Today's Cultural Warfare update
Apr. 15th, 2005 03:45 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
solarbirdRolling Stone discovers the Reconstructionist movement, and their allies in the Fundamentalist Right;
A rather breathless (and somewhat dated) Valley Advocate article that outlines how the Southern Baptist Convention went both fundamentalist and political;
Joe Scarborough: "God is... beating liberal elites on one political issue after another. Maybe that is why so many of them hate the Prince of Peace."
Oregon Supreme Court dissolves 3000 marriages;
DeLay attacks the concept of judicial review and the idea of a right to privacy: "The reason the judiciary has been able to impose a separation of church and state that's nowhere in the Constitution is that Congress didn't stop them. The reason we had judicial review is because Congress didn't stop them. The reason we had a right to privacy is because Congress didn't stop them."
FOX & Friends- Michael Schiavo's Supporters Are Communists?
Seattle PI columnist wonders why once again, nobody except queers have stood up for gay rights, after the Washington State GLBT Basic Civil Rights Act gets derailed yet again.
Focus on the Family article with action item on a Federal anti-marriage amendment;
Focus on the Family state-by-state rundown on anti-marriage activities; each state listed has an action item with it;
Focus on the Family article on a new anti-Planned Parenthood campaign;
Focus on the Family article on judicial filibusters - with action item;
FotF decries "Access to Legal Pharmaceuticals Act," recently introduced in Congress, which would require the filling of legal prescriptions by licensed pharmacists;
Today's Family News in Focus;
FotF brief saying "Scalia Insulted by Gay Activist" - see here for good commentary on that notion - if Scalia believes that your sex life is Federal business, as he does, then why shouldn't asking about his be okay?
Christian Broadcasting Network rails against schools being "coerced by [the] Gay Agenda";
CWFA rails against bill to lift the ban on gayfolk in the armed services - includes action item;
CWFA article about queer-themed cable channel and resistance from some cable companies;
Traditional Values Coalition action item demanding the Senate change filibuster rules to prohibit Judicial filibusters;
Washington Evangelicals for Responsible Government releases audio of their March 8th "Mayday for Marriage" anti-marriage-rights rally speakers.
----- 1 -----
The Crusaders
Christian evangelicals are plotting to remake America in their own image
By BOB MOSER
Rolling Stone
http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/story/_/id/7235393?pageid=rs.Home&pageregion=single7&rnd=1113410273322&has-player=true&version=6.0.11.847
It's February, and 900 of America's staunchest Christian fundamentalists have gathered in Fort Lauderdale to look back on what they accomplished in last year's election -- and to plan what's next. As they assemble in the vast sanctuary of Coral Ridge Presbyterian, with all fifty state flags dangling from the rafters, three stadium-size video screens flash the name of the conference: RECLAIMING AMERICA FOR CHRIST. These are the evangelical activists behind the nation's most effective political machine -- one that brought more than 4 million new Christian voters to the polls last November, sending George W. Bush back to the White House and thirty-two new pro-lifers to Congress. But despite their unprecedented power, fundamentalists still see themselves as a persecuted minority, waging a holy war against the godless forces of secularism. To rouse themselves, they kick off the festivities with "Soldiers of the Cross, Arise," the bloodthirstiest tune in all of Christendom: "Seize your armor, gird it on/Now the battle will be won/Soon, your enemies all slain/Crowns of glory you shall gain."
Meet the Dominionists -- biblical literalists who believe God has called them to take over the U.S. government. As the far-right wing of the evangelical movement, Dominionists are pressing an agenda that makes Newt Gingrich's Contract With America look like the Communist Manifesto. They want to rewrite schoolbooks to reflect a Christian version of American history, pack the nation's courts with judges who follow Old Testament law, post the Ten Commandments in every courthouse and make it a felony for gay men to have sex and women to have abortions. In Florida, when the courts ordered Terri Schiavo's feeding tube removed, it was the Dominionists who organized round-the-clock protests and issued a fiery call for Gov. Jeb Bush to defy the law and take Schiavo into state custody. Their ultimate goal is to plant the seeds of a "faith-based" government that will endure far longer than Bush's presidency -- all the way until Jesus comes back.
"Most people hear them talk about a 'Christian nation' and think, 'Well, that sounds like a good, moral thing,' says the Rev. Mel White, who ghostwrote Jerry Falwell's autobiography before breaking with the evangelical movement. "What they don't know -- what even most conservative Christians who voted for Bush don't know -- is that 'Christian nation' means something else entirely to these Dominionist leaders. This movement is no more about following the example of Christ than Bush's Clean Water Act is about clean water."
The godfather of the Dominionists is D. James Kennedy, the most influential evangelical you've never heard of. A former Arthur Murray dance instructor, he launched his Florida ministry in 1959, when most evangelicals still followed Billy Graham's gospel of nonpartisan soul-saving. Kennedy built Coral Ridge Ministries into a $37-million-a-year empire, with a TV-and-radio audience of 3 million, by preaching that it was time to save America -- not soul by soul but election by election. After helping found the Moral Majority in 1979, Kennedy became a five-star general in the Christian army. Bush sought his blessing before running for president -- and continues to consult top Dominionists on matters of federal policy.
"Our job is to reclaim America for Christ, whatever the cost," Kennedy says. "As the vice regents of God, we are to exercise godly dominion and influence over our neighborhoods, our schools, our government, our literature and arts, our sports arenas, our entertainment media, our news media, our scientific endeavors -- in short, over every aspect and institution of human society."
At Reclaiming America, most of the conference is taken up by grassroots training sessions that supply ministers, retirees and devout churchgoers with "The Facts of Stem-Cell Research" or "Practical Steps to Impact Your Community with America's Historical Judeo-Christian Heritage." "We're going to turn you into an army of one," Gary Cass, executive director of Reclaiming America, promises activists at one workshop held in Evangalism Explosion Hall. The Dominionists also attend speeches by supporters like Rep. Katherine Harris of Florida, who urges them to "win back America for God." In their spare time, conference-goers buy books about a God-devised health program called the Maker's Diet or meet with a financial adviser who offers a "biblically sound investment plan."
To implement their sweeping agenda, the Dominionists are working to remake the federal courts in God's image. In their view, the Founding Fathers never intended to erect a barrier between politics and religion. "The First Amendment does not say there should be a separation of church and state," declares Alan Sears, president and CEO of the Alliance Defense Fund, a team of 750 attorneys trained by the Dominionists to fight abortion and gay marriage. Sears argues that the constitutional guarantee against state-sponsored religion is actually designed to "shield" the church from federal interference -- allowing Christians to take their rightful place at the head of the government. "We have a right, indeed an obligation, to govern," says David Limbaugh, brother of Rush and author of Persecution: How Liberals Are Waging War Against Christianity. Nothing gets the Dominionists to their feet faster than ringing condemnations of judicial tyranny. "Activist judges have systematically deconstructed the Constitution," roars Rick Scarborough, author of Mixing Church and State. "A God-free society is their goal!"
Activist judges, of course, are precisely what the Dominionists want. Their model is Roy Moore, the former Alabama chief justice who installed a 5,300-pound granite memorial to the Ten Commandments, complete with an open Bible carved in its top, in the state judicial building. At Reclaiming America, Roy's Rock sits out front, fresh off a tour of twenty-one states, perched on the flag-festooned flatbed of a diesel truck, a potent symbol of the "faith-based" justice the Dominionists are bent on imposing. Activists at the conference pose for photographs beside the rock and have circulated a petition urging President Bush to appoint Moore -- who once penned an opinion calling for the state to execute "practicing homosexuals" -- to the U.S. Supreme Court.
[More at URL]
----- 2 -----
Wonder-Working Power
Valley Advocate: By James Heflin
April 18, 2003
Rather than considering himself the servant of the people, Bush, it seems, considers himself God's chosen to make over the world. The dropping of references for the ears of the Christian right is a regular occurrence; the term "evildoers," derided by some as not a real word, is quite real to the biblically informed, because it comes straight from the Book of Psalms.
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article2993.htm
George W. Bush's January State of the Union address was, for the most part, nothing out of the ordinary. But then my former governor (yes, I'm a Texan) dropped an unusual phrase: "...there's power, wonder-working power, in the goodness and idealism and faith of the American people."
That phrase was not mere wordsmithing. I know it well. I know about polished church pews; I know about dress shoes that blistered my young feet and the smooth heft of the hymnal. As the son of a Baptist minister, I know. I know about the exuberant, saloon-worthy piano, the cat-eye-spectacled old ladies sliding "power" into one syllable, and I know the rest of the phrase: "There is pow'r, pow'r, wonder-working pow'r, in the blood, [men echo] in the blood, of the Lamb, [men echo again] of the Lamb. There is pow'r, pow'r, wonder-working pow'r in the precious blood of the Lamb."
Bush was stealthily passing the message to the flock, to my flock. The issues that have plagued that flock for a quarter century are integral to understanding the second self-professed "born-again" man in the White House, his political tactics and his war in Iraq.
Its fans call it the "conservative resurgence." Its detractors call it the "fundamentalist takeover." The astonishing fact is that many, perhaps most, Southern Baptists are unaware that the foundation of their faith has been officially pulled out from under them through systematic, long-term political manipulation. The people of God trust each other; when someone breaks the rules, they pray, they try to reconcile. But the abandonment of civil behavior always trumps good will.
Two people, Paige Patterson and Paul Pressler (a former appeals court judge), perhaps as far back as the '60s, created the plan to transform a denomination. Like fundamentalists of every breed, they started with a simple premise: We're right. Everyone else is wrong. God is on our side, so what we do to those in our way is irrelevant, if our right triumphs over their wrong. That the central, selfless directive of Christianity is "do unto others as you would have them do unto you" is a petty detail, imminently ignorable to God's self-appointed chosen.
