Today's Cultural Warfare Update

[solarbird]

Boy Scout chief found distributing child porn - was a leader in the "get the fags out" movement in the Scouts;

Wall Street Journal article showing that better ways of teaching math closes the gender gap;

Eagle Forum and Focus on the Family turn the Terri S. case into a call for getting rid of "anti-life" judges;

Alan Keyes accuses Florida judge of insurrection and asserts Federal courts - including the US Supreme Court - have no standing to overturn state law as unconstitutional;

Today's Family News in Focus summary;

Focus on the Family focus-group-tested "talking points list" against marriage rights;

Article on bill allowing pharmacists to refuse to dispense at least some forms of contraceptives without ramifications - same as the Michigan bill, which is much more expansive? Dunno;

Article on upcoming judicial filibuster fight;

WERG distributes anti-marriage-rights bumperstickers and yard signs.

----- 1 -----
From http://www.livejournal.com/users/revdj/152883.html; link to full story further down in this article:

In December 2004, in response to a letter taking issue with the Boy Scouts' dismissal of an assistant scoutmaster, James Dale, because he was gay, program director of the Boy Scouts of America and chairman of its Youth Protection Task Force Douglas Sovereign Smith Jr. made this statement:

"Some intolerant elements in our society want to force scouting to abandon its values and become fundamentally different."

Yesterday, Douglas Sovereign Smith Jr. surrendered in Fort Worth on a federal charge of receiving and distributing child pornography on the Internet:

NY Times article: http://www.nytimes.com/2005/03/30/national/30scout.html

Boy Scouts Executive Surrenders in Fort Worth on a Child Pornography Charge
By RALPH BLUMENTHAL

Published: March 30, 2005

HOUSTON, March 29 - The longtime program director of the Boy Scouts of America and chairman of its Youth Protection Task Force has surrendered on a federal charge of receiving and distributing child pornography on the Internet, the United States attorney's office in Fort Worth said Tuesday.

The director, Douglas Sovereign Smith Jr., 61, who was put on leave last month and quietly retired March 1, was expected to plead guilty on Wednesday to the single felony count filed by federal prosecutors, a crime that can carry a prison term of 5 to 20 years, said Kathy Colvin, a spokeswoman for the United States attorney's office.


----- 2 -----
Improved Formula
In England, Girls Are Closing Gap With Boys in Math
Making Class Interactive Has Side Effect: Females Thrive;
Echoes of Harvard Debate What It Means to Be 'Innate'

By JEANNE WHALEN and SHARON BEGLEY
Staff Reporters of THE WALL STREET JOURNAL
March 30, 2005; Page A1

LEICESTER, England -- In her 10th-grade math class, Frankie Teague dimmed the lights, switched on soothing music and handed each student a white board and a marker. Then, she projected an arithmetic problem onto a screen at the front of the room.

"As soon as you get the answer, hold up your board," she said, setting off a round of squeaky scribbling. The simple step of having students hold up their work, instead of raising their hands or shouting out the answer, gives a leg up to a group of pupils who have long lagged in math classes -- girls.

Ms. Teague's teaching methods are part of broad changes in how math is taught in England's classrooms. Starting in the late 1980s, England's education department worried that lessons relied too heavily on teachers lecturing and students memorizing. So it began promoting changes in teaching methods, textbooks and testing in both state-funded and private schools. The changes were designed to help all students, but educators have noticed a surprising side effect: Girls are closing a decades-old gender gap -- and by many measures outscoring the boys.

The English record goes against theories that boys are innately destined to dominate math and science -- a view that caused a firestorm after recent remarks by Harvard University President Lawrence H. Summers. In discussing the preponderance of men in elite university science and engineering positions, Mr. Summers said "issues of intrinsic aptitude" might explain why more males than females score at the highest levels on measures of mathematical and scientific ability.

