Today's Cultural Warfare Update
Nov. 2nd, 2005 11:35 am![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
solarbirdThere're a lot of big articles in today's update; the social conservatives are trying to regain the offensive after what they see as the Miers setback. Sen. Brownback of Kansas is revving up the anti-marriage amendment again; the "activist judges" rhetoric and ads are out; and there's an interesting WorldNetDaily-published book out saying that oil is an essentially infinite resource produced purely through geology and that all indications of scarcity are the result of a worldwide anti-American conspiracy. It's fun for everyone!
But let's get straight to the news:
Washington Post article on the cervical cancer vaccine that some social conservatives are opposing - a former Focus on the Family wonk is on the Federal panel examining the matter;
Former Alito classmate (Princeton, Class of '73) and current Fox News analyst describes Supreme Court nominee Samuel Alito as "a big government conservative who will almost always side with the government against the individual, and the federal government against the state";
Focus on the Family endorses Alito, runs article of praise from various social conservatives;
FotF slaps Metropolitan Community Church over an outreach effort with a similar name - accuses the MCC of trying to "hijack" the Focus name;
FotF condemns Alaska Supreme Court ruling that same-sex couples are also eligible for state government benefits - ruling came under the Alaskan constitution's equal protections clause; two Republican state legislators promise anti-marriage Constitutional amendment in retaliation;
Senator Brownback (R-Kansas) to convene hearing to mark up new FEDERAL MARRIAGE AMENDMENT; plan is to vote it through and send to full committee;
The most recent Brownback version of the Federal Marriage Amendment, which would, yes, ban marriage rights in all states for same-sex couples, and would, yes, invalidate Massachusetts's marriage law as unconstitutional;
House of Representatives version of the FMA, which would do all of the above, but also includes language to attack civil unions/domestic partnerships;
A disturbing article by Maureen Dowd of the NYT on feminism and the antifeminist backlash; the things she describes are not a universal POV, but it's decidedly out there;
Jay Sekulow of the ACLJ and the financial empire he's built through it;
FotF happy about successes in forcing clinics providing abortion services to close - talks about it in conjunction with a PBS Frontline story on it; they like the story but worry it may motivate pro-choice people to do react;
Fundamentalists watching plans for National Health Museum, concerned about it being used to "push a liberal agenda";
Family Research Council launches ad blitz to "remind people of the threat posed by activist judges";
FRC's ad is online; they're asking for donations to support more airings;
Methodist Church high court defrocks lesbian minister, reinstates Virginia pastor previously suspended for denying congregation membership to a gay man;
Alito ignores precedent to side with government power in an assortment of cases;
Washington Post analysis: Alito will vote to overturn Roe v. Wade;
CWA attacks Alito critics as sexist;
CWA policy wonk Warren Throckmorton decides Jesus was talking about gay men when talking about eunuchs, and that therefore Jesus says homosexuals should be without sexual lives and that accordingly, Jesus did talk about homosexuality and did so negatively;
Wisconsin Catholic school drops "American Girl"-theme fashion show fundraiser in response to fundamentalist boycott against the company for supporting Girls, Inc.;
WorldNetDaily pushes a WND Press book called "Black Gold Stranglehold;" it pushes the theory of theoretical astrophysicist Thomas Gold that oil is created continuously by purely geologic processes rather than the conversion of organic matter via heat and pressure. (There are lots of problems with this idea, not the least of which is that you can tell rather specifically what biological material made the oil in many cases. Also, geologists point out that his process should result in a lot of silicates in the oil, and there isn't any. However, it has been demonstrated that you can make methane via the process he describes if you recreate it in a lab.) I include it mostly because there are indications that short-term Creationists are picking this up and running with it, and WND's treatment is very much conspiracy-theory oriented, with talk about how "fraudulent science" has been "sold to the American people in order to enslave them," and how Arabic countries are going to destroy America by converting to the Euro;
Pro-Life Action League launches official boycott of American Girl.
----- 1 -----
Debate rages on use of cervical cancer vaccine
While almost 100% effective, some contend use condones teen sex
Rob Stein, Washington Post
Monday, October 31, 2005
Long URL here
Washington -- A new vaccine that protects against cervical cancer has set up a clash between health advocates who want to use the shots aggressively to prevent thousands of malignancies and social conservatives who say immunizing teen-agers could encourage sexual activity.
Although the vaccine will not become available until next year at the earliest, activists on both sides have begun maneuvering to influence how widely the immunizations will be employed.
Groups working to reduce the toll of the cancer are eagerly awaiting the vaccine and want it to become part of the standard roster of shots that children, especially girls, receive just before puberty.
Because the vaccine protects against a sexually transmitted virus, many conservatives oppose making it mandatory, citing fears that it could send a subtle message condoning sexual activity before marriage. Several leading groups that promote abstinence are meeting this week to formulate official policies on the vaccine.
[...]
The jockeying reflects the growing influence social conservatives, who had long felt overlooked by Washington, have gained on a broad spectrum of policy issues under the Bush administration. In this case, a former member of the conservative group Focus on the Family serves on the federal panel that is playing a pivotal role in deciding how the vaccine is used.
[More at URL]
----- 2 -----
Alito '72 nominated for Supreme Court seat
Classmates describe judge as intelligent, reserved with dry sense of humor
The Princetonian
Christian Burset
Princetonian Senior Writer
http://www.dailyprincetonian.com/archives/2005/10/28/news/13656.shtml
Samuel Alito '72, an experienced appeals court judge and New Jersey native, was nominated this morning by President Bush to replace Sandra Day O'Connor as an associate justice on the Supreme Court. The announcement came four days after Bush's previous nominee, Harriet Miers, withdrew amid heavy criticism.
[...]
[Andrew Napolitano '72], the Fox News analyst, agreed, saying that Alito's decisions generally seek to resolve disputes between parties rather than set precedents.
Napolitano also said he wasn't surprised that Bush chose Alito.
"Sam Alito is just what George Bush is looking for: a big government conservative who will almost always side with the government against the individual, and the federal government against the state," Napolitano said.
Napolitano said he was optimistic about Alito's chances of becoming a Supreme Court justice.
"I think Sam will be confirmed," Napolitano said. "He will come across as a less charming, less warm Roberts ... There's no way they'll filibuster."
[More at URL]
----- 3 -----
Conservatives Applaud Alito as 'Judge's Judge'
by Pete Winn, associate editor
Focus on the Family
Family News in Focus
October 31, 2005
SUMMARY: But liberals are clearly worried about President
Bush's new nominee to the Supreme Court.
http://www.family.org/cforum/news/a0038428.cfm
President Bush nominated Judge Samuel Alito Jr. to the
U.S. Supreme Court today -- and he hadn't even finished
making the announcement before left-wing groups went on
the offensive.
Ralph Neas, head of the liberal activist group People for
the American Way (PFAW), pledged to "wage a massive
national effort to defeat Alito's nomination" and to "work
closely with its coalition partners to educate Americans
about the threats posed by this nomination."
"Alito's judicial opinions," Neas added, "demonstrate that
he is an out-of-the-mainstream opponent of fundamental
legal rights and protections for all Americans and must
not be confirmed to the Supreme Court."
Over-the-top reactions like that clearly indicate the
stage is being set for a show-down over the nomination,
according to Focus on the Family Action Chairman Dr. James
C. Dobson.
[More at URL]
----- 4 -----
Gay Activists Fail in Attempt to Hijack Focus Name
Focus on the Family
Newsbriefs
October 31, 2005
[Received in email; no URL]
The Metropolitan Community Church (MCC) -- with a
predominantly homosexual membership -- began feeding news
sources last week with information about a new outreach
program called "Focus on the Human Family."
Attorneys for Focus on the Family responded to the attempt
to hijack the ministry's name by issuing a
cease-and-desist order to the church.
Paul Hetrick, vice president of media and public relations
for Focus on the Family, said the MCC was hoping to launch
it new outreach at a weekend event.
"We took special note of what the homosexual activists and
Metropolitan Community Church were planning to do at the
Washington National Cathedral Sunday," he said. "We
noticed the title for their major new effort called,
'Focus on the Human Family,' was remarkably similar to our
trademarked name, Focus on the Family."
The matter was brought to the attention of the ministry's
legal department, which thought it was a simple case of
trademark infringement, he added.
"We sent the MCC a very polite cease-and-desist letter,"
Hetrick explained. "The MCC immediately decided to pull
the offending name from their Web site, stop using it and
changed it to something else."
