read Obama 'Defends' Marriage yet Promises its Destruction and follow embedded links therein.
-- From "Suit over long-term care can proceed" by Dale Kasler, Fresno Bee 1/21/11
A judge this week denied a request by the federal government, which is also a defendant, to dismiss the lawsuit. The ruling by U.S. District Judge Claudia Wilken means the lawsuit, filed last April by three same-sex couples in San Francisco, can go forward.
The California Public Employees' Retirement System [CalPERS] . . . whose premiums are priced lower than most private plans, has refused to sell to same-sex couples. The pension fund says its hands are tied by the federal Defense of Marriage Act, which doesn't recognize same-sex marriages.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Judge OKs Suit for Same-Sex Health Benefits in California" by Maria Dinzeo, Courthouse News Service 1/21/11
"A state cannot allow same-sex couples to participate in its long-term care plan if it wishes the plan to qualify for favorable tax treatment" under DOMA, the [past] ruling from California's northern district states.
The three couples suing the government had legally married during the window of time that California had legalized same-sex marriage before the passage of Proposition 8 in 2008, which amended the state constitution to prohibit gay marriage.
"The exclusion of same-sex couples from the federal definition of marriage does not encourage heterosexual marriages," Wilken wrote. "Furthermore, the preservation of resources does not justify barring some arbitrarily chosen group of individuals from a government program. Nor does moral condemnation of homosexuality provide the requisite justification for the DOMA's section three."
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Court win for same-sex couples seeking benefits" by Bob Egelko, San Francisco Chronicle Staff Writer 1/20/11
[Judge Wilken] rejected arguments that the law's sponsors put forth in 1996, that the legislation was necessary to promote procreation and preserve heterosexual marriage.
"Marriage has never been contingent on having children," Wilken said . . .
She said sponsors' "moral rejection of homosexuality" had been obvious in congressional debate. The U.S. Supreme Court has found that bias against gays is an unconstitutional justification for passing a law [NOT!], Wilken noted.
Her statements paralleled the reasoning of the Massachusetts decision and a ruling in August by Chief U.S. District Judge Vaughn Walker of San Francisco that struck down California's ban on same-sex marriage.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
For background on the DOMA battle, read Obama 'Defends' Marriage yet Promises its Destruction and follow embedded links therein.
-- From "Suit over long-term care can proceed" by Dale Kasler, Fresno Bee 1/21/11
A judge this week denied a request by the federal government, which is also a defendant, to dismiss the lawsuit. The ruling by U.S. District Judge Claudia Wilken means the lawsuit, filed last April by three same-sex couples in San Francisco, can go forward.
The California Public Employees' Retirement System [CalPERS] . . . whose premiums are priced lower than most private plans, has refused to sell to same-sex couples. The pension fund says its hands are tied by the federal Defense of Marriage Act, which doesn't recognize same-sex marriages.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Judge OKs Suit for Same-Sex Health Benefits in California" by Maria Dinzeo, Courthouse News Service 1/21/11
"A state cannot allow same-sex couples to participate in its long-term care plan if it wishes the plan to qualify for favorable tax treatment" under DOMA, the [past] ruling from California's northern district states.
The three couples suing the government had legally married during the window of time that California had legalized same-sex marriage before the passage of Proposition 8 in 2008, which amended the state constitution to prohibit gay marriage.
"The exclusion of same-sex couples from the federal definition of marriage does not encourage heterosexual marriages," Wilken wrote. "Furthermore, the preservation of resources does not justify barring some arbitrarily chosen group of individuals from a government program. Nor does moral condemnation of homosexuality provide the requisite justification for the DOMA's section three."
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Court win for same-sex couples seeking benefits" by Bob Egelko, San Francisco Chronicle Staff Writer 1/20/11
[Judge Wilken] rejected arguments that the law's sponsors put forth in 1996, that the legislation was necessary to promote procreation and preserve heterosexual marriage.
"Marriage has never been contingent on having children," Wilken said . . .
She said sponsors' "moral rejection of homosexuality" had been obvious in congressional debate. The U.S. Supreme Court has found that bias against gays is an unconstitutional justification for passing a law [NOT!], Wilken noted.
Her statements paralleled the reasoning of the Massachusetts decision and a ruling in August by Chief U.S. District Judge Vaughn Walker of San Francisco that struck down California's ban on same-sex marriage.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
Friday, January 21, 2011
Murders by Abortionist are Conservatives' Fault, Says Media
Time Magazine published two articles, each presenting an excuse for the infanticide by the abortionist now charged with multiple counts of murder: The reason for the horrific crimes, according to Time, is either 1) poverty or 2) the ever-increasing restrictions on abortions beyond the first trimester.
“As a rule, any law restricting abortion is almost automatically going to make abortion more dangerous for women.”
UPDATE 2/15/11: PA Gov. Corbett fires several health agency administrators for ignoring clinic failings
For background, read Kermit the Abortionist Loses 'License to Kill'
-- From "Why the Pa. Abortion Doc's Case Is About Poverty, Not Roe v. Wade" by Belinda Luscombe, Time Magazine 1/20/11
Depending on where people fall in the reproductive rights vs. fetal rights debate, their views on abortion doctors are different. To some, these doctors are heroic figures, helping needy women in the face of considerable public opprobrium, if not death threats. To others, they're taking away the lives of the yet-to-be-born. But if the grand-jury report released Wednesday by the Philadelphia district attorney is to be believed, abortion provider Dr. Kermit Gosnell would be hard for anyone to defend.
. . . the sad truth is that Gosnell's long-running practice probably has much more to do with poverty than with Roe v. Wade.
[Gosnell] is alleged to have performed illegal late-term abortions (in Pennsylvania, the law prohibits abortion later than 24 weeks). These procedures are difficult, so Gosnell's method, according to the charges, was to induce labor, deliver a live baby then kill it — or "ensure fetal demise," as Gosnell referred to it. He did this, the grand-jury report says, by "sticking scissors into the back of the baby's neck and cutting the spinal cord."
[Gosnell] was a health-care provider of last resort. Many of the women who came were too young, or too far along in their pregnancies to be treated by the mainstream medical establishment. They came because they were out of options or, at least, they believed they were.
Many of Gosnell's clients might have been afraid to report him because it would have meant admitting an illegal act on their part.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Philly Abortion Horrors: What Matters is How and Not When an Abortion is Done, Says Expert" by Bonnie Rochman, Time Magazine 1/21/11
. . . Pennsylvania, like most states, [restrict when abortions can be performed]; it bans them after 24 weeks.
For sure, late abortions have the potential to be more dangerous than first-trimester abortions. The fetus is larger, the uterus is larger, and there is a greater chance of serious complications. But early abortions can be deadly too [sic] if they're not done properly.
When abortion is restricted . . . only the well-off have access to the procedure.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "The Philadelphia Horror: How mass murder gets a pass" by Michelle Malkin, Creators Syndicate 1/21/11
The 281-page grand jury report (see full embedded document below) released Wednesday provides a bone-chilling account of how Gosnell’s “Women’s Medical Society” systematically preyed on poor, minority pregnant women and their live, viable babies. The report’s introduction lays out the criminal enterprise that claimed the lives of untold numbers of babies — and mothers:
To read the entire opinion column above, CLICK HERE.
Grand Jury Report -- Philly Abortionist Kermit B. Gosnell Multiple Counts of Murder (January 2011) -
“As a rule, any law restricting abortion is almost automatically going to make abortion more dangerous for women.”
UPDATE 2/15/11: PA Gov. Corbett fires several health agency administrators for ignoring clinic failings
For background, read Kermit the Abortionist Loses 'License to Kill'
-- From "Why the Pa. Abortion Doc's Case Is About Poverty, Not Roe v. Wade" by Belinda Luscombe, Time Magazine 1/20/11
Depending on where people fall in the reproductive rights vs. fetal rights debate, their views on abortion doctors are different. To some, these doctors are heroic figures, helping needy women in the face of considerable public opprobrium, if not death threats. To others, they're taking away the lives of the yet-to-be-born. But if the grand-jury report released Wednesday by the Philadelphia district attorney is to be believed, abortion provider Dr. Kermit Gosnell would be hard for anyone to defend.
. . . the sad truth is that Gosnell's long-running practice probably has much more to do with poverty than with Roe v. Wade.
[Gosnell] is alleged to have performed illegal late-term abortions (in Pennsylvania, the law prohibits abortion later than 24 weeks). These procedures are difficult, so Gosnell's method, according to the charges, was to induce labor, deliver a live baby then kill it — or "ensure fetal demise," as Gosnell referred to it. He did this, the grand-jury report says, by "sticking scissors into the back of the baby's neck and cutting the spinal cord."
[Gosnell] was a health-care provider of last resort. Many of the women who came were too young, or too far along in their pregnancies to be treated by the mainstream medical establishment. They came because they were out of options or, at least, they believed they were.
Many of Gosnell's clients might have been afraid to report him because it would have meant admitting an illegal act on their part.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Philly Abortion Horrors: What Matters is How and Not When an Abortion is Done, Says Expert" by Bonnie Rochman, Time Magazine 1/21/11
. . . Pennsylvania, like most states, [restrict when abortions can be performed]; it bans them after 24 weeks.
For sure, late abortions have the potential to be more dangerous than first-trimester abortions. The fetus is larger, the uterus is larger, and there is a greater chance of serious complications. But early abortions can be deadly too [sic] if they're not done properly.
When abortion is restricted . . . only the well-off have access to the procedure.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "The Philadelphia Horror: How mass murder gets a pass" by Michelle Malkin, Creators Syndicate 1/21/11
The 281-page grand jury report (see full embedded document below) released Wednesday provides a bone-chilling account of how Gosnell’s “Women’s Medical Society” systematically preyed on poor, minority pregnant women and their live, viable babies. The report’s introduction lays out the criminal enterprise that claimed the lives of untold numbers of babies — and mothers:
“This case is about a doctor who killed babies and endangered women. What we mean is that he regularly and illegally delivered live, viable, babies in the third trimester of pregnancy – and then murdered these newborns by severing their spinal cords with scissors. The medical practice by which he carried out this business was a filthy fraud in which he overdosed his patients with dangerous drugs, spread venereal disease among them with infected instruments, perforated their wombs and bowels – and, on at least two occasions, caused their deaths. Over the years, many people came to know that something was going on here. But no one put a stop to it.”Deadly indifference to protecting life isn’t tangential to the abortion industry’s existence – it’s at the core of it. The Philadelphia Horror is no anomaly. It’s the logical, blood-curdling consequence of an evil, eugenics-rooted enterprise wrapped in feminist clothing.
To read the entire opinion column above, CLICK HERE.
Grand Jury Report -- Philly Abortionist Kermit B. Gosnell Multiple Counts of Murder (January 2011) -
God Hearing Prayers Healed Rep. Giffords of Gunshot
Nearly 8 in 10 American voters say they believe prayers helped Arizona Rep. Gabrielle Giffords survive the Tucson shooting, according to a Fox News poll.