Elaborating in the ensuing debate over his comments, however, Mr. Summers said in a letter to the Harvard faculty that his "January remarks substantially understated the impact of socialization and discrimination, including implicit attitudes." He added that his remarks about why more boys than girls score at the extremes on math tests and other assessments "went beyond what the research has established."

The English experience with math education suggests that gender differences, even those that seem innate and based in biology, do not lead inevitably to any particular outcome. That view fits into a broader current sweeping over how scientists think of genetics. Many now believe that traits that seem intrinsic -- meaning those grounded in the brain or shaped by a gene -- are subject to cultural and social forces, and that these forces determine how a biological trait actually manifests itself in a person's behavior or abilities. An "intrinsic" trait, in other words, does not mean an inevitable outcome, as many scientists had long thought.

"What's now in play is the question of what it means for a trait to be innate," says Eric Turkheimer of the University of Virginia. In 2003, a study led by Prof. Turkheimer found that the influence of genes on intelligence varies with social class: In well-off children, genes seem to explain most IQ differences, but in disadvantaged minority children environmental influences have a greater impact.

[More in paper/at web site]


----- 3 -----
America Talking About the Value of Life
by Stuart Shepard, correspondent

SUMMARY: Terri Schiavo's plight has provoked discussion
about the worth of all human life.

Whether over the dinner table, at the water cooler or in
the bleachers, people all over America are talking about
Terri Schiavo and the value of life -- a discussion that
will have a long-term impact in public debate.

Media all over the world have followed the story of
Schiavo, a brain-damaged Florida woman whose life has hung
by a thread since a Florida judge ordered her feeding and
hydration tube removed 12 days ago.

"It's on every news station. It's what everybody's talking
about. It's on every radio station," said Amber Dolle with
Rock for Life. "And I think young people are right in the
middle of it."

Dolle, 26, describes people her age as the post-Roe v.
Wade generation, since abortion has been legal all their
lives. The intense media focus on the Schiavo case, she
explained, is driving new, deep conversations.

"Young people," she said, "are really starting to say,
'Hey, if they can do this to her, who's to say they can't
do it to me, or to my mom or my sister or my dad?' "

Phyllis Schlafly, founder of the Eagle Forum, agreed.

"All lives have a purpose," she said, "and Terri Schiavo's
purpose will be to wake up a lot of people."

Schlafly added that in the coming weeks, we'll learn more
of the full impact of the debate generated by Schiavo's
tragedy.

"It's going to impact the issue of the judges even more
than the pro-life issue," she said. "It is showing people
that the judges are anti-life all the way up and down the
line."


----- 4 -----
Alan Keyes on the Mark Larson Show
March 28, 2005

http://www.renewamerica.us/archives/media/interviews/05_03_28larson.htm

MARK LARSON, HOST: Help me interpret this. George Felos, the attorney
for Michael Schiavo, came out and said, "Well, OK, the Schindlers
aren't saying anything about Terri's condition, but I'm going to say
something." First, he comes out and says that he had visited Terri
today, for about an hour and fifteen minutes, and then said, "Let me
clear up something in this morphine issue," that the morphine, you
know, she's not on a morphine drip, and there were two instances where
they gave her the lowest available does of morphine. This would be on
March 19th, and again on the 26th, which would be last Saturday. And
they gave it to her in a suppository manner, and then he described,
"Well, there was a tensing of the muscles and some moaning."

You know, hello? Could this be tied to Terri's will to live, even in
her semi-vegetative state?

And so you know, by the way, Michael Schiavo will now go along with an
autopsy before cremation, because they want to show the world what the
brain is really like. And then he kind of danced around some of the
questions with regard to whether this would be a full autopsy where
you could look into the questions of bone fractures and these other
allegations. I mean, this is just more sick by the moment. On the one
hand, he's saying, "Well, I just saw Terri, and her eyes are a little
more sunken." Yes, that's because you're starving her! That's because
she's dehydrating! That's because the judges are aiding and abetting!
Testing . . . hello? What part of this don't you get?!