Nancy Wilson, installed as the Presiding Bishop of MCC on
Sunday, said she was taken by surprise that controversy
erupted.
"It's a bit puzzling," she said. "The ministry of
Metropolitan Community Churches is so different from that
of James Dobson. His group tends to focus on one kind of
family, what they often mistakenly call the traditional
family. In Metropolitan Community Churches, we believe
that God's people find many ways to create family, and
that includes gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender
families."
Hetrick said Wilson's reaction doesn't ring true.
"They are now describing this incident in a tone of
astonished victimization, as David (i.e., them) being
pounced on by Goliath (i.e., us)," he said. "But they knew
all along what they were doing and did it deliberately."
----- 5 -----
Alaska High Court Betrays Citizens in Gay-Benefits Ruling
Focus on the Family
Newsbriefs
October 31, 2005
[Received in email; no URL]
The Alaska Supreme Court has defied the will of the people
a ruling that gives government employees in same-sex
relationships the same benefits as their married
coworkers.
Alaska passed one of the first constitutional amendments
defining marriage as a union between one man and one woman
by a significant majority in 1998. The amendment was
immediately challenged by the American Civil Liberties
Union and 14 gay couples.
A Superior Court ruling found for the state, claiming that
since non-married heterosexual couples aren't eligible for
benefits, gay couples have no qualm. Appeals went all the
way to the Supreme Court, which ruled that since there is
no remedy in the state -- i.e. same-sex couples can't get
married -- the state is obligated to give benefits to
those couples.
Republican state Rep. John Coghill said he is disappointed
by the decision.
"This is one of a string of issues that they have forced
on the people of Alaska -- that have forded the will of
Alaska and changed the face of our Constitution," he told
CitizenLink. "So this flies in the face of, certainly, the
popular view, but it flies in the face of our own
constitution."
Coghill said it is another example of the out-of-control
judiciary set on making law instead of interpreting law.
"It was not about equal protection at all; it was just a
bold political move," he said. "They've made other bold
political moves, too.
"We in the Legislature have tried to ban partial-birth
abortion. This court has struck that down. We've tried
to uphold the parent's right to know and give consent to a
child who is seeking abortion -- and this court has struck
that down.
We have, in the Legislature, forbidden public money to be
used for abortions -- and this court has struck that down.
"So they've had a whole line of what I'd call severe
judicial activism. To go through the public policy
debate then just have a panel of judges turn it down, the
arrogance is significant."
Republican state Sen. Fred Dyson agreed that the decision
to give homosexual couples the same benefits as married
couples ignored the state's constitution.
Both Coghill and Dyson intend to present to their
respective bodies a proposed amendment to the state
constitution that would include language that makes no
other union equal to marriage.
----- 6 -----
Federal Anti-Gay Marriage Amendment Moves Forward
by Doreen Brandt 365Gay.com Washington Bureau
Posted: October 28, 2005 5:00 pm ET
http://www.365gay.com/newscon05/10/102805fedAmend.htm
(Washington) Sen. Sam Brownback (R-Kan.) announced Friday that the Senate Sub Committee on the Judiciary will meet on Nov. 2 to markup the so-called Marriage Protection Amendment.
Brownback, the sub committee chair, said he expects to hold a vote that day on the proposed amendment, which would ban same-sex marriage, and then send the measure on to the full committee.
Brownback said that he hoped the amendment would come to a vote in both the full Senate and House prior to the 2006 mid term elections.
"This has been and always will be about cynical politics," said Human Rights Campaign President Joe Solmonese.
"Political games in Washington are common, but when the lives of millions of American families are at state, these hearings are an affront to American values."
[More at URL]
----- 7 -----
Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States relative to marriage. (Introduced in Senate)
thomas.loc.gov
SJ 13 IS
109th CONGRESS
1st Session
S. J. RES. 13
Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States relative to marriage .
IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES
April 14, 2005
Mr. BROWNBACK (for himself and Mr. INHOFE) introduced the following joint resolution; which was read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary
JOINT RESOLUTION
Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States relative to marriage .
Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled (two-thirds of each House concurring therein), That the following article is proposed as an amendment to the Constitution of the United States, which shall be valid to all intents and purposes as part of the Constitution when ratified by the legislatures of three-fourths of the several States:
`Article --
`SECTION 1. Marriage in the United States shall consist only of the union of a man and a woman.
`SECTION 2. Congress shall have the power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.'.
----- 8 -----
HJ 39 IH
109th CONGRESS
1st Session
H. J. RES. 39
Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States relating to marriage .
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
March 17, 2005
Mr. DANIEL E. LUNGREN of California (for himself, Mr. BACHUS, Mr. STEARNS, Mrs. EMERSON, Mr. ROGERS of Alabama, Mr. ALEXANDER, Mr. BARTLETT of Maryland, Mr. DAVIS of Tennessee, Mr. TAYLOR of Mississippi, and Mr. GOHMERT) introduced the following joint resolution; which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary
JOINT RESOLUTION
Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States relating to marriage .
Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled (two-thirds of each House concurring therein), That the following article is proposed as an amendment to the Constitution of the United States, which shall be valid to all intents and purposes as part of the Constitution when ratified by the legislatures of three-fourths of the several States within seven years after the date of its submission for ratification:
`Article --
`SECTION 1. Marriage in the United States shall consist only of a legal union of one man and one woman.
`SECTION 2. No court of the United States or of any State shall have jurisdiction to determine whether this Constitution or the constitution of any State requires that the legal incidents of marriage be conferred upon any union other than a legal union between one man and one woman.
`SECTION 3. No State shall be required to give effect to any public act, record, or judicial proceeding of any other State concerning a union between persons of the same sex that is treated as a marriage , or as having the legal incidents of marriage , under the laws of such other State.'.
----- 9 -----
What's a Modern Girl to Do?
By MAUREEN DOWD
Published: October 30, 2005
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/10/30/magazine/30feminism.html
When I entered college in 1969, women were bursting out of their 50's chrysalis, shedding girdles, padded bras and conventions. The Jazz Age spirit flared in the Age of Aquarius. Women were once again imitating men and acting all independent: smoking, drinking, wanting to earn money and thinking they had the right to be sexual, this time protected by the pill. I didn't fit in with the brazen new world of hard-charging feminists. I was more of a fun-loving (if chaste) type who would decades later come to life in Sarah Jessica Parker's Carrie Bradshaw. I hated the grubby, unisex jeans and no-makeup look and drugs that zoned you out, and I couldn't understand the appeal of dances that didn't involve touching your partner. In the universe of Eros, I longed for style and wit. I loved the Art Deco glamour of 30's movies. I wanted to dance the Continental like Fred and Ginger in white hotel suites; drink martinis like Myrna Loy and William Powell; live the life of a screwball heroine like Katharine Hepburn, wearing a gold lamé gown cut on the bias, cavorting with Cary Grant, strolling along Fifth Avenue with my pet leopard.
[There wasn't really a good way to excerpt individual sections from this one, so go to the URL instead]
----- 10 -----
The Secrets of Jay Sekulow
Tony Mauro
Legal Times
11-01-2005
http://www.law.com/jsp/article.jsp?id=1130499506270
Just the week before, Jay Sekulow, chief counsel of the American Center for Law and Justice, had cheerfully predicted that Supreme Court nominee Harriet Miers had "turned the corner" and would never withdraw her name from consideration.
Now, a few hours after Miers proved him dead wrong, Sekulow sounded as upbeat as ever. "She did the noble thing," Sekulow told the million-plus people listening to his daily radio show on Christian stations last Thursday, adding, confidentially, "I saw this coming." The next nominee, he predicted, would be a sitting judge just as worthy of support as Miers.
It was vintage Sekulow: gliding over contradictions, pleased to be a player in nomination politics, and more than ready to play again. In recent weeks, Sekulow, the leading Supreme Court advocate of the Christian right, emerged as the steadiest and most visible of a dwindling number of social conservatives willing to support Miers. Because of that steadfast loyalty, he is likely to play a key role in campaigning for whoever replaces her.
"Jay has clearly succeeded in becoming closely linked to the Bush administration and has become a principal salesman for Bush nominees," says Elliot Mincberg, legal director of People For the American Way.
This is the public Jay Sekulow, the man who has become a familiar face on television in recent months and who has been a fixture in Washington legal circles as head of the ACLJ, an organization founded by religious broadcaster Pat Robertson in 1990.
But there is another side to Jay Sekulow, one that, until now, has been obscured from the public. It is the Jay Sekulow who, through the ACLJ and a string of interconnected nonprofit and for-profit entities, has built a financial empire that generates millions of dollars a year and supports a lavish lifestyle -- complete with multiple homes, chauffeur-driven cars, and a private jet that he once used to ferry Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia.