-- From "Most Say Prayer Helped Save Congresswoman Giffords" by Dana Blanton, FoxNews.com 1/20/11
The congresswoman and 18 others were shot on Jan. 8 at a town-hall meeting in Tucson. Her neurosurgeon has called her recovery “miraculous.” Giffords is expected to be transferred to a rehabilitation facility as early as Friday to continue recovering from brain injuries she suffered after being shot in the head.
Seventy-seven percent of voters believe prayers helped save Giffords, while 17 percent don’t believe that. The remaining 6 percent are unsure.
Those most likely to believe prayer saved Giffords include white Born-Again Christians (95 percent), those who regularly attend religious services (91 percent), blacks (91 percent), Republicans (84 percent), Southerners (83 percent) and women (81 percent).
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "The Giffords Miracle" by John Hayward, Human Events 1/18/11
CNN reports that her doctors estimate Gabrielle Giffords could be out of the hospital as soon as “days to weeks.”
This is an astonishing, and wonderful, recovery from a horrific wound. Giffords was shot in the face with a 9mm handgun at point-blank range. You won’t find a doctor in her hospital who doesn’t speak of miracles.
A long period of rehabilitation awaits the congresswoman after she’s released from the hospital. The Washington Post wondered this morning if Arizona statutes might force her to retire her seat in Congress, but concluded they are not legally applicable to her office. (And, as National Review’s Jim Geraghty put it, “Who wants to be the Arizonan leading the charge to get Gabrielle Giffords removed from office?”)
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
Also read, Blamed for Tucson Killings, Christians Pray -- and then read how the Tea Party movement is a Christian movement.
-- From "Most Say Prayer Helped Save Congresswoman Giffords" by Dana Blanton, FoxNews.com 1/20/11
The congresswoman and 18 others were shot on Jan. 8 at a town-hall meeting in Tucson. Her neurosurgeon has called her recovery “miraculous.” Giffords is expected to be transferred to a rehabilitation facility as early as Friday to continue recovering from brain injuries she suffered after being shot in the head.
Seventy-seven percent of voters believe prayers helped save Giffords, while 17 percent don’t believe that. The remaining 6 percent are unsure.
Those most likely to believe prayer saved Giffords include white Born-Again Christians (95 percent), those who regularly attend religious services (91 percent), blacks (91 percent), Republicans (84 percent), Southerners (83 percent) and women (81 percent).
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "The Giffords Miracle" by John Hayward, Human Events 1/18/11
CNN reports that her doctors estimate Gabrielle Giffords could be out of the hospital as soon as “days to weeks.”
This is an astonishing, and wonderful, recovery from a horrific wound. Giffords was shot in the face with a 9mm handgun at point-blank range. You won’t find a doctor in her hospital who doesn’t speak of miracles.
A long period of rehabilitation awaits the congresswoman after she’s released from the hospital. The Washington Post wondered this morning if Arizona statutes might force her to retire her seat in Congress, but concluded they are not legally applicable to her office. (And, as National Review’s Jim Geraghty put it, “Who wants to be the Arizonan leading the charge to get Gabrielle Giffords removed from office?”)
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
Also read, Blamed for Tucson Killings, Christians Pray -- and then read how the Tea Party movement is a Christian movement.
Thursday, January 20, 2011
AL Gov. Apologizes for Christian-speak
When the new Alabama Gov. Robert Bentley made an appeal at church that he desires everyone to accept Jesus Christ as Savior, the media pounced on him, declaring that once elected to office, Americans are not permitted to speak as Christians, even within the church.
-- From "Alabama Gov. Robert Bentley Apologizes for Christian-Only Comments" by Russell Goldman, ABC News 1/19/11
Gov. Robert Bentley of Alabama met with religious leaders and issued an apology today for saying after his inauguration Monday that he wished non-Christians would become his brothers and sisters in Christ.
Several civil rights groups said the comments Bentley, a Republican, made at church service following his inauguration were offensive and tantamount to proselytizing.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Alabama Governor Apologizes for Controversial Religious Remarks" posted at FoxNews.com 1/19/11
Bentley, a Republican, told a crowd at Dexter Avenue King Memorial Baptist Church on Monday that if they haven’t accepted Jesus Christ as their savior, they are not his brother or his sister.
"There may be some people here today who do not have living within them the Holy Spirit," Bentley said during his speech. "But if you have been adopted in God's family like I have, and like you have if you're a Christian and if you're saved, and the Holy Spirit lives within you just like the Holy Spirit lives within me, then you know what that makes? It makes you and me brothers. And it makes you and me brother and sister."
On Wednesday afternoon, Bentley issued a public apology: "If anyone from other religions felt disenfranchised by the language, I want to say I am sorry. I am sorry if I offended anyone in any way."
. . . Joey Kennedy, an opinion writer for The Birmingham News [said] . . . the fact Bentley chose to deliver his remarks in a church doesn’t make it appropriate. “The forum doesn’t matter. Look at the forum, it was a commemoration of Martin Luther King Day to honor the legacy of Dr. King, which was anything but exclusionary,” he said.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Local religious leaders react to Bentley controversy" by Joe Mcadory, Opelika Auburn News 1/19/11
“… So anybody here today who has not accepted Jesus Christ as their savior, I’m telling you, you’re not my brother and you’re not my sister, and I want to be your brother,” Bentley told a crowd inside Montgomery’s Dexter Avenue King Memorial Baptist Church.
Mark Dougherty, Chairman of the Board of Directors of the Auburn Islamic Center, said . . . “The term he’s using, and I’m a former Christian, is the ‘brother in faith’ use. I take it that way knowing his background.”
. . . Rev. Steve Scoggins, pastor at First Baptist Church of Opelika . . . defended Bentley’s remark because “that is what we evangelical Christians believe. But we also believe God loves everyone on the planet. Only Christians are brothers and sisters in Christ. I would not disagree (with Bentley’s remark), but we also believe that everyone is God’s creation and loved by God and deserves equal respect. I am sure the governor believes that as well.”
Scoggins referred to John 1:12, which reads, “But as many as received Him, to them gave he power to become the children of God, to them that believe on His name.”
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
"Dr. Bentley has a great reputation as a legislator. This is no indication that he would treat people anything other than equal. I have great confidence that he will treat everyone fair as governor."
Steve Scoggins, pastor, First Baptist Church of Opelika
-- From "Alabama Gov. Robert Bentley Apologizes for Christian-Only Comments" by Russell Goldman, ABC News 1/19/11
Gov. Robert Bentley of Alabama met with religious leaders and issued an apology today for saying after his inauguration Monday that he wished non-Christians would become his brothers and sisters in Christ.
Several civil rights groups said the comments Bentley, a Republican, made at church service following his inauguration were offensive and tantamount to proselytizing.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Alabama Governor Apologizes for Controversial Religious Remarks" posted at FoxNews.com 1/19/11
Bentley, a Republican, told a crowd at Dexter Avenue King Memorial Baptist Church on Monday that if they haven’t accepted Jesus Christ as their savior, they are not his brother or his sister.
"There may be some people here today who do not have living within them the Holy Spirit," Bentley said during his speech. "But if you have been adopted in God's family like I have, and like you have if you're a Christian and if you're saved, and the Holy Spirit lives within you just like the Holy Spirit lives within me, then you know what that makes? It makes you and me brothers. And it makes you and me brother and sister."
On Wednesday afternoon, Bentley issued a public apology: "If anyone from other religions felt disenfranchised by the language, I want to say I am sorry. I am sorry if I offended anyone in any way."
. . . Joey Kennedy, an opinion writer for The Birmingham News [said] . . . the fact Bentley chose to deliver his remarks in a church doesn’t make it appropriate. “The forum doesn’t matter. Look at the forum, it was a commemoration of Martin Luther King Day to honor the legacy of Dr. King, which was anything but exclusionary,” he said.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Local religious leaders react to Bentley controversy" by Joe Mcadory, Opelika Auburn News 1/19/11
“… So anybody here today who has not accepted Jesus Christ as their savior, I’m telling you, you’re not my brother and you’re not my sister, and I want to be your brother,” Bentley told a crowd inside Montgomery’s Dexter Avenue King Memorial Baptist Church.
Mark Dougherty, Chairman of the Board of Directors of the Auburn Islamic Center, said . . . “The term he’s using, and I’m a former Christian, is the ‘brother in faith’ use. I take it that way knowing his background.”
. . . Rev. Steve Scoggins, pastor at First Baptist Church of Opelika . . . defended Bentley’s remark because “that is what we evangelical Christians believe. But we also believe God loves everyone on the planet. Only Christians are brothers and sisters in Christ. I would not disagree (with Bentley’s remark), but we also believe that everyone is God’s creation and loved by God and deserves equal respect. I am sure the governor believes that as well.”
Scoggins referred to John 1:12, which reads, “But as many as received Him, to them gave he power to become the children of God, to them that believe on His name.”
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
Wednesday, January 19, 2011
Baptism 'Dumbed Down' to be More Palatable
Church of England baptism services may be re-written to remove some references to Christianity.
-- From "The christening without much Christianity" by Steve Doughty, UK Daily Mail 1/18/11
The plan for a new ‘baptism lite’ service designed to make christenings more interesting to non-churchgoers will be considered next month by the Church’s parliament, the General Synod.
Supporters say the baptism service should be ‘expressed in culturally appropriate and accessible language’ that is readily understood by ‘non-theologically versed Britons’.
Complaints centre on three sections of the baptism service from the Church’s latest prayer book, Common Worship, authorised for use in 1997.
In one, parents, godparents or an adult being baptised are asked to ‘reject the devil and all rebellion against God’ and to renounce ‘the deceit and corruption of evil’. They are asked to ‘submit to Christ as Lord’.
. . . ‘there was a strong plea for a shorter prayer in direct but poetic language that allows the Gospel to resonate better with people’s experience of life’.
To read the entire article, CLICK HERE.
-- From "The christening without much Christianity" by Steve Doughty, UK Daily Mail 1/18/11
The plan for a new ‘baptism lite’ service designed to make christenings more interesting to non-churchgoers will be considered next month by the Church’s parliament, the General Synod.
Supporters say the baptism service should be ‘expressed in culturally appropriate and accessible language’ that is readily understood by ‘non-theologically versed Britons’.
Complaints centre on three sections of the baptism service from the Church’s latest prayer book, Common Worship, authorised for use in 1997.
In one, parents, godparents or an adult being baptised are asked to ‘reject the devil and all rebellion against God’ and to renounce ‘the deceit and corruption of evil’. They are asked to ‘submit to Christ as Lord’.
. . . ‘there was a strong plea for a shorter prayer in direct but poetic language that allows the Gospel to resonate better with people’s experience of life’.
To read the entire article, CLICK HERE.
Marriage Protection Amendment in West Virginia
As part of its legislative agenda, the West Virginia House GOP members announced that they will be fighting to give West Virginians the right to vote on a constitutional amendment to define marriage as between one man and one woman.
-- From "West Virginia GOP looks to define marriage" by The Associated Press 1/14/11
In a release sent out by Republican minority leader Tim Armstead, House Republicans call for the strengthening of West Virginia's Defense for Marriage statute to prevent it from being overturned by a Supreme Court.