The whole thing is just even more sick than it was last week. And the
question now is, what can be done, when you've run the course, you
keep bouncing back to judges like Whittemore and George Greer--a
little county judge basically saying, "OK, I'm bigger than the federal
government!"

Well, Alan Keyes is here. Ambassador Keyes joins us on our news line.
You're on KOGO. Hello?

KEYES: Hello?

LARSON: There you are. Yes, have you been watching this Felos
commentary in the last couple of minutes?

KEYES: I actually didn't see it specifically, no. My wife came in and
told me what he had said.

LARSON: In fact, he's still going on here. Let's bring up a little
bit. He's doing a little Q and A. Let's see if we can get some other
gems from him.

GEORGE FELOS, ATTORNEY: I don't know this for sure, but I would
presume that, of course, any family members that are not present at
the time would be notified before there is any public announcement
whatsoever.

LARSON: He's talking about when she finally expires.

FELOS: After that, I had received a call from a member of the
Associated Press asking me to call them, and they said it would be put
on the newswire. I don't know if that's a fair way to do it.
Otherwise, I was just . . .

LARSON: OK. He's into just, "here's what we're going to do once we
announce that she has died"-mode. There's a strange disconnect here.
We were just talking about this during the break. My producer Monica
came and she said, "It's so weird, because here they are aiding and
abetting killing her off, and then when he holds these press
conferences"--this Felos, attorney for Michael Schiavo--"the
discussion is, 'Let's tell you how well she's doing under the
circumstances.'" It's a weird disconnect.

KEYES: Yeah, I think part of the problem is that they have tried to
present this as if it's somehow a right-to-die thing, when in point of
fact they are killing her. She's not dying of natural causes. She is
being killed by the withholding of nourishment that would kill you if
somebody did it, or me, or anybody else on this earth, regardless of
our state of health.

She is a severely disabled person, otherwise in good health, who was
living until they decided to withhold nutrition and starve her to
death. It's basically judicially-mandated, and assisted, murder.

And I use the word murder advisedly, because that is "killing,
contrary to law." The highest law in Florida is the constitution of
Florida. And that constitution guarantees to all natural persons the
right to enjoy and defend their lives. That's a basic right, and it's
an inalienable right. They specifically used that word. And that word
means that it can't be given away or transferred, by law, to another.

And what Judge Greer has done is transfer her right to life to Michael
Schiavo, her husband, and that violates the constitution of Florida at
the highest level.

Now, Jeb Bush, who is the chief executive officer of Florida--

LARSON: Right.

KEYES: The Florida constitution gives him the supreme executive
authority. That means there is no higher ability, on the part of the
state government, to take action.

LARSON: So you mean that Judge Greer, the county judge, can't trump
the governor?!

KEYES: No, he can't. A matter of fact, the county judge can have his
opinion, but he actually has, under the Florida state constitution, no
ultimate authority to put that opinion into action. And if he tells a
county sheriff to resist the governor, the judge is in insurrection.
He is using armed force against the power designated by the
constitution of Florida, which is in the hands of the governor.

The judge has no power whatsoever to order executive action, contrary
to the will of the governor. And if the governor comes to the
decision, which he says he has, that this is an injustice, that it's
being done contrary to the constitution, he is bound by oath to stop
it. And if he doesn't do his duty, he is in dereliction of duty, and
by succumbing to the judge, he is also impairing the authority of his
high office. Which means that on two counts, he is in dereliction of
duty.

LARSON: We're talking to Ambassador Alan Keyes here live in Southern
California and across America on KOGO.com, on KOGO Newsradio 600,
KOGO.

Now, on Friday, we had reports, and some of this came out over the
Easter weekend, that there was a move, the governor, Jeb Bush, was
going to go in there and seize Terri. And then somehow, the buzz got
out, and a local county sheriff again said, "Well, you can't do that,"
and they backed down. Did that happen? What's going on with that?