[More at URL]
----- 11 -----
The Last Abortion Clinic
by Terry Phillips
Focus on the Family
Family News in Focus
November 2, 2005
PBS Frontline will look at the success of pro-life efforts to close abortion clinics.
http://www.family.org/cforum/fnif/news/a0038455.cfm
Next Tuesday, the PBS program, Frontline, will air an examination of the conflict between the pro-life and pro-abortion movements in the South. The hour-long feature is called "The Last Abortion Clinic," taking its name…at least in part… from the fact that there is now only one-abortion clinic in all of Mississippi. The producers say the message is that Roe v Wade is becoming "irrelevant" because of state laws regulating abortion. Raney Aronson produced and wrote "The Last Abortion Clinic."
"I ended up really chronicling and looking the pro-life strategy and their success."
The state wearing the pro-life crown of success is Mississippi. Terri Herring, President of Pro-Life Mississippi, was interviewed extensively for the film.
"We have passed fifteen pro-life laws in Mississippi but even those are very minimal."
But "minimal" restrictions have reduced abortion clinics operating in the state from seven to one. Herring sees the conflict as David versus Goliath.
"I think right now the pro-life movement has the rock in the sling and I think the head of the Giant is Roe v Wade."
[More at URL]
----- 12 -----
National Health Museum under Conservative Watch
by Bill Wilson
Focus on the Family
Family News in Focus
November 2, 2005
Many fear the proposed museum will be used to push a liberal agenda.
http://www.family.org/cforum/fnif/news/a0038454.cfm
The medical industry and doctors from across the nation are working to establish a national health museum near the Smithsonian in Washington, D.C. But, some conservatives fear it will wind-up being a vehicle for liberal causes. Pro-Life medical doctor and Georgia Congressman, Phil Gingrey, has introduced legislation to appropriate land near for the museum.
"My vision of it is the history of medicine. What we have done, how far we have come, similar to what you have in the space museum.
But some conservatives believe the museum could be a back door for promoting a liberal agenda such as women's reproductive heath, abortion, embryonic stem cell research, sex education and more. Jim Backlin of the Christian Coalition calls it "yet another dumb, expensive idea."
"I noticed that one of the board members, one of the original board members was a member, an executive of Planned Parenthood, one of the most dangerous and destructive organizations in America."
[More at URL]
----- 13 -----
FRC Launches TV Ads: $100,000 in 5 States
November 1, 2005 - Tuesday
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: November 1, 2005 CONTACT: J.P. Duffy or Bethanie Swendsen, (202) 393-2100
"The ads will educate voters in key states about the urgent need to save our courts from activist judges who are undermining our religious freedoms."
~ Family Research Council President Tony Perkins
http://www.frc.org/get.cfm?i=PR05K01&f=PG03I03
Washington, D.C. - Today, Family Research Council President Tony Perkins announced the launch of an initial TV ad buy of $100,000 in 5 states. The ads, which can be viewed on frc.org, will begin running next week and will expand to other states after the initial buy of $100,000. The 30 second TV ad titled "Sandblasting" dramatizes the courts' efforts to remove references to God from the public square. FRC President Tony Perkins released the following statement:
"Today we are announcing an ad campaign which will remind people of the threat posed by activist judges. The ads will educate voters in key states about the urgent need to save our courts from activist judges who are undermining our religious freedoms. The ad highlights how the courts have become a serious threat to religious liberties. For the last forty years, the courts have chipped away at our religious liberties and chiseled away references to God in the public square. I look forward to the discussion that our nation will have over the next few weeks regarding the proper role of the courts."
The "Sandblasting" TV Ad can be viewed at www.frc.org.
----- 13 -----
Watch FRC's New Ad: One Nation Under God
November 1, 2005 - Tuesday
Forward to a Friend!
http://www.frc.org/get.cfm?i=AL05K01&f=PG03I03
President Bush has nominated distinguished 3rd Circuit Judge Samuel Alito to the U.S. Supreme Court. Already Americans United for the Separation of Church and State, run by the former ACLU director Barry Lynn, has attacked Alito for refusing to apply ACLU doctrine on church-state relations. Lynn has criticized Alito for a decision in which he wrote that a public school must allow Christian groups to post flyers on the same basis as those created by secular community groups.
FRC strongly opposes the ACLU and Americans United's attempts to rewrite U.S. history and law in order to render them hostile to religious values. If these leftwing groups have their way, the Supreme Court will continue to strike down religious expression in the public square. Judges like Samuel Alito, in turn, recognize and apply the standards developed throughout our nation's history, which permit having chaplains open each session of Congress, the inclusion of "Under God" in the Pledge of Allegiance, and inscriptions honoring God on public buildings.
To underscore the stakes in this battle over America's heritage, and to stress the need for good judges who will follow the law, FRC has produced a dramatic 30-second TV spot. The ad illustrates what activist judges are doing when they decree the removal of all mention of God from our nation's most treasured ceremonies and symbols.
Use the below graphic to watch FRC's new 30-second spot using either Windows Media Player or Real Audio.
[Ad skim: "Since America began, we have publicly honoured God... our declaration of independence... our national motto is "in God we trust"... activist judges are erasing God from the public square; if they succeed, where will we find justice? Join FRC... save our court."]
[More at URL]
----- 14 -----
Methodist Church court defrocks lesbian minister
It restores pastor who turned away gay man
By Alan Cooperman, Washington Post | November 1, 2005
Long URL here
WASHINGTON -- The highest court in the Methodist Church yesterday defrocked a lesbian minister in Philadelphia, and reinstated a Virginia pastor who had been suspended for denying congregation membership to a gay man.
The nine-member Judicial Council also voided a declaration by Methodists in the Pacific Northwest that there was a ''difference of opinion among faithful Christians regarding sexual orientation and practice." The court said the declaration was a ''historical statement without prescriptive force" and had no bearing on church laws.
The decisions amounted to a clean sweep for conservatives in the church who believe homosexual activity is a sin and want to enforce a Methodist rule against ''self-avowed, practicing" homosexuals in ordained ministry. They were the latest in a series of recent defeats for liberals in the nation's second-largest Protestant denomination who have sought to be more welcoming toward gays and lesbians.
The court rulings, which are final, put an end to the Rev. Irene ''Beth" Stroud's hopes of remaining an ordained Methodist minister. Stroud, 35, said she thought she ''was prepared for whatever might happen," but found it impossible to master her emotions today. ''It's been tears off and on all morning," she said.
[More at URL]
----- 15 -----
Alito's colleagues said he ignored precedent
Tone of rebukes unusually strong
By Charlie Savage, Globe Staff | November 2, 2005
Long URL here
WASHINGTON -- The Supreme Court nominee, Samuel A. Alito Jr., was criticized twice in recent years by appeals court colleagues who said he ignored established rules when he voted on cases, calling into question assurances from some of Alito's supporters that he would probably respect precedents such as the Roe v. Wade abortion rights decision.
In separate cases involving the deportation of foreigners, Alito sided with the government. In both cases, Alito was outvoted by his colleagues, who accused him of ignoring court precedent.
''We suggest that to read the [law as Alito did] not only guts the statutory standard, but ignores our precedent," the majority said in one of the cases, which involved how much credence to give to an African man's assertion that he would be persecuted if sent home.
The two cases, one in 2003 and the other in 2004, were not the only times colleagues have chided Alito over perceived failures to follow established rules.
They were, however, unusual in the strength of the language used to rebuke him -- especially because judges on the US Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit generally have a reputation for being polite to one another.
[More at URL]
----- 16 -----
Nominee's Reasoning Points to a Likely Vote Against Roe v. Wade
By Charles Lane
Washington Post Staff Writer
Wednesday, November 2, 2005; Page A06
Long URL here
As far as anyone yet knows, Judge Samuel A. Alito Jr. has not made any public declaration calling for the overruling of Roe v. Wade , the 1973 Supreme Court decision that recognized a constitutional right to abortion.
At least on the surface, Alito's record as an appeals court judge contains something for everyone. In 1991, he voted to uphold a Pennsylvania law that would have required married women to notify their husbands before getting an abortion. In 1995, however, he cast a deciding vote on a three-judge panel to strike down what abortion rights advocates saw as Pennsylvania's onerous regulations on federally funded abortions for victims of incest or rape. And in 2000, he concurred in a ruling that struck down a New Jersey ban on the late-term procedure called partial-birth abortion by opponents.