Delegate Rick Snuffer, R-Raleigh, said the people of West Virginia should be allowed to vote on the amendment and decide for themselves if "one man, one woman," marriage should be the definition in the state's constitution.
Snuffer, a freshman delegate, said the Legislature needs to act proactively before a decision elsewhere forces lawmakers to make a decision on the issue. According to information provided at the press conference by Republican officials, the state Supreme Court of Appeals voted 3-2 to not hear a prior challenge to current law by homosexual couples.
Republican officials in West Virginia say West Virginians overwhelmingly support traditional definitions of marriage as one man and one woman.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Marriage Amendment Introduced at Capitol" posted at West Virginia MetroNews 1/14/11
For the sixth consecutive year, the state legislature will consider a constitutional amendment that defines marriage as between one man and one woman.
The amendment as follows: "Only a union between one man and one woman may be a marriage valid in or recognized by this state and its political subdivisions. This state and its political subdivisions shall not create or recognize a legal status for same-sex relationships to which is assigned the rights, benefits, obligations, qualities or effects of marriage.”
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Boley, Nohe co-sponsor gay marriage ban" by Brett Dunlap, Parkersburg News 1/14/11
Sen. Donna Boley, R-Pleasants, and Sen. David Nohe, R-Wood, were co-sponsors of the Senate version of the amendment.
"The people of West Virginia have always been conservative," she said. "It is just the way it is here. So far, I have not received any opposition to it."
West Virginia Family Foundation President Kevin McCoy said . . . "The amendment will also preserve the unique legal benefits that are provided for this sacred institution and prohibit counterfeit relationships such as homosexual 'civil unions' and 'domestic partner benefits,' which are homosexual 'marriage' by another name."
McCoy noted the state Supreme Court of Appeals has established "sexual orientation" as a "protected class" in its Code of Judicial Conduct Canon. Three other state supreme courts - California, Iowa and Massachusetts - each cited their state's adoption of identical policies as validating their rulings declaring same-sex marriage a constitutional right.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
-- From "West Virginia GOP looks to define marriage" by The Associated Press 1/14/11
In a release sent out by Republican minority leader Tim Armstead, House Republicans call for the strengthening of West Virginia's Defense for Marriage statute to prevent it from being overturned by a Supreme Court.
Delegate Rick Snuffer, R-Raleigh, said the people of West Virginia should be allowed to vote on the amendment and decide for themselves if "one man, one woman," marriage should be the definition in the state's constitution.
Snuffer, a freshman delegate, said the Legislature needs to act proactively before a decision elsewhere forces lawmakers to make a decision on the issue. According to information provided at the press conference by Republican officials, the state Supreme Court of Appeals voted 3-2 to not hear a prior challenge to current law by homosexual couples.
Republican officials in West Virginia say West Virginians overwhelmingly support traditional definitions of marriage as one man and one woman.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Marriage Amendment Introduced at Capitol" posted at West Virginia MetroNews 1/14/11
For the sixth consecutive year, the state legislature will consider a constitutional amendment that defines marriage as between one man and one woman.
The amendment as follows: "Only a union between one man and one woman may be a marriage valid in or recognized by this state and its political subdivisions. This state and its political subdivisions shall not create or recognize a legal status for same-sex relationships to which is assigned the rights, benefits, obligations, qualities or effects of marriage.”
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Boley, Nohe co-sponsor gay marriage ban" by Brett Dunlap, Parkersburg News 1/14/11
Sen. Donna Boley, R-Pleasants, and Sen. David Nohe, R-Wood, were co-sponsors of the Senate version of the amendment.
"The people of West Virginia have always been conservative," she said. "It is just the way it is here. So far, I have not received any opposition to it."
West Virginia Family Foundation President Kevin McCoy said . . . "The amendment will also preserve the unique legal benefits that are provided for this sacred institution and prohibit counterfeit relationships such as homosexual 'civil unions' and 'domestic partner benefits,' which are homosexual 'marriage' by another name."
McCoy noted the state Supreme Court of Appeals has established "sexual orientation" as a "protected class" in its Code of Judicial Conduct Canon. Three other state supreme courts - California, Iowa and Massachusetts - each cited their state's adoption of identical policies as validating their rulings declaring same-sex marriage a constitutional right.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
Pro-lifer Challenges Obama in Dem. Primary 2012
Randall Terry, the controversial pro-life activist, will challenge pro-abortion President Barack Obama in the Democratic primary with the sole mission of bringing up the issue of abortion.
UPDATE 3/7/12: Randall Terry succeeds with Super Bowl ads, and wins Democrat delegate in primary election against President Obama
-- From "Abortion foe plans Obama challenge" by Dan Hirschhorn, Politico 1/18/11
An outspoken anti-abortion activist says he wants to unseat President Barack Obama next year — and he wants to do it via the nearly impossible path of a Democratic primary challenge.
Randall Terry, who founded the group Operation Rescue and has been arrested numerous times for his aggressive approach to opposing abortion rights, plans to announce a primary challenge against Obama on Thursday outside the Holocaust Memorial Museum in Washington.
Besting a sitting Democratic president from far off his right flank is exceedingly unlikely. In an interview with POLITICO, Terry was blunt about being an underdog and said his main goals are to bloody up Obama politically and draw more attention to the abortion fight.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Activist Vows Graphic Anti-Abortion Ads During Super Bowl" by Devin Dwyer, ABC News 1/18/11
Veteran anti-abortion activist Randall Terry says he's mounting a Democratic primary challenge to President Obama in 2012, in part to be able to run graphic TV ads showing aborted fetuses during next year's Super Bowl.
"I want to pummel Obama. I despise this presidency. He is the arch child killer of the Western Hemisphere, so I'm going to go head-to-head with him," Terry said in a phone interview.
"My ultimate goal is to make child killing illegal again. And for child killing to be made illegal, there has to be a crisis of conscience; we have to show the victims like we show the Holocaust victims and say never again."
While TV networks occasionally reject ads based on controversial or graphic content, the Federal Communications Act requires broadcasters to provide legally qualified political candidates fair access to ad time and forbids them from censoring ads "in any way, or for any reason." Terry said he's confident he can raise the $2.5 million for a Super Bowl spot and that CBS would broadcast it.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Pro-Life Activist to Challenge Pro-Abortion Obama in Democratic Primary" by Steven Ertelt, LifeNews.com 1/18/11
Terry understands he has absolutely no shot of winning the Democratic nomination over the president, but he says his goal is to expose Obama’s pro-abortion record and energizing pro-life voters to oppose him in the general election, where Obama will face one of numerous potential pro-life Republican candidates.
He said the goal of his campaign is to “create a crisis of conscience for Americans regarding” abortion and to “pound on President Obama’s agenda” starting with abortion.
“America has never truly debated child killing, because America has never truly seen child killing. We will use FEC and FCC laws for federal candidates to bring America face to face with this massacre of the innocents,” he said.
But Wesley J. Smith, a respected bioethics attorney, called the move by Terry a [publicity] stunt and said it would ultimately help Obama.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
UPDATE 3/7/12: Randall Terry succeeds with Super Bowl ads, and wins Democrat delegate in primary election against President Obama
-- From "Abortion foe plans Obama challenge" by Dan Hirschhorn, Politico 1/18/11
An outspoken anti-abortion activist says he wants to unseat President Barack Obama next year — and he wants to do it via the nearly impossible path of a Democratic primary challenge.
Randall Terry, who founded the group Operation Rescue and has been arrested numerous times for his aggressive approach to opposing abortion rights, plans to announce a primary challenge against Obama on Thursday outside the Holocaust Memorial Museum in Washington.
Besting a sitting Democratic president from far off his right flank is exceedingly unlikely. In an interview with POLITICO, Terry was blunt about being an underdog and said his main goals are to bloody up Obama politically and draw more attention to the abortion fight.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Activist Vows Graphic Anti-Abortion Ads During Super Bowl" by Devin Dwyer, ABC News 1/18/11
Veteran anti-abortion activist Randall Terry says he's mounting a Democratic primary challenge to President Obama in 2012, in part to be able to run graphic TV ads showing aborted fetuses during next year's Super Bowl.
"I want to pummel Obama. I despise this presidency. He is the arch child killer of the Western Hemisphere, so I'm going to go head-to-head with him," Terry said in a phone interview.
"My ultimate goal is to make child killing illegal again. And for child killing to be made illegal, there has to be a crisis of conscience; we have to show the victims like we show the Holocaust victims and say never again."
While TV networks occasionally reject ads based on controversial or graphic content, the Federal Communications Act requires broadcasters to provide legally qualified political candidates fair access to ad time and forbids them from censoring ads "in any way, or for any reason." Terry said he's confident he can raise the $2.5 million for a Super Bowl spot and that CBS would broadcast it.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Pro-Life Activist to Challenge Pro-Abortion Obama in Democratic Primary" by Steven Ertelt, LifeNews.com 1/18/11
Terry understands he has absolutely no shot of winning the Democratic nomination over the president, but he says his goal is to expose Obama’s pro-abortion record and energizing pro-life voters to oppose him in the general election, where Obama will face one of numerous potential pro-life Republican candidates.
He said the goal of his campaign is to “create a crisis of conscience for Americans regarding” abortion and to “pound on President Obama’s agenda” starting with abortion.
“America has never truly debated child killing, because America has never truly seen child killing. We will use FEC and FCC laws for federal candidates to bring America face to face with this massacre of the innocents,” he said.
But Wesley J. Smith, a respected bioethics attorney, called the move by Terry a [publicity] stunt and said it would ultimately help Obama.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
Tuesday, January 18, 2011
Obama 'Defends' Marriage yet Promises its Destruction
The Obama Administration Department of Justice continues its charade of defending the 1996 Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) in court filings, while at the same time President Obama himself increases his support for same-sex marriage, and Vice President Biden says that "gay marriage" is inevitable.
The DOJ writes, "When DOMA was enacted, the institution of marriage had long been understood as a formal relationship between a man and a woman, and state and federal law had been built on that understanding. But our society is evolving. Over the years, the prevailing concept of marriage has been challenged as unfair to a significant element of the population. Recently there has been a growing recognition that the prevailing regime is harmful to gay and lesbian members of our society."
UPDATE 4/21/11: President Obama promises homosexualists that if re-elected his "evolution process" on same-sex "marriage" will come to fruition.
-- From "Gay Rights Groups Angered by Justice Department's DOMA Defense" by Stephanie Condon, CBS News 1/14/11
The gay rights community is pressing President Obama to take a bolder stance in favor of gay marriage after the Justice Department on Thursday filed a brief defending the Defense of Marriage Act.
Mr. Obama says he is opposed to the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), which prohibits federal recognition of same-sex marriages, and the Justice Department has explicitly stated that the president maintains that position. However, after a district judge ruled in July that DOMA is unconstitutional, the Justice Department announced it would appeal the ruling because it has an obligation to defend all federal laws.
In its brief, the Justice Department argues that the federal government should maintain its current laws on marriage while the states experiment with their own marriage laws.
The appeal explicitly addresses Mr. Obama's opposition to the law.