KEYES: I saw that on Knight-Ridder news service. I don't know beyond
that whether it was accurate or not. If accurate, it is definite proof
that the governor actually backed down before the inferior authority
of the sheriff--meaning to say that he did act in derogation of his
duly-constituted authority, under the Florida state constitution.

That, by the way, is serious harm. Because if you let every judge in
this country feel that he can use force to defend his opinion, then
every case potentially becomes a case of insurrection. And that's
going to lead to serious disorder. That's why there is a separation of
powers in our government, so that judges cannot automatically put
their judgments into effect.

LARSON: Now, this puts Governor Bush and the President and Congress
into a bit of a pickle, to say the least, here. This is going to be a
very difficult situation, which, if they don't do something, I mean
the risks are, all of a sudden you become fodder for the Left to say,
"OK, let's impeach Bush." Or whatever they plan to do. Although, they
didn't do that when the Elian Gonzalez came up. That was "just fine"
under a different administration. But if they don't do something, it
makes it appear that this was all political. Correct?

KEYES: Well, see, the sad truth is, I think that Jeb Bush needs to
understand, step number one, the talk of impeaching him if he acts is
crazy--because if Jeb Bush acts, he is acting under existing law in
Florida. The existing law in Florida is Terri's Law. And I know there
are people who say, "Well, the Supreme Court said it's
unconstitutional." But the Supreme Court doesn't make law in Florida.
It simply has an opinion about a law that has been made.

If the executive doesn't agree with that opinion, but goes along with
the legislature, because by passing it, the legislature is declaring
its judgment that it is constitutional, he's not acting unlawfully.
He's acting according to the law, and using his judgment of the
constitution to guide his use of executive authority. And that is
quite properly within the boundaries of his discretion, to go along
with the legislature instead of the judiciary.

LARSON: Do you think it has been helpful, or a little bit hurting the
cause, for Randall Terry to be the spokesperson for the Schindlers at
this point? Because, I got a lot of buzz--in fact, I heard from
people, good, pro-life people, at church over the weekend, for
example, who said, you know, "What's the deal with Randall Terry?"
because sometimes he's been a little "out there."

Has that helped or hindered the case?

KEYES: Well, I think that Randall is a wonderful guy who has been
there with the Schindlers for a long, long, time--and, in fact, I
think helped put together the effort that got Terri's Law originally.
He, like a lot of people, feels very strongly and deeply about this.
You and I--I, at least--can sympathize with this. I feel deeply,
myself.

But we have, a lot of us, stepped in to help, because we know that the
arguments need to be made in a very clear fashion, based on both
history, logic, precedent, the opinions of the Founders and other
things. That's what I and others have tried to put together, in order
to make the case cogently, not only for Terri's constitutional rights,
but as to Governor Bush's responsibilities in this case. And I hope we
have done so.

LARSON: Alan Keyes with us. Alan, hang on one second here on KOGO.
We're live with Alan Keyes. Mark Larson, here on KOGO. Let's go to
Florida, Pinellas Park, again, where now the sister of Terri Schiavo,
this would be Suzanne, is speaking, obviously prompted by Felos coming
out. They weren't going to make family comments, but she's talking.

SUZANNE VITADAMO: . . . please help me. So, she's fighting. She's
struggling. Does this sound like somebody that wants to die? I don't
think so.

LARSON: All right. She made a comment before coming on about facial
expressions, as if Terri was making these, you know, "help me, please"
looks. And of course, it's very, very tough. And you know, you here
Barney Frank and people saying, "Oh, this is very sad." Yeah, it is.
And it's sad because some good people are doing nothing.

KEYES: What I don't quite understand, though--in point of fact, we
have a situation here where a lot of people who are supporting Michael
Schiavo are saying, "Well, would anybody want to be in her condition,"
and so forth. They are expressing prejudices against her, because of
her physical condition, because she is a severely disabled person.

And I would think we had gotten beyond the point in this country where
we allow someone to be discriminated against to the point of taking
their lives, because of their physical appearance and condition. That
was true with the racial prejudice. That's true with other kinds of
prejudice. You don't get to do that in America anymore! Except we are
watching it happen right now, as a result of a prejudice and extreme
sanction being implemented because of a prejudice against a severely
disabled person.