The Southern Baptist Convention (currently around 16 million strong) is a bottom-up institution, with autonomous congregations and a democratically elected leadership whose proclamations have not, historically, been binding. One crack in the democracy was evident: The president appoints members to committees which hold sway over organizations like the Baptist press, Baptist seminaries and the missionary organization. The fundies (the decidedly non-affectionate term applied to them by detractors) calculated that winning the convention presidency 10 years in a row could gain them majorities on all committees and de facto control of all the national-level bodies.
The tactic was simple: Recruit like-minded pastors to scare people about the evil of liberalism which, they assured their flocks, was quietly taking over their institutions and diluting their theology. Those who did not endorse the literal truth of every word of the Bible – "Biblical inerrancy" – were on the slippery slope to unbelief. You're with us or you're against us.
[More at URL]
----- 3 -----
April 9, 2005 | 10:20 p.m. ET
Pope John Paul II: God is not dead (Joe Scarborough)
MSNBC.com
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6330851/
The world said goodbye today to a man already being hailed as John Paul the Great.The number of mourners at the funeral were epic. Many said it was the largest funeral in world history.
Across the world, a staggering two billion Christians watched as the greatest religious figure of our time was laid to rest.
And while millions were filling the streets of the Eternal City, some elites in Western newsrooms, on college campuses, and in Hollywood boardrooms were seething with contempt for the affection shown to this man of God.
Before he was even buried, a former Washington Post reporter blasted John Paul as "the Bully Pope," attacking him for being undemocratic, chavenistic, dogmatically dictatorial, and a man whose Christ-centered theology was "garbage."
Others, like Vanity Fair's Christopher Hitchens, went so far as to accuse the Pope of being the primary cause for the spread of Aids throughout Africa, the genocide in Rwanda, and the enslavement of millions across the Middle East.
The no-condoms-equals-Aids charge suggests that an African male who goes through scores of sexual partners each year is somehow shamed into refraining from wearing a condom because of the Holy See's teachings.
The argument is laughable.
But then again, no one ever suggested that these church-hating elites ever employed reason when launching polemics against Jesus Christ and his followers.
Understanding why these isolated creatures hate Jesus Christ's teachings so much is more important than ever because every few weeks it seems we are confronted with a national debate concerning Christianity and its impact on U.S. policy.
Terri Schiavo.
The mere name still elicits heated debates regarding life, death, law, politics, and domestic policy. But at its core, the Schiavo case launched a cultural war over two competing world views.
Christians found themselves pitted against America's cultural elites, who spent weeks blasting "right wing religious zealots" as the singular cause of the Schiavo controversy.
As with the Pope's passing, the public record is packed with thousands of instances of elites bashing conservative Christians for their power in forcing the President and Congress to do whatever it took to save the suffering woman's life. (Hitchens dismissed her as a "lifeless cadaver.)
George W. Bush's elevation to the presidency through the power of the evangelical vote is the main reason why the cultural and religious wars Patrick Buchanan predicted at the 1992 Republican National Convention have finally erupted in full view of the American public.
Historian Gary Wills compared the evangelical's support of George W. Bush to Islamic extremists' support of terror to promote their political goals. Wills breathlessly predicted that Christians' ascendency in American politics would lead to a radicalized, theocratic state that would have more in common with the Taliban and Osama Bin Laden than with our allies in Europe.
Pulitzer winner Maureen Dowd used her space in the New York Times to predict the coming of "the next dark ages" where religious superstition and religious bigotry will replace science and reason.
Whether the debate centers around a Presidential election, the right to die movement, the gay agenda, prayer in school, or simply letting our children recite the Pledge of Alligence, the teachings of Jesus Christ always seems to thwart the agenda of America's left wing elites.
Forget what you heard in the 1960s.
God is not dead.
In fact, he is very much alive and beating liberal elites on one political issue after another.
Maybe that is why so many of them hate the Prince of Peace.
----- 4 -----
Oregon court tosses gay marriage licenses
Thursday, April 14, 2005 · Last updated 10:08 a.m. PT
By CHARLES E. BEGGS
ASSOCIATED PRESS WRITER
http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/national/apus_story.asp?category=1110&slug=Civil%20Unions%20Oregon
SALEM, Ore. -- The Oregon Supreme Court on Thursday nullified nearly 3,000 marriage licenses issued to same-sex couples by Multnomah County a year ago, saying a single county couldn't take such action on its own.
The court said while the county can question the constitutionality of laws governing marriage, they are a matter of statewide concern so the county had no authority to issue licenses to gay couples.
The court noted that last November, Oregonians approved a constitutional amendment that limits marriages to a man and a woman. The court also said that long before that vote, state law had set the same limitations on marriages since Oregon became a state.
"Today, marriage in Oregon - an institution once limited to opposite-sex couples only by statute - now is so limited by the state Constitution as well," the court ruling said.
The court left the door open for state legislators to craft an alternative to gay marriages, such as civil unions.
"We conclude that Oregon law currently places the regulation of marriage exclusively within the province of the state's legislative power," the court said.
Tim Nashif, head of the Oregon Family Council and the Defense of Marriage Coalition, said, "We're pretty thrilled and pretty relieved at the opinion."
Members of the Legislature have been awaiting the ruling to give them guidance on how to proceed on the issue, and just Wednesday, Gov. Ted Kulongoski said he will push for a law allowing gay couples to form civil unions.
Marte Sheehan, who married Linda Duchek last March, said she was disappointed with the ruling but had hopes the Legislature would pass a bill allowing civil unions.
"I believe that ultimately the Legislature will do the right thing," she said.
[More at URL]
----- 5 -----
Transcript of interview with Tom DeLay
THE WASHINGTON TIMES
April 14, 2005
http://www.washingtontimes.com/national/20050413-111439-5048r.htm
Transcript of an interview between editors and reporters from The Washington Times and House Majority Leader Tom DeLay, Texas Republican, yesterday at his Capitol office:
National Editor Ken Hanner: Ten years ago, Republicans won control of the House by running on the Contract with America, which was a blueprint for limited government. Recently, Republicans have championed expansion of federal role in education, huge new entitlement programs, including prescription drugs, and overall increases of federal spending. When did the Republicans become the party of big government?
Mr. DeLay: Well, I hope we can shed anybody's notion that that's where we are headed. First, in full disclosure, I voted against No Child Left Behind. But, that's the president's agenda. And he worked very hard to accomplish that agenda. We will revisit No Child Left Behind, look at its effectiveness and those kinds of issues. I know the president wants to extend it. But I think we have to see if No Child Left Behind is actually working before we talk about extending it.
[...]
Mr. Dinan: You've been talking about going after activist judges since at least 1997. The [Terri] Schiavo case gives you a chance to do that, but you've recently said you blame Congress for not being zealous in oversight.
Mr. DeLay: Not zealous. I blame Congress over the last 50 to 100 years for not standing up and taking its responsibility given to it by the Constitution. The reason the judiciary has been able to impose a separation of church and state that's nowhere in the Constitution is that Congress didn't stop them. The reason we had judicial review is because Congress didn't stop them. The reason we had a right to privacy is because Congress didn't stop them.
Mr. Dinan: How can Congress stop them?
Mr. DeLay: There's all kinds of ways available to them.
Mr. Dinan: You tried two last year on the Defense of Marriage Act and the Pledge of Allegiance, and the Senate didn't go along with those.
Mr. DeLay: We're having to change a whole culture in this - a culture created by law schools. People really believe that these are nine gods, and that all wisdom is vested in them. This means it's a slow, long-term process. I mean, we passed six bills out of the House limiting jurisdiction. We passed an amendment last September breaking up the Ninth Circuit. These are all things that have passed the House of Representatives.
[More at URL]
----- 6 -----
FOX & Friends- Michael Schiavo's Supporters Are Communists?
Thursday, March 31, 2005
Michael Schiavo's supporters are communists according to FOX:
http://www.overspun.com/2005_03_01_archive.html
[Link to WMV file containing a video from Fox and Friends - hosts said that Michael Schiavo had very few supporters, and that they were Communists. Specifically, that they were members of the Young Communist Party. Really. Having WindowsMedia issues, not transcribing, but you can get to the link yourself from there.]
----- 7 -----
Who will stand up for gay rights? Anyone?
Monday, April 11, 2005
By ROBERT L. JAMIESON Jr.
SEATTLE POST-INTELLIGENCER COLUMNIST
http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/jamieson/219591_robert11.html
Someone has to stand up for a gay civil rights bill in Washington.
Who better to fill that role than the Democrats -- the party of the people, the party of social conscience?
In fall 2003, the party leadership went before a Seattle gathering of gays and lesbians at "Fighting for the Majority," a fund-raiser to benefit Democrats in the state House and Senate.
Lisa Brown, the Senate Democratic minority leader at the time, spoke at the fund-raiser on Capitol Hill. Bill Dubay, a Seattle gay rights activist who was at the event, says he heard Brown make this vow: If Democrats gain a majority in the House and Senate, we will put your civil rights bill on the governor's desk.
One top lawmaker, though, says Dubay heard it wrong -- that Brown promised to put a gay civil rights bill on the floor for a vote.
Either way, two years later, Democrats have dropped the ball.
The Democrats rule the House. Democrats control the Senate by a slim margin. They have even got their candidate, Christine Gregoire, in the governor's mansion.
[More at URL]
----- 8 -----
Senate Ponders Protecting Marriage
by Josh Montez, correspondent
Focus on the family
April 14, 2005
Lawmakers take a look at how much danger the institution faces from activist judges.
http://www.family.org/cforum/fnif/news/a0036203.cfm
A Senate subcommittee is talking about traditional marriage and wondering if it needs constitutional protection in the form of the Marriage Protection Amendment (MPA).
Specifically, members of the Senate Judiciary subcommittee on the Constitution, Civil Rights and Property Rights are looking at the vulnerability of state defense of marriage acts in the hands of activist judges.
