Today's Cultural Warfare Update
May. 18th, 2005 10:49 am![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
solarbirdFocus on the Family says Frist will bring nominees to the floor this week, and if you're somehow still thinking this isn't really about the Supreme Court, this article just outright says it is [Ed. Note: the first nominee has been brought to the floor; the FotF web site is surprisingly quiet, and sections normally updated daily aren't being updated; they're clearly very busy];
Kansas creationists team up with Muslim fundamentalists in evolution "trial" - creationism, a.k.a. "intelligent design," voted up 6-4, will be introduced as science;
Story on the state of the anti-marriage amendment in Massachusetts - it appears to be losing steam;
Agape Press rants about the "Reign of Madness" in Massachusetts, claiming the state has been "overrun by homosexuality" and that Christians are being "arrested by police for resisting having their kids exposed to homosexuality";
Focus on the Family article against embryonic stem-cell research;
Focus on the Family article promoting the anti-gay school inquisition proposal for the Southern Baptist Convention's conference;
FotF attacks ACLU for planned campaign highlighting problems facing gay couples because of the lack of legal marriage or CU protections;
Today's Family News in Focus;
CWA rails against shareholder motions to make the unified ExxonMobil, which dropped Mobil's DP benefits and GBLT-protections when they and Exxon merged, re-adopt anti-discrimination language;
CWA demands filibuster rules change - two articles;
CWA tells John McCain that he should support the rules change;
CWA marks anniversary of Massachusetts marriage by claiming nothing as energised "Americans" more;
Washington Times opinion column against women in near-combat support roles;
Washington Evangelicals for Responsible Government crows about the defeat of HB1515: "They Got Our Money, But Not Our Souls."
----- 1 -----
FRIST TO INVOKE 'CONSTITUTIONAL OPTION' THIS WEEK
An end to the blockade of judicial nominees may finally be
at hand.
http://www.family.org/cforum/feature/a0036565.cfm
Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist, R-Tenn., vowed last
Friday to send Priscilla Owen and Janice Rogers Brown to
the Senate floor for debate and an up-or-down vote as soon
as the Senate completes work on the highway bill.
The nominations are sure to be filibustered -- or bottled
up -- by Senate Democrats who oppose both because of
supposed conservative or pro-life rulings. That means this
could be the week when Frist invokes the "constitutional
option" to allow the Owen and Brown nominations -- as well
as a handful of others -- to come to the Senate floor for
an up-or-down vote.
Jan LaRue, chief counsel of Concerned Women for America,
told CitizenLink her advice to the Senate is simple:
"Hurry up and finish on the highway bill, so you can 'hit
the road' on the president's judicial nominees."
LaRue said Rogers and Brown, both found to be qualified
candidates by the American Bar Association, deserve an
up-or-down vote.
"Sen. Frist needs to bring up the nominees and move
full-speed ahead -- no picking up
hitchhiking-compromisers, no detours, no sightseeing, no
back-seat filibustering. If the Senate Democrats resume
their obstructionist filibustering in order to prevent an
up-or-down vote, Sen. Frist should apply the
'constitutional option' without tapping the brakes."
Bruce Hausknecht, legal issues analyst at Focus on the
Family, said after the nominations are brought to the
floor, at least 100 hours will be set aside for thorough
debate.
"After several days of extended debate, a cloture motion
vote will be taken -- meaning a vote to end debate," he
said. "If that vote fails, meaning that 60 votes are not
available to end debate, then Sen. Frist will get up and
make a motion to the chair."
That motion -- the "constitutional option" -- means the
chair, Vice President Dick Cheney, who serves as the
president of the Senate, will likely rule it is
unconstitutional to require 60 votes to break a filibuster
on judicial nominations.
Senate Majority Whip Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., indicated
over the weekend he had the votes needed to secure a
cloture vote -- and for the constitutional option.
For their part, Senate Democrats are not expected to take
the constitutional option lying down.
Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., threatened
months ago to shut down the Senate if the constitutional
option was invoked. But when public sentiment seemed to
run against that proposal, he has since taken to making
generalized threats.
"If they, for whatever reason, decide to do this, it's not
only wrong, they will rue the day they did it," Reid said
recently, "because we will do whatever we can do to strike
back . . . I will, for lack of a better word, screw things
up."
Kay Daly, president of Coalition for a Fair Judiciary,
said Democrats have already been playing obstructionist
with regard to some of the president's judicial nominees.
Many nominees have been waiting years for their
nominations to come to the Senate floor for a vote.
"The question is: Is it unconstitutional to apply the
filibuster to judicial nominations? If it is, a grave
injustice is being done to these nominees," Daly said. "At
some point, I think we all have to ask ourselves exactly
what the Constitution means."
There is no doubt, then, this is an important legal issue.
But why is it an important issue for the pro-family
community? Leaders say it's really the question of what
the future will look like for America.
"Believe it or not," Hausknecht said, "there is a simple
correlation between the types of judges that we put on the
bench and the moral issues of the day. Are we going to be
a nation that murders its preborn children and tries to
wipe Christianity from the public square, or are we going
to be a nation that holds dear its principles, as
enunciated in the Declaration of Independence and the
Constitution, that we are 'one nation, under God?"
Practically speaking, Hausknecht said, this is essentially
Round One in the expected battle over future Supreme Court
nominations. Capitol Hill was swirling with rumors Monday
that at least one vacancy is likely to come up "in the
next few weeks" -- as one Washington newspaper put it.
"It has come to this because the liberals have lost
control of both houses of Congress and the presidency,"
Hausknecht said. "They can no longer control policy
through legislative means or oppose conservative measures
with a veto from the White House. The only branch of
government they have left that has been very receptive to
their agenda -- is the judiciary."
TAKE ACTION: Ask your Senators to support Sen. Frist and
the constitutional option. You may reach them through our
CitizenLink Action Center:
http://www.family.org/cforum/action_center.cfm?capwizurl=http://www3.capwiz.com/fof/dbq/officials/
----- 2 -----
Darwin's evolution theory loses out in mock trial
Indo-Asian News Service
New York, May 16, 2005
http://www.hindustantimes.com/news/181_1363727,0004.htm
Charles Darwin's theory of evolution was on trial in Topeka, Kansas, and it seems the legendary British naturologist lost to an "intelligent designer" - a barely disguised euphemism for God.
The mock trial of Darwin's theory by Kansas' Board of Education, which concluded on May 12, included testimonies and cross-examination of and by pro-evolution and pro-creationism experts.
The board's trial voted 6 to 4 in favour of bringing the concept of "intelligent design" within the methods of teaching science in schools. Over two dozen scientists, teachers and lawyers said the state's science standards be amended to incorporate alternative thinking.
There was widespread apprehension among America's liberals and scientists that God is being brought into the country's classrooms by the supporters of the concept of an "intelligent designer", who argue that the world had to have been designed by a particularly smart designer, possibly God.
At the centre of the trials is Steve Abrams, a veterinarian and Republican, who among other things believes that earth is only 5,000 years old, a view propagated by Christian conservatives, as opposed to 4.5 billion years as argued by scientists.
Abrams as the board chairman has challenged the validity of evolution as the only valid explanation of life. He has said evolutionary biology is inadequate in terms of evidence and there ought to be an intelligent designer at the helm.
The pro-creationists, who are generally perceived by scientists and liberals as Christian religious zealots pushing a biblical agenda, have lately chosen to use seemingly more neutral language while arguing their case. Rather than saying that life was created by God, they use the term an intelligent designer to give their case a more rational touch.
Among those who testified was Mustafa Akyol, a Turkish newspaper columnist and Muslim. He reportedly said that the theory of evolution, which incidentally goes against Islam as well, generates "anti-Westernism" elsewhere in the world. The purpose behind introducing people like Akyol was to give the trial an appearance of being non-partisan and religiously diverse.
The evolution versus creationism debate has been raging in Kansas since 1999, when the state dropped evolution from its requirements of science education and invited widespread ridicule.
----- 3 -----
Amendment banning gay marriage faces uncertain future
By Steve LeBlanc, Associated Press Writer | May 17, 2005
Associated Press
BOSTON -- A year after same-sex couples started taking their first-in-the-nation wedding vows in Massachusetts, a constitutional amendment designed to undo gay marriage is facing an uncertain future.
http://www.boston.com/news/local/massachusetts/articles/2005/05/17/amendment_banning_gay_marriage_faces_uncertain_future/
Both supporters and opponents of gay marriage, for very different reasons, are hoping to defeat the amendment that was seen as a compromise when it got preliminary legislative approval a year ago.