"Indeed, the President supports repeal of DOMA and has taken the position that Congress should extend federal benefits to individuals in same-sex marriages," the Justice Department says. "But a consensus behind that approach has not yet developed, and Congress could properly take notice of the divergent views regarding same-sex marriage across the states."
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Justice Dept. appeals judge's decision on same-sex marriage" by Sandhya Somashekhar, Washington Post Staff Writer 1/15/11
Gay groups had pleaded with President Obama to let the judge's ruling stand, but on Thursday, the Justice Department officially filed its appeal to the 1st Circuit Court of Appeals. Gay groups responded that they were ready to take the case to the next level.
Obama has said in the past that he does not support the right of gay couples to marry, though he said last month that his views are "evolving." His administration has shepherded through several reforms recently that expand the rights of gay couples to visit their ailing spouses in the hospital and recognize gay parents on passports. With Obama's backing, Congress in December voted to lift the ban on gays and lesbians serving openly in the military.
The Justice Department has said it has little choice but to defend the law. "The Justice Department is defending the statute, as it traditionally does when acts of Congress are challenged in court," spokeswoman Tracy Schmaler said in a statement.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Same-sex marriage.Gay groups criticize Justice Department brief" by Ben Smith, Politico 1/13/11
Gay groups are furious with a Justice Department brief defending — though in quite narrow terms — the Defense of Marriage Act, which candidate Obama, unlike even his Democratic rivals, had pledged to repeal in full.
"DOMA is supported by rationales that constitute a sufficient rational basis for the law. For example, as explained below, it is supported by an interest in maintaining the status quo and uniformity on the federal level and preserving room for the development of policy in the states," says the government's brief (.pdf) in two cases in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 1st Circuit. The brief focuses solely on the virtues of keeping the federal law while states experiment, and not the underlying question of marriage.
The half-heartedness of that defense didn't offer much solace to activists who — despite the Justice Department's traditional role defending federal laws — are demanding that Obama return to the full support for same-sex marriage that he advocated in the 1990s.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "What DOJ Thinks of the Defense of Marriage Act Doesn't Matter Much" by Andrew Cohen, The Atlantic 1/16/11
Here . . . is one passage in the Administration's brief. Federal lawyers want to reassure the appellate court that there is no "animus" in the DOMA and that there is perfectly rational reason for its enactment. They wrote:
"DOMA, which implicates over 1000 federal laws, reflects Congress reasonable response to this sill-evolving debate among the states regarding same-sex marriage. The Constitution permitted Congress to enact DOMA as a means to preserve the status quo, ensure consistency in the distribution of federal marriage-based benefits, and respect policy developments in the states without implicating other states or the United States, pending the resolution of the debate taking place in the states over whether to permit same-sex marriage."
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
The DOJ writes, "When DOMA was enacted, the institution of marriage had long been understood as a formal relationship between a man and a woman, and state and federal law had been built on that understanding. But our society is evolving. Over the years, the prevailing concept of marriage has been challenged as unfair to a significant element of the population. Recently there has been a growing recognition that the prevailing regime is harmful to gay and lesbian members of our society."
UPDATE 4/21/11: President Obama promises homosexualists that if re-elected his "evolution process" on same-sex "marriage" will come to fruition.
-- From "Gay Rights Groups Angered by Justice Department's DOMA Defense" by Stephanie Condon, CBS News 1/14/11
The gay rights community is pressing President Obama to take a bolder stance in favor of gay marriage after the Justice Department on Thursday filed a brief defending the Defense of Marriage Act.
Mr. Obama says he is opposed to the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), which prohibits federal recognition of same-sex marriages, and the Justice Department has explicitly stated that the president maintains that position. However, after a district judge ruled in July that DOMA is unconstitutional, the Justice Department announced it would appeal the ruling because it has an obligation to defend all federal laws.
In its brief, the Justice Department argues that the federal government should maintain its current laws on marriage while the states experiment with their own marriage laws.
The appeal explicitly addresses Mr. Obama's opposition to the law.
"Indeed, the President supports repeal of DOMA and has taken the position that Congress should extend federal benefits to individuals in same-sex marriages," the Justice Department says. "But a consensus behind that approach has not yet developed, and Congress could properly take notice of the divergent views regarding same-sex marriage across the states."
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Justice Dept. appeals judge's decision on same-sex marriage" by Sandhya Somashekhar, Washington Post Staff Writer 1/15/11
Gay groups had pleaded with President Obama to let the judge's ruling stand, but on Thursday, the Justice Department officially filed its appeal to the 1st Circuit Court of Appeals. Gay groups responded that they were ready to take the case to the next level.
Obama has said in the past that he does not support the right of gay couples to marry, though he said last month that his views are "evolving." His administration has shepherded through several reforms recently that expand the rights of gay couples to visit their ailing spouses in the hospital and recognize gay parents on passports. With Obama's backing, Congress in December voted to lift the ban on gays and lesbians serving openly in the military.
The Justice Department has said it has little choice but to defend the law. "The Justice Department is defending the statute, as it traditionally does when acts of Congress are challenged in court," spokeswoman Tracy Schmaler said in a statement.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Same-sex marriage.Gay groups criticize Justice Department brief" by Ben Smith, Politico 1/13/11
Gay groups are furious with a Justice Department brief defending — though in quite narrow terms — the Defense of Marriage Act, which candidate Obama, unlike even his Democratic rivals, had pledged to repeal in full.
"DOMA is supported by rationales that constitute a sufficient rational basis for the law. For example, as explained below, it is supported by an interest in maintaining the status quo and uniformity on the federal level and preserving room for the development of policy in the states," says the government's brief (.pdf) in two cases in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 1st Circuit. The brief focuses solely on the virtues of keeping the federal law while states experiment, and not the underlying question of marriage.
The half-heartedness of that defense didn't offer much solace to activists who — despite the Justice Department's traditional role defending federal laws — are demanding that Obama return to the full support for same-sex marriage that he advocated in the 1990s.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "What DOJ Thinks of the Defense of Marriage Act Doesn't Matter Much" by Andrew Cohen, The Atlantic 1/16/11
Here . . . is one passage in the Administration's brief. Federal lawyers want to reassure the appellate court that there is no "animus" in the DOMA and that there is perfectly rational reason for its enactment. They wrote:
"DOMA, which implicates over 1000 federal laws, reflects Congress reasonable response to this sill-evolving debate among the states regarding same-sex marriage. The Constitution permitted Congress to enact DOMA as a means to preserve the status quo, ensure consistency in the distribution of federal marriage-based benefits, and respect policy developments in the states without implicating other states or the United States, pending the resolution of the debate taking place in the states over whether to permit same-sex marriage."
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
Monday, January 17, 2011
Obama Family Makes Rare Church Appearance
Since dropping membership from Jeremiah Wright's church in Chicago, the Obamas have been without a church home; however, to highlight the Martin Luther King, Jr. holiday weekend, they paid a visit to the Metropolitan African Methodist Episcopal Church near the White House, where the pastor called on the first family to join a church family.
-- From "Obamas attend MLK-themed church service" posted at UPI 1/16/11
The Obamas were welcomed warmly when they arrived at Metropolitan AME Church. The several hundred congregants cheered loudly and one woman yelled "God bless you!"
After the choir sang several hymns, including "Lift Every Voice and Sing," often referred to as the Negro National Anthem, the congregation prayed and many yelled "Amen!" when the speaker mentioned the "people of Tucson, Ariz."
The Right Rev. Adam J. Richardson recognized the Obamas, thanked them for their leadership and also praised the president for his speech at the memorial service last week for the victims of the shooting in Tucson.
The congregation also sang "Happy Birthday" to the first lady, who turns 47 Monday.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Marking holiday at Metropolitan AME, Obamas get new invite" by Hamil R. Harris and Peter Wallsten, Washington Post Staff Writers 1/17/11
Looking at Michelle Obama, the Rev. Marie Braxton declared: "It would be something if you joined our church, and I got to be your pastor and you got to be my girlfriend. And Mr. President, we would find something for you to do."
The president and his family were full participants for more than two hours, singing, standing, even enduring church announcements and the passing of the collection plates. But it seemed the family remained noncommittal Sunday on the question of joining.
A year ago, on the eve of the King holiday, Obama delivered remarks at the Vermont Avenue Baptist Church, where King preached in the early days of the civil rights movement. Obama reflected on King's legacy and the difficulties facing black Americans.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
Click headlines below to read previous articles:
Is Obama Christian? Few Think So: Poll
Obama Reads Bible, but doesn't Honor Bible
-- From "Obamas attend MLK-themed church service" posted at UPI 1/16/11
The Obamas were welcomed warmly when they arrived at Metropolitan AME Church. The several hundred congregants cheered loudly and one woman yelled "God bless you!"
After the choir sang several hymns, including "Lift Every Voice and Sing," often referred to as the Negro National Anthem, the congregation prayed and many yelled "Amen!" when the speaker mentioned the "people of Tucson, Ariz."
The Right Rev. Adam J. Richardson recognized the Obamas, thanked them for their leadership and also praised the president for his speech at the memorial service last week for the victims of the shooting in Tucson.
The congregation also sang "Happy Birthday" to the first lady, who turns 47 Monday.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Marking holiday at Metropolitan AME, Obamas get new invite" by Hamil R. Harris and Peter Wallsten, Washington Post Staff Writers 1/17/11
Looking at Michelle Obama, the Rev. Marie Braxton declared: "It would be something if you joined our church, and I got to be your pastor and you got to be my girlfriend. And Mr. President, we would find something for you to do."
The president and his family were full participants for more than two hours, singing, standing, even enduring church announcements and the passing of the collection plates. But it seemed the family remained noncommittal Sunday on the question of joining.
A year ago, on the eve of the King holiday, Obama delivered remarks at the Vermont Avenue Baptist Church, where King preached in the early days of the civil rights movement. Obama reflected on King's legacy and the difficulties facing black Americans.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
Click headlines below to read previous articles:
Is Obama Christian? Few Think So: Poll
Obama Reads Bible, but doesn't Honor Bible
Black Pastors Denounce Gay Rights Tie to MLK
Taking the occasion of the Martin Luther King, Jr. holiday, dozens of pastors from across the Chicago area expressed their opposition to homosexualists claiming an analogy between the momentous civil rights movement and the movement to normalize deviant sexual behavior.
-- From "Ministers Denounce Comparison Of Dr. King, Gay Rights" posted at WBBM/CBS Radio Chicago 1/17/11
“When we apply words to things that are as sacred as a movement to free a people – African-Americans – from the stigma of the color of their skin, and then apply that to what I call a lifestyle choice that wants to be made into a law, I find that very disheartening,” [said Rev. Al Cleveland, the pastor of a church in Bensenville, IL].
Cleveland said to equate the gay rights movement with the work of Dr. King perverts a noble cause.
The group [of pastors] said in a news release that comparing the gay rights movement to the civil rights movement is the equivalent of using “the heroic battle to end racial discrimination as a Trojan Horse to eradicate moral judgments about homosexual conduct. All civilized persons — particularly African-Americans — should be outraged.”