Sen. Sam Brownback, R-Kan., the subcommittee's chairman, began a series of hearings Wednesday to explore the importance of a constitutional amendment to protect traditional marriage. Brownback pointed out that eight states are already facing lawsuits challenging their traditional marriage laws.
"Courts in at least two states have already recognized civil unions imported from Vermont, and DOMA (the federal Defense of Marriage Act) itself is already being challenged," Brownback said. "A federal lawsuit in Washington State challenging DOMA's constitutionality could be before the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals within a year."
Senate liberals, however, didn't want to talk about the threat to marriage. Sen. Russ Feingold, D-Wis., claimed at the hearing that there are more important issues to debate.
"The full effect of the federal marriage amendment must be explored and carefully debated in the Judiciary Committee," he said, "before the Senate is asked to vote again."
Feingold is already on record as opposing the MPA.
Brigham Young University Law professor Lynn Wardle, meanwhile, said federal protection is important because the courts are subverting the will of the people.
"The people want this," he said. "Eighteen out of 18 proposed state amendments that have come before the voters have been passed by margins that are overwhelming—from 57 percent to 86 percent."
Wardle added that he hopes congressional interest will highlight the importance of making sure the people have the right to define traditional marriage—not the courts.
Though liberals at the hearing argued that the courts are not imposing a federal definition of marriage, Wardle called that a myth, countering that whenever an activist judge defines marriage it has an impact—not just in the judge's jurisdiction, but across the nation.
TAKE ACTION
It is important for ordinary Americans to let the Senate know how they feel about the protection of marriage. It is especially important that we let our senators know that changes to marriage should not be imposed by an unaccountable judiciary. The Marriage Protection Amendment (S.J. Res. 1) is an absolute necessity to protect marriage—and to give the states the right to vote on whether to amend the Constitution, rather than let judges do so from the bench.
For help in contacting your senators, please see the CitizenLink Action Center and type your ZIP code in the space provided.
In addition, to find out where your state stands in terms of statewide marriage protection, please see the CitizenLink article, "What's the Latest on State Marriage Amendments?" by Aaron Atwood.
----- 9 -----
What's the Latest on State Marriage Amendments?
by Aaron Atwood, assistant editor
Focus on the Family
April 13, 2005
Here's the most recent information on efforts to protect the traditional definition of marriage—and how you can make a difference.
http://www.family.org/cforum/extras/a0036194.cfm
Kansas voters passed an amendment to their state constitution April 5 that defined marriage as "between one man and one woman," becoming the 18th state to pass a constitutional amendment to protect marriage.
Several other states, meanwhile, are poised to join their ranks.
"Whenever the people get a chance to vote on the definition of marriage, they have always voted to support the traditional view of marriage," said Mona Passignano, state issues analyst for Focus on the Family.
You can track what is happening in this crucial battle below. Check back often to see the latest developments.
Alabama
What's happened: Has passed both the House and the Senate.
What's next: It goes on the ballot in June 2006.
How to take action: Log onto the Alabama Policy Institute's Web site for more information on how you can get involved.
Arizona
What's happened: The Center for Arizona Policy has begun recruiting volunteers to help gathering the 186,000 signatures needed to put the marriage amendment on the ballot in November 2006.
What's next: Depends on the signatures collected.
How to take action: Go to the Center for Arizona Policy Web site to find more information and help in this effort.
California
What's happened: Currently, there are several amendments before the California Legislature, but it is thought that the language used in these amendments will keep them from being approved by the Legislature.
What's next: The California Family Council is in the process of getting an amendment with language that can make it through the Legislature.
How to take action: For information on how you can help get an amendment through the Legislature, please visit the California Family Council Web site.
Colorado
What's happened: Plans are being laid to see that a state marriage amendment will go before the voters in November 2006.
How to take action: Contact your legislators and let them know that you support a state constitutional amendment that defines marriage as between one man and one woman only. For contact information, visit the CitizenLink Action Center.
[Much more at URL]
----- 10 -----
STOPP Starts New Campaign
by Terry Phillips, correspondent
Focus on the family
April 14, 2005
Group looking to expose the real agenda behind Planned Parenthood.
http://www.family.org/cforum/fnif/news/a0036202.cfm
STOPP International—an implacable foe of Planned Parenthood—is using the abortion provider's national conference as an occasion to launch a new education campaign.
Although Planned Parenthood likes to call itself a healthcare organization, STOPP Executive Director Jim Sedlak said nothing could be further from the truth.
"It is really an organization that is out there trying to spread its own ideas and philosophies with our money," he explained.
A key component of STOPP's new campaign—kicked off with a prayer vigil outside Planned Parenthood's national conference—lies in that phrase: "our money." David Bereit, the national director of STOPP, said more than a quarter billion dollars of taxpayer money goes to subsidize Planned Parenthood's 250,000 abortions each year.
"Here we are, as taxpayers, funneling $265 million into the coffers of Planned Parenthood," Bereit said, "and at the end of the year, they have net of $35.2 million left over."
Despite that $35 million excess, Planned Parenthood is officially a not-for-profit corporation—a status that makes it eligible for taxpayer funding.
"We would probably have enough votes in the House of Representatives," Sedlak said, "to remove Planned Parenthood funding and even their tax-exempt status."
But in the Senate, with its higher-concentration of pro-abortion lawmakers, Planned Parenthood seems insulated from being defunded. But Bereit said that can be changed by people of conscience and faith.
"It's a matter that the people of God are willing to take their faith," he said, "and finally put it into action and focus efforts."
FOR MORE INFORMATION
To learn more about STOPP International and its campaign, please see the organization's Web site.
(NOTE: Referral to Web sites not produced by Focus on the Family is for informational purposes only and does not constitute an endorsement of the sites' content.)
----- 11 -----
No Senate Vote Yet on Key Judicial Nominees
by Bill Wilson, Washington, D.C., correspondent
Focus on the Family
April 15, 2005
Will Arlen Specter live up to his promise to allow votes on judicial nominees? It's still unclear after a critical committee session Thursday in the Senate.
http://www.family.org/cforum/fnif/news/a0036217.cfm
Questions remain whether Sen. Arlen Specter, chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, will keep his promise that every judicial nominee of President Bush will receive a fair vote—something the president asked for in his State of the Union address.
"The Constitution also gives the Senate a responsibility," Bush said. "Every judicial nominee deserves an up-or-down vote."
With those words, however, the president set off a firestorm. Conservative Senate Republicans pressured the more liberal Specter, R-Pa., into a public promise to support Bush judicial nominees as a condition to becoming the chairman of the powerful Judiciary Committee.
Thursday's committee meeting was the first real test of whether he would hold true to his word. But two of the more controversial conservative nominees—Justices Priscilla Owen and Janice Rogers Brown—failed to pass muster, as none made it out of committee, while three others passed by voice vote.
Not to worry, said Mike Broomus, press secretary for a top committee member, Sen. Jeff Sessions, R-Ala.
"I guess there's nothing sinister about it," Broomus said. "These nominees came up today, and the normal procedure is that they come up the first time and the standard procedure is they are always held over for a week and then next week they would be on the agenda again and presumably be voted on."
Judicial activism has become a flashpoint issue with the president, and the White House is sure to be keeping an eye on the next Judiciary Committee meeting.
There are 47 vacancies on the federal bench. Only one nominee has been approved since January, and even if the nominees clear the committee, a Democratic filibuster likely awaits them at the Senate floor.
FOR MORE INFORMATION
To learn how you can help stop judicial filibusters—and why it is very important to do so—please see the CitizenLink article, "Help End Judicial Filibusters."
----- 12 -----
Liberals Target Conscience Exemptions
by Steve Jordahl, correspondent
Focus on the family
Democrats in Congress want to make sure pharmacists have to dispense prescriptions they are morally opposed to.
April 15, 2005
Congressional Democrats are introducing legislation to take away a pharmacist's right of conscience to refuse filling prescriptions for abortion-causing birth-control pills.
The bill is called the Access to Legal Pharmaceuticals Act, but legal analysts say it could be called the Repeal the Bill of Rights Act. It says no pharmacist may refuse to fill a prescription on the basis of personal belief.
Pharmacist Anthony Miller is one of those who could be affected if the legislation becomes law.
"The 'morning-after pill' I will not stock," he said. "I have not done it and I won't do it. I guess if it comes down to a point where my choice is to fill a prescription or get out, I think I would get out."
Karen Brauer of Pharmacists for Life said the legislation takes away a fundamental tenet of working in the health care field.
"Any clinical care provided to patients is based upon the act of the conscience," she said, "assuming that human life has value and should be protected."
Francis Manion, a senior attorney with the American Center for Law and Justice, said the bill, in effect, claims that a person's right to contraception is more fundamental than a person's right to religious belief. That being said, he added, the legislation has almost no chance of surviving a court challenge.
"This is an outrageous, I would say unprecedented assault on the constitutional rights of all Americans," he noted. "It's another example of certain elements of our polity being bought lock, stock, and barrel by the pro-abortion lobby, which has gone absolutely ballistic over this issue."
FOR MORE INFORMATION
Visit the Focus on Social Issues Web site for more information about so called "emergency contraception."
----- 13 -----
Family News in Focus
Focus on the Family
15 April 2005
Bob Ditmer
* Will Arlen Specter allow votes on judicial nominees? We still don’t know after a critical committee session yesterday in the Senate.
3: Yesterday's committee meeting was "the first real test of whether he would hold true to his word." Most controversial of nominees have made it out of committee yet. Jeff Sessions's press secretary says not to worry yet - "the normal procedure is that they come up the first time and the standard procedure is that they're always held over a week, then next week they would be on the agenda again and then be voted on." "Judicial activism has become a flashpoint for the President."
* Efforts on Capitol Hill to take away a pharmacists right to refuse to dispense drugs that may cause an abortion.