The proposal to ban gay marriage while allowing civil unions was seen by supporters as a way to preserve some rights for same-sex couples, and by many opponents as a chance to persuade the state Supreme Judicial Court to temporarily stop gay marriage until voters had a say.
Since then the political landscape has shifted, with more support in the Legislature for gay marriage and a lack of widespread opposition by voters as thousands of couples have married.
At the same time, opponents of gay marriage are considering pulling their support for the compromise to work toward a ban of both same-sex marriages and civil unions.
If the amendment fails during a planned second round of voting in the fall, gay marriage will remain legal in Massachusetts.
Sen. Stephen Buoniconti is one of a handful of lawmakers who supported the compromise, which passed 105-92, now reconsidering his vote.
Buoniconti said he's particularly concerned about creating a legal limbo for the thousands of gay couples who have already married.
"That wasn't so much of a question the first time around," said Buoniconti, a Democrat.
And, he said, during his door-to-door Senate campaign last year, only one person brought up gay marriage. "The sky hasn't fallen. There's a new landscape. The world has changed."
One of the sponsors of the compromise amendment, Republican Sen. Brian Lees, also said he's not ruling out a change of heart.
"More than likely I will support it, but I want to keep an open mind on it," Lees said. "With a year's hindsight you've got to take a second look and I will do that. I am continuing to hear from both sides."
Supporters of traditional marriage are considering gathering voter signatures for a ballot initiative that would ban gay marriage and civil unions, said Ron Crews, head of the Massachusetts Family Institute.
They would need to gather more than 68,000 signatures, but would face a lower threshold of legislative support -- 51 lawmakers instead of 101 -- to get it on the ballot. The earliest it could go before voters is 2008.
[More at URL]
----- 4 -----
Mass. Pro-Family Groups Resist Homosexual Activism's 'Reign of Madness'
By Bill Fancher
May 16, 2005
http://headlines.agapepress.org/archive/5/162005a.asp
(AgapePress) - Tomorrow (May 17) marks the first anniversary of legalized homosexual marriage in Massachusetts, and a pro-family group there says the citizens have endured a "reign of madness" since the fateful Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court (MSJC) ruling that cleared the way for same-sex couples to marry legally in that state.
Brian Camenker of the Article 8 Alliance says since the MSJC legalized same-sex unions, Massachusetts has become overrun by homosexuality. "Even driver's licenses now, when you renew them, have a question such as, 'Has your sex changed?'" he notes.
And since the MSJC ruling, Camenker points out, parents can no longer opt their children out of pro-homosexual lessons and activities in school. During school assemblies, he asserts, speakers will come in and tell the young people gathered "that the Bible's prohibitions on homosexuality are essentially misinterpretations, and if your parents believe them then they're wrong."
Parents have even been arrested by police for resisting having their kids exposed to homosexuality, the pro-family advocate claims. "Society is going through this enforced homosexualization in Massachusetts," he says. "It's truly frightening." For example, he points to Lexington parent David Parker, who was arrested and charged with "trespassing" at his son's elementary school during a scheduled meeting with the principal and the town's Director of Education over his objections to homosexual curriculum materials.
Camenker and other traditional family supporters feel the MSJC's ruling legalizing homosexual marriage was tantamount to ripping the Constitution of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts into shreds. In addition, he maintains that parents and others who believe in the biblical view of homosexuality are being vilified in the schools by supporters of the educators' unions.
In response to all this, the Article 8 spokesman reveals that a big rally is being planned for City Hall Plaza in Boston, with its number-one priority being to inform the media and the public about what is going on. "Essentially, we're going to outline to the press the kinds of things that have been going on in this year that have oppressed the people," he says, such as "the incredibly accelerated homosexual agenda in the schools because of this [court ruling]."
The Article 8 Alliance and the Parents Rights Coalition have worked together to get four important bills filed in the Massachusetts legislature -- three aimed at constitutionally removing the "rogue judges" on the MSJC who voted to legalize same-sex marriage and to reverse that ruling. The fourth piece of legislation is an updated Parents' Rights Law, which would stop the accompanying homosexual programs in the state's public schools.
----- 5 -----
CITIZENLINK BREAKING NEWS:
Focus on the Family
Divergent Bills Spotlight Stem-Cell Debate
by Pete Winn, associate editor
http://citizenlink.org
SUMMARY: Separate bills illustrate confusion over two
types of stem-cell research.
Congress is poised to deal soon with two stem-cell
research bills -- each would take the country in
completely different directions.
One, H.R. 810, would increase the number of embryonic
stem-cell lines available for federally funded research --
and bring to an end the president's policy placing limits
on funding to certain already-existing lines.
The other, H.R. 596, the National Cord Blood Stem Cell
Bank Network bill, champions the use of stem cells derived
from umbilical-cord blood -- setting up a registry for
researchers and doctors.
Which way will Congress go?
Pro-life groups say H.R. 810, which deals with embryonic
stem-cell research, is anti-life because human embryos are
destroyed in the process.
The cord blood bill pleases pro-lifers and is completely
without controversy.
"It is always wrong for government to promote the
destruction of innocent human life, which embryonic
stem-cell research does," said Richard Doerflinger, deputy
director of the United States Conference of Catholic
Bishops. "To do so when a clear majority of the taxpayers
themselves reject this approach would be especially
irresponsible.
"Congress should not be misled on this important issue,"
he added. "Most Americans oppose federal funding of
research which requires destroying human embryos."
Indeed, a recent poll commissioned by the bishops, shows
that when Americans find out human embryos are killed in
embryonic stem-cell research, 52 percent oppose federal
funding of it, while just 36 percent support it.
The cord blood registry bill, sponsored in the House by
Rep. Chris Smith, R-N.J., and in the Senate by Sen. Sam
Brownback, R-Kan., would direct money into more research
utilizing cord blood stem cells and also create a central
registry.
Brownback said support for the life-destroying embryonic
stem-cell bill, H.R. 810, has been declining some -- while
momentum has been building for his bill.
"They have lost votes from the last election, and on an
issue like this, it still requires 60 votes (for
passage)," he said. "The other thing I feel like there's
been a gain in, is the effectiveness of adult and cord
blood stem cells. They are curing people of things that
the other side has said we need cloning to cure people
with. But we're curing them with adult stem cells and from
cord blood."
Brownback said many people in Congress don't seem to
understand the distinction between embryonic stem-cell
research and adult stem-cell research, such as with cord
blood.
"I really hope people will look at the science of what has
happened in the several years that we've been tied in on
this debate," he said. "We've known about embryonic stem
cells and have not cured anybody with them -- even though
the research is not illegal at all. We've only recently
learned about adult stem cells within the last five years,
and we're already curing people with heart disease, with
eye problems, with spinal cord injuries. We are producing
results, and we do not need to kill a human being in order
to cure somebody else with the use of stem cells."
Dr. David Prentice, a senior fellow at the Family Research
Council in Washington, D.C., agreed Congress needs to
oppose embryonic stem-cell research, but should endorse
research utilizing adult stem cells.
----- 6 -----
Southern Baptists Concerned About Gay Agenda in Schools
By Kim Trobee, correspondent
http://www.family.org/cforum/fnif/news/a0036571.cfm
SUMMARY: Resolution suggests commending what's working in
public schools, as churches offer support to help families
to find other options.
More than 80 percent of Southern Baptists have children in
public schools. But many of those parents worry whether
educators may be influencing their children to accept
homosexuality.
Dr. Voddie Baucham authored a resolution that's will be
presented at next month's Southern Baptist Convention
annual meeting.
"The resolution is not calling for an exodus," he said.
"The resolution is simply calling for churches to open
their eyes and examine what is going on in our schools."
It also asks Baptists to commend Christians working in
public schools, and for churches to provide support for
options.
"There are many educational alternatives out there,"
Baucham said, "that are not as expensive as many of our
current private Christian schools are. We want people to
explore those alternatives."
Baucham says parents have a biblical mandate to teach
their children biblical principles.
----- 7 -----
ACLU Launches Nationwide Gay Marriage Campaign
Focus on the Family
[No URL; received in email]
The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) has announced a
national campaign to persuade Americans the legal
protections of marriage should be made available for
homosexual couples, 365gay.com reported.