“Homosexualist organizations have one goal that reigns supreme over all others: the eradication of the true moral belief that homosexual acts are profoundly immoral,” the news release continues, “and they are willing to exploit the legacy of Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. and the Civil Rights Movement in order to achieve their morally dubious and intellectually vacuous goal.”
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Ill. Church Leaders Reject Gays Misrepresenting MLK's Legacy" by Stephanie Samuel, Christian Post Reporter 1/17/11
The group, which largely consisted of African-Americans, gathered Monday to speak out and commune together at a luncheon. Most of the concerns shared were that of "deep concern" over legislation connecting gay rights to the civil rights movement – which helped secure voting rights and end the discrimination that was rampant in the south.
King, born into a family of reverends, pursued theology studies at Crozer Theological Seminary in 1948 and Boston University in 1955. Following his ordination, King served as assistant pastor of Ebenezer Baptist Church, his father's. After finishing his doctoral studies at BU, he became the pastor of Dexter Avenue Baptist Church in Montgomery, Ala.
King accomplished all these things before he got involved in the fight for racial equality. As pastor of Dexter, he founded the Southern Christian Leadership Conference with three other ministers. King and others orchestrated civil right protests in Georgia and Alabama through the SCLC. In 1960, King returned to Ebenezer Baptist Church as co-pastor with his father until his death in 1968.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Christian leaders rally against gay activists 'hijacking' Martin Luther King legacy" by Kevin J. Jones, Catholic News Agency 1/17/11
Dr. Alveda King, full-time director of African-American Outreach for Priests for Life and King's niece, cited her uncle's advice columns written for Ebony magazine in 1957 and 1958.
"In advising men and women on questions of personal behavior 50 years ago, Uncle Martin sounded no different than a conservative Christian preacher does now," she commented. "He was pro-life, pro-abstinence before marriage, and based his views on the unchanging Word of the Bible. Today, Planned Parenthood would condemn Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. as part of the 'religious right'."
"Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. was a man of peace, justice, and most of all a man of God," Alveda King continued, suggesting that he would be working today to secure justice for those in the womb endangered by abortion.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "King's Legacy and Civil Rights Cause Misrepresented" by Laurie Higgins, Illinois Family Institute 1/16/11
Illinois State Senator Heather Steans (D-Chicago) cited Dr. Martin Luther King's description of "the long arc of the moral universe that bends toward justice," saying that jettisoning the most enduring criterion of marriage -sexual complementarity- is the moral equivalent of "ending Jim Crow segregation laws."
State Senator Michael Noland (D-Elgin) continued by saying dishonestly that "We have come far on this issue of Civil Rights and today good men and woman on both sides of the aisle should be able to unite behind this very straightforward issue." This is dishonest in that the legalization of civil unions for homosexuals is anything but a "straight forward issue."
Both State Representative Careen Gordon (D-Morris) and openly homosexual State Representative Greg Harris (D-Chicago) further exploited the flawed analogy by comparing same sex marriage to interracial marriage. They are in essence saying that opposition to discrimination based on an immutable, non-behavioral, morally neutral condition like race is equivalent to homosexuals' fight to normalize and institutionalize deviant sexual relations. Rep. Gordon expressed a radical and heretical notion in her plea for civil unions, which is merely a more publicly palatable term for same sex marriages. She described the passage of the civil union bill as doing "God's work."
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
-- From "Ministers Denounce Comparison Of Dr. King, Gay Rights" posted at WBBM/CBS Radio Chicago 1/17/11
“When we apply words to things that are as sacred as a movement to free a people – African-Americans – from the stigma of the color of their skin, and then apply that to what I call a lifestyle choice that wants to be made into a law, I find that very disheartening,” [said Rev. Al Cleveland, the pastor of a church in Bensenville, IL].
Cleveland said to equate the gay rights movement with the work of Dr. King perverts a noble cause.
The group [of pastors] said in a news release that comparing the gay rights movement to the civil rights movement is the equivalent of using “the heroic battle to end racial discrimination as a Trojan Horse to eradicate moral judgments about homosexual conduct. All civilized persons — particularly African-Americans — should be outraged.”
“Homosexualist organizations have one goal that reigns supreme over all others: the eradication of the true moral belief that homosexual acts are profoundly immoral,” the news release continues, “and they are willing to exploit the legacy of Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. and the Civil Rights Movement in order to achieve their morally dubious and intellectually vacuous goal.”
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Ill. Church Leaders Reject Gays Misrepresenting MLK's Legacy" by Stephanie Samuel, Christian Post Reporter 1/17/11
The group, which largely consisted of African-Americans, gathered Monday to speak out and commune together at a luncheon. Most of the concerns shared were that of "deep concern" over legislation connecting gay rights to the civil rights movement – which helped secure voting rights and end the discrimination that was rampant in the south.
King, born into a family of reverends, pursued theology studies at Crozer Theological Seminary in 1948 and Boston University in 1955. Following his ordination, King served as assistant pastor of Ebenezer Baptist Church, his father's. After finishing his doctoral studies at BU, he became the pastor of Dexter Avenue Baptist Church in Montgomery, Ala.
King accomplished all these things before he got involved in the fight for racial equality. As pastor of Dexter, he founded the Southern Christian Leadership Conference with three other ministers. King and others orchestrated civil right protests in Georgia and Alabama through the SCLC. In 1960, King returned to Ebenezer Baptist Church as co-pastor with his father until his death in 1968.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Christian leaders rally against gay activists 'hijacking' Martin Luther King legacy" by Kevin J. Jones, Catholic News Agency 1/17/11
Dr. Alveda King, full-time director of African-American Outreach for Priests for Life and King's niece, cited her uncle's advice columns written for Ebony magazine in 1957 and 1958.
"In advising men and women on questions of personal behavior 50 years ago, Uncle Martin sounded no different than a conservative Christian preacher does now," she commented. "He was pro-life, pro-abstinence before marriage, and based his views on the unchanging Word of the Bible. Today, Planned Parenthood would condemn Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. as part of the 'religious right'."
"Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. was a man of peace, justice, and most of all a man of God," Alveda King continued, suggesting that he would be working today to secure justice for those in the womb endangered by abortion.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "King's Legacy and Civil Rights Cause Misrepresented" by Laurie Higgins, Illinois Family Institute 1/16/11
Illinois State Senator Heather Steans (D-Chicago) cited Dr. Martin Luther King's description of "the long arc of the moral universe that bends toward justice," saying that jettisoning the most enduring criterion of marriage -sexual complementarity- is the moral equivalent of "ending Jim Crow segregation laws."
State Senator Michael Noland (D-Elgin) continued by saying dishonestly that "We have come far on this issue of Civil Rights and today good men and woman on both sides of the aisle should be able to unite behind this very straightforward issue." This is dishonest in that the legalization of civil unions for homosexuals is anything but a "straight forward issue."
Both State Representative Careen Gordon (D-Morris) and openly homosexual State Representative Greg Harris (D-Chicago) further exploited the flawed analogy by comparing same sex marriage to interracial marriage. They are in essence saying that opposition to discrimination based on an immutable, non-behavioral, morally neutral condition like race is equivalent to homosexuals' fight to normalize and institutionalize deviant sexual relations. Rep. Gordon expressed a radical and heretical notion in her plea for civil unions, which is merely a more publicly palatable term for same sex marriages. She described the passage of the civil union bill as doing "God's work."
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
Sunday, January 16, 2011
Twins Socialize in Womb at 14 Weeks
Humans have a deep-seated urge to be social, and new research on the interactions of twins in the womb suggests this begins even before babies are born.
-- From "Twin fetuses learn how to be social in the womb" by Lin Edwards, PhysOrg.com Psychology & Psychiatry 10/13/10
Researchers from the University of Padova in Italy have been studying pregnancies involving twins. Leader of the team, psychologist Umberto Castiello, explained that newborns appear to be already "wired" to interact socially with other humans soon after birth, and previous research has demonstrated that within only a few hours after birth babies can imitate gestures of people around them and make other social interactions. Studying twins in the womb made it possible to see investigate the pre-wired hypothesis and see if socialization was already apparent while still in the womb.
The study, which was published in the Public Library of Science One (PLoS One), used four-dimensional ultrasonography to make 3D videos of twins at 14 and 18 weeks of gestation. The five pairs of twins were found to be reaching for each other even at 14 weeks, and making a range of contacts including head to head, arm to head and head to arm. By the time they were at 18 weeks, they touched each other more often than they touched their own bodies, spending up to 30 percent of their time reaching out and stroking their co-twin.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Wired to Be Social: The Ontogeny of Human Interaction" by Umberto Castiello et al., posted at Public Library of Science One 10/7/11
Newborns come into the world wired to socially interact. Is a propensity to socially oriented action already present before birth? Twin pregnancies provide a unique opportunity to investigate the social pre-wiring hypothesis. Although various types of inter-twins contact have been demonstrated starting from the 11th week of gestation, no study has so far investigated the critical question whether intra-pair contact is the result of motor planning rather then the accidental outcome of spatial proximity.
We conclude that performance of movements towards the co-twin is not accidental: already starting from the 14th week of gestation twin foetuses execute movements specifically aimed at the co-twin.
To read the research study, CLICK HERE.
From "Unborn twins interact with each other as early as 14 weeks" by Thaddeus Baklinski, LifeSiteNews.com 1/12/11
“We demonstrate that by the 14th week of gestation twin foetuses do not only display movements directed towards the uterine wall and self-directed movements, but also movements specifically aimed at the co-twin, the proportion of which increases between the 14th and 18th gestational week,” the scientists stated.
“Starting from the 14th week of gestation twin foetuses plan and execute movements specifically aimed at the co-twin,” the authors wrote, stating that “when the context enables it, as in the case of twin foetuses, other-directed actions are not only possible but predominant over self-directed actions.” The findings provided quantitative empirical evidence that unborn babies are very much aware of their surroundings and of the presence of a twin with them in their mother’s womb, said the researchers.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
-- From "Twin fetuses learn how to be social in the womb" by Lin Edwards, PhysOrg.com Psychology & Psychiatry 10/13/10
Researchers from the University of Padova in Italy have been studying pregnancies involving twins. Leader of the team, psychologist Umberto Castiello, explained that newborns appear to be already "wired" to interact socially with other humans soon after birth, and previous research has demonstrated that within only a few hours after birth babies can imitate gestures of people around them and make other social interactions. Studying twins in the womb made it possible to see investigate the pre-wired hypothesis and see if socialization was already apparent while still in the womb.
The study, which was published in the Public Library of Science One (PLoS One), used four-dimensional ultrasonography to make 3D videos of twins at 14 and 18 weeks of gestation. The five pairs of twins were found to be reaching for each other even at 14 weeks, and making a range of contacts including head to head, arm to head and head to arm. By the time they were at 18 weeks, they touched each other more often than they touched their own bodies, spending up to 30 percent of their time reaching out and stroking their co-twin.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Wired to Be Social: The Ontogeny of Human Interaction" by Umberto Castiello et al., posted at Public Library of Science One 10/7/11
Newborns come into the world wired to socially interact. Is a propensity to socially oriented action already present before birth? Twin pregnancies provide a unique opportunity to investigate the social pre-wiring hypothesis. Although various types of inter-twins contact have been demonstrated starting from the 11th week of gestation, no study has so far investigated the critical question whether intra-pair contact is the result of motor planning rather then the accidental outcome of spatial proximity.