LARSON: All right. Ambassador Keyes here on KOGO. You know, a lot of
conservative scholars are saying, "You know, you can't just go in
there and just seize her," and despite the compelling case that you
make--and we've heard certainly a lot of this over the weekend--you
know, [they say,] "You would set a precedent. And other
administrations nationally could use this to come back in and do
things we don't even imagine." It sounds like a great political way
just to sort of song and dance.

KEYES: I don't understand what they are talking about. If the
Constitution allows this [executive action]--and it does, by the
way--do you know why the executive has this kind of authority? To meet
emergencies. So that, if the country is being attacked, if someone is
being done to death, you don't have to wait on a court or a judge. You
go in and you take care of the situation, to defend the country,
defend order, defend constitutional integrity. That's why the
executive was put in the hands of one person, rather than a
deliberative body. And that, because you need to be able to act
expeditiously to meet the circumstances.

The notion that this would be some sort of abused power is crazy. The
legislature has the power to call the governor to account, to remove
him from office, if they believe his action is misconduct. But in this
case, he is carrying out their will--so they surely couldn't accuse
him of misconduct.

LARSON: Absolutely. Well, time is ticking here. I mean, every time we
turn around, another day has gone by. And that was one of the most, I
think, irritating situations on Friday, when Greer has this telephone
conference about this time on Friday, and says, "OK, I'll get back to
you tomorrow by noon, eastern," and another day goes by. We're moving
into, what, day eleven now. Obviously, Terri is fighting. But this
can't go on forever. That's what is so macabre about this.

KEYES: Well, see, I think the sister just made the cogent point that a
lot people who have been, I think, careless about this in their
thinking need to think about. If this lady wants to die, why is she
hanging on to life with such grim determination? The evidence, again,
raises a serious doubt about whether the determination of fact in this
case was made with proper respect for reasonable doubt. There is a
reasonable doubt about whether or not this in fact is her will. Leave
aside every other issue. And that reasonable doubt should be enough to
say, "No, we can't kill her," the same way it is in court. If you want
to pass sentence on somebody who has committed murder, the jury can't
convict them if there is a reasonable doubt.

LARSON: Well, we're going to pray that reason prevails, and something
is done here, because the time is running out, and the options are
narrowing. And, of course, you can't keep bouncing back to these same
judges.

KEYES: Well, see, this is one of the things--because we have a
singular executive, action ultimately becomes, in an extreme
situation, the responsibility of one person. And that one person, in
this case in Florida, is Jeb Bush. There is no escaping it. He faces
the responsibility--and it's a moral principle, as well. He says he's
a Catholic. Well, Thomas Aquinas, the great Catholic theologian, said
that if a judge makes a decision that contains an excusable error, the
person charged with executing that decision should not do so. It is
immoral to do so.

We applied that to the Nazis at Nuremburg. We know it's the principle
of decent conscience. He is violating it now, and he needs to stop and
take action.

LARSON: All right. Alan Keyes, good to talk to you. Appreciate the update.

KEYES: Thank you.

LARSON: And we'll keep praying for a better result here, and I hope
soon. Thanks much.

KEYES: Bye-bye.

LARSON: Alan Keyes with us here on KOGO, Newsradio 600, KOGO.


----- 5 -----
Family News in Focus
Focus on the Family
Wednesday, March 30, 2005

* A growing number of states are looking to pass protections for pharmacists who refuse to prescribe drugs that violate their consciences.
4. More states "moving to protect health care workers" from ramifications of service refusal. This is almost entirely about pharmacists - all of their examples are birth control related - refusing to dispense birth control methods prescribed by doctors. "At least 11 states" are considered legislation to support refusing to dispense birth control, both standard and day-after. RU-486 also briefly mentioned.