Michael Mitchell, formerly of the gay advocacy group,
Executive Utah, will head up the campaign. His goal is to
convince the nation that same-sex couples suffer because
they are not allowed to marry, and will offer assistance
to groups fighting state battles to redefine marriage to
include homosexual couples.
But Dr. Bill Maier, Focus on the Family's Psychologist in
Residence, says it's clear the American people don't want
marriage upended to suit the whims of 2 percent of the
population.
"Gay activists and their allies in the ACLU know they
can't win at the ballot box or in the court of public
opinion," he said. "So they attempt to circumvent the
democratic process by finding sympathetic liberal courts
and activist judges who will do their bidding."
----- 7 -----
Family News in Focus
Wednesday, May 18, 2005
Focus on the Family
Bob Ditmer
* Congress moves to protect “under God” in the pledge of allegiance from activist judges
1. Supreme Court dodged the "under God" issue last year on a legal-standing issue; "Constitution... gives Congress the power to instruct the courts." Introduction of legislation ordering courts that they cannot rule in Pledge of Allegiance cases. "Bipartisan support for Aiken's bill." "It's time that the courts are prevented from removing god from the pledge." "Removing him from our most sacred, patriotic vow of allegiance." "Strong support" for bill in the House; more difficulty in the Senate.
* Amber Alerts are now available to cell phone users
2. Various statements for it; no indication of what it actually means. Some sort of text messaging, I guess? You can - or will be able to - sign up for them for free by contacting your wireless provider.
* Report shows many preschool kids are being expelled from school
4. Yale study - this was on NPR last night. Expulsions are overwhelmingly behavioural. Starts talking about how every task at a featured playschool includes discipline. Study group says councellors at school cut expulsion rates in half. Focus on the Family says parents should do it, and children should be sent to Christian pre-schools.
* Despite States complaining about No Child Left Behind plan, Secretary of Education recently increased the number of disabled children exempted from the standards
6. "Out of level testing" exemption for learning-disabled students increased. Christian Educators Association International doesn't like it, thinks too many exemptions are being issued.
* Woman organized almost a million and a half letters of thanks to US troops works on promoting patriotism on high school campuses
7. Shawna Fleming - "A Million Thanks Programme." Wants to found clubs to foster patriotism. "American patriotism had decreased a lot - not so many flags out, not as many yellow ribbons."
* ACLU files lawsuit claiming an abstinence-based group misused Federal funds to spread Christianity
3. "The Silver Ring Thing" has been charged. "The ACLU is afraid to support teenage issues, but teenagers are willing to step in and help."
* New report to Corporate America tells employers how to protect their worker’s religious rights
5. "Many [businesses] are known for protecting diversity - except when it comes to religious beliefs." Rutherford Institute wants all businesses to have a person on staff "who understands religious beliefs."
----- 8 -----
Homosexual Activists Continue to Pound ExxonMobil
5/18/2005
By Martha Kleder
Concerned Women for America
Shareholders to vote on adding ‘sexual orientation’ to employment, discrimination policy.
http://www.cwfa.org/articles/8174/CFI/family/index.htm
ExxonMobil shareholders are still fighting attempts to add sexual orientation to the company’s employment and discrimination policy. When shareholders gather in Dallas, Texas, for their annual meeting on May 25, 2005, they will be voting on the proposal for the seventh year.
The proposal has been submitted by the New York City Employees Retirement System each year since the 1999 merger of Exxon and Mobil oil companies, a merger that rolled back homosexual gains made at Mobil Oil.
“This assault on ExxonMobil is a classic example of how homosexual activists refuse to give up,” says Robert Knight, director of Concerned Women for America’s Culture & Family Institute. “Homosexual activists continue to harass and publicly pressure companies to accept their agenda and they never let up.”
Shareholder resolution number 7 quotes statistics from the Human Rights Campaign on the number of workers who perceive on-the-job discrimination, lists cities that restrict business with companies that have not enacted homosexual protection measures, and quotes public opinion polls in building its case in support of the following resolution language:
Exxon was being pressured by HRC before its 1999 merger with Mobil Oil. When Mobil Oil came under the Exxon banner, it adopted Exxon’s employment benefits package, abruptly ending not only Mobil’s discrimination and harassment policy, but also its domestic partner health benefits. This move angered and motivated homosexual activists.
[More at URL]
----- 9 -----
The Fraudulent Filibuster
5/17/2005
By Janice Shaw Crouse
Concerned Women for America
Playing Hard Ball in the Culture War
http://www.cwfa.org/articles/8167/BLI/reports/index.htm
The filibuster has a long history, but the Democrats are abusing it in their current maneuvering in the Senate –– a small handful of minority party senators are blocking the will of the majority; they are using their personal ideology to grind democracy to a halt.
The Democratic senators don’t seem to realize that “to the victor go the spoils” and that the losing party is not in control. Sadly, some of the winning Republicans haven’t yet realized, either, that the winning team (that’s the key word) gets to call the shots.
Several of President Bush’s nominees for federal appeals and district courts have been waiting for FOUR YEARS for their nominations to have a vote in the Senate. These are distinguished Americans –– Janice Rogers Brown got 76 percent of the vote on her election to the California Supreme Court.
To further compound the tragedy, those holding up the proceedings are not even in the areas where the judges are to be assigned. This is a matter of fairness; this is a matter of principle. This is a matter of constitutional authority –– the president’s nominees ought to be voted up or down.
What’s the hold up? The targeted judges believe the Constitution means what it says, not what they reinterpret it to mean, so they are being held hostage under a fraudulent filibuster.
Why is the filibuster fraudulent? The minority argues that they are doing nothing unusual –– they throw out numbers claiming that other presidents have had votes on their nominees held up. Sorry, that won’t wash. The past three presidents, too, nominated 11 appeals court nominees and they were confirmed in an average of just over 80 days. President Bush’s nominees are still unconfirmed –– three haven’t even had a vote up or down –– after nearly 1,500 days.
[More at URL]
CWA Tells Democrats: Drive-by Distortion and Deception are Not Debate
5/18/2005 - CWA
http://www.cwfa.org/articles/8175/MEDIA/nation/index.htm
Washington, D.C. -- Majority leader Sen. Bill Frist (R-Tennessee) will bring to the Senate floor today the nomination of Texas Supreme Court Justice Priscilla Owen to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit. President Bush announced her nomination four years ago.
“Democrats’ willful distortions of Justice Owen’s record and qualifications should not be tolerated by Republicans during the debates,” said Jan LaRue, Concerned Women for America’s chief counsel. “There’s no excuse for allowing this remarkable jurist to twist-in-the wind as she’s attacked on the Senate floor. Dainty rebuttal won’t cut it. When Democrats sacrifice truth for political gain, it’s time to call it what it is.”
On May 9, Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-New York) said: “Priscilla Owens [sic] is just the type of person that the Founding Fathers did not want on the bench because she is just the type of person who says, when she becomes a judge: MY views are more important than the whole view of the elected legislature or than decades or even centuries of judicial decisions and thinking. She feels she is so right, that just because she’s right, she can overturn laws and decisions. If you think Priscilla Owens [sic] is a mainstream conservative, look again.”
“Schumer and company think a mainstream judge is the Clinton appointee who just declared Nebraska’s marriage amendment unconstitutional despite the will of 70 percent of Nebraskans,” LaRue added. “Worse yet, Schumer is now trying to blame his absurdities about Owen on the Founders.”
[More at URL]
----- 10 -----
CWA says, No Soft-Centered Sell-Outs to Avoid Democrats’ Nuclear Reactor
5/17/2005
Concerned Women for America
http://www.cwfa.org/articles/8163/MEDIA/nation/index.htm
Washington, D.C. -- According to media reports, Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid, (D-Nevada) broke off talks on Monday with majority leader Sen. Bill Frist (R-Tennessee) on efforts to head off a showdown on judicial nominations.
Nonetheless, media are also reporting that Sen. Ben Nelson (D-Nebraska) and Sen. John McCain (R-Arizona) are each trying to persuade five of their members to cut a deal that would allow votes on up to five of eight disputed judges in return for a commitment from Republicans not to support a rule change. Democrats would also promise to apply future filibusters only in “extreme” cases, including future Supreme Court openings.
“Democrats have attacked every nominee as ‘extreme,’” said Jan LaRue, Concerned Women for America’s chief counsel. “Priscilla Owen won reelection to the Texas Supreme Court by an 84 percent margin. Every major newspaper in Texas endorsed her. The American Bar Association unanimously gave her its highest ‘well-qualified’ rating, yet the Democrats call her ‘extreme.’