We conclude that performance of movements towards the co-twin is not accidental: already starting from the 14th week of gestation twin foetuses execute movements specifically aimed at the co-twin.
To read the research study, CLICK HERE.
From "Unborn twins interact with each other as early as 14 weeks" by Thaddeus Baklinski, LifeSiteNews.com 1/12/11
“We demonstrate that by the 14th week of gestation twin foetuses do not only display movements directed towards the uterine wall and self-directed movements, but also movements specifically aimed at the co-twin, the proportion of which increases between the 14th and 18th gestational week,” the scientists stated.
“Starting from the 14th week of gestation twin foetuses plan and execute movements specifically aimed at the co-twin,” the authors wrote, stating that “when the context enables it, as in the case of twin foetuses, other-directed actions are not only possible but predominant over self-directed actions.” The findings provided quantitative empirical evidence that unborn babies are very much aware of their surroundings and of the presence of a twin with them in their mother’s womb, said the researchers.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
Report: Not Enough Abortions - ObamaCare the Answer
Friday's report on “reproductive rights” by the abortion advocacy group NARAL Pro-Choice America, which criticizes most state governments for restricting abortion, precedes abortionists' “full court press” to preserve tax-payer-funded abortion in ObamaCare.
UPDATE 10/1/13: Taxpayers Fund Abortions, ObamaCare Pays Abortionists
UPDATE 3/3/12: To Cut Costs, ObamaCare will Lower Birth Rate, Says White House
-- From "NARAL Report Gives America D Grade For Limiting Abortions" by Steven Ertelt, LifeNews.com 1/14/11
A prominent abortion advocacy group released a state-by-state report on the status of state laws on abortion heading into the 2011 legislative session, and it says America deserves a D grade for limiting abortions too much.
The report comes as state legislatures are expected to add a significant number of new abortion limits, with some stopping the abortion funding in the state exchanges created under Obamacare, others following Nebraska to ban abortions after the 20th week of pregnancy based on fetal pain, and others passing more traditional pro-life legislation such as unborn victims bills or parental notification measures.
“It is clear that the results of the 2010 elections could pose serious threats to the progress we celebrated in previous years’ reports,” NARAL president Nancy Keenan complained. “Some of our key pro-choice champions in Congress and in the states are not returning to their positions.”
The report, titled The Status of Women’s Reproductive Rights in the United States, is a “report card” grading the states and NARAL gives its top marks to California and Washington, which aggressively fund abortions and the Planned Parenthood abortion business with taxpayer dollars. They received A+ grades while Connecticut, Maine, Maryland, and Oregon received A grades from the pro-abortion group.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
For a series of articles about advancement of myriad state laws restricting abortions, CLICK HERE and follow links.
From "Abortion Lobby Gives America a ‘D’ Grade for ‘Reproductive Rights’" by Penny Starr, CNSNews.com 1/14/11
The report methodology explains that the nationwide score is based on both state restrictions and federal “anti-choice” laws, such as the Federal Abortion Ban, signed into law by President George W. Bush in 2003; the Federal Refusal Clause of the 2004 Abortion Non-Discrimination Act that protects health professionals who are opposed to abortion; and restrictions on abortions for women in the U.S. military.
The 109-page report’s “key findings” section shows what NARAL considers the increase of “anti-choice” laws that have been enacted over the years. In 1995 (the earliest year reported) there were 18 “anti-choice” measures enacted. In 2010 (the last year reported), there were 644 measures enacted nationwide.
The states receiving an “F” in the report are Alabama, Arkansas, Idaho, Indiana, Kentucky, Louisiana, Michigan, Mississippi, Missouri, Nebraska, North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, South Dakota, Texas, Utah and Virginia.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Healthcare repeal effort will bring abortion debate to the forefront" by Julian Pecquet, The Hill 01/15/11
The House is scheduled to vote on a repeal bill [of ObamaCare] next week, after a one-week hiatus following last weekend's shooting in Tucson that left six people dead and gravely injured Rep. Gabrielle Giffords (D-Ariz.). Lawmakers on both sides of the aisle have since called for the political rhetoric to be toned down, but a looming showdown over abortion may make that especially difficult.
If anything, the issue may have become even more divisive over the past week after the pro-abortion rights Guttmacher Institute released a report saying a steady decline in U.S. abortions between 1990 and 2005 appears to have stalled . . .
The abortion issue is almost certain to come up as the House takes up the repeal bill because lawmakers will also vote to adopt a resolution instructing congressional committees to draft replacement legislation. That resolution specifies that the effort should include "provisions that ... prohibit taxpayer funding of abortions and provide conscience protections for health care providers."
“It seems clear to us that the new House leadership is threatening a whole series of attacks on reproductive rights, to begin next week,” NARAL Pro-Choice Policy Director Donna Crane told The Hill.
After repeal [of ObamaCare], the anti-abortion rights group has two top priorities related to the healthcare law.
One is a prohibition on taxpayer support for abortion providers under Title X family planning grants. The legislation, introduced Jan. 7 by Rep. Mike Pence (R-Ind.), targets Planned Parenthood; defeating it is a top priority for NARAL. The bill would “cripple family planning services - not necessarily abortion services but contraceptive services in this country,” Crane said.
[The] other priority is a multi-pronged abortion funding ban sponsored by Reps. Chris Smith (R-N.J.) and Dan Lipinski (D-Ill.). The legislation [HR 5939] was introduced last year but has not been introduced so far this year.
The bill incorporates an amendment, sponsored by Reps. Joe Pitts (R-Penn.) and Bart Stupak (D-Mich.) during the reform debate, prohibiting federal funds from being used “to pay for any abortion or to cover any part of the costs of any health plan that includes coverage of abortion.”
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
UPDATE 10/1/13: Taxpayers Fund Abortions, ObamaCare Pays Abortionists
UPDATE 3/3/12: To Cut Costs, ObamaCare will Lower Birth Rate, Says White House
-- From "NARAL Report Gives America D Grade For Limiting Abortions" by Steven Ertelt, LifeNews.com 1/14/11
A prominent abortion advocacy group released a state-by-state report on the status of state laws on abortion heading into the 2011 legislative session, and it says America deserves a D grade for limiting abortions too much.
The report comes as state legislatures are expected to add a significant number of new abortion limits, with some stopping the abortion funding in the state exchanges created under Obamacare, others following Nebraska to ban abortions after the 20th week of pregnancy based on fetal pain, and others passing more traditional pro-life legislation such as unborn victims bills or parental notification measures.
“It is clear that the results of the 2010 elections could pose serious threats to the progress we celebrated in previous years’ reports,” NARAL president Nancy Keenan complained. “Some of our key pro-choice champions in Congress and in the states are not returning to their positions.”
The report, titled The Status of Women’s Reproductive Rights in the United States, is a “report card” grading the states and NARAL gives its top marks to California and Washington, which aggressively fund abortions and the Planned Parenthood abortion business with taxpayer dollars. They received A+ grades while Connecticut, Maine, Maryland, and Oregon received A grades from the pro-abortion group.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
For a series of articles about advancement of myriad state laws restricting abortions, CLICK HERE and follow links.
From "Abortion Lobby Gives America a ‘D’ Grade for ‘Reproductive Rights’" by Penny Starr, CNSNews.com 1/14/11
The report methodology explains that the nationwide score is based on both state restrictions and federal “anti-choice” laws, such as the Federal Abortion Ban, signed into law by President George W. Bush in 2003; the Federal Refusal Clause of the 2004 Abortion Non-Discrimination Act that protects health professionals who are opposed to abortion; and restrictions on abortions for women in the U.S. military.
The 109-page report’s “key findings” section shows what NARAL considers the increase of “anti-choice” laws that have been enacted over the years. In 1995 (the earliest year reported) there were 18 “anti-choice” measures enacted. In 2010 (the last year reported), there were 644 measures enacted nationwide.
The states receiving an “F” in the report are Alabama, Arkansas, Idaho, Indiana, Kentucky, Louisiana, Michigan, Mississippi, Missouri, Nebraska, North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, South Dakota, Texas, Utah and Virginia.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Healthcare repeal effort will bring abortion debate to the forefront" by Julian Pecquet, The Hill 01/15/11
The House is scheduled to vote on a repeal bill [of ObamaCare] next week, after a one-week hiatus following last weekend's shooting in Tucson that left six people dead and gravely injured Rep. Gabrielle Giffords (D-Ariz.). Lawmakers on both sides of the aisle have since called for the political rhetoric to be toned down, but a looming showdown over abortion may make that especially difficult.
If anything, the issue may have become even more divisive over the past week after the pro-abortion rights Guttmacher Institute released a report saying a steady decline in U.S. abortions between 1990 and 2005 appears to have stalled . . .
The abortion issue is almost certain to come up as the House takes up the repeal bill because lawmakers will also vote to adopt a resolution instructing congressional committees to draft replacement legislation. That resolution specifies that the effort should include "provisions that ... prohibit taxpayer funding of abortions and provide conscience protections for health care providers."
“It seems clear to us that the new House leadership is threatening a whole series of attacks on reproductive rights, to begin next week,” NARAL Pro-Choice Policy Director Donna Crane told The Hill.
After repeal [of ObamaCare], the anti-abortion rights group has two top priorities related to the healthcare law.
One is a prohibition on taxpayer support for abortion providers under Title X family planning grants. The legislation, introduced Jan. 7 by Rep. Mike Pence (R-Ind.), targets Planned Parenthood; defeating it is a top priority for NARAL. The bill would “cripple family planning services - not necessarily abortion services but contraceptive services in this country,” Crane said.
[The] other priority is a multi-pronged abortion funding ban sponsored by Reps. Chris Smith (R-N.J.) and Dan Lipinski (D-Ill.). The legislation [HR 5939] was introduced last year but has not been introduced so far this year.
The bill incorporates an amendment, sponsored by Reps. Joe Pitts (R-Penn.) and Bart Stupak (D-Mich.) during the reform debate, prohibiting federal funds from being used “to pay for any abortion or to cover any part of the costs of any health plan that includes coverage of abortion.”
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
Saturday, January 15, 2011
Colorado County Initiates Prayer at all Meetings
El Paso County commissioners will include prayer in their meetings starting next week. Newly elected commissioner Peggy Littleton suggested the idea when she was sworn in Tuesday.
-- From "Prayer At County Meetings Stirs Up Debate" by Patti Moon, KRDO TV-13 Colorado Springs 1/13/11
"I think it's important to put God first, country second and then others after that and in that order because I do think it makes a difference in the way that we serve and in how we affect lives," said Littleton.
The commissioner pointed out that her colleagues unanimously support the idea. She said the prayers will be delivered by pastors, community leaders and everyday residents.
Public opinion on the idea, however, is mixed. Supporters said prayer is a way to overcome political divisiveness while opponents said those who are not religious would feel alienated.