4: Forcing pharmacists to issue "Abortion-causing birth control pills." "Repeal of the Bill of Rights Act." Pharmacists for Life: "Any clinical care provided for patients is based upon conscience." ACLJ "outrageous, unprecedented assault on the constitutional rights of all Americans." "The bill has almost no chance of surviving a court challenge."
* Newly published report looks at what faith based organizations are able to do against HIV and AIDs.
6: "Faith In Action" attempt to "measure the effectiveness of [faith-based groups] outreach." Intent is to help Christian groups get more funding.
* College freshmen have very strong religious values according to a survey of 112,000 students at 236 colleges and universities.
8: Strongly religious students much more likely to be conservative. "There's a lot of potential to work there with." Campus evangelists are pleased and excited - Campus Crusade for Christ in particular. "Many students may define spirituality in terms that are outside Biblical truth" but they can use that language to "insert Biblical truth." "And that's good news for America's future."
* It appears Connecticut is going to have civil unions for same-sex partners. The House added an amendment in favor of civil unions. It's expected the Connecticut Senate and Governor will approve it.
2: Bill gives CUs "the benefits and privileges of marriage." It "makes no sense." You're "trying to square a circle." "We don't want to be the first state in the union that moves forward on civil unions without a court order."
* Oregon Supreme Court voided same-sex marriage licenses issued there last year.
1: "Pro-family groups are applauding the Oregon Supreme Court" for voiding 3,000 marriages, as noted above. Family Research Council, American Family Asosication, CWFA cheered the ruling as well."
* Conservatives are rallying behind House Majority Leader Tom DeLay. A declaration by the Judeo-Christian Council for Constitutional Restoration backs up the Texas lawmaker’s call for an end to judicial tyranny.
7: "...and lets him know he isn't alone." Don Fetter: "Conservatives have an unfortunate habit of often disturbing their leaders, their heroes, their icons, when they come under fire." Resolution against judicial filibusters. Signers include Dobson, Falwell, etc.
* NOT IN SUMMARY: Drew's Law under consideration by Congress.
5: Drew's Law: National registry of sex offenders - takes an existing national registry and makes parts of it public.
----- 14 -----
Focus on the Family
Daily Update
14 April 2005
Scalia Insulted by Gay Activist
U.S. Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia was taunted by a
gay activist Tuesday night when he spoke at New York
University.
According to the New York Post, some 300 students were in
the room -- alongside protesters outside who were
picketing Scalia for his dissent in the Lawrence v. Texas
case that overturned state laws against sodomy.
The paper said a gay student asked Scalia whether
government had any business enacting and enforcing laws
against consensual sodomy. Following Scalia's answer, the
student then reportedly asked the conservative justice a
follow-up: "Do you sodomize your wife?" The justice
replied that the question was unworthy of an answer.
Mrs. Scalia was reportedly in attendance.
----- 15 -----
Not-So-Gay: Schools Coerced by Gay Agenda
By Valerie Thomas-Wack
CBN News Producer
Christian Broadcasting Network
http://www.cbn.com/cbnnews/news/050413a.asp
CBN.com – (CBN News) - WASHINGTON -- Today marks a day of silence in some schools, where students will stay silent the whole day, to show what they call the silencing experienced by the homosexual community. Across the country, events like this have become commonplace. Schools have turned into battlegrounds for the homosexual agenda. The fight is over what should be taught at school versus what should be taught in the home.
Lawsuits between parents and school boards are on the rise. In some cases, students are forced to learn about homosexuality.
Some parents in Maryland are worried that their children's school system may adopt a new curriculum: one which stresses to students that homosexuality is normal, healthy and that people are born that way. The course is called "Family Life and Human Sexuality."
Students are introduced to homosexual terms and encouraged to "develop their so-called individual sexual identity." That has sparked outrage from many parents.
Maryland mother Carolyn Black says, “I am a Christian. We are Christians, and certainly I do not believe in homosexuality, and I believe that the subject of homosexuality should be taught at home. It has no place and no business in the public school system -- being taught and forced on our children in the public school system. It just has no place.”
Barry Sullivan has chosen to bypass the public schools and home-school his kids.
Sullivan says, “Are we really going to teach our kids that this is normal behavior? If some kid stands up and says that ‘I got a brother and he is attracted to young boys,’ is the teacher going to say, ‘I do not want to be judgmental. Well, he is just born that way?’”
Across the country, from blue-state California to small town mid-America, homosexuality lessons have become the norm in many schools, and in some cases, without parental consent.
One case is playing out in a Santa Cruz, California public school. A group of lesbian teachers has put up posters in classrooms that promote the gay lifestyle, and refer students who question their sexuality to homosexual and bisexual organizations. Parents are suing to change the posters to represent all differences among students. In this case, the homosexuals believe they should have exclusive rights.
[More at URL]
----- 16 -----
Homosexuals Press to Lift Restrictions to Military Service
4/14/2005
Concerned Women for America
http://www.cwfa.org/articles/7912/CWA/freedom/index.htm
[Article includes a little picture of a green army man with photoshopped-on rainbow clothes.]
"Congressman Jim Kolbe, R-Arizona has introduced legislation aimed at lifting the military’s ban on homosexuals. The homosexual advocacy group Center for the Study of Sexual Minorities in the Military is also pushing the issue in the media. Both are using the case of Army Sgt. Robert Stout, an Iraq war veteran who won a purple heart, who is seeking the right to continue his military service as an open homosexual. Bob Knight, director of CWA’s Culture & Family Institute has more on this issue. Click here to listen."
"There's a new push on to lift the ban on gays in the military." "We've seen a full court press here... legislation introduced..." Washington Post editorial, McNeal/Leher report on the ban in the military. "There's definitely a campaign underway to lift the ban on homosexuality." "Congress passed a law saying that if you had even the propensity towards homosexuality you can't serve..." Sgt. Stout, American serviceman injured in Iraq, pushing to have it lifted. "We do appreciate his service... but that doesn't mean he can now campaign to open the military up to sodomy. ... it's been well documented that homosexuality in the military... is very bad."
"I don't think it'll go briskly through a republican congress... all but three [sponsors] are Democrats... but people need to know, change like this starts somewhere..."
"They do not want the military homosexualised." Talks about how the military is missing recruitment goals, says that allowing queers in will make it worse. "If you don't want to hurt recruiting, you shouldn't even talk about lifting the ban on homosexuality."
Urges listeners to contact their legislators in opposition to lifting the ban.
----- 17 -----
Reluctant Cable Operators Delaying Launch of ‘Gay-Themed’ Channel
4/14/2005
By Martha Kleder
Concerned Women for America
Viacom steps up pressure on MTV to get ‘Logo’ on the air.
Editor’s Note: A “gay” cable channel? This development illustrates again why Concerned Women for America (CWA) is a leader in the movement for cable choice, which would allow customers to pay for only the stations they select. For more on cable choice, read CWA’s resources:
Give Us Cable Choice for Decency’s Sake
Monopoly Is More Than a Game
Cable Choice Is Channel Choice
http://www.cwfa.org/articles/7915/CFI/pornography/index.htm
[Ed. Note: Note the inclusion of any queer-related content under "pornography." This is not an accident.]
Cable TV operators outside major urban areas are refusing to accept a new channel targeted at homosexuals, delaying its launch, according to The New York Times.
Logo, the channel being developed by MTV for Viacom, is scheduled to debut on June 30, 2005, instead of the original February target date. This is the second delay for the network. On March 29, 2004, Viacom Chief Executive Officer Sumner Redstone apologized for the first postponement, and ordered MTV executives to get Logo on the air “as soon as possible.” Viacom is the nation’s largest owner of cable networks.
So far, the network has secured carriage to only about 10 million homes in major cities out of the estimated 90 million U.S. homes that have cable.
Nicole Browning, president of MTV Networks’ affiliate sales and marketing unit, told The New York Times that there is a strong resistance to the channel outside major urban centers.
One senior cable operator told her during a presentation, “There are no gays here.” Another one said, “If we launch that network here, I will personally resign,” Browning said.
[More at URL]
----- 18 -----
TVC Urges An End
Judicial Filibusters Action Needed
Traditional Values Coalition
http://www.traditionalvalues.org/modules.php?sid=2226
April 14, 2005 – TVC is urging activists to bombard their Senators’ offices with faxes, emails, and phone calls on April 25 th to ask that the Senate vote to overturn the unconstitutional filibuster of judges.
The Senate must overturn the 60-vote rule that is required to break a filibuster and return it to a simple majority of 51 votes. The Senate has the authority to overturn this rule and should do so immediately.
Traditional Values Coalition signed on to a coalition letter of concern that was sent to key Senate leaders on April 5. In it, the coalition stated: “The Senate must act as steward of the federal courts by returning the power to confirm judges to the Constitution’s simple majority requirement. While it is the right of the President to expect the Senate to give Advice and Consent within a reasonable period of time, it is the duty of every Senator to offer Advice and Consent through an honest, up or down vote.”
TAKE ACTION: Contact your two U.S. Senators on April 25 th and ask that they vote for a return to tradition and the 51-vote majority for voting to end filibusters on judicial candidates. Use CapWiz: http://capwiz.com/traditional/dbq/officials/
----- 19 -----
Washington Evangelicals for Responsible Government
http://www.werg.org/
Washington Evangelicals for Responsible Government (WERG) provides an evangelical Christian lobbyist for the Washington State Legislature and to State Government Agencies. Legislation and Rulings are evaluated from a Biblical perspective. Testimony is presented at hearings held on issues affecting the Christian community.
March 8, 2005, Olympia, Washington
Mayday for Marriage
Audio, NOW AVAILABLE for download.