Yet for supporters and skeptics, Alito's record is not ambiguous, and it points toward the same conclusion: He would probably vote to strike down Roe . And they say this for a similar reason: It's not the results Alito reached in past cases that matters, it's his legal reasoning.
Alito's dissenting opinion in the 1991 case, which was later rejected by a 5 to 4 vote of the Supreme Court, shows "there was a little bit of interpretation, and more room for him to apply his own perspective to it," said Marcia Greenberger, co-president of the National Women's Law Center, which backs abortion rights. As a result, she said, his true anti- Roe colors came through.
As for Alito's vote to strike down Pennsylvania's rules on abortions funded by Medicaid, conservatives dismiss that as a ruling that turned on the finer points of administrative law. "It can't be characterized as an abortion ruling on the merits," said Jan LaRue, chief counsel of Concerned Women for America, which opposes Roe.
[More at URL]
----- 17 -----
Abortion Advocates Use Sexist Attacks Against Nominee Samuel Alito
by Steven Ertelt
LifeNews.com Editor
November 1, 2005
http://www.lifenews.com/nat1751.html
Washington, DC (LifeNews.com) -- Abortion advocates wasted no time Monday attacking Supreme Court nominee Samuel Alito, who enjoys the support of numerous pro-life groups. In addition to attacks on him about abortion, abortion advocates used sexist language to decry Bush's nominee and even accused him of sympathizing with wife beaters.
Pointing to his dissent in a case regarding Pennsylvania's abortion law, Planned Parenthood interim president Karen Pearl claimed Alito looked the other way at the actions of men who abuse their wives because he voted to uphold a statute requiring wives to tell their husband about a potential abortion before it is performed.
"In callous disregard of battered women who would be affected by the statute, Alito wrote separately from the majority to express his support for the law," Pearl wrote in an email to her group's supporters.
Meanwhile, Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid blasted President Bush for not picking a woman to replace retiring pro-abortion Justice Sandra Day O'Connor.
"The President has chosen a man to replace Sandra Day O'Connor, one of only two women on the Court. President Bush would leave the Supreme Court looking less like America and more like an old boys club," he said.
Those attacks aren't going over very well with Wendy Wright of Concerned Women for America.
"Planned Parenthood presumes all husbands are abusive and marriage is merely a living arrangement," Wright responded to Pearl's comments.
"What wives want most is to be loved, yet abortionists do not profit when husbands love their wives and babies," Wright explained. "It is financially advantageous to Planned Parenthood to separate wives from their husbands, so it demands that courts to impose its will when its views are not popular among citizens who respect marriage and life."
Regarding Reid's attacks on Bush and Alito, Wright said Reid should step aside and let a pro-life woman replace him in the Senate if he's truly concerned about the number of women in governmental positions.
[More at URL]
----- 18 -----
Did Jesus Bless Homosexuality?
Concerned Women for America
11/1/2005
By Warren Throckmorton, PhD
Let’s look at His key statements on sexual ethics.
http://www.cwfa.org/articles/9355/CFI/family/index.htm
Many “gay” religionists insist that Jesus never mentioned homosexuality and thus could not have opposed it. Often conservatives counter that He taught against any form of sexual expression other than heterosexual marriage, so He did not need to specify every sexual act outside of marriage for condemnation. What is the correct position?
Certainly, Jesus did address the topic of sexual ethics and marriage. In Matthew 19:4b-9, Jesus said:
"Have you not read that He who made them at the beginning ‘made them male and female,’ and said, ‘For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh’? So then, they are no longer two but one flesh. Therefore what God has joined together, let not man separate. They said to Him, ‘Why then did Moses command to give a certificate of divorce, and to put her away?’ He said to them, ‘Moses, because of the hardness of your hearts, permitted you to divorce your wife, but from the beginning it was not so. And I say to you, whoever divorces his wife, except for sexual immorality, and marries another, commits adultery; and whoever marries her who is divorced commits adultery.”
Jesus’ disciples were nervous at this teaching. In fact, since Jesus made divorce much more difficult to attain than Moses did, they wondered aloud if marriage was such a good thing after all (“If such is the case of the man with his wife, it is better not to marry." Matthew 19:10). Like many people today, the disciples thought the fidelity and permanence taught by Jesus might be too difficult for anyone to follow.
To the skepticism of the disciples, Jesus responded:
"All cannot accept this saying, but only those to whom it has been given: For there are eunuchs who were born thus from their mother’s womb, and there are eunuchs who were made eunuchs by men, and there are eunuchs who have made themselves eunuchs for the kingdom of heaven’s sake. He who is able to accept it, let him accept it.”
For years, I did not give much thought to who Jesus might have been referencing here by the use of the term “eunuchs.” I assumed that all eunuchs were males who were castrated or otherwise physically incapable to have sexual relations. Recently, however, I have begun to wonder if the Greek word eunouchoi (eunuchs) might also include someone without natural attraction to the opposite sex.
[More at URL]
----- 19 -----
Wis. School: No American Girl Fashion Show
Yahoo! News
Mon Oct 31, 6:58 PM ET
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20051031/ap_on_re_us/american_girl_protest
MILWAUKEE - A Roman Catholic school is canceling a fashion show by the manufacturer of American Girl dolls and books amid conservative groups' criticism of a girls organization that receives support from the company.
St. Luke School in Brookfield notified its parents of the decision through bulletins at Masses over the weekend.
Two national groups — the Pro-Life Action League in Chicago and the American Family Association in Tupelo, Miss. — have raised questions about the American Girl brand and its parent company, Mattel Inc., because of the company's fund-raising for Girls Inc., formerly known as Girls Clubs of America.
The American Family Association has called Girls Inc. "a pro-abortion, pro-lesbian advocacy group." Girls Inc., which has more than 1,500 centers across the country, says it provides a variety of programs to educate and encourage girls and does accept lesbian sexual orientation. Alexander Kopelman, director of communications, said it does not include abortion in its programming, though it does not control what leaders say if girls ask about it.
[More at URL]
----- 20 -----
'Hundreds of years' of oil available
'Black Gold Stranglehold' author debates scarcity-theory advocate
Posted: November 2, 2005
1:00 a.m. Eastern
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=47169
In a dynamic debate regarding the origins of oil, best-selling author of "Black Gold Stranglehold: The Myth of Scarcity and the Politics of Oil," Craig Smith, told CNBC's "Squawk Box" yesterday: "We can get all the oil we need for dozens, if not hundreds of years to come."
Debating peak oil vs. deep oil perspectives, Smith went head-to-head with Matthew Simmons, author of "Twilight in the Desert" on the cable news outlet's program. Smith, CEO of Swiss America Trading Company, contends that oil is not a fossil fuel. Rather, he believes it is being producing deep within the earth and is brought to attainable depths by centrifugal forces of the earth's rotation. In contrast, Simmons argues that oil is a finite resource and that Saudi Arabian oil supplies are dwindling, putting the world in a possible economic and political crisis.
[More at URL]
[Excerpt from book's inside flap, courtesy Amazon: "In Black Gold Stranglehold, Jerome R. Corsi and Craig R. Smith expose the fraudulent science that has been sold to the American people in order to enslave them: the belief that oil is a fossil fuel and a finite resource. On the contrary, this book presents authoritative research, currently known mostly in the scientific community, that oil is not a product of decaying dinosaurs and prehistoric forests. Rather, it is a natural product of the earth. The scientific evidence cited by Corsi and Smith suggests that oil is constantly being produced by the earth, far below the planet's surface, and that it is brought to attainable depths by the centrifugal forces of the earth's rotation."]
[More at Amazon, long URL here]
----- 21 -----
American Girl boycotted
Accused of luring youth into radical feminist ideology
Posted: November 2, 2005
1:00 a.m. Eastern
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=47175
After repeated unheeded warnings, a pro-life group launched a boycott yesterday against the popular doll maker American Girl for its association with a group that promotes abortion rights and lesbianism.
"American Girl has refused to sever ties with pro-abortion Girls Incorporated," said Ann Scheidler, executive director of the Chicago-based Pro-Life Action League, "This leaves us no choice but to call for a boycott of American Girl dolls and accessories for the duration of the 2005 Christmas shopping season."