To read the entire article above, and view the TV news video, CLICK HERE.
From "'God first,' new commissioner says, urging prayer at all meetings" by Debbie Kelley, Colorado Springs Gazette 1/12/11
Because Littleton’s appeal was not a policy item, informal agreement by at least three commissioners propelled it into motion. And because the commission chair has authority over agendas, it’s a done deal.
New commission chairwoman Amy Lathen said Wednesday that she got the support needed, and likely starting next week, every Tuesday and Thursday meeting will include prayer.
A U.S. Supreme Court decision in the 1980s ruled that legislative bodies can start sessions with prayer without violating the U.S. Constitution. The Colorado Springs City Council, the state Legislature and other elected groups routinely pray or have moments of silence before meetings.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
-- From "Prayer At County Meetings Stirs Up Debate" by Patti Moon, KRDO TV-13 Colorado Springs 1/13/11
"I think it's important to put God first, country second and then others after that and in that order because I do think it makes a difference in the way that we serve and in how we affect lives," said Littleton.
The commissioner pointed out that her colleagues unanimously support the idea. She said the prayers will be delivered by pastors, community leaders and everyday residents.
Public opinion on the idea, however, is mixed. Supporters said prayer is a way to overcome political divisiveness while opponents said those who are not religious would feel alienated.
To read the entire article above, and view the TV news video, CLICK HERE.
From "'God first,' new commissioner says, urging prayer at all meetings" by Debbie Kelley, Colorado Springs Gazette 1/12/11
Because Littleton’s appeal was not a policy item, informal agreement by at least three commissioners propelled it into motion. And because the commission chair has authority over agendas, it’s a done deal.
New commission chairwoman Amy Lathen said Wednesday that she got the support needed, and likely starting next week, every Tuesday and Thursday meeting will include prayer.
A U.S. Supreme Court decision in the 1980s ruled that legislative bodies can start sessions with prayer without violating the U.S. Constitution. The Colorado Springs City Council, the state Legislature and other elected groups routinely pray or have moments of silence before meetings.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
Friday, January 14, 2011
Students Taught 'Vagina Dance' in Illinois
Parents and students from a Crystal Lake, IL high school took exception to a sex education group exercise that taught female anatomy by "pointing to and singing about reproductive parts while prancing around the room, was set to the tune of the Hokey Pokey."
“[T]he teacher used such a cavalier presentation method, and forced a student to participate when he requested to abstain from it.”
UPDATE 1/18/11: Student's father provides inside-the-classroom details, including this description:
[The teacher,] Ms. Levin, who identified the activity as the "Vagina Dance," told her students that "the 'Vagina Dance' is like the Hokey Pokey. It goes along similar to the Hokey Pokey." She then told her students to stand up with legs apart. She demonstrated the dance; then she did it again with the students; and then she had the students do it two more times, while she observed.
-- From "Sex ed teaching method questioned" by Larissa Chinwah, Daily Herald 1/12/11
The Illinois Family Institute, a nonprofit ministry based in Carol Stream, [IL,] posted an article on its website this week claiming Jacqulyn Levin, a health and physical education teacher at Prairie Ridge high school, taught students about female anatomy using “the Vagina Dance.”
School officials, however, called the characterization inaccurate.
The district's director of curriculum, Scott Kubelka, said the five-minute activity was used to reinforce information the students had previously learned through textbooks and other lessons.
Kubelka said the activity, which has been used in the past, was a kinesthetic way of explaining the female reproductive organs.
Robert King, a parent who complained to the district and the Illinois Family Institute back in October, said his son asked to be excused from the activity but was denied.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Group: PR health teacher's methods crossed line" by Brett Rowland, Northwest Herald 1/12/11
School officials said the [Illinois Family Institute's] report was incorrect.
“It’s inaccurate, and it’s a misrepresentation of the activity,” said Jeff Puma, a spokesman for Crystal Lake-based District 155. “There is no ‘Vagina Dance.’” [Yet, Principal Paul Humpa, referred to the classroom activity by this name, when he wrote to the parent -- see next article below.]
Laurie Higgins, director of the school advocacy division of the Illinois Family Institute, said she doubted if the activity would have taken place if a parent had been in the room or if the lesson had been videotaped and posted on YouTube.
“We as educators have a responsibility not to lower ourselves to the kind of cultural debasement that we see in the movies and on reality TV,” Higgins said. “That is not to say this reaches the level of ‘Jersey Shore,’ but I don’t think you cultivate modesty with a dance like the ‘Vagina Dance.’ ”
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "The 'Vagina Dance' Taught in a Crystal Lake High School" by Laurie Higgins, Illinois Family Institute 1/10/11
[The teacher's] selection of this inappropriate instructional activity demonstrated a lack of empathy for those who may have a degree of modesty and self-respect that [the teacher, Jacqulyn Levin, herself] does not possess. Did she consider that some students might feel uncomfortable participating in or even watching this dance and that they might fear being ridiculed if they chose to opt-out?
Her decision to use this dance as a teaching tool also reveals that she has no commitment to fostering modesty (please don't be deceived by the attempt of "progressives" to conflate essential modesty with some kind of priggish, neurotic prudery). The very fact that a teacher would consider such an activity reflects how debased and immodest a culture we have. And it reveals that she has no regard for the values of all the families who have entrusted their children to her tutelage.
When a father complained about the dance, she defended it as a "kinesthetic" device to help students memorize body parts. The "kinesthetic" argument is simply a rationalization, an obvious and foolish attempt to conceal the inappropriateness and silliness of the activity with a patina of pedagogical legitimacy. Somehow few teachers in math, science, literature, or social studies feel the need to employ "kinesthetic" activities to facilitate memorization. If ever there was a subject in which "kinesthetic" activities would be inappropriate, it would be seem to be female sexual anatomy in a coed class.
Sounding a wee bit like Professor Irwin Corey, Principal Paul Humpa wrote the following non-sense to the concerned father:
Parents often rationalize their silence by saying that an offensive activity, or scene in a film, or passage in book is too trivial to address. They fail to realize that cultural change rarely happens through dramatic single events but rather through the slow accretion of little occurrences we ignore or dismiss.
Click here to read the entire commentary above, which urges citizens to properly engage their local school systems.
“[T]he teacher used such a cavalier presentation method, and forced a student to participate when he requested to abstain from it.”
UPDATE 1/18/11: Student's father provides inside-the-classroom details, including this description:
[The teacher,] Ms. Levin, who identified the activity as the "Vagina Dance," told her students that "the 'Vagina Dance' is like the Hokey Pokey. It goes along similar to the Hokey Pokey." She then told her students to stand up with legs apart. She demonstrated the dance; then she did it again with the students; and then she had the students do it two more times, while she observed.
First, she raised her arms parallel to the ground and rotated her hands (which represent ovaries) in circles, saying in a sing-song-y rhythm like the Hokey Pokey, "You've got the ovaries."
Then, she started doing arm circles, saying rhythmically, "You've got the fallopian tubes."
Then she placed both palms against her belly button and sliding them up and down her mid-section, she said "You've got the uterus."
Then she placed both palms against the groin area and sliding them from side to side, she said rhythmically, "You've got the cervix."
Then, with her legs apart, she placed her hands on her inner, upper thighs and sliding them up and down to the knees, she said, "You've got the vagina."
She concluded by rising up on her heels and moving the toes of her feet in and out, saying, "You've got the labia."
-- From "Sex ed teaching method questioned" by Larissa Chinwah, Daily Herald 1/12/11
The Illinois Family Institute, a nonprofit ministry based in Carol Stream, [IL,] posted an article on its website this week claiming Jacqulyn Levin, a health and physical education teacher at Prairie Ridge high school, taught students about female anatomy using “the Vagina Dance.”
School officials, however, called the characterization inaccurate.
The district's director of curriculum, Scott Kubelka, said the five-minute activity was used to reinforce information the students had previously learned through textbooks and other lessons.
Kubelka said the activity, which has been used in the past, was a kinesthetic way of explaining the female reproductive organs.
Robert King, a parent who complained to the district and the Illinois Family Institute back in October, said his son asked to be excused from the activity but was denied.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Group: PR health teacher's methods crossed line" by Brett Rowland, Northwest Herald 1/12/11
School officials said the [Illinois Family Institute's] report was incorrect.
“It’s inaccurate, and it’s a misrepresentation of the activity,” said Jeff Puma, a spokesman for Crystal Lake-based District 155. “There is no ‘Vagina Dance.’” [Yet, Principal Paul Humpa, referred to the classroom activity by this name, when he wrote to the parent -- see next article below.]
Laurie Higgins, director of the school advocacy division of the Illinois Family Institute, said she doubted if the activity would have taken place if a parent had been in the room or if the lesson had been videotaped and posted on YouTube.
“We as educators have a responsibility not to lower ourselves to the kind of cultural debasement that we see in the movies and on reality TV,” Higgins said. “That is not to say this reaches the level of ‘Jersey Shore,’ but I don’t think you cultivate modesty with a dance like the ‘Vagina Dance.’ ”
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "The 'Vagina Dance' Taught in a Crystal Lake High School" by Laurie Higgins, Illinois Family Institute 1/10/11
[The teacher's] selection of this inappropriate instructional activity demonstrated a lack of empathy for those who may have a degree of modesty and self-respect that [the teacher, Jacqulyn Levin, herself] does not possess. Did she consider that some students might feel uncomfortable participating in or even watching this dance and that they might fear being ridiculed if they chose to opt-out?
Her decision to use this dance as a teaching tool also reveals that she has no commitment to fostering modesty (please don't be deceived by the attempt of "progressives" to conflate essential modesty with some kind of priggish, neurotic prudery). The very fact that a teacher would consider such an activity reflects how debased and immodest a culture we have. And it reveals that she has no regard for the values of all the families who have entrusted their children to her tutelage.
When a father complained about the dance, she defended it as a "kinesthetic" device to help students memorize body parts. The "kinesthetic" argument is simply a rationalization, an obvious and foolish attempt to conceal the inappropriateness and silliness of the activity with a patina of pedagogical legitimacy. Somehow few teachers in math, science, literature, or social studies feel the need to employ "kinesthetic" activities to facilitate memorization. If ever there was a subject in which "kinesthetic" activities would be inappropriate, it would be seem to be female sexual anatomy in a coed class.
Sounding a wee bit like Professor Irwin Corey, Principal Paul Humpa wrote the following non-sense to the concerned father:
I made a commitment to speak to Ms. Loeding, the PE department chairman, and Ms. Levin, your son's Health teacher, about alternative strategies to teach the female reproductive system....My request of Ms. Loeding and Ms. Levin was to investigate a variety of alternative instructional strategies to be used to present the female reproductive system in lieu of the Vagina Dance. Through their efforts, I expect that thorough research of effective instructional strategies and activities designed to address different learning styles will be conducted. These strategies would certainly not exclude the potential use of kinesthetic methodologies.This is the kind of rhetorical runaround conservative parents regularly experience when challenging inappropriate activities and resources.
Parents often rationalize their silence by saying that an offensive activity, or scene in a film, or passage in book is too trivial to address. They fail to realize that cultural change rarely happens through dramatic single events but rather through the slow accretion of little occurrences we ignore or dismiss.