Audio File 1:
http://www.werg.org/mp3s/Artist%20-%20May_Day_For_Marriage.mp3
Audio File 2:
http://www.werg.org/mp3s/Artist%20-%20May_Day_For_Marriage_part2.mp3
A rather breathless (and somewhat dated) Valley Advocate article that outlines how the Southern Baptist Convention went both fundamentalist and political;
Joe Scarborough: "God is... beating liberal elites on one political issue after another. Maybe that is why so many of them hate the Prince of Peace."
Oregon Supreme Court dissolves 3000 marriages;
DeLay attacks the concept of judicial review and the idea of a right to privacy: "The reason the judiciary has been able to impose a separation of church and state that's nowhere in the Constitution is that Congress didn't stop them. The reason we had judicial review is because Congress didn't stop them. The reason we had a right to privacy is because Congress didn't stop them."
FOX & Friends- Michael Schiavo's Supporters Are Communists?
Seattle PI columnist wonders why once again, nobody except queers have stood up for gay rights, after the Washington State GLBT Basic Civil Rights Act gets derailed yet again.
Focus on the Family article with action item on a Federal anti-marriage amendment;
Focus on the Family state-by-state rundown on anti-marriage activities; each state listed has an action item with it;
Focus on the Family article on a new anti-Planned Parenthood campaign;
Focus on the Family article on judicial filibusters - with action item;
FotF decries "Access to Legal Pharmaceuticals Act," recently introduced in Congress, which would require the filling of legal prescriptions by licensed pharmacists;
Today's Family News in Focus;
FotF brief saying "Scalia Insulted by Gay Activist" - see here for good commentary on that notion - if Scalia believes that your sex life is Federal business, as he does, then why shouldn't asking about his be okay?
Christian Broadcasting Network rails against schools being "coerced by [the] Gay Agenda";
CWFA rails against bill to lift the ban on gayfolk in the armed services - includes action item;
CWFA article about queer-themed cable channel and resistance from some cable companies;
Traditional Values Coalition action item demanding the Senate change filibuster rules to prohibit Judicial filibusters;
Washington Evangelicals for Responsible Government releases audio of their March 8th "Mayday for Marriage" anti-marriage-rights rally speakers.
----- 1 -----
The Crusaders
Christian evangelicals are plotting to remake America in their own image
By BOB MOSER
Rolling Stone
http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/story/_/id/7235393?pageid=rs.Home&pageregion=single7&rnd=1113410273322&has-player=true&version=6.0.11.847
It's February, and 900 of America's staunchest Christian fundamentalists have gathered in Fort Lauderdale to look back on what they accomplished in last year's election -- and to plan what's next. As they assemble in the vast sanctuary of Coral Ridge Presbyterian, with all fifty state flags dangling from the rafters, three stadium-size video screens flash the name of the conference: RECLAIMING AMERICA FOR CHRIST. These are the evangelical activists behind the nation's most effective political machine -- one that brought more than 4 million new Christian voters to the polls last November, sending George W. Bush back to the White House and thirty-two new pro-lifers to Congress. But despite their unprecedented power, fundamentalists still see themselves as a persecuted minority, waging a holy war against the godless forces of secularism. To rouse themselves, they kick off the festivities with "Soldiers of the Cross, Arise," the bloodthirstiest tune in all of Christendom: "Seize your armor, gird it on/Now the battle will be won/Soon, your enemies all slain/Crowns of glory you shall gain."
Meet the Dominionists -- biblical literalists who believe God has called them to take over the U.S. government. As the far-right wing of the evangelical movement, Dominionists are pressing an agenda that makes Newt Gingrich's Contract With America look like the Communist Manifesto. They want to rewrite schoolbooks to reflect a Christian version of American history, pack the nation's courts with judges who follow Old Testament law, post the Ten Commandments in every courthouse and make it a felony for gay men to have sex and women to have abortions. In Florida, when the courts ordered Terri Schiavo's feeding tube removed, it was the Dominionists who organized round-the-clock protests and issued a fiery call for Gov. Jeb Bush to defy the law and take Schiavo into state custody. Their ultimate goal is to plant the seeds of a "faith-based" government that will endure far longer than Bush's presidency -- all the way until Jesus comes back.
"Most people hear them talk about a 'Christian nation' and think, 'Well, that sounds like a good, moral thing,' says the Rev. Mel White, who ghostwrote Jerry Falwell's autobiography before breaking with the evangelical movement. "What they don't know -- what even most conservative Christians who voted for Bush don't know -- is that 'Christian nation' means something else entirely to these Dominionist leaders. This movement is no more about following the example of Christ than Bush's Clean Water Act is about clean water."
The godfather of the Dominionists is D. James Kennedy, the most influential evangelical you've never heard of. A former Arthur Murray dance instructor, he launched his Florida ministry in 1959, when most evangelicals still followed Billy Graham's gospel of nonpartisan soul-saving. Kennedy built Coral Ridge Ministries into a $37-million-a-year empire, with a TV-and-radio audience of 3 million, by preaching that it was time to save America -- not soul by soul but election by election. After helping found the Moral Majority in 1979, Kennedy became a five-star general in the Christian army. Bush sought his blessing before running for president -- and continues to consult top Dominionists on matters of federal policy.
"Our job is to reclaim America for Christ, whatever the cost," Kennedy says. "As the vice regents of God, we are to exercise godly dominion and influence over our neighborhoods, our schools, our government, our literature and arts, our sports arenas, our entertainment media, our news media, our scientific endeavors -- in short, over every aspect and institution of human society."
At Reclaiming America, most of the conference is taken up by grassroots training sessions that supply ministers, retirees and devout churchgoers with "The Facts of Stem-Cell Research" or "Practical Steps to Impact Your Community with America's Historical Judeo-Christian Heritage." "We're going to turn you into an army of one," Gary Cass, executive director of Reclaiming America, promises activists at one workshop held in Evangalism Explosion Hall. The Dominionists also attend speeches by supporters like Rep. Katherine Harris of Florida, who urges them to "win back America for God." In their spare time, conference-goers buy books about a God-devised health program called the Maker's Diet or meet with a financial adviser who offers a "biblically sound investment plan."
To implement their sweeping agenda, the Dominionists are working to remake the federal courts in God's image. In their view, the Founding Fathers never intended to erect a barrier between politics and religion. "The First Amendment does not say there should be a separation of church and state," declares Alan Sears, president and CEO of the Alliance Defense Fund, a team of 750 attorneys trained by the Dominionists to fight abortion and gay marriage. Sears argues that the constitutional guarantee against state-sponsored religion is actually designed to "shield" the church from federal interference -- allowing Christians to take their rightful place at the head of the government. "We have a right, indeed an obligation, to govern," says David Limbaugh, brother of Rush and author of Persecution: How Liberals Are Waging War Against Christianity. Nothing gets the Dominionists to their feet faster than ringing condemnations of judicial tyranny. "Activist judges have systematically deconstructed the Constitution," roars Rick Scarborough, author of Mixing Church and State. "A God-free society is their goal!"
Activist judges, of course, are precisely what the Dominionists want. Their model is Roy Moore, the former Alabama chief justice who installed a 5,300-pound granite memorial to the Ten Commandments, complete with an open Bible carved in its top, in the state judicial building. At Reclaiming America, Roy's Rock sits out front, fresh off a tour of twenty-one states, perched on the flag-festooned flatbed of a diesel truck, a potent symbol of the "faith-based" justice the Dominionists are bent on imposing. Activists at the conference pose for photographs beside the rock and have circulated a petition urging President Bush to appoint Moore -- who once penned an opinion calling for the state to execute "practicing homosexuals" -- to the U.S. Supreme Court.
[More at URL]
----- 2 -----
Wonder-Working Power
Valley Advocate: By James Heflin
April 18, 2003
Rather than considering himself the servant of the people, Bush, it seems, considers himself God's chosen to make over the world. The dropping of references for the ears of the Christian right is a regular occurrence; the term "evildoers," derided by some as not a real word, is quite real to the biblically informed, because it comes straight from the Book of Psalms.
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article2993.htm
George W. Bush's January State of the Union address was, for the most part, nothing out of the ordinary. But then my former governor (yes, I'm a Texan) dropped an unusual phrase: "...there's power, wonder-working power, in the goodness and idealism and faith of the American people."
That phrase was not mere wordsmithing. I know it well. I know about polished church pews; I know about dress shoes that blistered my young feet and the smooth heft of the hymnal. As the son of a Baptist minister, I know. I know about the exuberant, saloon-worthy piano, the cat-eye-spectacled old ladies sliding "power" into one syllable, and I know the rest of the phrase: "There is pow'r, pow'r, wonder-working pow'r, in the blood, [men echo] in the blood, of the Lamb, [men echo again] of the Lamb. There is pow'r, pow'r, wonder-working pow'r in the precious blood of the Lamb."
Bush was stealthily passing the message to the flock, to my flock. The issues that have plagued that flock for a quarter century are integral to understanding the second self-professed "born-again" man in the White House, his political tactics and his war in Iraq.
Its fans call it the "conservative resurgence." Its detractors call it the "fundamentalist takeover." The astonishing fact is that many, perhaps most, Southern Baptists are unaware that the foundation of their faith has been officially pulled out from under them through systematic, long-term political manipulation. The people of God trust each other; when someone breaks the rules, they pray, they try to reconcile. But the abandonment of civil behavior always trumps good will.
Two people, Paige Patterson and Paul Pressler (a former appeals court judge), perhaps as far back as the '60s, created the plan to transform a denomination. Like fundamentalists of every breed, they started with a simple premise: We're right. Everyone else is wrong. God is on our side, so what we do to those in our way is irrelevant, if our right triumphs over their wrong. That the central, selfless directive of Christianity is "do unto others as you would have them do unto you" is a petty detail, imminently ignorable to God's self-appointed chosen.