[More at URL]
But let's get straight to the news:
Washington Post article on the cervical cancer vaccine that some social conservatives are opposing - a former Focus on the Family wonk is on the Federal panel examining the matter;
Former Alito classmate (Princeton, Class of '73) and current Fox News analyst describes Supreme Court nominee Samuel Alito as "a big government conservative who will almost always side with the government against the individual, and the federal government against the state";
Focus on the Family endorses Alito, runs article of praise from various social conservatives;
FotF slaps Metropolitan Community Church over an outreach effort with a similar name - accuses the MCC of trying to "hijack" the Focus name;
FotF condemns Alaska Supreme Court ruling that same-sex couples are also eligible for state government benefits - ruling came under the Alaskan constitution's equal protections clause; two Republican state legislators promise anti-marriage Constitutional amendment in retaliation;
Senator Brownback (R-Kansas) to convene hearing to mark up new FEDERAL MARRIAGE AMENDMENT; plan is to vote it through and send to full committee;
The most recent Brownback version of the Federal Marriage Amendment, which would, yes, ban marriage rights in all states for same-sex couples, and would, yes, invalidate Massachusetts's marriage law as unconstitutional;
House of Representatives version of the FMA, which would do all of the above, but also includes language to attack civil unions/domestic partnerships;
A disturbing article by Maureen Dowd of the NYT on feminism and the antifeminist backlash; the things she describes are not a universal POV, but it's decidedly out there;
Jay Sekulow of the ACLJ and the financial empire he's built through it;
FotF happy about successes in forcing clinics providing abortion services to close - talks about it in conjunction with a PBS Frontline story on it; they like the story but worry it may motivate pro-choice people to do react;
Fundamentalists watching plans for National Health Museum, concerned about it being used to "push a liberal agenda";
Family Research Council launches ad blitz to "remind people of the threat posed by activist judges";
FRC's ad is online; they're asking for donations to support more airings;
Methodist Church high court defrocks lesbian minister, reinstates Virginia pastor previously suspended for denying congregation membership to a gay man;
Alito ignores precedent to side with government power in an assortment of cases;
Washington Post analysis: Alito will vote to overturn Roe v. Wade;
CWA attacks Alito critics as sexist;
CWA policy wonk Warren Throckmorton decides Jesus was talking about gay men when talking about eunuchs, and that therefore Jesus says homosexuals should be without sexual lives and that accordingly, Jesus did talk about homosexuality and did so negatively;
Wisconsin Catholic school drops "American Girl"-theme fashion show fundraiser in response to fundamentalist boycott against the company for supporting Girls, Inc.;
WorldNetDaily pushes a WND Press book called "Black Gold Stranglehold;" it pushes the theory of theoretical astrophysicist Thomas Gold that oil is created continuously by purely geologic processes rather than the conversion of organic matter via heat and pressure. (There are lots of problems with this idea, not the least of which is that you can tell rather specifically what biological material made the oil in many cases. Also, geologists point out that his process should result in a lot of silicates in the oil, and there isn't any. However, it has been demonstrated that you can make methane via the process he describes if you recreate it in a lab.) I include it mostly because there are indications that short-term Creationists are picking this up and running with it, and WND's treatment is very much conspiracy-theory oriented, with talk about how "fraudulent science" has been "sold to the American people in order to enslave them," and how Arabic countries are going to destroy America by converting to the Euro;
Pro-Life Action League launches official boycott of American Girl.
----- 1 -----
Debate rages on use of cervical cancer vaccine
While almost 100% effective, some contend use condones teen sex
Rob Stein, Washington Post
Monday, October 31, 2005
Long URL here
Washington -- A new vaccine that protects against cervical cancer has set up a clash between health advocates who want to use the shots aggressively to prevent thousands of malignancies and social conservatives who say immunizing teen-agers could encourage sexual activity.
Although the vaccine will not become available until next year at the earliest, activists on both sides have begun maneuvering to influence how widely the immunizations will be employed.
Groups working to reduce the toll of the cancer are eagerly awaiting the vaccine and want it to become part of the standard roster of shots that children, especially girls, receive just before puberty.
Because the vaccine protects against a sexually transmitted virus, many conservatives oppose making it mandatory, citing fears that it could send a subtle message condoning sexual activity before marriage. Several leading groups that promote abstinence are meeting this week to formulate official policies on the vaccine.
[...]
The jockeying reflects the growing influence social conservatives, who had long felt overlooked by Washington, have gained on a broad spectrum of policy issues under the Bush administration. In this case, a former member of the conservative group Focus on the Family serves on the federal panel that is playing a pivotal role in deciding how the vaccine is used.
[More at URL]
----- 2 -----
Alito '72 nominated for Supreme Court seat
Classmates describe judge as intelligent, reserved with dry sense of humor
The Princetonian
Christian Burset
Princetonian Senior Writer
http://www.dailyprincetonian.com/archives/2005/10/28/news/13656.shtml
Samuel Alito '72, an experienced appeals court judge and New Jersey native, was nominated this morning by President Bush to replace Sandra Day O'Connor as an associate justice on the Supreme Court. The announcement came four days after Bush's previous nominee, Harriet Miers, withdrew amid heavy criticism.
[...]
[Andrew Napolitano '72], the Fox News analyst, agreed, saying that Alito's decisions generally seek to resolve disputes between parties rather than set precedents.
Napolitano also said he wasn't surprised that Bush chose Alito.
"Sam Alito is just what George Bush is looking for: a big government conservative who will almost always side with the government against the individual, and the federal government against the state," Napolitano said.
Napolitano said he was optimistic about Alito's chances of becoming a Supreme Court justice.
"I think Sam will be confirmed," Napolitano said. "He will come across as a less charming, less warm Roberts ... There's no way they'll filibuster."
[More at URL]
----- 3 -----
Conservatives Applaud Alito as 'Judge's Judge'
by Pete Winn, associate editor
Focus on the Family
Family News in Focus
October 31, 2005
SUMMARY: But liberals are clearly worried about President
Bush's new nominee to the Supreme Court.
http://www.family.org/cforum/news/a0038428.cfm
President Bush nominated Judge Samuel Alito Jr. to the
U.S. Supreme Court today -- and he hadn't even finished
making the announcement before left-wing groups went on
the offensive.
Ralph Neas, head of the liberal activist group People for
the American Way (PFAW), pledged to "wage a massive
national effort to defeat Alito's nomination" and to "work
closely with its coalition partners to educate Americans
about the threats posed by this nomination."
"Alito's judicial opinions," Neas added, "demonstrate that
he is an out-of-the-mainstream opponent of fundamental
legal rights and protections for all Americans and must
not be confirmed to the Supreme Court."
Over-the-top reactions like that clearly indicate the
stage is being set for a show-down over the nomination,
according to Focus on the Family Action Chairman Dr. James
C. Dobson.
[More at URL]
----- 4 -----
Gay Activists Fail in Attempt to Hijack Focus Name
Focus on the Family
Newsbriefs
October 31, 2005
[Received in email; no URL]
The Metropolitan Community Church (MCC) -- with a
predominantly homosexual membership -- began feeding news
sources last week with information about a new outreach
program called "Focus on the Human Family."
Attorneys for Focus on the Family responded to the attempt
to hijack the ministry's name by issuing a
cease-and-desist order to the church.
Paul Hetrick, vice president of media and public relations
for Focus on the Family, said the MCC was hoping to launch
it new outreach at a weekend event.
"We took special note of what the homosexual activists and
Metropolitan Community Church were planning to do at the
Washington National Cathedral Sunday," he said. "We
noticed the title for their major new effort called,
'Focus on the Human Family,' was remarkably similar to our
trademarked name, Focus on the Family."
The matter was brought to the attention of the ministry's
legal department, which thought it was a simple case of
trademark infringement, he added.
"We sent the MCC a very polite cease-and-desist letter,"
Hetrick explained. "The MCC immediately decided to pull
the offending name from their Web site, stop using it and
changed it to something else."
Nancy Wilson, installed as the Presiding Bishop of MCC on
Sunday, said she was taken by surprise that controversy
erupted.
"It's a bit puzzling," she said. "The ministry of
Metropolitan Community Churches is so different from that
of James Dobson. His group tends to focus on one kind of
family, what they often mistakenly call the traditional
family. In Metropolitan Community Churches, we believe
that God's people find many ways to create family, and
that includes gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender
families."
Hetrick said Wilson's reaction doesn't ring true.
"They are now describing this incident in a tone of
astonished victimization, as David (i.e., them) being
pounced on by Goliath (i.e., us)," he said. "But they knew
all along what they were doing and did it deliberately."
----- 5 -----
Alaska High Court Betrays Citizens in Gay-Benefits Ruling
Focus on the Family
Newsbriefs
October 31, 2005
[Received in email; no URL]
The Alaska Supreme Court has defied the will of the people
a ruling that gives government employees in same-sex
relationships the same benefits as their married
coworkers.