“Every Republican says it’s only fair and right to have up-or-down votes on nominees but they’re apparently willing to jettison some of the nominees in exchange for a mess of pottage. This so-called compromise shows that ‘centrists’ are out of their league as negotiators if they think this is a good deal.
“Sen. McCain is a war hero. He refused release as a prisoner of war because he wouldn’t cut a deal that left his fellow prisoners behind. He needs to take the same tough stand here. Why Republicans fear letting the American people watch the Democrats’ nuclear meltdown simply because the Senate adheres to 214 years of Senate history and practice by having up-or-down votes on every nominee is baffling, to say the least,” LaRue concluded.
----- 11 -----
Massachusetts’ One-Sex ‘Marriages’: Nothing Energized Americans More 5/17/2005
Washington, D.C. – Concerned Women for America (CWA) marked today’s one-year anniversary of Massachusetts’ issuing of court-ordered one-sex “marriage” licenses by noting the groundswell of support across the nation for preserving marriage as the union of one man and one woman. Fourteen new state constitutional amendments resulted immediately, bringing the total to 18, with several more on the ballot in 2006. The revolt against judicial tyranny in Massachusetts is the political backdrop for the debate over judicial nominees in the U.S. Senate and will influence the battle for Supreme Court appointments when Chief Justice William Rehnquist resigns.
"Nothing has energized previously uninvolved citizens more than this issue,” Robert Knight, director of CWA’s Culture and Family Institute, said in today’s Los Angeles Times.
A brief analysis of recent election results shows that concern for marriage among Americans outweighs support for any other issue or candidate:
* Average election results for all 18 states that have voted on a constitutional marriage amendment, by percentage: Yes: 70%.
* State marriage amendments in all 18 states combined received 12 percent more support on average per state than George W. Bush did for President.
* State amendments in all 18 states combined received 30 percent more support on average per state than Sen. John Kerry (D-Massachusetts) did for President.
“It [‘gay marriage’] has energized the pro-family movement because it has moved the debate beyond theory to actual images of men marrying men and women marrying women,” Knight told the Times. “And the realization has set in that this is about more than marriage. It will affect, eventually, every classroom in the country, as textbooks begin to portray two men as a marriage. And it will affect businesses as they are forced to subsidize homosexual relationships.
“The political impact alone has been enormous. It probably swung the election for George W. Bush,” said Knight.
----- 12 -----
Women on the front lines?
By Robert L. Maginnis
The Washington Times
http://www.washingtontimes.com/commentary/20050516-091558-1268r.htm
"I just don't think America is ready to see a woman without an arm," said Juanita Wilson, an army staff sergeant who lost her hand to an improvised explosive device that destroyed her vehicle while on a mission in Iraq. Despite this statement, it seems that many in the United States have been coarsened to the killing and maiming of young women and are ready for more of the same. Thirty-five women have died and 271 have been wounded in Iraq.
Sgt. Wilson is one of five American military women at Walter Reed hospital who have lost limbs during combat in Iraq.
The sight of young women maimed in combat will become more common unless action is taken. Military bureaucrats, members of Congress and the media seem to be lusting for a more-women-in-combat policy that could lead to conscripting our daughters if a draft becomes necessary.
Rep. Heather Wilson, a 1980s Air Force veteran and New Mexico Republican, suggests the killing and maiming of young women in combat is now accepted by Americans. She told The Washington Post, "We have gotten beyond the point where losing a daughter is somehow worse than losing a son."
But Connie Halfaker, the mother of one of those women at Walter Reed recovering from a lost limb, trusted the Army's promise to keep women out of direct combat and never worried about her daughter going to war, although she told a reporter, "I knew it was a possibility that I would need to give up my son for a war." Lt. Dawn Halfaker, who lost her right arm on a military police patrol last year in Ba'qubah, Iraq, explained, "Women in combat is not really an issue. It is happening."
Although President Bush has said, "No women in combat," the enemy doesn't discriminate. Insurgents target every American, whether male, female, combatant or noncombatant.
The fact is that the war in Iraq is unlike a conventional war. It is a struggle against well-armed insurgents with no clearly defined battle lines. It is a classic example of guerrilla warfare where no participant is safe.
Today, 15 percent of the active army are women. They pepper the ranks of all but direct combat units. Though as of 1994, women were barred from "units and positions required to collocate and remain with direct ground combat units assigned to direct ground combat missions," the Pentagon policy actually increases the danger for servicewomen.
Recently, Army Secretary Francis Harvey told Congress his women-in-combat policy doesn't need to be changed to comply with the 1994 provision. Perhaps, but the Army is assigning women to forward combat companies, which are in direct support of the 3rd Infantry Division's new brigade combat teams now serving in Baghdad. This potentially makes them increasingly vulnerable to attacks by insurgents.
Even though women are not supposed to serve in combat they do fly Army helicopters in hostile areas. Maj. Ladda Duckworth lost both legs when a rocket-propelled grenade downed her Black Hawk helicopter last fall. Women also serve in multiple-launch rocket, reconnaissance and Stryker units. The line defining combat is getting very fuzzy.
The only way the United States can eliminate women from dying or being maimed in direct combat is to remove them from the battlefield. "That would be politically untenable," said a powerful congressman to this writer, and besides, it would force male soldiers to serve more frequent combat tours. The Army is dependent upon the large female force to perform global missions.
[More at URL]
----- 13 -----
They Got Our Money, but not Our Souls
We have much to be thankful for in the victories we won!
Washington Evangelicals for Responsible Government
http://www.werg.org/newsletter/April2005.pdf
What a fight we have had over these last few months! We have not won all the battles but we have won far more than anyone thought we would. Besides that, we have improved our position to be able to have an impact in the days ahead. In the last twelve months we have more than tripled the number of people working with us with more joining every month.
I am so proud of Bob Higley for his work in the Legislature. We should all be grateful to him for his hard work in this session completely controlled by the Democrats. They may have gotten more of our money but they did not get our souls. We stood up on the moral issues and mostly won by holding the line.
I am thrilled to have Danille Turissini as our grassroots coordinator. She was able to organize and vastly increase the influence from the people of this state on the Legislature. When the Legislature hears from the people good things happen. When we leave them to their own devices we get more government and less of a place for righteousness. They like to tell us that we are the most unchurched state in the Union. That may be true but more than half the people of this state are in church on at least a monthly basis. The majority of the people are still with us, not with the secularists. If we continue to rally God’s people we will win.
We organized the second largest Olympia rally in state history last month and it has had a huge impact. People across the state are praying that the Supreme Court does not impose same-sex marriage upon the state. Keep praying until we know what they are going to do. Ask for prayer in your churches and Sunday School classes. In the legislature, people now know who WERG is and they know we represent a huge number of people. The Evangelical voice in Olympia is firmer than ever.
WERG added staff this last year and organized the Mayday for Marriage Rally in Olympia on March 8th. These were new and bigger responsibilities for us. Following the rally, we started last month $40,000 in the red. In addition to many smaller gifts we had a $12,000 and $15,000 gift that really helped us. Several churches took offerings for WERG last month.
With all these efforts I am happy to tell you that we are back to zero. Zero never looked so good as it did last week when we pulled out of the minus category. We need your help to cover our ongoing expenses and rebuild for the future. You have believed in the vision of Christian influence in the decisions of government in the past. I am asking that you continue to believe in what we are doing and to support it financially as much as you can. We have never had greater success or greater needs than we do right now.
Kansas creationists team up with Muslim fundamentalists in evolution "trial" - creationism, a.k.a. "intelligent design," voted up 6-4, will be introduced as science;
Story on the state of the anti-marriage amendment in Massachusetts - it appears to be losing steam;
Agape Press rants about the "Reign of Madness" in Massachusetts, claiming the state has been "overrun by homosexuality" and that Christians are being "arrested by police for resisting having their kids exposed to homosexuality";
Focus on the Family article against embryonic stem-cell research;
Focus on the Family article promoting the anti-gay school inquisition proposal for the Southern Baptist Convention's conference;
FotF attacks ACLU for planned campaign highlighting problems facing gay couples because of the lack of legal marriage or CU protections;
Today's Family News in Focus;
CWA rails against shareholder motions to make the unified ExxonMobil, which dropped Mobil's DP benefits and GBLT-protections when they and Exxon merged, re-adopt anti-discrimination language;
CWA demands filibuster rules change - two articles;
CWA tells John McCain that he should support the rules change;
CWA marks anniversary of Massachusetts marriage by claiming nothing as energised "Americans" more;
Washington Times opinion column against women in near-combat support roles;
Washington Evangelicals for Responsible Government crows about the defeat of HB1515: "They Got Our Money, But Not Our Souls."