The Southern Baptist Convention (currently around 16 million strong) is a bottom-up institution, with autonomous congregations and a democratically elected leadership whose proclamations have not, historically, been binding. One crack in the democracy was evident: The president appoints members to committees which hold sway over organizations like the Baptist press, Baptist seminaries and the missionary organization. The fundies (the decidedly non-affectionate term applied to them by detractors) calculated that winning the convention presidency 10 years in a row could gain them majorities on all committees and de facto control of all the national-level bodies.
The tactic was simple: Recruit like-minded pastors to scare people about the evil of liberalism which, they assured their flocks, was quietly taking over their institutions and diluting their theology. Those who did not endorse the literal truth of every word of the Bible – "Biblical inerrancy" – were on the slippery slope to unbelief. You're with us or you're against us.
[More at URL]
----- 3 -----
April 9, 2005 | 10:20 p.m. ET
Pope John Paul II: God is not dead (Joe Scarborough)
MSNBC.com
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6330851/
The world said goodbye today to a man already being hailed as John Paul the Great.The number of mourners at the funeral were epic. Many said it was the largest funeral in world history.
Across the world, a staggering two billion Christians watched as the greatest religious figure of our time was laid to rest.
And while millions were filling the streets of the Eternal City, some elites in Western newsrooms, on college campuses, and in Hollywood boardrooms were seething with contempt for the affection shown to this man of God.
Before he was even buried, a former Washington Post reporter blasted John Paul as "the Bully Pope," attacking him for being undemocratic, chavenistic, dogmatically dictatorial, and a man whose Christ-centered theology was "garbage."
Others, like Vanity Fair's Christopher Hitchens, went so far as to accuse the Pope of being the primary cause for the spread of Aids throughout Africa, the genocide in Rwanda, and the enslavement of millions across the Middle East.
The no-condoms-equals-Aids charge suggests that an African male who goes through scores of sexual partners each year is somehow shamed into refraining from wearing a condom because of the Holy See's teachings.
The argument is laughable.
But then again, no one ever suggested that these church-hating elites ever employed reason when launching polemics against Jesus Christ and his followers.
Understanding why these isolated creatures hate Jesus Christ's teachings so much is more important than ever because every few weeks it seems we are confronted with a national debate concerning Christianity and its impact on U.S. policy.
Terri Schiavo.
The mere name still elicits heated debates regarding life, death, law, politics, and domestic policy. But at its core, the Schiavo case launched a cultural war over two competing world views.
Christians found themselves pitted against America's cultural elites, who spent weeks blasting "right wing religious zealots" as the singular cause of the Schiavo controversy.
As with the Pope's passing, the public record is packed with thousands of instances of elites bashing conservative Christians for their power in forcing the President and Congress to do whatever it took to save the suffering woman's life. (Hitchens dismissed her as a "lifeless cadaver.)
George W. Bush's elevation to the presidency through the power of the evangelical vote is the main reason why the cultural and religious wars Patrick Buchanan predicted at the 1992 Republican National Convention have finally erupted in full view of the American public.
Historian Gary Wills compared the evangelical's support of George W. Bush to Islamic extremists' support of terror to promote their political goals. Wills breathlessly predicted that Christians' ascendency in American politics would lead to a radicalized, theocratic state that would have more in common with the Taliban and Osama Bin Laden than with our allies in Europe.
Pulitzer winner Maureen Dowd used her space in the New York Times to predict the coming of "the next dark ages" where religious superstition and religious bigotry will replace science and reason.
Whether the debate centers around a Presidential election, the right to die movement, the gay agenda, prayer in school, or simply letting our children recite the Pledge of Alligence, the teachings of Jesus Christ always seems to thwart the agenda of America's left wing elites.
Forget what you heard in the 1960s.
God is not dead.
In fact, he is very much alive and beating liberal elites on one political issue after another.
Maybe that is why so many of them hate the Prince of Peace.
----- 4 -----
Oregon court tosses gay marriage licenses
Thursday, April 14, 2005 · Last updated 10:08 a.m. PT
By CHARLES E. BEGGS
ASSOCIATED PRESS WRITER
http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/national/apus_story.asp?category=1110&slug=Civil%20Unions%20Oregon
SALEM, Ore. -- The Oregon Supreme Court on Thursday nullified nearly 3,000 marriage licenses issued to same-sex couples by Multnomah County a year ago, saying a single county couldn't take such action on its own.
The court said while the county can question the constitutionality of laws governing marriage, they are a matter of statewide concern so the county had no authority to issue licenses to gay couples.
The court noted that last November, Oregonians approved a constitutional amendment that limits marriages to a man and a woman. The court also said that long before that vote, state law had set the same limitations on marriages since Oregon became a state.
"Today, marriage in Oregon - an institution once limited to opposite-sex couples only by statute - now is so limited by the state Constitution as well," the court ruling said.
The court left the door open for state legislators to craft an alternative to gay marriages, such as civil unions.
"We conclude that Oregon law currently places the regulation of marriage exclusively within the province of the state's legislative power," the court said.
Tim Nashif, head of the Oregon Family Council and the Defense of Marriage Coalition, said, "We're pretty thrilled and pretty relieved at the opinion."
Members of the Legislature have been awaiting the ruling to give them guidance on how to proceed on the issue, and just Wednesday, Gov. Ted Kulongoski said he will push for a law allowing gay couples to form civil unions.
Marte Sheehan, who married Linda Duchek last March, said she was disappointed with the ruling but had hopes the Legislature would pass a bill allowing civil unions.
"I believe that ultimately the Legislature will do the right thing," she said.
[More at URL]
----- 5 -----
Transcript of interview with Tom DeLay
THE WASHINGTON TIMES
April 14, 2005
http://www.washingtontimes.com/national/20050413-111439-5048r.htm
Transcript of an interview between editors and reporters from The Washington Times and House Majority Leader Tom DeLay, Texas Republican, yesterday at his Capitol office:
National Editor Ken Hanner: Ten years ago, Republicans won control of the House by running on the Contract with America, which was a blueprint for limited government. Recently, Republicans have championed expansion of federal role in education, huge new entitlement programs, including prescription drugs, and overall increases of federal spending. When did the Republicans become the party of big government?
Mr. DeLay: Well, I hope we can shed anybody's notion that that's where we are headed. First, in full disclosure, I voted against No Child Left Behind. But, that's the president's agenda. And he worked very hard to accomplish that agenda. We will revisit No Child Left Behind, look at its effectiveness and those kinds of issues. I know the president wants to extend it. But I think we have to see if No Child Left Behind is actually working before we talk about extending it.
[...]
Mr. Dinan: You've been talking about going after activist judges since at least 1997. The [Terri] Schiavo case gives you a chance to do that, but you've recently said you blame Congress for not being zealous in oversight.
Mr. DeLay: Not zealous. I blame Congress over the last 50 to 100 years for not standing up and taking its responsibility given to it by the Constitution. The reason the judiciary has been able to impose a separation of church and state that's nowhere in the Constitution is that Congress didn't stop them. The reason we had judicial review is because Congress didn't stop them. The reason we had a right to privacy is because Congress didn't stop them.
Mr. Dinan: How can Congress stop them?
Mr. DeLay: There's all kinds of ways available to them.
Mr. Dinan: You tried two last year on the Defense of Marriage Act and the Pledge of Allegiance, and the Senate didn't go along with those.
Mr. DeLay: We're having to change a whole culture in this - a culture created by law schools. People really believe that these are nine gods, and that all wisdom is vested in them. This means it's a slow, long-term process. I mean, we passed six bills out of the House limiting jurisdiction. We passed an amendment last September breaking up the Ninth Circuit. These are all things that have passed the House of Representatives.
[More at URL]
----- 6 -----
FOX & Friends- Michael Schiavo's Supporters Are Communists?
Thursday, March 31, 2005
Michael Schiavo's supporters are communists according to FOX:
http://www.overspun.com/2005_03_01_archive.html
[Link to WMV file containing a video from Fox and Friends - hosts said that Michael Schiavo had very few supporters, and that they were Communists. Specifically, that they were members of the Young Communist Party. Really. Having WindowsMedia issues, not transcribing, but you can get to the link yourself from there.]
----- 7 -----
Who will stand up for gay rights? Anyone?
Monday, April 11, 2005
By ROBERT L. JAMIESON Jr.
SEATTLE POST-INTELLIGENCER COLUMNIST
http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/jamieson/219591_robert11.html
Someone has to stand up for a gay civil rights bill in Washington.
Who better to fill that role than the Democrats -- the party of the people, the party of social conscience?
In fall 2003, the party leadership went before a Seattle gathering of gays and lesbians at "Fighting for the Majority," a fund-raiser to benefit Democrats in the state House and Senate.
Lisa Brown, the Senate Democratic minority leader at the time, spoke at the fund-raiser on Capitol Hill. Bill Dubay, a Seattle gay rights activist who was at the event, says he heard Brown make this vow: If Democrats gain a majority in the House and Senate, we will put your civil rights bill on the governor's desk.
One top lawmaker, though, says Dubay heard it wrong -- that Brown promised to put a gay civil rights bill on the floor for a vote.
Either way, two years later, Democrats have dropped the ball.
The Democrats rule the House. Democrats control the Senate by a slim margin. They have even got their candidate, Christine Gregoire, in the governor's mansion.
[More at URL]
----- 8 -----
Senate Ponders Protecting Marriage
by Josh Montez, correspondent
Focus on the family
April 14, 2005
Lawmakers take a look at how much danger the institution faces from activist judges.
http://www.family.org/cforum/fnif/news/a0036203.cfm
A Senate subcommittee is talking about traditional marriage and wondering if it needs constitutional protection in the form of the Marriage Protection Amendment (MPA).
Specifically, members of the Senate Judiciary subcommittee on the Constitution, Civil Rights and Property Rights are looking at the vulnerability of state defense of marriage acts in the hands of activist judges.