Alaska passed one of the first constitutional amendments
defining marriage as a union between one man and one woman
by a significant majority in 1998. The amendment was
immediately challenged by the American Civil Liberties
Union and 14 gay couples.
A Superior Court ruling found for the state, claiming that
since non-married heterosexual couples aren't eligible for
benefits, gay couples have no qualm. Appeals went all the
way to the Supreme Court, which ruled that since there is
no remedy in the state -- i.e. same-sex couples can't get
married -- the state is obligated to give benefits to
those couples.
Republican state Rep. John Coghill said he is disappointed
by the decision.
"This is one of a string of issues that they have forced
on the people of Alaska -- that have forded the will of
Alaska and changed the face of our Constitution," he told
CitizenLink. "So this flies in the face of, certainly, the
popular view, but it flies in the face of our own
constitution."
Coghill said it is another example of the out-of-control
judiciary set on making law instead of interpreting law.
"It was not about equal protection at all; it was just a
bold political move," he said. "They've made other bold
political moves, too.
"We in the Legislature have tried to ban partial-birth
abortion. This court has struck that down. We've tried
to uphold the parent's right to know and give consent to a
child who is seeking abortion -- and this court has struck
that down.
We have, in the Legislature, forbidden public money to be
used for abortions -- and this court has struck that down.
"So they've had a whole line of what I'd call severe
judicial activism. To go through the public policy
debate then just have a panel of judges turn it down, the
arrogance is significant."
Republican state Sen. Fred Dyson agreed that the decision
to give homosexual couples the same benefits as married
couples ignored the state's constitution.
Both Coghill and Dyson intend to present to their
respective bodies a proposed amendment to the state
constitution that would include language that makes no
other union equal to marriage.
----- 6 -----
Federal Anti-Gay Marriage Amendment Moves Forward
by Doreen Brandt 365Gay.com Washington Bureau
Posted: October 28, 2005 5:00 pm ET
http://www.365gay.com/newscon05/10/102805fedAmend.htm
(Washington) Sen. Sam Brownback (R-Kan.) announced Friday that the Senate Sub Committee on the Judiciary will meet on Nov. 2 to markup the so-called Marriage Protection Amendment.
Brownback, the sub committee chair, said he expects to hold a vote that day on the proposed amendment, which would ban same-sex marriage, and then send the measure on to the full committee.
Brownback said that he hoped the amendment would come to a vote in both the full Senate and House prior to the 2006 mid term elections.
"This has been and always will be about cynical politics," said Human Rights Campaign President Joe Solmonese.
"Political games in Washington are common, but when the lives of millions of American families are at state, these hearings are an affront to American values."
[More at URL]
----- 7 -----
Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States relative to marriage. (Introduced in Senate)
thomas.loc.gov
SJ 13 IS
109th CONGRESS
1st Session
S. J. RES. 13
Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States relative to marriage .
IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES
April 14, 2005
Mr. BROWNBACK (for himself and Mr. INHOFE) introduced the following joint resolution; which was read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary
JOINT RESOLUTION
Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States relative to marriage .
Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled (two-thirds of each House concurring therein), That the following article is proposed as an amendment to the Constitution of the United States, which shall be valid to all intents and purposes as part of the Constitution when ratified by the legislatures of three-fourths of the several States:
`Article --
`SECTION 1. Marriage in the United States shall consist only of the union of a man and a woman.
`SECTION 2. Congress shall have the power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.'.
----- 8 -----
HJ 39 IH
109th CONGRESS
1st Session
H. J. RES. 39
Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States relating to marriage .
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
March 17, 2005
Mr. DANIEL E. LUNGREN of California (for himself, Mr. BACHUS, Mr. STEARNS, Mrs. EMERSON, Mr. ROGERS of Alabama, Mr. ALEXANDER, Mr. BARTLETT of Maryland, Mr. DAVIS of Tennessee, Mr. TAYLOR of Mississippi, and Mr. GOHMERT) introduced the following joint resolution; which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary
JOINT RESOLUTION
Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States relating to marriage .
Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled (two-thirds of each House concurring therein), That the following article is proposed as an amendment to the Constitution of the United States, which shall be valid to all intents and purposes as part of the Constitution when ratified by the legislatures of three-fourths of the several States within seven years after the date of its submission for ratification:
`Article --
`SECTION 1. Marriage in the United States shall consist only of a legal union of one man and one woman.
`SECTION 2. No court of the United States or of any State shall have jurisdiction to determine whether this Constitution or the constitution of any State requires that the legal incidents of marriage be conferred upon any union other than a legal union between one man and one woman.
`SECTION 3. No State shall be required to give effect to any public act, record, or judicial proceeding of any other State concerning a union between persons of the same sex that is treated as a marriage , or as having the legal incidents of marriage , under the laws of such other State.'.
----- 9 -----
What's a Modern Girl to Do?
By MAUREEN DOWD
Published: October 30, 2005
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/10/30/magazine/30feminism.html
When I entered college in 1969, women were bursting out of their 50's chrysalis, shedding girdles, padded bras and conventions. The Jazz Age spirit flared in the Age of Aquarius. Women were once again imitating men and acting all independent: smoking, drinking, wanting to earn money and thinking they had the right to be sexual, this time protected by the pill. I didn't fit in with the brazen new world of hard-charging feminists. I was more of a fun-loving (if chaste) type who would decades later come to life in Sarah Jessica Parker's Carrie Bradshaw. I hated the grubby, unisex jeans and no-makeup look and drugs that zoned you out, and I couldn't understand the appeal of dances that didn't involve touching your partner. In the universe of Eros, I longed for style and wit. I loved the Art Deco glamour of 30's movies. I wanted to dance the Continental like Fred and Ginger in white hotel suites; drink martinis like Myrna Loy and William Powell; live the life of a screwball heroine like Katharine Hepburn, wearing a gold lamé gown cut on the bias, cavorting with Cary Grant, strolling along Fifth Avenue with my pet leopard.
[There wasn't really a good way to excerpt individual sections from this one, so go to the URL instead]
----- 10 -----
The Secrets of Jay Sekulow
Tony Mauro
Legal Times
11-01-2005
http://www.law.com/jsp/article.jsp?id=1130499506270
Just the week before, Jay Sekulow, chief counsel of the American Center for Law and Justice, had cheerfully predicted that Supreme Court nominee Harriet Miers had "turned the corner" and would never withdraw her name from consideration.
Now, a few hours after Miers proved him dead wrong, Sekulow sounded as upbeat as ever. "She did the noble thing," Sekulow told the million-plus people listening to his daily radio show on Christian stations last Thursday, adding, confidentially, "I saw this coming." The next nominee, he predicted, would be a sitting judge just as worthy of support as Miers.
It was vintage Sekulow: gliding over contradictions, pleased to be a player in nomination politics, and more than ready to play again. In recent weeks, Sekulow, the leading Supreme Court advocate of the Christian right, emerged as the steadiest and most visible of a dwindling number of social conservatives willing to support Miers. Because of that steadfast loyalty, he is likely to play a key role in campaigning for whoever replaces her.
"Jay has clearly succeeded in becoming closely linked to the Bush administration and has become a principal salesman for Bush nominees," says Elliot Mincberg, legal director of People For the American Way.
This is the public Jay Sekulow, the man who has become a familiar face on television in recent months and who has been a fixture in Washington legal circles as head of the ACLJ, an organization founded by religious broadcaster Pat Robertson in 1990.
But there is another side to Jay Sekulow, one that, until now, has been obscured from the public. It is the Jay Sekulow who, through the ACLJ and a string of interconnected nonprofit and for-profit entities, has built a financial empire that generates millions of dollars a year and supports a lavish lifestyle -- complete with multiple homes, chauffeur-driven cars, and a private jet that he once used to ferry Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia.
[More at URL]
----- 11 -----
The Last Abortion Clinic
by Terry Phillips
Focus on the Family
Family News in Focus
November 2, 2005
PBS Frontline will look at the success of pro-life efforts to close abortion clinics.
http://www.family.org/cforum/fnif/news/a0038455.cfm
Next Tuesday, the PBS program, Frontline, will air an examination of the conflict between the pro-life and pro-abortion movements in the South. The hour-long feature is called "The Last Abortion Clinic," taking its name…at least in part… from the fact that there is now only one-abortion clinic in all of Mississippi. The producers say the message is that Roe v Wade is becoming "irrelevant" because of state laws regulating abortion. Raney Aronson produced and wrote "The Last Abortion Clinic."