Click here to read the entire commentary above, which urges citizens to properly engage their local school systems.
Christians Will Flourish Demographically, Academic Says
Cambridge University economics professor Robert Rowthorn suggests that a "believers' gene," coupled with the higher birth rate among the religious, points to the inevitable spread of religion. New mathematical models show how "a religious group that makes up only 0.5 percent of a population could make up 50 percent within 10 generations."
In contrast with liberals, the religious tend to procreate, rather than kill their offspring.
UPDATE 3/9/12: Kids are Hazardous to Marriage, Say Liberal Studies
UPDATE 1/9/14: Where Liberalism Flourishes, Population Diminishes
-- From "'Believers' gene' will spread religion, says academic" by Stephen Adams, London Telegraph 1/12/11
Writing in the journal Proceedings of the The Royal Society B, [Rowthorn] cited a worldwide study showing that the more religious had more children.
The World Values Survey, which covered 82 nations from 1981 to 2004, found that adults who attended religious services more than once a week had 2.5 children on average; while those who went once a month had two; and those who never attended had 1.67.
Prof Rowthorn wrote: "The more devout people are, the more children they are likely to have."
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Predisposition for Religion Can Spread Quickly" by Wynne Parry, LiveScience Senior Writer 1/11/11
"All people who work in this area know there is a genetic basis to being religious, in the sense there is a genetic basis to all human behavior," said Robert Rowthorn, a professor emeritus of economics at Kings College in Cambridge, who developed the models.
Even controlling for income and education, religious people have more children than secular people do, according to others' research that Rowthorn cited. In some cases, such as with mainstream churches, the difference is small, while others, such as the Amish and ultra-Orthodox Jews, the total fertility rates are three or four times higher than the secular population.
The transition to lower birth rates was driven, in part, by individualistic values of self-fulfillment that run against traditional religious teaching, Rowthorn wrote in his study, which will be published in the Jan. 12 issue of the journal Proceedings of the Royal Society B.
It is possible that by depressing birth rates, secularism could ultimately lead to the human population becoming more religiously inclined, although this would depend on the balance between fertility and defection from the religious group, according to Rowthorn.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
UPDATE 1/19/11: From "Scientist: Religion gene spreads the word" By Electa Draper, The Denver Post 01/19/11
Rowthorn contended that scientists widely agree that religion has biological foundations. Belief in the supernatural, obedience to authority, and affinity for ceremony and ritual depend on genetically based features of the human brain, he wrote, citing several influential studies.
And, in modern times, religious people — of all income and education levels — on average reproduce more.
Global birth rates have fallen dramatically in modern times. In Japan and most of Europe, where societies are increasingly secular, rates are now well below parent-replacement levels. But the transition to lower fertility rates has been much slower and less complete among the religious.
Even if most of the children from high-fertility groups leave their faith traditions because of its demands or because of competing cultural values, their defections will only serve to spread the group's genes into the surrounding population, Rowthorn said.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
UPDATE 4/24/15: From "The world is expected to become more religious — not less" by Sarah Pulliam Bailey, Washington Post
By 2050, the number of Muslims around the world will nearly equal the number of Christians. Pew [Research Center] projections suggest that Muslims will make up nearly one-third of the world’s population of about 9 billion people.
In six countries with large [religious] unaffiliated populations (Japan, the United States, Vietnam, Germany, France and Britain), the number of those with no religion is expected to increase in the coming decades. But those countries also have populations that are shrinking as a share of the world’s population.
Pew demographer Conrad Hackett said an estimated 5 percent of Chinese are Christians. Purdue University sociologist Fenggang Yang estimates that the annual growth rate of Protestant Christians will continue at 10 percent, suggesting that China could become the largest Protestant country by 2021 and the largest Christian country by 2025. If growth continues, two-thirds of China could be Christian in 2050.
There has been a significant shift in where Christians are located globally. In 1910, two out of three Christians lived in Europe. By 2050, only 16 percent of the world’s Christians will be in Europe.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
In contrast with liberals, the religious tend to procreate, rather than kill their offspring.
UPDATE 3/9/12: Kids are Hazardous to Marriage, Say Liberal Studies
UPDATE 1/9/14: Where Liberalism Flourishes, Population Diminishes
-- From "'Believers' gene' will spread religion, says academic" by Stephen Adams, London Telegraph 1/12/11
Writing in the journal Proceedings of the The Royal Society B, [Rowthorn] cited a worldwide study showing that the more religious had more children.
The World Values Survey, which covered 82 nations from 1981 to 2004, found that adults who attended religious services more than once a week had 2.5 children on average; while those who went once a month had two; and those who never attended had 1.67.
Prof Rowthorn wrote: "The more devout people are, the more children they are likely to have."
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Predisposition for Religion Can Spread Quickly" by Wynne Parry, LiveScience Senior Writer 1/11/11
"All people who work in this area know there is a genetic basis to being religious, in the sense there is a genetic basis to all human behavior," said Robert Rowthorn, a professor emeritus of economics at Kings College in Cambridge, who developed the models.
Even controlling for income and education, religious people have more children than secular people do, according to others' research that Rowthorn cited. In some cases, such as with mainstream churches, the difference is small, while others, such as the Amish and ultra-Orthodox Jews, the total fertility rates are three or four times higher than the secular population.
The transition to lower birth rates was driven, in part, by individualistic values of self-fulfillment that run against traditional religious teaching, Rowthorn wrote in his study, which will be published in the Jan. 12 issue of the journal Proceedings of the Royal Society B.
It is possible that by depressing birth rates, secularism could ultimately lead to the human population becoming more religiously inclined, although this would depend on the balance between fertility and defection from the religious group, according to Rowthorn.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
UPDATE 1/19/11: From "Scientist: Religion gene spreads the word" By Electa Draper, The Denver Post 01/19/11
Rowthorn contended that scientists widely agree that religion has biological foundations. Belief in the supernatural, obedience to authority, and affinity for ceremony and ritual depend on genetically based features of the human brain, he wrote, citing several influential studies.
And, in modern times, religious people — of all income and education levels — on average reproduce more.
Global birth rates have fallen dramatically in modern times. In Japan and most of Europe, where societies are increasingly secular, rates are now well below parent-replacement levels. But the transition to lower fertility rates has been much slower and less complete among the religious.
Even if most of the children from high-fertility groups leave their faith traditions because of its demands or because of competing cultural values, their defections will only serve to spread the group's genes into the surrounding population, Rowthorn said.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
UPDATE 4/24/15: From "The world is expected to become more religious — not less" by Sarah Pulliam Bailey, Washington Post
By 2050, the number of Muslims around the world will nearly equal the number of Christians. Pew [Research Center] projections suggest that Muslims will make up nearly one-third of the world’s population of about 9 billion people.
In six countries with large [religious] unaffiliated populations (Japan, the United States, Vietnam, Germany, France and Britain), the number of those with no religion is expected to increase in the coming decades. But those countries also have populations that are shrinking as a share of the world’s population.
Pew demographer Conrad Hackett said an estimated 5 percent of Chinese are Christians. Purdue University sociologist Fenggang Yang estimates that the annual growth rate of Protestant Christians will continue at 10 percent, suggesting that China could become the largest Protestant country by 2021 and the largest Christian country by 2025. If growth continues, two-thirds of China could be Christian in 2050.
There has been a significant shift in where Christians are located globally. In 1910, two out of three Christians lived in Europe. By 2050, only 16 percent of the world’s Christians will be in Europe.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
Same-sex 'Marriage' in Maryland Legislature
Maryland is poised to become the sixth state to recognize same-sex marriage as proponents say they believe they have enough support to pass such a measure in the upcoming legislative session.
Sen. Allan Kittleman told CNN that he wants to grant gay couples all the rights afforded to straight married couples under Maryland law without the stigma of religion.
UPDATE 2/20/11: Poll shows Maryland voters support traditional marriage by huge margin
UPDATE 2/17/11: 'Marriage' bill sails through Senate committee, full passage expected
UPDATE 2/8/11: Hundreds crowd Senate for hearing on same-sex marriage
-- From "Md. lawmakers' agenda includes budget cuts, gay marriage" by John Wagner, Washington Post Staff Writer 1/6/11
[The] prospects for passage of a same-sex marriage bill have greatly improved since the Nov. 2 elections.
A Democratic pickup of two seats and a shift in committee memberships have changed the dynamic in the Senate, where same-sex marriage bills have stalled in the past.
"This has truly been a transformative election on this issue," said Sen. Richard S. Madaleno Jr. (D-Montgomery), an openly gay lawmaker who has sponsored same-sex marriage legislation and said he plans to push for passage this session. "I could not have hoped for a better result," he said. "You can see a real path to enacting this legislation."
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Maryland set to expand gay rights, same-sex marriage" by Evan Glass, CNN congressional producer 1/12/11
The expansion of gay rights appears to have gained significant traction as Maryland's General Assembly begins its 90-day session Wednesday. Not only are Democrats optimistic about their chances of approving same-sex marriage, but a leading Republican, sensing momentum on the issue, has instead countered with a proposal to grant civil unions to gay couples.
Democratic Gov. Martin O'Malley has publicly stated that he would sign a marriage bill into law. Maryland then would join Massachusetts, Connecticut, Iowa, New Hampshire, Vermont and Washington, D.C., in sanctioning same-sex marriages.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
Sen. Allan Kittleman told CNN that he wants to grant gay couples all the rights afforded to straight married couples under Maryland law without the stigma of religion.
UPDATE 2/20/11: Poll shows Maryland voters support traditional marriage by huge margin
UPDATE 2/17/11: 'Marriage' bill sails through Senate committee, full passage expected
UPDATE 2/8/11: Hundreds crowd Senate for hearing on same-sex marriage
-- From "Md. lawmakers' agenda includes budget cuts, gay marriage" by John Wagner, Washington Post Staff Writer 1/6/11
[The] prospects for passage of a same-sex marriage bill have greatly improved since the Nov. 2 elections.
A Democratic pickup of two seats and a shift in committee memberships have changed the dynamic in the Senate, where same-sex marriage bills have stalled in the past.
"This has truly been a transformative election on this issue," said Sen. Richard S. Madaleno Jr. (D-Montgomery), an openly gay lawmaker who has sponsored same-sex marriage legislation and said he plans to push for passage this session. "I could not have hoped for a better result," he said. "You can see a real path to enacting this legislation."
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Maryland set to expand gay rights, same-sex marriage" by Evan Glass, CNN congressional producer 1/12/11
The expansion of gay rights appears to have gained significant traction as Maryland's General Assembly begins its 90-day session Wednesday. Not only are Democrats optimistic about their chances of approving same-sex marriage, but a leading Republican, sensing momentum on the issue, has instead countered with a proposal to grant civil unions to gay couples.
Democratic Gov. Martin O'Malley has publicly stated that he would sign a marriage bill into law. Maryland then would join Massachusetts, Connecticut, Iowa, New Hampshire, Vermont and Washington, D.C., in sanctioning same-sex marriages.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