----- 1 -----
FRIST TO INVOKE 'CONSTITUTIONAL OPTION' THIS WEEK
An end to the blockade of judicial nominees may finally be
at hand.
http://www.family.org/cforum/feature/a0036565.cfm
Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist, R-Tenn., vowed last
Friday to send Priscilla Owen and Janice Rogers Brown to
the Senate floor for debate and an up-or-down vote as soon
as the Senate completes work on the highway bill.
The nominations are sure to be filibustered -- or bottled
up -- by Senate Democrats who oppose both because of
supposed conservative or pro-life rulings. That means this
could be the week when Frist invokes the "constitutional
option" to allow the Owen and Brown nominations -- as well
as a handful of others -- to come to the Senate floor for
an up-or-down vote.
Jan LaRue, chief counsel of Concerned Women for America,
told CitizenLink her advice to the Senate is simple:
"Hurry up and finish on the highway bill, so you can 'hit
the road' on the president's judicial nominees."
LaRue said Rogers and Brown, both found to be qualified
candidates by the American Bar Association, deserve an
up-or-down vote.
"Sen. Frist needs to bring up the nominees and move
full-speed ahead -- no picking up
hitchhiking-compromisers, no detours, no sightseeing, no
back-seat filibustering. If the Senate Democrats resume
their obstructionist filibustering in order to prevent an
up-or-down vote, Sen. Frist should apply the
'constitutional option' without tapping the brakes."
Bruce Hausknecht, legal issues analyst at Focus on the
Family, said after the nominations are brought to the
floor, at least 100 hours will be set aside for thorough
debate.
"After several days of extended debate, a cloture motion
vote will be taken -- meaning a vote to end debate," he
said. "If that vote fails, meaning that 60 votes are not
available to end debate, then Sen. Frist will get up and
make a motion to the chair."
That motion -- the "constitutional option" -- means the
chair, Vice President Dick Cheney, who serves as the
president of the Senate, will likely rule it is
unconstitutional to require 60 votes to break a filibuster
on judicial nominations.
Senate Majority Whip Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., indicated
over the weekend he had the votes needed to secure a
cloture vote -- and for the constitutional option.
For their part, Senate Democrats are not expected to take
the constitutional option lying down.
Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., threatened
months ago to shut down the Senate if the constitutional
option was invoked. But when public sentiment seemed to
run against that proposal, he has since taken to making
generalized threats.
"If they, for whatever reason, decide to do this, it's not
only wrong, they will rue the day they did it," Reid said
recently, "because we will do whatever we can do to strike
back . . . I will, for lack of a better word, screw things
up."
Kay Daly, president of Coalition for a Fair Judiciary,
said Democrats have already been playing obstructionist
with regard to some of the president's judicial nominees.
Many nominees have been waiting years for their
nominations to come to the Senate floor for a vote.
"The question is: Is it unconstitutional to apply the
filibuster to judicial nominations? If it is, a grave
injustice is being done to these nominees," Daly said. "At
some point, I think we all have to ask ourselves exactly
what the Constitution means."
There is no doubt, then, this is an important legal issue.
But why is it an important issue for the pro-family
community? Leaders say it's really the question of what
the future will look like for America.
"Believe it or not," Hausknecht said, "there is a simple
correlation between the types of judges that we put on the
bench and the moral issues of the day. Are we going to be
a nation that murders its preborn children and tries to
wipe Christianity from the public square, or are we going
to be a nation that holds dear its principles, as
enunciated in the Declaration of Independence and the
Constitution, that we are 'one nation, under God?"
Practically speaking, Hausknecht said, this is essentially
Round One in the expected battle over future Supreme Court
nominations. Capitol Hill was swirling with rumors Monday
that at least one vacancy is likely to come up "in the
next few weeks" -- as one Washington newspaper put it.
"It has come to this because the liberals have lost
control of both houses of Congress and the presidency,"
Hausknecht said. "They can no longer control policy
through legislative means or oppose conservative measures
with a veto from the White House. The only branch of
government they have left that has been very receptive to
their agenda -- is the judiciary."
TAKE ACTION: Ask your Senators to support Sen. Frist and
the constitutional option. You may reach them through our
CitizenLink Action Center:
http://www.family.org/cforum/action_center.cfm?capwizurl=http://www3.capwiz.com/fof/dbq/officials/
----- 2 -----
Darwin's evolution theory loses out in mock trial
Indo-Asian News Service
New York, May 16, 2005
http://www.hindustantimes.com/news/181_1363727,0004.htm
Charles Darwin's theory of evolution was on trial in Topeka, Kansas, and it seems the legendary British naturologist lost to an "intelligent designer" - a barely disguised euphemism for God.
The mock trial of Darwin's theory by Kansas' Board of Education, which concluded on May 12, included testimonies and cross-examination of and by pro-evolution and pro-creationism experts.
The board's trial voted 6 to 4 in favour of bringing the concept of "intelligent design" within the methods of teaching science in schools. Over two dozen scientists, teachers and lawyers said the state's science standards be amended to incorporate alternative thinking.
There was widespread apprehension among America's liberals and scientists that God is being brought into the country's classrooms by the supporters of the concept of an "intelligent designer", who argue that the world had to have been designed by a particularly smart designer, possibly God.
At the centre of the trials is Steve Abrams, a veterinarian and Republican, who among other things believes that earth is only 5,000 years old, a view propagated by Christian conservatives, as opposed to 4.5 billion years as argued by scientists.
Abrams as the board chairman has challenged the validity of evolution as the only valid explanation of life. He has said evolutionary biology is inadequate in terms of evidence and there ought to be an intelligent designer at the helm.
The pro-creationists, who are generally perceived by scientists and liberals as Christian religious zealots pushing a biblical agenda, have lately chosen to use seemingly more neutral language while arguing their case. Rather than saying that life was created by God, they use the term an intelligent designer to give their case a more rational touch.
Among those who testified was Mustafa Akyol, a Turkish newspaper columnist and Muslim. He reportedly said that the theory of evolution, which incidentally goes against Islam as well, generates "anti-Westernism" elsewhere in the world. The purpose behind introducing people like Akyol was to give the trial an appearance of being non-partisan and religiously diverse.
The evolution versus creationism debate has been raging in Kansas since 1999, when the state dropped evolution from its requirements of science education and invited widespread ridicule.
----- 3 -----
Amendment banning gay marriage faces uncertain future
By Steve LeBlanc, Associated Press Writer | May 17, 2005
Associated Press
BOSTON -- A year after same-sex couples started taking their first-in-the-nation wedding vows in Massachusetts, a constitutional amendment designed to undo gay marriage is facing an uncertain future.
http://www.boston.com/news/local/massachusetts/articles/2005/05/17/amendment_banning_gay_marriage_faces_uncertain_future/
Both supporters and opponents of gay marriage, for very different reasons, are hoping to defeat the amendment that was seen as a compromise when it got preliminary legislative approval a year ago.
The proposal to ban gay marriage while allowing civil unions was seen by supporters as a way to preserve some rights for same-sex couples, and by many opponents as a chance to persuade the state Supreme Judicial Court to temporarily stop gay marriage until voters had a say.
Since then the political landscape has shifted, with more support in the Legislature for gay marriage and a lack of widespread opposition by voters as thousands of couples have married.
At the same time, opponents of gay marriage are considering pulling their support for the compromise to work toward a ban of both same-sex marriages and civil unions.
If the amendment fails during a planned second round of voting in the fall, gay marriage will remain legal in Massachusetts.
Sen. Stephen Buoniconti is one of a handful of lawmakers who supported the compromise, which passed 105-92, now reconsidering his vote.
Buoniconti said he's particularly concerned about creating a legal limbo for the thousands of gay couples who have already married.
"That wasn't so much of a question the first time around," said Buoniconti, a Democrat.
And, he said, during his door-to-door Senate campaign last year, only one person brought up gay marriage. "The sky hasn't fallen. There's a new landscape. The world has changed."