Sen. Sam Brownback, R-Kan., the subcommittee's chairman, began a series of hearings Wednesday to explore the importance of a constitutional amendment to protect traditional marriage. Brownback pointed out that eight states are already facing lawsuits challenging their traditional marriage laws.
"Courts in at least two states have already recognized civil unions imported from Vermont, and DOMA (the federal Defense of Marriage Act) itself is already being challenged," Brownback said. "A federal lawsuit in Washington State challenging DOMA's constitutionality could be before the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals within a year."
Senate liberals, however, didn't want to talk about the threat to marriage. Sen. Russ Feingold, D-Wis., claimed at the hearing that there are more important issues to debate.
"The full effect of the federal marriage amendment must be explored and carefully debated in the Judiciary Committee," he said, "before the Senate is asked to vote again."
Feingold is already on record as opposing the MPA.
Brigham Young University Law professor Lynn Wardle, meanwhile, said federal protection is important because the courts are subverting the will of the people.
"The people want this," he said. "Eighteen out of 18 proposed state amendments that have come before the voters have been passed by margins that are overwhelming—from 57 percent to 86 percent."
Wardle added that he hopes congressional interest will highlight the importance of making sure the people have the right to define traditional marriage—not the courts.
Though liberals at the hearing argued that the courts are not imposing a federal definition of marriage, Wardle called that a myth, countering that whenever an activist judge defines marriage it has an impact—not just in the judge's jurisdiction, but across the nation.
TAKE ACTION
It is important for ordinary Americans to let the Senate know how they feel about the protection of marriage. It is especially important that we let our senators know that changes to marriage should not be imposed by an unaccountable judiciary. The Marriage Protection Amendment (S.J. Res. 1) is an absolute necessity to protect marriage—and to give the states the right to vote on whether to amend the Constitution, rather than let judges do so from the bench.
For help in contacting your senators, please see the CitizenLink Action Center and type your ZIP code in the space provided.
In addition, to find out where your state stands in terms of statewide marriage protection, please see the CitizenLink article, "What's the Latest on State Marriage Amendments?" by Aaron Atwood.
----- 9 -----
What's the Latest on State Marriage Amendments?
by Aaron Atwood, assistant editor
Focus on the Family
April 13, 2005
Here's the most recent information on efforts to protect the traditional definition of marriage—and how you can make a difference.
http://www.family.org/cforum/extras/a0036194.cfm
Kansas voters passed an amendment to their state constitution April 5 that defined marriage as "between one man and one woman," becoming the 18th state to pass a constitutional amendment to protect marriage.
Several other states, meanwhile, are poised to join their ranks.
"Whenever the people get a chance to vote on the definition of marriage, they have always voted to support the traditional view of marriage," said Mona Passignano, state issues analyst for Focus on the Family.
You can track what is happening in this crucial battle below. Check back often to see the latest developments.
Alabama
What's happened: Has passed both the House and the Senate.
What's next: It goes on the ballot in June 2006.
How to take action: Log onto the Alabama Policy Institute's Web site for more information on how you can get involved.
Arizona
What's happened: The Center for Arizona Policy has begun recruiting volunteers to help gathering the 186,000 signatures needed to put the marriage amendment on the ballot in November 2006.
What's next: Depends on the signatures collected.
How to take action: Go to the Center for Arizona Policy Web site to find more information and help in this effort.
California
What's happened: Currently, there are several amendments before the California Legislature, but it is thought that the language used in these amendments will keep them from being approved by the Legislature.
What's next: The California Family Council is in the process of getting an amendment with language that can make it through the Legislature.
How to take action: For information on how you can help get an amendment through the Legislature, please visit the California Family Council Web site.
Colorado
What's happened: Plans are being laid to see that a state marriage amendment will go before the voters in November 2006.
How to take action: Contact your legislators and let them know that you support a state constitutional amendment that defines marriage as between one man and one woman only. For contact information, visit the CitizenLink Action Center.
[Much more at URL]
----- 10 -----
STOPP Starts New Campaign
by Terry Phillips, correspondent
Focus on the family
April 14, 2005
Group looking to expose the real agenda behind Planned Parenthood.
http://www.family.org/cforum/fnif/news/a0036202.cfm
STOPP International—an implacable foe of Planned Parenthood—is using the abortion provider's national conference as an occasion to launch a new education campaign.
Although Planned Parenthood likes to call itself a healthcare organization, STOPP Executive Director Jim Sedlak said nothing could be further from the truth.
"It is really an organization that is out there trying to spread its own ideas and philosophies with our money," he explained.
A key component of STOPP's new campaign—kicked off with a prayer vigil outside Planned Parenthood's national conference—lies in that phrase: "our money." David Bereit, the national director of STOPP, said more than a quarter billion dollars of taxpayer money goes to subsidize Planned Parenthood's 250,000 abortions each year.
"Here we are, as taxpayers, funneling $265 million into the coffers of Planned Parenthood," Bereit said, "and at the end of the year, they have net of $35.2 million left over."
Despite that $35 million excess, Planned Parenthood is officially a not-for-profit corporation—a status that makes it eligible for taxpayer funding.
"We would probably have enough votes in the House of Representatives," Sedlak said, "to remove Planned Parenthood funding and even their tax-exempt status."
But in the Senate, with its higher-concentration of pro-abortion lawmakers, Planned Parenthood seems insulated from being defunded. But Bereit said that can be changed by people of conscience and faith.
"It's a matter that the people of God are willing to take their faith," he said, "and finally put it into action and focus efforts."
FOR MORE INFORMATION
To learn more about STOPP International and its campaign, please see the organization's Web site.
(NOTE: Referral to Web sites not produced by Focus on the Family is for informational purposes only and does not constitute an endorsement of the sites' content.)
----- 11 -----
No Senate Vote Yet on Key Judicial Nominees
by Bill Wilson, Washington, D.C., correspondent
Focus on the Family
April 15, 2005
Will Arlen Specter live up to his promise to allow votes on judicial nominees? It's still unclear after a critical committee session Thursday in the Senate.
http://www.family.org/cforum/fnif/news/a0036217.cfm
Questions remain whether Sen. Arlen Specter, chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, will keep his promise that every judicial nominee of President Bush will receive a fair vote—something the president asked for in his State of the Union address.
"The Constitution also gives the Senate a responsibility," Bush said. "Every judicial nominee deserves an up-or-down vote."
With those words, however, the president set off a firestorm. Conservative Senate Republicans pressured the more liberal Specter, R-Pa., into a public promise to support Bush judicial nominees as a condition to becoming the chairman of the powerful Judiciary Committee.
Thursday's committee meeting was the first real test of whether he would hold true to his word. But two of the more controversial conservative nominees—Justices Priscilla Owen and Janice Rogers Brown—failed to pass muster, as none made it out of committee, while three others passed by voice vote.
Not to worry, said Mike Broomus, press secretary for a top committee member, Sen. Jeff Sessions, R-Ala.
"I guess there's nothing sinister about it," Broomus said. "These nominees came up today, and the normal procedure is that they come up the first time and the standard procedure is they are always held over for a week and then next week they would be on the agenda again and presumably be voted on."
Judicial activism has become a flashpoint issue with the president, and the White House is sure to be keeping an eye on the next Judiciary Committee meeting.
There are 47 vacancies on the federal bench. Only one nominee has been approved since January, and even if the nominees clear the committee, a Democratic filibuster likely awaits them at the Senate floor.
FOR MORE INFORMATION
To learn how you can help stop judicial filibusters—and why it is very important to do so—please see the CitizenLink article, "Help End Judicial Filibusters."
----- 12 -----
Liberals Target Conscience Exemptions
by Steve Jordahl, correspondent
Focus on the family
Democrats in Congress want to make sure pharmacists have to dispense prescriptions they are morally opposed to.
April 15, 2005
Congressional Democrats are introducing legislation to take away a pharmacist's right of conscience to refuse filling prescriptions for abortion-causing birth-control pills.
The bill is called the Access to Legal Pharmaceuticals Act, but legal analysts say it could be called the Repeal the Bill of Rights Act. It says no pharmacist may refuse to fill a prescription on the basis of personal belief.
Pharmacist Anthony Miller is one of those who could be affected if the legislation becomes law.
"The 'morning-after pill' I will not stock," he said. "I have not done it and I won't do it. I guess if it comes down to a point where my choice is to fill a prescription or get out, I think I would get out."
Karen Brauer of Pharmacists for Life said the legislation takes away a fundamental tenet of working in the health care field.
"Any clinical care provided to patients is based upon the act of the conscience," she said, "assuming that human life has value and should be protected."
Francis Manion, a senior attorney with the American Center for Law and Justice, said the bill, in effect, claims that a person's right to contraception is more fundamental than a person's right to religious belief. That being said, he added, the legislation has almost no chance of surviving a court challenge.
"This is an outrageous, I would say unprecedented assault on the constitutional rights of all Americans," he noted. "It's another example of certain elements of our polity being bought lock, stock, and barrel by the pro-abortion lobby, which has gone absolutely ballistic over this issue."
FOR MORE INFORMATION
Visit the Focus on Social Issues Web site for more information about so called "emergency contraception."
----- 13 -----
Family News in Focus
Focus on the Family
15 April 2005
Bob Ditmer
* Will Arlen Specter allow votes on judicial nominees? We still don’t know after a critical committee session yesterday in the Senate.
3: Yesterday's committee meeting was "the first real test of whether he would hold true to his word." Most controversial of nominees have made it out of committee yet. Jeff Sessions's press secretary says not to worry yet - "the normal procedure is that they come up the first time and the standard procedure is that they're always held over a week, then next week they would be on the agenda again and then be voted on." "Judicial activism has become a flashpoint for the President."
* Efforts on Capitol Hill to take away a pharmacists right to refuse to dispense drugs that may cause an abortion.