* The United Nations hears testimony today about persecuted Christians in China.
5. UN to look into anti-Christian persecution in China; video et al to be shown. It's unsurprising that FotF gets a lot more friendly to the UN when the UN is doing something they support.

* One group that is closely watching the Terri Schiavo ordeal is the disabled. They’re afraid they’re next.
1. "Many of them fear their lives might be taken next if they don't speak out." Steven Drake of Not Dead Yet wants to know "where is the line going to be drawn?" Fears of euthanasia.

* A prominent civil rights leader calls for Terri Schiavo’s feeding tube to be reinserted.
2. Reverend Jessie Jackson calls Schiavo situation "an injustice, and inhumane." Tries to get Florida legislators to reconsider another action. "Jackson called the Schiavo case a moral issue that transcends politics and family disputes."

* A study on the effects of gambling in Iowa finds the vice is worth 3.5 billion dollars to the state, and creates thousands of jobs.
7. "Crime and financial ruin are also on the rise in counties with casinos." "Politicians will see what they want." "These legislators want more money to spend, just like the governor, and they don't care about the damage being done to Iowa individuals and families." Accuses study of being "flawed."

* The Colorado Supreme Court has ruled that jurors in a rape and murder trial should not have consulted the Bible while deliberating whether to impose the death sentence.
3. Ruling has broad implications; "really, it's about the fact that our legal code in America was founded on principles derived from the Bible" - claims "personal moral underpinnings" are a vital part of any case, and that "for many Americans, morality cannot be separated from the Bible."

* A new study suggests the liberal bias in academia is worse than anyone thought.
6. "Liberal Democrats outnumber Republican professors five to one." Accuses academia of prejudice against conservatives.


----- 6 -----
Talking Points: Same-Sex Marriage
Focus on the Family
Focus Magazine

Here are some suggestions for discussing traditional marriage and same-sex unions for people who reject the Bible and for whom biblical arguments for marriage won't work. These soundbites have been tested by focus groups and rated very strongly.

by Glenn T. Stanton

http://family.org/cforum/citizenmag/features/a0035624.cfm

Marriage is always about the next generation...

o A loving and compassionate society never intentionally creates motherless or fatherless families, which is exactly what every same-sex home does.

o A loving and compassionate society always comes to the aid of motherless and fatherless families.

o The same-sex family is not driven by the needs of children, but rather by the radical wishes of a small group of adults.

o No child development theory says children need two parents of the same gender, but rather that children need their mothers and fathers.

A vast social experiment inflicted upon children...

o No society, at any time, has ever raised a generation of children in same-sex families.

o Same-sex "marriage" will subject generations of children to the status of lab rats in a vast, untested social experiment. But we know how the experiment will turn out…

o All of the family experimentation over the past 30 years—no fault divorce, the sexual revolution, cohabitation, fatherlessness—have all been documented failures, harming adults and children in far deeper ways, for longer periods of time, than anyone ever imagined. Why do we think that this radical experiment will somehow bring good things?1

How same-sex families will harm my family...

o Same-sex "marriage" advocates are not seeking marriage for themselves alone, but rather demanding me—and all of us—to radically change our understanding of family.

o If gay/lesbian families are portrayed as complete and natural, then my boys and girls will get the impression that mothers and fathers are merely optional. In effect, they've redefined family for me and my children.

o I will never allow my children to be taught that their gender doesn't matter for the family. Their masculinity and femininity matter far too much, as does everyone's.

The public purpose of marriage…

o Marriage is a common good, not a special interest.

o Every society needs natural marriage—as many men as possible each finding a woman, each man caring for and committing himself exclusively to her—working together to create and raise the next generation. Too little natural marriage is harmful to society.

o No society needs homosexual coupling. Same-sex "marriage" would be harmful to society. Natural marriage and same-sex coupling cannot be considered socially equal.