One of the sponsors of the compromise amendment, Republican Sen. Brian Lees, also said he's not ruling out a change of heart.
"More than likely I will support it, but I want to keep an open mind on it," Lees said. "With a year's hindsight you've got to take a second look and I will do that. I am continuing to hear from both sides."
Supporters of traditional marriage are considering gathering voter signatures for a ballot initiative that would ban gay marriage and civil unions, said Ron Crews, head of the Massachusetts Family Institute.
They would need to gather more than 68,000 signatures, but would face a lower threshold of legislative support -- 51 lawmakers instead of 101 -- to get it on the ballot. The earliest it could go before voters is 2008.
[More at URL]
----- 4 -----
Mass. Pro-Family Groups Resist Homosexual Activism's 'Reign of Madness'
By Bill Fancher
May 16, 2005
http://headlines.agapepress.org/archive/5/162005a.asp
(AgapePress) - Tomorrow (May 17) marks the first anniversary of legalized homosexual marriage in Massachusetts, and a pro-family group there says the citizens have endured a "reign of madness" since the fateful Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court (MSJC) ruling that cleared the way for same-sex couples to marry legally in that state.
Brian Camenker of the Article 8 Alliance says since the MSJC legalized same-sex unions, Massachusetts has become overrun by homosexuality. "Even driver's licenses now, when you renew them, have a question such as, 'Has your sex changed?'" he notes.
And since the MSJC ruling, Camenker points out, parents can no longer opt their children out of pro-homosexual lessons and activities in school. During school assemblies, he asserts, speakers will come in and tell the young people gathered "that the Bible's prohibitions on homosexuality are essentially misinterpretations, and if your parents believe them then they're wrong."
Parents have even been arrested by police for resisting having their kids exposed to homosexuality, the pro-family advocate claims. "Society is going through this enforced homosexualization in Massachusetts," he says. "It's truly frightening." For example, he points to Lexington parent David Parker, who was arrested and charged with "trespassing" at his son's elementary school during a scheduled meeting with the principal and the town's Director of Education over his objections to homosexual curriculum materials.
Camenker and other traditional family supporters feel the MSJC's ruling legalizing homosexual marriage was tantamount to ripping the Constitution of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts into shreds. In addition, he maintains that parents and others who believe in the biblical view of homosexuality are being vilified in the schools by supporters of the educators' unions.
In response to all this, the Article 8 spokesman reveals that a big rally is being planned for City Hall Plaza in Boston, with its number-one priority being to inform the media and the public about what is going on. "Essentially, we're going to outline to the press the kinds of things that have been going on in this year that have oppressed the people," he says, such as "the incredibly accelerated homosexual agenda in the schools because of this [court ruling]."
The Article 8 Alliance and the Parents Rights Coalition have worked together to get four important bills filed in the Massachusetts legislature -- three aimed at constitutionally removing the "rogue judges" on the MSJC who voted to legalize same-sex marriage and to reverse that ruling. The fourth piece of legislation is an updated Parents' Rights Law, which would stop the accompanying homosexual programs in the state's public schools.
----- 5 -----
CITIZENLINK BREAKING NEWS:
Focus on the Family
Divergent Bills Spotlight Stem-Cell Debate
by Pete Winn, associate editor
http://citizenlink.org
SUMMARY: Separate bills illustrate confusion over two
types of stem-cell research.
Congress is poised to deal soon with two stem-cell
research bills -- each would take the country in
completely different directions.
One, H.R. 810, would increase the number of embryonic
stem-cell lines available for federally funded research --
and bring to an end the president's policy placing limits
on funding to certain already-existing lines.
The other, H.R. 596, the National Cord Blood Stem Cell
Bank Network bill, champions the use of stem cells derived
from umbilical-cord blood -- setting up a registry for
researchers and doctors.
Which way will Congress go?
Pro-life groups say H.R. 810, which deals with embryonic
stem-cell research, is anti-life because human embryos are
destroyed in the process.
The cord blood bill pleases pro-lifers and is completely
without controversy.
"It is always wrong for government to promote the
destruction of innocent human life, which embryonic
stem-cell research does," said Richard Doerflinger, deputy
director of the United States Conference of Catholic
Bishops. "To do so when a clear majority of the taxpayers
themselves reject this approach would be especially
irresponsible.
"Congress should not be misled on this important issue,"
he added. "Most Americans oppose federal funding of
research which requires destroying human embryos."
Indeed, a recent poll commissioned by the bishops, shows
that when Americans find out human embryos are killed in
embryonic stem-cell research, 52 percent oppose federal
funding of it, while just 36 percent support it.
The cord blood registry bill, sponsored in the House by
Rep. Chris Smith, R-N.J., and in the Senate by Sen. Sam
Brownback, R-Kan., would direct money into more research
utilizing cord blood stem cells and also create a central
registry.
Brownback said support for the life-destroying embryonic
stem-cell bill, H.R. 810, has been declining some -- while
momentum has been building for his bill.
"They have lost votes from the last election, and on an
issue like this, it still requires 60 votes (for
passage)," he said. "The other thing I feel like there's
been a gain in, is the effectiveness of adult and cord
blood stem cells. They are curing people of things that
the other side has said we need cloning to cure people
with. But we're curing them with adult stem cells and from
cord blood."
Brownback said many people in Congress don't seem to
understand the distinction between embryonic stem-cell
research and adult stem-cell research, such as with cord
blood.
"I really hope people will look at the science of what has
happened in the several years that we've been tied in on
this debate," he said. "We've known about embryonic stem
cells and have not cured anybody with them -- even though
the research is not illegal at all. We've only recently
learned about adult stem cells within the last five years,
and we're already curing people with heart disease, with
eye problems, with spinal cord injuries. We are producing
results, and we do not need to kill a human being in order
to cure somebody else with the use of stem cells."
Dr. David Prentice, a senior fellow at the Family Research
Council in Washington, D.C., agreed Congress needs to
oppose embryonic stem-cell research, but should endorse
research utilizing adult stem cells.
----- 6 -----
Southern Baptists Concerned About Gay Agenda in Schools
By Kim Trobee, correspondent
http://www.family.org/cforum/fnif/news/a0036571.cfm
SUMMARY: Resolution suggests commending what's working in
public schools, as churches offer support to help families
to find other options.
More than 80 percent of Southern Baptists have children in
public schools. But many of those parents worry whether
educators may be influencing their children to accept
homosexuality.
Dr. Voddie Baucham authored a resolution that's will be
presented at next month's Southern Baptist Convention
annual meeting.
"The resolution is not calling for an exodus," he said.
"The resolution is simply calling for churches to open
their eyes and examine what is going on in our schools."
It also asks Baptists to commend Christians working in
public schools, and for churches to provide support for
options.
"There are many educational alternatives out there,"
Baucham said, "that are not as expensive as many of our
current private Christian schools are. We want people to
explore those alternatives."
Baucham says parents have a biblical mandate to teach
their children biblical principles.
----- 7 -----
ACLU Launches Nationwide Gay Marriage Campaign
Focus on the Family
[No URL; received in email]
The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) has announced a
national campaign to persuade Americans the legal
protections of marriage should be made available for
homosexual couples, 365gay.com reported.
Michael Mitchell, formerly of the gay advocacy group,
Executive Utah, will head up the campaign. His goal is to
convince the nation that same-sex couples suffer because
they are not allowed to marry, and will offer assistance
to groups fighting state battles to redefine marriage to
include homosexual couples.
But Dr. Bill Maier, Focus on the Family's Psychologist in
Residence, says it's clear the American people don't want
marriage upended to suit the whims of 2 percent of the
population.
"Gay activists and their allies in the ACLU know they
can't win at the ballot box or in the court of public
opinion," he said. "So they attempt to circumvent the
democratic process by finding sympathetic liberal courts
and activist judges who will do their bidding."
----- 7 -----
Family News in Focus
Wednesday, May 18, 2005
Focus on the Family
Bob Ditmer
* Congress moves to protect “under God” in the pledge of allegiance from activist judges
1. Supreme Court dodged the "under God" issue last year on a legal-standing issue; "Constitution... gives Congress the power to instruct the courts." Introduction of legislation ordering courts that they cannot rule in Pledge of Allegiance cases. "Bipartisan support for Aiken's bill." "It's time that the courts are prevented from removing god from the pledge." "Removing him from our most sacred, patriotic vow of allegiance." "Strong support" for bill in the House; more difficulty in the Senate.