4: Forcing pharmacists to issue "Abortion-causing birth control pills." "Repeal of the Bill of Rights Act." Pharmacists for Life: "Any clinical care provided for patients is based upon conscience." ACLJ "outrageous, unprecedented assault on the constitutional rights of all Americans." "The bill has almost no chance of surviving a court challenge."
* Newly published report looks at what faith based organizations are able to do against HIV and AIDs.
6: "Faith In Action" attempt to "measure the effectiveness of [faith-based groups] outreach." Intent is to help Christian groups get more funding.
* College freshmen have very strong religious values according to a survey of 112,000 students at 236 colleges and universities.
8: Strongly religious students much more likely to be conservative. "There's a lot of potential to work there with." Campus evangelists are pleased and excited - Campus Crusade for Christ in particular. "Many students may define spirituality in terms that are outside Biblical truth" but they can use that language to "insert Biblical truth." "And that's good news for America's future."
* It appears Connecticut is going to have civil unions for same-sex partners. The House added an amendment in favor of civil unions. It's expected the Connecticut Senate and Governor will approve it.
2: Bill gives CUs "the benefits and privileges of marriage." It "makes no sense." You're "trying to square a circle." "We don't want to be the first state in the union that moves forward on civil unions without a court order."
* Oregon Supreme Court voided same-sex marriage licenses issued there last year.
1: "Pro-family groups are applauding the Oregon Supreme Court" for voiding 3,000 marriages, as noted above. Family Research Council, American Family Asosication, CWFA cheered the ruling as well."
* Conservatives are rallying behind House Majority Leader Tom DeLay. A declaration by the Judeo-Christian Council for Constitutional Restoration backs up the Texas lawmaker’s call for an end to judicial tyranny.
7: "...and lets him know he isn't alone." Don Fetter: "Conservatives have an unfortunate habit of often disturbing their leaders, their heroes, their icons, when they come under fire." Resolution against judicial filibusters. Signers include Dobson, Falwell, etc.
* NOT IN SUMMARY: Drew's Law under consideration by Congress.
5: Drew's Law: National registry of sex offenders - takes an existing national registry and makes parts of it public.
----- 14 -----
Focus on the Family
Daily Update
14 April 2005
Scalia Insulted by Gay Activist
U.S. Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia was taunted by a
gay activist Tuesday night when he spoke at New York
University.
According to the New York Post, some 300 students were in
the room -- alongside protesters outside who were
picketing Scalia for his dissent in the Lawrence v. Texas
case that overturned state laws against sodomy.
The paper said a gay student asked Scalia whether
government had any business enacting and enforcing laws
against consensual sodomy. Following Scalia's answer, the
student then reportedly asked the conservative justice a
follow-up: "Do you sodomize your wife?" The justice
replied that the question was unworthy of an answer.
Mrs. Scalia was reportedly in attendance.
----- 15 -----
Not-So-Gay: Schools Coerced by Gay Agenda
By Valerie Thomas-Wack
CBN News Producer
Christian Broadcasting Network
http://www.cbn.com/cbnnews/news/050413a.asp
CBN.com – (CBN News) - WASHINGTON -- Today marks a day of silence in some schools, where students will stay silent the whole day, to show what they call the silencing experienced by the homosexual community. Across the country, events like this have become commonplace. Schools have turned into battlegrounds for the homosexual agenda. The fight is over what should be taught at school versus what should be taught in the home.
Lawsuits between parents and school boards are on the rise. In some cases, students are forced to learn about homosexuality.
Some parents in Maryland are worried that their children's school system may adopt a new curriculum: one which stresses to students that homosexuality is normal, healthy and that people are born that way. The course is called "Family Life and Human Sexuality."
Students are introduced to homosexual terms and encouraged to "develop their so-called individual sexual identity." That has sparked outrage from many parents.
Maryland mother Carolyn Black says, “I am a Christian. We are Christians, and certainly I do not believe in homosexuality, and I believe that the subject of homosexuality should be taught at home. It has no place and no business in the public school system -- being taught and forced on our children in the public school system. It just has no place.”
Barry Sullivan has chosen to bypass the public schools and home-school his kids.
Sullivan says, “Are we really going to teach our kids that this is normal behavior? If some kid stands up and says that ‘I got a brother and he is attracted to young boys,’ is the teacher going to say, ‘I do not want to be judgmental. Well, he is just born that way?’”
Across the country, from blue-state California to small town mid-America, homosexuality lessons have become the norm in many schools, and in some cases, without parental consent.
One case is playing out in a Santa Cruz, California public school. A group of lesbian teachers has put up posters in classrooms that promote the gay lifestyle, and refer students who question their sexuality to homosexual and bisexual organizations. Parents are suing to change the posters to represent all differences among students. In this case, the homosexuals believe they should have exclusive rights.
[More at URL]
----- 16 -----
Homosexuals Press to Lift Restrictions to Military Service
4/14/2005
Concerned Women for America
http://www.cwfa.org/articles/7912/CWA/freedom/index.htm
[Article includes a little picture of a green army man with photoshopped-on rainbow clothes.]
"Congressman Jim Kolbe, R-Arizona has introduced legislation aimed at lifting the military’s ban on homosexuals. The homosexual advocacy group Center for the Study of Sexual Minorities in the Military is also pushing the issue in the media. Both are using the case of Army Sgt. Robert Stout, an Iraq war veteran who won a purple heart, who is seeking the right to continue his military service as an open homosexual. Bob Knight, director of CWA’s Culture & Family Institute has more on this issue. Click here to listen."
"There's a new push on to lift the ban on gays in the military." "We've seen a full court press here... legislation introduced..." Washington Post editorial, McNeal/Leher report on the ban in the military. "There's definitely a campaign underway to lift the ban on homosexuality." "Congress passed a law saying that if you had even the propensity towards homosexuality you can't serve..." Sgt. Stout, American serviceman injured in Iraq, pushing to have it lifted. "We do appreciate his service... but that doesn't mean he can now campaign to open the military up to sodomy. ... it's been well documented that homosexuality in the military... is very bad."
"I don't think it'll go briskly through a republican congress... all but three [sponsors] are Democrats... but people need to know, change like this starts somewhere..."
"They do not want the military homosexualised." Talks about how the military is missing recruitment goals, says that allowing queers in will make it worse. "If you don't want to hurt recruiting, you shouldn't even talk about lifting the ban on homosexuality."
Urges listeners to contact their legislators in opposition to lifting the ban.
----- 17 -----
Reluctant Cable Operators Delaying Launch of ‘Gay-Themed’ Channel
4/14/2005
By Martha Kleder
Concerned Women for America
Viacom steps up pressure on MTV to get ‘Logo’ on the air.
Editor’s Note: A “gay” cable channel? This development illustrates again why Concerned Women for America (CWA) is a leader in the movement for cable choice, which would allow customers to pay for only the stations they select. For more on cable choice, read CWA’s resources:
Give Us Cable Choice for Decency’s Sake
Monopoly Is More Than a Game
Cable Choice Is Channel Choice
http://www.cwfa.org/articles/7915/CFI/pornography/index.htm
[Ed. Note: Note the inclusion of any queer-related content under "pornography." This is not an accident.]
Cable TV operators outside major urban areas are refusing to accept a new channel targeted at homosexuals, delaying its launch, according to The New York Times.
Logo, the channel being developed by MTV for Viacom, is scheduled to debut on June 30, 2005, instead of the original February target date. This is the second delay for the network. On March 29, 2004, Viacom Chief Executive Officer Sumner Redstone apologized for the first postponement, and ordered MTV executives to get Logo on the air “as soon as possible.” Viacom is the nation’s largest owner of cable networks.
So far, the network has secured carriage to only about 10 million homes in major cities out of the estimated 90 million U.S. homes that have cable.
Nicole Browning, president of MTV Networks’ affiliate sales and marketing unit, told The New York Times that there is a strong resistance to the channel outside major urban centers.
One senior cable operator told her during a presentation, “There are no gays here.” Another one said, “If we launch that network here, I will personally resign,” Browning said.
[More at URL]
----- 18 -----
TVC Urges An End
Judicial Filibusters Action Needed
Traditional Values Coalition
http://www.traditionalvalues.org/modules.php?sid=2226
April 14, 2005 – TVC is urging activists to bombard their Senators’ offices with faxes, emails, and phone calls on April 25 th to ask that the Senate vote to overturn the unconstitutional filibuster of judges.
The Senate must overturn the 60-vote rule that is required to break a filibuster and return it to a simple majority of 51 votes. The Senate has the authority to overturn this rule and should do so immediately.
Traditional Values Coalition signed on to a coalition letter of concern that was sent to key Senate leaders on April 5. In it, the coalition stated: “The Senate must act as steward of the federal courts by returning the power to confirm judges to the Constitution’s simple majority requirement. While it is the right of the President to expect the Senate to give Advice and Consent within a reasonable period of time, it is the duty of every Senator to offer Advice and Consent through an honest, up or down vote.”
TAKE ACTION: Contact your two U.S. Senators on April 25 th and ask that they vote for a return to tradition and the 51-vote majority for voting to end filibusters on judicial candidates. Use CapWiz: http://capwiz.com/traditional/dbq/officials/
----- 19 -----
Washington Evangelicals for Responsible Government
http://www.werg.org/
Washington Evangelicals for Responsible Government (WERG) provides an evangelical Christian lobbyist for the Washington State Legislature and to State Government Agencies. Legislation and Rulings are evaluated from a Biblical perspective. Testimony is presented at hearings held on issues affecting the Christian community.
March 8, 2005, Olympia, Washington
Mayday for Marriage
Audio, NOW AVAILABLE for download.
Audio File 1:
http://www.werg.org/mp3s/Artist%20-%20May_Day_For_Marriage.mp3
Audio File 2:
http://www.werg.org/mp3s/Artist%20-%20May_Day_For_Marriage_part2.mp3
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2005-04-16 02:45 am (UTC)