Full acceptance will be mandatory...

o Shortly after some Canadian provinces legalized same-sex "marriage," activists there successfully passed C-250, a bill criminalizing public statements against homosexuality, punishable by up to two years in prison! Say the wrong thing; go to jail. The same will happen here.

o Every public school in the nation would be forced to teach that same-sex "marriage" and homosexuality are perfectly normal—Heather has Two Mommies in K-12. Pictures in textbooks will be changed to show same-sex couples as normal.

o Your church will be legally pressured to perform same-sex weddings. When courts—as happened in Massachusetts—find same-sex "marriage" to be a constitutional and fundamental human right, the ACLU will argue that the government is underwriting discrimination by offering tax exemptions to churches and synagogues that only honor biblical marriage.

A civil rights issue...?

o There is no civil right to deny children their mothers or fathers, which is exactly what every same-sex home does.

o There is no civil right to conduct a vast, untested social experiment on children.

o It is an affront to blacks to say that being prevented from taking a drink from a public water fountain or being sprayed down by fire hoses was on par with laws preventing a man from marrying another man. The comparison is shameful.

o Civil rights leaders strongly reject this assertion that same-sex marriage is a civil-rights issue. Jesse Jackson explains, "Gays were never called three-fifths of a person in the Constitution...and they did not require the Voting Rights Act to have the right to vote."2

Where does it stop...?

o If, as Andrew Sullivan says, "The right to marry whomever you want is a fundamental civil right," how do we say "no" to a woman who wants to become the third wife of a polygamist…?3

o How do we say no to grooms Jonathan Yarbrough (a bisexual) and Cody Rogahn (a homosexual)-the first same-sex couple in Provincetown, Mass., to receive a marriage application—who explained to the press "…it's possible to love more than one person and have more than one partner… In our case… we have an open marriage."4

o When posed with the question "Why draw the line at two people?" same-sex marriage advocate Cheryl Jacques said, "Because I don't approve of that."5

…well, that brings an important question to mind:

How come your "because I don't approve of that" objection to polygamy is more reasonable than my "I don't approve of that" objection to same-sex "marriage"?

Allowing same-sex 'marriage' is like allowing interracial marriage...

o Racism was about keeping races apart and that is wrong. Marriage is about bringing the genders together and that is good.

o Striking down the ban on interracial marriage affirmed marriage by saying any man has a right to marry any woman. Same-sex "marriage" redefines marriage.

o Marriage has nothing to do with race. Marriage has everything to do with bringing men and women together to build a domestic life—creating and caring for the next generation.

o There are no negative child-development outcomes from being raised by interracial parents. There are thousands of social science studies showing negative outcomes for children who are denied their mothers and fathers.

o Sexual preference is not like skin color: The former is a behavior of choice, the latter is an unchangeable physical trait.


----- 7 -----
The Business Journal of Phoenix - 4:33 PM MST Monday

Abortion drug refusal bill could be decided this week
Mike Sunnucks
The Business Journal

[Ed Note: Note that this also includes emergency contraception; I need to get to the actual text of the bill and see what else it includes. Anybody know the number? The article doesn't report it.]

http://phoenix.bizjournals.com/phoenix/stories/2005/03/28/daily14.html

The Arizona state Senate could vote this week on a controversial bill that allows pharmacists and health care professionals the right to refuse to dispense abortion inducing and emergency birth control drugs if they are morally opposed to such things.

The conservative and Catholic-backed bill also would protect those pharmacists and health care professionals from disciplinary actions from their employers if they voice those concerns in writing.

The bill, which already has been approved by the state House of Representatives, also allows health care institutions and pharmacies that on moral grounds oppose abortion or emergency contraception to refuse those services to patients.

[more at URL]


----- 8 -----
Fight over judicial nominees heats up

By MARGARET TALEV
McClatchy Newspapers
March 29, 2005

http://www.knoxstudio.com/shns/story.cfm?pk=JUDGES-03-29-05&cat=AN

WASHINGTON - Many Americans are more interested in the movies than in the inner workings of Congress, so when television producer Norman Lear set out to turn public opinion against a Republican plan to block Democrats from filibustering President Bush's judicial nominees, Lear looked to the silver screen.