* Amber Alerts are now available to cell phone users
2. Various statements for it; no indication of what it actually means. Some sort of text messaging, I guess? You can - or will be able to - sign up for them for free by contacting your wireless provider.
* Report shows many preschool kids are being expelled from school
4. Yale study - this was on NPR last night. Expulsions are overwhelmingly behavioural. Starts talking about how every task at a featured playschool includes discipline. Study group says councellors at school cut expulsion rates in half. Focus on the Family says parents should do it, and children should be sent to Christian pre-schools.
* Despite States complaining about No Child Left Behind plan, Secretary of Education recently increased the number of disabled children exempted from the standards
6. "Out of level testing" exemption for learning-disabled students increased. Christian Educators Association International doesn't like it, thinks too many exemptions are being issued.
* Woman organized almost a million and a half letters of thanks to US troops works on promoting patriotism on high school campuses
7. Shawna Fleming - "A Million Thanks Programme." Wants to found clubs to foster patriotism. "American patriotism had decreased a lot - not so many flags out, not as many yellow ribbons."
* ACLU files lawsuit claiming an abstinence-based group misused Federal funds to spread Christianity
3. "The Silver Ring Thing" has been charged. "The ACLU is afraid to support teenage issues, but teenagers are willing to step in and help."
* New report to Corporate America tells employers how to protect their worker’s religious rights
5. "Many [businesses] are known for protecting diversity - except when it comes to religious beliefs." Rutherford Institute wants all businesses to have a person on staff "who understands religious beliefs."
----- 8 -----
Homosexual Activists Continue to Pound ExxonMobil
5/18/2005
By Martha Kleder
Concerned Women for America
Shareholders to vote on adding ‘sexual orientation’ to employment, discrimination policy.
http://www.cwfa.org/articles/8174/CFI/family/index.htm
ExxonMobil shareholders are still fighting attempts to add sexual orientation to the company’s employment and discrimination policy. When shareholders gather in Dallas, Texas, for their annual meeting on May 25, 2005, they will be voting on the proposal for the seventh year.
The proposal has been submitted by the New York City Employees Retirement System each year since the 1999 merger of Exxon and Mobil oil companies, a merger that rolled back homosexual gains made at Mobil Oil.
“This assault on ExxonMobil is a classic example of how homosexual activists refuse to give up,” says Robert Knight, director of Concerned Women for America’s Culture & Family Institute. “Homosexual activists continue to harass and publicly pressure companies to accept their agenda and they never let up.”
Shareholder resolution number 7 quotes statistics from the Human Rights Campaign on the number of workers who perceive on-the-job discrimination, lists cities that restrict business with companies that have not enacted homosexual protection measures, and quotes public opinion polls in building its case in support of the following resolution language:
Resolved: The Shareholders request that ExxonMobil amend its written equal employment opportunity policy to explicitly prohibit discrimination based on sexual orientation and to substantially implement the policy.The Human Rights Campaign (HRC), the nation’s largest homosexual activist group, has been at the forefront of the assault on corporations. HRC has not only created the “studies” which support making homosexuals a protected class in a company’s employment policy, but it has also organized shareholders in support of the resolutions, and conducted boycotts and protests against uncooperative corporations.
Exxon was being pressured by HRC before its 1999 merger with Mobil Oil. When Mobil Oil came under the Exxon banner, it adopted Exxon’s employment benefits package, abruptly ending not only Mobil’s discrimination and harassment policy, but also its domestic partner health benefits. This move angered and motivated homosexual activists.
[More at URL]
----- 9 -----
The Fraudulent Filibuster
5/17/2005
By Janice Shaw Crouse
Concerned Women for America
Playing Hard Ball in the Culture War
http://www.cwfa.org/articles/8167/BLI/reports/index.htm
The filibuster has a long history, but the Democrats are abusing it in their current maneuvering in the Senate –– a small handful of minority party senators are blocking the will of the majority; they are using their personal ideology to grind democracy to a halt.
The Democratic senators don’t seem to realize that “to the victor go the spoils” and that the losing party is not in control. Sadly, some of the winning Republicans haven’t yet realized, either, that the winning team (that’s the key word) gets to call the shots.
Several of President Bush’s nominees for federal appeals and district courts have been waiting for FOUR YEARS for their nominations to have a vote in the Senate. These are distinguished Americans –– Janice Rogers Brown got 76 percent of the vote on her election to the California Supreme Court.
To further compound the tragedy, those holding up the proceedings are not even in the areas where the judges are to be assigned. This is a matter of fairness; this is a matter of principle. This is a matter of constitutional authority –– the president’s nominees ought to be voted up or down.
What’s the hold up? The targeted judges believe the Constitution means what it says, not what they reinterpret it to mean, so they are being held hostage under a fraudulent filibuster.
Why is the filibuster fraudulent? The minority argues that they are doing nothing unusual –– they throw out numbers claiming that other presidents have had votes on their nominees held up. Sorry, that won’t wash. The past three presidents, too, nominated 11 appeals court nominees and they were confirmed in an average of just over 80 days. President Bush’s nominees are still unconfirmed –– three haven’t even had a vote up or down –– after nearly 1,500 days.
[More at URL]
CWA Tells Democrats: Drive-by Distortion and Deception are Not Debate
5/18/2005 - CWA
http://www.cwfa.org/articles/8175/MEDIA/nation/index.htm
Washington, D.C. -- Majority leader Sen. Bill Frist (R-Tennessee) will bring to the Senate floor today the nomination of Texas Supreme Court Justice Priscilla Owen to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit. President Bush announced her nomination four years ago.
“Democrats’ willful distortions of Justice Owen’s record and qualifications should not be tolerated by Republicans during the debates,” said Jan LaRue, Concerned Women for America’s chief counsel. “There’s no excuse for allowing this remarkable jurist to twist-in-the wind as she’s attacked on the Senate floor. Dainty rebuttal won’t cut it. When Democrats sacrifice truth for political gain, it’s time to call it what it is.”
On May 9, Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-New York) said: “Priscilla Owens [sic] is just the type of person that the Founding Fathers did not want on the bench because she is just the type of person who says, when she becomes a judge: MY views are more important than the whole view of the elected legislature or than decades or even centuries of judicial decisions and thinking. She feels she is so right, that just because she’s right, she can overturn laws and decisions. If you think Priscilla Owens [sic] is a mainstream conservative, look again.”
“Schumer and company think a mainstream judge is the Clinton appointee who just declared Nebraska’s marriage amendment unconstitutional despite the will of 70 percent of Nebraskans,” LaRue added. “Worse yet, Schumer is now trying to blame his absurdities about Owen on the Founders.”
[More at URL]
----- 10 -----
CWA says, No Soft-Centered Sell-Outs to Avoid Democrats’ Nuclear Reactor
5/17/2005
Concerned Women for America
http://www.cwfa.org/articles/8163/MEDIA/nation/index.htm
Washington, D.C. -- According to media reports, Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid, (D-Nevada) broke off talks on Monday with majority leader Sen. Bill Frist (R-Tennessee) on efforts to head off a showdown on judicial nominations.
Nonetheless, media are also reporting that Sen. Ben Nelson (D-Nebraska) and Sen. John McCain (R-Arizona) are each trying to persuade five of their members to cut a deal that would allow votes on up to five of eight disputed judges in return for a commitment from Republicans not to support a rule change. Democrats would also promise to apply future filibusters only in “extreme” cases, including future Supreme Court openings.
“Democrats have attacked every nominee as ‘extreme,’” said Jan LaRue, Concerned Women for America’s chief counsel. “Priscilla Owen won reelection to the Texas Supreme Court by an 84 percent margin. Every major newspaper in Texas endorsed her. The American Bar Association unanimously gave her its highest ‘well-qualified’ rating, yet the Democrats call her ‘extreme.’
“Every Republican says it’s only fair and right to have up-or-down votes on nominees but they’re apparently willing to jettison some of the nominees in exchange for a mess of pottage. This so-called compromise shows that ‘centrists’ are out of their league as negotiators if they think this is a good deal.
“Sen. McCain is a war hero. He refused release as a prisoner of war because he wouldn’t cut a deal that left his fellow prisoners behind. He needs to take the same tough stand here. Why Republicans fear letting the American people watch the Democrats’ nuclear meltdown simply because the Senate adheres to 214 years of Senate history and practice by having up-or-down votes on every nominee is baffling, to say the least,” LaRue concluded.