"I ended up really chronicling and looking the pro-life strategy and their success."
The state wearing the pro-life crown of success is Mississippi. Terri Herring, President of Pro-Life Mississippi, was interviewed extensively for the film.
"We have passed fifteen pro-life laws in Mississippi but even those are very minimal."
But "minimal" restrictions have reduced abortion clinics operating in the state from seven to one. Herring sees the conflict as David versus Goliath.
"I think right now the pro-life movement has the rock in the sling and I think the head of the Giant is Roe v Wade."
[More at URL]
----- 12 -----
National Health Museum under Conservative Watch
by Bill Wilson
Focus on the Family
Family News in Focus
November 2, 2005
Many fear the proposed museum will be used to push a liberal agenda.
http://www.family.org/cforum/fnif/news/a0038454.cfm
The medical industry and doctors from across the nation are working to establish a national health museum near the Smithsonian in Washington, D.C. But, some conservatives fear it will wind-up being a vehicle for liberal causes. Pro-Life medical doctor and Georgia Congressman, Phil Gingrey, has introduced legislation to appropriate land near for the museum.
"My vision of it is the history of medicine. What we have done, how far we have come, similar to what you have in the space museum.
But some conservatives believe the museum could be a back door for promoting a liberal agenda such as women's reproductive heath, abortion, embryonic stem cell research, sex education and more. Jim Backlin of the Christian Coalition calls it "yet another dumb, expensive idea."
"I noticed that one of the board members, one of the original board members was a member, an executive of Planned Parenthood, one of the most dangerous and destructive organizations in America."
[More at URL]
----- 13 -----
FRC Launches TV Ads: $100,000 in 5 States
November 1, 2005 - Tuesday
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: November 1, 2005 CONTACT: J.P. Duffy or Bethanie Swendsen, (202) 393-2100
"The ads will educate voters in key states about the urgent need to save our courts from activist judges who are undermining our religious freedoms."
~ Family Research Council President Tony Perkins
http://www.frc.org/get.cfm?i=PR05K01&f=PG03I03
Washington, D.C. - Today, Family Research Council President Tony Perkins announced the launch of an initial TV ad buy of $100,000 in 5 states. The ads, which can be viewed on frc.org, will begin running next week and will expand to other states after the initial buy of $100,000. The 30 second TV ad titled "Sandblasting" dramatizes the courts' efforts to remove references to God from the public square. FRC President Tony Perkins released the following statement:
"Today we are announcing an ad campaign which will remind people of the threat posed by activist judges. The ads will educate voters in key states about the urgent need to save our courts from activist judges who are undermining our religious freedoms. The ad highlights how the courts have become a serious threat to religious liberties. For the last forty years, the courts have chipped away at our religious liberties and chiseled away references to God in the public square. I look forward to the discussion that our nation will have over the next few weeks regarding the proper role of the courts."
The "Sandblasting" TV Ad can be viewed at www.frc.org.
----- 13 -----
Watch FRC's New Ad: One Nation Under God
November 1, 2005 - Tuesday
Forward to a Friend!
http://www.frc.org/get.cfm?i=AL05K01&f=PG03I03
President Bush has nominated distinguished 3rd Circuit Judge Samuel Alito to the U.S. Supreme Court. Already Americans United for the Separation of Church and State, run by the former ACLU director Barry Lynn, has attacked Alito for refusing to apply ACLU doctrine on church-state relations. Lynn has criticized Alito for a decision in which he wrote that a public school must allow Christian groups to post flyers on the same basis as those created by secular community groups.
FRC strongly opposes the ACLU and Americans United's attempts to rewrite U.S. history and law in order to render them hostile to religious values. If these leftwing groups have their way, the Supreme Court will continue to strike down religious expression in the public square. Judges like Samuel Alito, in turn, recognize and apply the standards developed throughout our nation's history, which permit having chaplains open each session of Congress, the inclusion of "Under God" in the Pledge of Allegiance, and inscriptions honoring God on public buildings.
To underscore the stakes in this battle over America's heritage, and to stress the need for good judges who will follow the law, FRC has produced a dramatic 30-second TV spot. The ad illustrates what activist judges are doing when they decree the removal of all mention of God from our nation's most treasured ceremonies and symbols.
Use the below graphic to watch FRC's new 30-second spot using either Windows Media Player or Real Audio.
[Ad skim: "Since America began, we have publicly honoured God... our declaration of independence... our national motto is "in God we trust"... activist judges are erasing God from the public square; if they succeed, where will we find justice? Join FRC... save our court."]
[More at URL]
----- 14 -----
Methodist Church court defrocks lesbian minister
It restores pastor who turned away gay man
By Alan Cooperman, Washington Post | November 1, 2005
Long URL here
WASHINGTON -- The highest court in the Methodist Church yesterday defrocked a lesbian minister in Philadelphia, and reinstated a Virginia pastor who had been suspended for denying congregation membership to a gay man.
The nine-member Judicial Council also voided a declaration by Methodists in the Pacific Northwest that there was a ''difference of opinion among faithful Christians regarding sexual orientation and practice." The court said the declaration was a ''historical statement without prescriptive force" and had no bearing on church laws.
The decisions amounted to a clean sweep for conservatives in the church who believe homosexual activity is a sin and want to enforce a Methodist rule against ''self-avowed, practicing" homosexuals in ordained ministry. They were the latest in a series of recent defeats for liberals in the nation's second-largest Protestant denomination who have sought to be more welcoming toward gays and lesbians.
The court rulings, which are final, put an end to the Rev. Irene ''Beth" Stroud's hopes of remaining an ordained Methodist minister. Stroud, 35, said she thought she ''was prepared for whatever might happen," but found it impossible to master her emotions today. ''It's been tears off and on all morning," she said.
[More at URL]
----- 15 -----
Alito's colleagues said he ignored precedent
Tone of rebukes unusually strong
By Charlie Savage, Globe Staff | November 2, 2005
Long URL here
WASHINGTON -- The Supreme Court nominee, Samuel A. Alito Jr., was criticized twice in recent years by appeals court colleagues who said he ignored established rules when he voted on cases, calling into question assurances from some of Alito's supporters that he would probably respect precedents such as the Roe v. Wade abortion rights decision.
In separate cases involving the deportation of foreigners, Alito sided with the government. In both cases, Alito was outvoted by his colleagues, who accused him of ignoring court precedent.
''We suggest that to read the [law as Alito did] not only guts the statutory standard, but ignores our precedent," the majority said in one of the cases, which involved how much credence to give to an African man's assertion that he would be persecuted if sent home.
The two cases, one in 2003 and the other in 2004, were not the only times colleagues have chided Alito over perceived failures to follow established rules.
They were, however, unusual in the strength of the language used to rebuke him -- especially because judges on the US Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit generally have a reputation for being polite to one another.
[More at URL]
----- 16 -----
Nominee's Reasoning Points to a Likely Vote Against Roe v. Wade
By Charles Lane
Washington Post Staff Writer
Wednesday, November 2, 2005; Page A06
Long URL here
As far as anyone yet knows, Judge Samuel A. Alito Jr. has not made any public declaration calling for the overruling of Roe v. Wade , the 1973 Supreme Court decision that recognized a constitutional right to abortion.
At least on the surface, Alito's record as an appeals court judge contains something for everyone. In 1991, he voted to uphold a Pennsylvania law that would have required married women to notify their husbands before getting an abortion. In 1995, however, he cast a deciding vote on a three-judge panel to strike down what abortion rights advocates saw as Pennsylvania's onerous regulations on federally funded abortions for victims of incest or rape. And in 2000, he concurred in a ruling that struck down a New Jersey ban on the late-term procedure called partial-birth abortion by opponents.
Yet for supporters and skeptics, Alito's record is not ambiguous, and it points toward the same conclusion: He would probably vote to strike down Roe . And they say this for a similar reason: It's not the results Alito reached in past cases that matters, it's his legal reasoning.
Alito's dissenting opinion in the 1991 case, which was later rejected by a 5 to 4 vote of the Supreme Court, shows "there was a little bit of interpretation, and more room for him to apply his own perspective to it," said Marcia Greenberger, co-president of the National Women's Law Center, which backs abortion rights. As a result, she said, his true anti- Roe colors came through.
As for Alito's vote to strike down Pennsylvania's rules on abortions funded by Medicaid, conservatives dismiss that as a ruling that turned on the finer points of administrative law. "It can't be characterized as an abortion ruling on the merits," said Jan LaRue, chief counsel of Concerned Women for America, which opposes Roe.