Clips from the climactic filibuster scene in "Mr. Smith Goes to Washington," the 1939 classic starring Jimmy Stewart, feature prominently in a $5 million television advertising campaign being launched Wednesday by People for the American Way, a left-leaning advocacy group founded by Lear. The ad, which tells voters the country works best "when no one party holds absolute power," also features a California firefighter, described as a Republican who has twice voted for President Bush. It is to run over the next two weeks in 18 states with GOP senators, including Alaska and South Carolina.

The ad is a centerpiece in a coordinated opposition effort by dozens of groups that advocate abortion rights, expanded civil liberties, stricter environmental regulations and the distinct separation between church and state. All say the rule change that Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist has threatened to use to shut down debate on judicial filibusters - also known as the "nuclear option" or "constitutional option" - could pave the way for an anti-abortion Supreme Court justice later this year, and generally put on the federal bench more conservative judges than those who now could clear confirmation hearings.

Conservative groups, meanwhile, are stepping up campaigns to encourage Republican senators to do what it takes to bring the president's nominees to full votes. For weeks, activists have been calling, writing and visiting GOP senators and their staffs and pledging their support for the rule change.

The Family Research Council and Focus on the Family ran newspaper ads in the nation's capital and in Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid's state of Nevada accusing Democrats, led by Reid, of being obstructionist. Activists say discussions are under way about rallies and television ads.

"Numerous coalitions have been and are being formed. This is not one-sided," said Lanier Swann, director of government relations for Concerned Women for America. "Both sides are very mobilized."

The issue could come to a head next month, after lawmakers return from their spring recess.

In the interim, opponents are hoping to turn enough Republican senators against the move to deny Frist the 51 votes he needs to go forward. They're going after senators who are undecided, or ones they believe they can sway because of their moderate ideologies, feelings about the deliberative nature of the Senate, or concerns about political repercussions when it comes time for re-election or perhaps campaigns for president.


----- 9 -----
Washington Evangelicals for Responsible Government

http://www.werg.org/

WERG is selling and distributing anti-marriage yard signs and bumper stickers, presumably gearing up for the constitutional amendment drive they're probably expecting to start later this year.

Comments

[poodlgrl.livejournal.com]

Boy Scout chief found distributing child porn - was a leader in the "get the fags out" movement in the Scouts

Sad part is, people will interpret this as "Oh, he's a secret, self-hating, homo" instead of a heterosexual pedophile like the vast majority of them are.

[solarbird]

Of course.

[shikyrie.livejournal.com]

WERG distributes anti-marriage-rights bumperstickers and yard signs.

What's WERG?

[solarbird]

As per the article. Washington Evangelicals for Responsible Government. Social conservatives.

[shikyrie.livejournal.com]

oh THEM peoples... Pfah...

Re: In England, Girls Are Closing Gap With Boys in Math

[(Anonymous)]

The article, "In England, Girls Are Closing Gap With Boys in Math" has a false emphasis on a point that no educator really argues. Back when I was a mathematics professor, I paid attention to math eduction issues. In American junior high school, the girls do as well as the boys in math class. The problem was that the girls were less likely to choose to continue to study math once they could opt out. I am surprised at the mention in the article that the girls previously performed worse than the boys in England.

Erin Schram
Mathematician and former pen-pal

Re: In England, Girls Are Closing Gap With Boys in Math

[solarbird]

People absolutely still argue it. The fundamentalist right has all been rallying behind the dean at Harvard after he's been receiving a lot of criticism for saying that he suspected that girls are biologically not as good at math at boys, despite massive evidence demonstrating that this is fundamentally cultural. I see this repeated ad nauseam in discussion groups, often amoungst people who should know better.

As far as I can tell, in the greater population in the US, it's absolutely assumed.

The problem with writing letters with me is that if you don't reply to mine I probably forget to send you my next one. It's not on purpose, I just kind of forget. ^_^