----- 11 -----
Massachusetts’ One-Sex ‘Marriages’: Nothing Energized Americans More 5/17/2005
Washington, D.C. – Concerned Women for America (CWA) marked today’s one-year anniversary of Massachusetts’ issuing of court-ordered one-sex “marriage” licenses by noting the groundswell of support across the nation for preserving marriage as the union of one man and one woman. Fourteen new state constitutional amendments resulted immediately, bringing the total to 18, with several more on the ballot in 2006. The revolt against judicial tyranny in Massachusetts is the political backdrop for the debate over judicial nominees in the U.S. Senate and will influence the battle for Supreme Court appointments when Chief Justice William Rehnquist resigns.
"Nothing has energized previously uninvolved citizens more than this issue,” Robert Knight, director of CWA’s Culture and Family Institute, said in today’s Los Angeles Times.
A brief analysis of recent election results shows that concern for marriage among Americans outweighs support for any other issue or candidate:
* Average election results for all 18 states that have voted on a constitutional marriage amendment, by percentage: Yes: 70%.
* State marriage amendments in all 18 states combined received 12 percent more support on average per state than George W. Bush did for President.
* State amendments in all 18 states combined received 30 percent more support on average per state than Sen. John Kerry (D-Massachusetts) did for President.
“It [‘gay marriage’] has energized the pro-family movement because it has moved the debate beyond theory to actual images of men marrying men and women marrying women,” Knight told the Times. “And the realization has set in that this is about more than marriage. It will affect, eventually, every classroom in the country, as textbooks begin to portray two men as a marriage. And it will affect businesses as they are forced to subsidize homosexual relationships.
“The political impact alone has been enormous. It probably swung the election for George W. Bush,” said Knight.
----- 12 -----
Women on the front lines?
By Robert L. Maginnis
The Washington Times
http://www.washingtontimes.com/commentary/20050516-091558-1268r.htm
"I just don't think America is ready to see a woman without an arm," said Juanita Wilson, an army staff sergeant who lost her hand to an improvised explosive device that destroyed her vehicle while on a mission in Iraq. Despite this statement, it seems that many in the United States have been coarsened to the killing and maiming of young women and are ready for more of the same. Thirty-five women have died and 271 have been wounded in Iraq.
Sgt. Wilson is one of five American military women at Walter Reed hospital who have lost limbs during combat in Iraq.
The sight of young women maimed in combat will become more common unless action is taken. Military bureaucrats, members of Congress and the media seem to be lusting for a more-women-in-combat policy that could lead to conscripting our daughters if a draft becomes necessary.
Rep. Heather Wilson, a 1980s Air Force veteran and New Mexico Republican, suggests the killing and maiming of young women in combat is now accepted by Americans. She told The Washington Post, "We have gotten beyond the point where losing a daughter is somehow worse than losing a son."
But Connie Halfaker, the mother of one of those women at Walter Reed recovering from a lost limb, trusted the Army's promise to keep women out of direct combat and never worried about her daughter going to war, although she told a reporter, "I knew it was a possibility that I would need to give up my son for a war." Lt. Dawn Halfaker, who lost her right arm on a military police patrol last year in Ba'qubah, Iraq, explained, "Women in combat is not really an issue. It is happening."
Although President Bush has said, "No women in combat," the enemy doesn't discriminate. Insurgents target every American, whether male, female, combatant or noncombatant.
The fact is that the war in Iraq is unlike a conventional war. It is a struggle against well-armed insurgents with no clearly defined battle lines. It is a classic example of guerrilla warfare where no participant is safe.
Today, 15 percent of the active army are women. They pepper the ranks of all but direct combat units. Though as of 1994, women were barred from "units and positions required to collocate and remain with direct ground combat units assigned to direct ground combat missions," the Pentagon policy actually increases the danger for servicewomen.
Recently, Army Secretary Francis Harvey told Congress his women-in-combat policy doesn't need to be changed to comply with the 1994 provision. Perhaps, but the Army is assigning women to forward combat companies, which are in direct support of the 3rd Infantry Division's new brigade combat teams now serving in Baghdad. This potentially makes them increasingly vulnerable to attacks by insurgents.
Even though women are not supposed to serve in combat they do fly Army helicopters in hostile areas. Maj. Ladda Duckworth lost both legs when a rocket-propelled grenade downed her Black Hawk helicopter last fall. Women also serve in multiple-launch rocket, reconnaissance and Stryker units. The line defining combat is getting very fuzzy.
The only way the United States can eliminate women from dying or being maimed in direct combat is to remove them from the battlefield. "That would be politically untenable," said a powerful congressman to this writer, and besides, it would force male soldiers to serve more frequent combat tours. The Army is dependent upon the large female force to perform global missions.
[More at URL]
----- 13 -----
They Got Our Money, but not Our Souls
We have much to be thankful for in the victories we won!
Washington Evangelicals for Responsible Government
http://www.werg.org/newsletter/April2005.pdf
What a fight we have had over these last few months! We have not won all the battles but we have won far more than anyone thought we would. Besides that, we have improved our position to be able to have an impact in the days ahead. In the last twelve months we have more than tripled the number of people working with us with more joining every month.
I am so proud of Bob Higley for his work in the Legislature. We should all be grateful to him for his hard work in this session completely controlled by the Democrats. They may have gotten more of our money but they did not get our souls. We stood up on the moral issues and mostly won by holding the line.
I am thrilled to have Danille Turissini as our grassroots coordinator. She was able to organize and vastly increase the influence from the people of this state on the Legislature. When the Legislature hears from the people good things happen. When we leave them to their own devices we get more government and less of a place for righteousness. They like to tell us that we are the most unchurched state in the Union. That may be true but more than half the people of this state are in church on at least a monthly basis. The majority of the people are still with us, not with the secularists. If we continue to rally God’s people we will win.
We organized the second largest Olympia rally in state history last month and it has had a huge impact. People across the state are praying that the Supreme Court does not impose same-sex marriage upon the state. Keep praying until we know what they are going to do. Ask for prayer in your churches and Sunday School classes. In the legislature, people now know who WERG is and they know we represent a huge number of people. The Evangelical voice in Olympia is firmer than ever.
WERG added staff this last year and organized the Mayday for Marriage Rally in Olympia on March 8th. These were new and bigger responsibilities for us. Following the rally, we started last month $40,000 in the red. In addition to many smaller gifts we had a $12,000 and $15,000 gift that really helped us. Several churches took offerings for WERG last month.
With all these efforts I am happy to tell you that we are back to zero. Zero never looked so good as it did last week when we pulled out of the minus category. We need your help to cover our ongoing expenses and rebuild for the future. You have believed in the vision of Christian influence in the decisions of government in the past. I am asking that you continue to believe in what we are doing and to support it financially as much as you can. We have never had greater success or greater needs than we do right now.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2005-05-18 08:20 pm (UTC)#2, "We have gotten beyond the point where losing a daughter is somehow worse than losing a son."
This attitude really irks me. Because it's a HUMAN life--both sides are equally valid, and I really hate this sort of attitude that it's OK for men to be cannon fodder. What does that do to young boys' self esteem, knowing that to some, they are valued LESS than women because of their cannon-fodder status??? We NEED to see men and women without arms, to see the horror of war; maybe these fuckers will snap out of their Bush-induced coma and vote the Repubs out of office at the next opportunity. Am I being too optimistic?
no subject
Date: 2005-05-19 09:15 am (UTC)Which whe need to make sure we outbreed the towelheads and homosexuals.
[/sarcasm]
no subject
Date: 2005-05-19 09:35 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2005-05-19 03:56 pm (UTC)This is the same crowd that takes a gay newspaper's condemnation of NAMBLA - they were trying to get into a queer pride parade - and uses it to claim that the newspaper endorsed pedophilia. (The editorial quoted NAMBLA materials. The fundamentalists proceeded to quote the quote and attribute it to the newspaper as the newspaper's position for a decade.) This is the same crowd that finds endless ways to recycle the fraudulent research of Paul Cameron over and over again.
They do not care about truth in any sense we do - objectiveness and observability are not relevant. The only thing that matters is whether it matches their religious/political agenda or not. If it does, it's true. If it doesn't, it's not. Period.
no subject
Date: 2005-05-19 09:34 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2005-05-20 08:20 am (UTC)Of course even saying something like this in Jest is toing to get me in trouble next time I try to get into the US.
OMFG! Terrorist!!!111oneeleventy!