[More at URL]
----- 17 -----
Abortion Advocates Use Sexist Attacks Against Nominee Samuel Alito
by Steven Ertelt
LifeNews.com Editor
November 1, 2005
http://www.lifenews.com/nat1751.html
Washington, DC (LifeNews.com) -- Abortion advocates wasted no time Monday attacking Supreme Court nominee Samuel Alito, who enjoys the support of numerous pro-life groups. In addition to attacks on him about abortion, abortion advocates used sexist language to decry Bush's nominee and even accused him of sympathizing with wife beaters.
Pointing to his dissent in a case regarding Pennsylvania's abortion law, Planned Parenthood interim president Karen Pearl claimed Alito looked the other way at the actions of men who abuse their wives because he voted to uphold a statute requiring wives to tell their husband about a potential abortion before it is performed.
"In callous disregard of battered women who would be affected by the statute, Alito wrote separately from the majority to express his support for the law," Pearl wrote in an email to her group's supporters.
Meanwhile, Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid blasted President Bush for not picking a woman to replace retiring pro-abortion Justice Sandra Day O'Connor.
"The President has chosen a man to replace Sandra Day O'Connor, one of only two women on the Court. President Bush would leave the Supreme Court looking less like America and more like an old boys club," he said.
Those attacks aren't going over very well with Wendy Wright of Concerned Women for America.
"Planned Parenthood presumes all husbands are abusive and marriage is merely a living arrangement," Wright responded to Pearl's comments.
"What wives want most is to be loved, yet abortionists do not profit when husbands love their wives and babies," Wright explained. "It is financially advantageous to Planned Parenthood to separate wives from their husbands, so it demands that courts to impose its will when its views are not popular among citizens who respect marriage and life."
Regarding Reid's attacks on Bush and Alito, Wright said Reid should step aside and let a pro-life woman replace him in the Senate if he's truly concerned about the number of women in governmental positions.
[More at URL]
----- 18 -----
Did Jesus Bless Homosexuality?
Concerned Women for America
11/1/2005
By Warren Throckmorton, PhD
Let’s look at His key statements on sexual ethics.
http://www.cwfa.org/articles/9355/CFI/family/index.htm
Many “gay” religionists insist that Jesus never mentioned homosexuality and thus could not have opposed it. Often conservatives counter that He taught against any form of sexual expression other than heterosexual marriage, so He did not need to specify every sexual act outside of marriage for condemnation. What is the correct position?
Certainly, Jesus did address the topic of sexual ethics and marriage. In Matthew 19:4b-9, Jesus said:
"Have you not read that He who made them at the beginning ‘made them male and female,’ and said, ‘For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh’? So then, they are no longer two but one flesh. Therefore what God has joined together, let not man separate. They said to Him, ‘Why then did Moses command to give a certificate of divorce, and to put her away?’ He said to them, ‘Moses, because of the hardness of your hearts, permitted you to divorce your wife, but from the beginning it was not so. And I say to you, whoever divorces his wife, except for sexual immorality, and marries another, commits adultery; and whoever marries her who is divorced commits adultery.”
Jesus’ disciples were nervous at this teaching. In fact, since Jesus made divorce much more difficult to attain than Moses did, they wondered aloud if marriage was such a good thing after all (“If such is the case of the man with his wife, it is better not to marry." Matthew 19:10). Like many people today, the disciples thought the fidelity and permanence taught by Jesus might be too difficult for anyone to follow.
To the skepticism of the disciples, Jesus responded:
"All cannot accept this saying, but only those to whom it has been given: For there are eunuchs who were born thus from their mother’s womb, and there are eunuchs who were made eunuchs by men, and there are eunuchs who have made themselves eunuchs for the kingdom of heaven’s sake. He who is able to accept it, let him accept it.”
For years, I did not give much thought to who Jesus might have been referencing here by the use of the term “eunuchs.” I assumed that all eunuchs were males who were castrated or otherwise physically incapable to have sexual relations. Recently, however, I have begun to wonder if the Greek word eunouchoi (eunuchs) might also include someone without natural attraction to the opposite sex.
[More at URL]
----- 19 -----
Wis. School: No American Girl Fashion Show
Yahoo! News
Mon Oct 31, 6:58 PM ET
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20051031/ap_on_re_us/american_girl_protest
MILWAUKEE - A Roman Catholic school is canceling a fashion show by the manufacturer of American Girl dolls and books amid conservative groups' criticism of a girls organization that receives support from the company.
St. Luke School in Brookfield notified its parents of the decision through bulletins at Masses over the weekend.
Two national groups — the Pro-Life Action League in Chicago and the American Family Association in Tupelo, Miss. — have raised questions about the American Girl brand and its parent company, Mattel Inc., because of the company's fund-raising for Girls Inc., formerly known as Girls Clubs of America.
The American Family Association has called Girls Inc. "a pro-abortion, pro-lesbian advocacy group." Girls Inc., which has more than 1,500 centers across the country, says it provides a variety of programs to educate and encourage girls and does accept lesbian sexual orientation. Alexander Kopelman, director of communications, said it does not include abortion in its programming, though it does not control what leaders say if girls ask about it.
[More at URL]
----- 20 -----
'Hundreds of years' of oil available
'Black Gold Stranglehold' author debates scarcity-theory advocate
Posted: November 2, 2005
1:00 a.m. Eastern
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=47169
In a dynamic debate regarding the origins of oil, best-selling author of "Black Gold Stranglehold: The Myth of Scarcity and the Politics of Oil," Craig Smith, told CNBC's "Squawk Box" yesterday: "We can get all the oil we need for dozens, if not hundreds of years to come."
Debating peak oil vs. deep oil perspectives, Smith went head-to-head with Matthew Simmons, author of "Twilight in the Desert" on the cable news outlet's program. Smith, CEO of Swiss America Trading Company, contends that oil is not a fossil fuel. Rather, he believes it is being producing deep within the earth and is brought to attainable depths by centrifugal forces of the earth's rotation. In contrast, Simmons argues that oil is a finite resource and that Saudi Arabian oil supplies are dwindling, putting the world in a possible economic and political crisis.
[More at URL]
[Excerpt from book's inside flap, courtesy Amazon: "In Black Gold Stranglehold, Jerome R. Corsi and Craig R. Smith expose the fraudulent science that has been sold to the American people in order to enslave them: the belief that oil is a fossil fuel and a finite resource. On the contrary, this book presents authoritative research, currently known mostly in the scientific community, that oil is not a product of decaying dinosaurs and prehistoric forests. Rather, it is a natural product of the earth. The scientific evidence cited by Corsi and Smith suggests that oil is constantly being produced by the earth, far below the planet's surface, and that it is brought to attainable depths by the centrifugal forces of the earth's rotation."]
[More at Amazon, long URL here]
----- 21 -----
American Girl boycotted
Accused of luring youth into radical feminist ideology
Posted: November 2, 2005
1:00 a.m. Eastern
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=47175
After repeated unheeded warnings, a pro-life group launched a boycott yesterday against the popular doll maker American Girl for its association with a group that promotes abortion rights and lesbianism.
"American Girl has refused to sever ties with pro-abortion Girls Incorporated," said Ann Scheidler, executive director of the Chicago-based Pro-Life Action League, "This leaves us no choice but to call for a boycott of American Girl dolls and accessories for the duration of the 2005 Christmas shopping season."
[More at URL]
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2005-11-02 08:01 pm (UTC)Their fundamental failure of logic rests on two mistaken ideas:
In fact, the actual data contradicts both ideas, which are illogical in any case. The isotopic signatures of known oil reserves match biological origin almost everywhere. The sole case where any natural abiotic oil was found included only the merest traces, with the bulk (as in more than 99%) of the oil in that location being biological in origin. I have the entire text of this particular bit of research on my home computer, from a previous effort to debunk the whole idea that ran into calls for scientific evidence either way.
no subject
Date: 2005-11-02 08:29 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2005-11-02 08:33 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2005-11-02 08:51 pm (UTC)Doesn't seem particularly likely, anyhow, but a bit less outrageous I guess :)
no subject
Date: 2005-11-02 10:27 pm (UTC)It would in that fewer people would see a need to hold dollar reserves for the purpose of petro transactions. However, I don't see the Euro as being well-enough established for that to happen, so I think they're on crack.
Really, if a viable contender existed, I suspect there'd already have been a change. But there really isn't. It takes a lot to make a trading changeover like that. It took World War II for the dollar to take over from the Pound Sterling.