Watchman #179

BMAT Moral Action Committee Watchman Report #179 03/21/2007

News Topics of a Conservative Interest or Moral Concern

Liberals Mobilize $350 Million for 'Aggressive' 2008 Election Effort - A coalition of liberal organizations announced plans Tuesday to move "the most expensive mobilization in history this election season." MoveOn.org, Rock the Vote, Acorn, National Council of La Raza, Women's Voices Women Vote Action Fund, and the AFL-CIO announced plans for a $350 million initiative for the 2008 elections at the Take Back America conference in Washington, D.C., sponsored by the liberal Campaign for America's Future. Robert Borosage, co-director of the Campaign for America's Future, called it a "sea change election" on Tuesday, "one that we really haven't seen since 1980 when Reagan was elected and conservatives really changed the course of our country for the next three decades." More

In Heap of Trouble, Planned Parenthood Funds Pro-Abortion Candidates - Local affiliates accused of racism, overbilling and violating state abortion laws. Amid high-profile criminal investigations, Planned Parenthood has announced plans to spend $10 million this election cycle to ensure it has support in government and in the courts. Its One Million Strong effort will attempt to recruit 1 million people to vote for pro-abortion candidates. The massive recruitment campaign will begin at the national, state and local levels and accelerate over the final eight weeks before the election, The Wall Street Journal reported. Jenn Giroux, president of Women Influencing the Nation, said it's clear Planned Parenthood has little regard for state laws. “The reason Planned Parenthood is spending an unprecedented $10 million this election cycle is to elect pro-choice candidates who will overlook … racist and unethical business practices that continue to occur at their clinics across the country,” she said. More

Republican Lawmaker Proposes Amendment to Defund Planned Parenthood - Rep. Mike Pence (R-Ind.) is proposing an amendment to the appropriations bill that funds the Departments of Labor and Health and Human Services to prohibit federal funding for Planned Parenthood. "I just think it's wrong that the largest abortion provider in America is the largest recipient of non-abortion funding under Title X." Title X is the "family planning" program run by HHS that funds birth control clinics. Pence said his amendment mirrors the so-called "Mexico City policy" that currently prohibits federal funding for family planning programs overseas that perform or promote abortions. "We don't give any U.S. tax dollars to any foreign family planning organization that promotes or provides abortion as a means of birth control," Pence said. More

Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton Join Senate against Parental Involvement on Abortion - Washington, DC - Led by votes from pro-abortion Democratic presidential candidates Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton, the Senate rejected a measure on Thursday night that would have promoted parental involvement when it comes to a minor teenager girl who is considering an abortion. The Senate voted on an amendment from Sen. John Ensign of Nevada authorizing funds for the federal government to enforce the prevention of taking teens to another state for a secret abortion. Congress has previously considered the Child Custody Protection Act, a bill to make sure someone can't take a girl to another state for an abortion that violates the parental consent or notification laws of her home state. Because the Senate's pro-abortion leadership won't take up the bill, Ensign structured a budgetary amendment to essentially accomplish the same purpose as the legislation and pro-life groups considered the vote the same as a vote on the bill. More

Big Pharma Pushes Legislation to Use Taxpayer’s Funding to Branding Pregnancy as Mental Illness - The Mothers Act is pending legislation that will indoctrinate hundreds of thousands of mothers into taking dangerous psych drugs. It is a great example of how the Big Pharma lobby controls Congress to the detriment of health, as well as needlessly and dramatically inflating the costs of our health care system for everyone. Like any piece of legislation it purports to address a troubling issue – in this case the mood distress of mothers following birth known as postpartum depression. It is true that 10% - 15% of women need some assistance in dealing with this topic – but the majority of them sure don’t need it from Big Pharma. That is the Big Lie. The Mothers Act (S. 1375: Mom's Opportunity to Access Health, Education, Research, and Support for Postpartum Depression Act) has the net affect of reclassifying the natural process of pregnancy and birth as a mental disorder that requires the use of unproven and extremely dangerous psychotropic medications (which can also easily harm the child). Urgent consumer action (see below) is needed to stop this atrocity, as the Senate could now vote any day. More

Supreme Court Will Examine Profanity Rules - WASHINGTON (AP) -- The Supreme Court on Monday stepped into a legal fight over the use of curse words on the airwaves, the high court's first major case on broadcast indecency in 30 years. The Supreme Court announced it would hear its first broadcast indecency case since its landmark 1978 ruling in FCC v. Pacifica Foundation. The case concerns a Federal Communications Commission policy that allows for fines against broadcasters for so-called "fleeting expletives," one-time uses of the F-word or its close cousins. Fox Broadcasting Co., along with ABC, CBS and NBC, challenged the new policy after the commission said broadcasts of entertainment awards shows in 2002 and 2003 were indecent because of profanity uttered by Bono, Cher and Nicole Richie. A federal appeals court said the new policy was invalid and could violate the First Amendment. No fines were issued in the incidents, but the FCC could impose fines for future violations of the policy. More

Texas State Education Commissioner Seeks Attorney General’s Opinion on Bible Course - AUSTIN — Fiercely debated legislation last year to put a Bible course in public schools has landed in the hands of Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott for an opinion on what it means. And that's hardly a surprise, since state lawmakers couldn't agree on what the wording of the bill meant last May when they passed House Bill 1287, the so-called "Bible bill." Just about everyone agrees the Bible course cannot be used to endorse, promote or disparage any particular religious faith — and that the purpose of the class is to help students understand the Bible as literature. But Texas Education Commissioner Robert Scott has called on Abbott to referee one of the bill's most contentious points: Are public high schools required to offer a Bible course if at least 15 students request it? The bill's author, Rep. Warren Chisum, R-Pampa, and Sen. Craig Estes, R-Wichita Falls, who carried the legislation in the Senate, emphatically contend it was intended to obligate school districts to offer the course in high schools if the 15-student threshold is met. More

Thinking Outside the Box...Office - Just how much impact do family values have on Hollywood? A lot, according to a study released this morning by the Nielsen Company. In its research of 400 films from 2005-2007, the amount of profanity in a PG movie was the biggest indicator of how well it did at the box office. On a scale of one to 10--10 being the most offensive--movies that scored a 0.8 on the profanity scale made an average of $69 million. On the flip side, the profits for a film that scored a 2.8 were nearly slashed in half, drawing an average of only $38 million. Surprisingly, the amount of profanity--more than sexuality or violence--was the most significant indicator of how well a PG film would fare. More

City of Plano Prevents Pastor from Using Council Room on National Day of Prayer - When it comes to government authority, religious discrimination can take all kinds of forms. That's why Willowcreek Fellowship Senior Pastor Roy Frady's decision to send a demand letter to the City of Plano last Friday was an important move for the protection of religious freedom. For years, Pastor Frady has represented a group of Dallas area churches and synagogues who reserve the Plano Council Chambers for a National Day of Prayer event. The City requires anyone who wants to reserve the room to submit a request 90 days from the scheduled event, and awards the room on a first-come, first-serve basis.

Although Pastor Frady was the only individual to submit a request for the National Day of Prayer, he was denied when the City informed him that they had instead chosen to hold a City-endorsed 2008 National Day of Prayer event coordinated by the Multi-Cultural Outreach Committee of Plano because the City apparently did not want an exclusively Judeo-Christian event. In Friday's letter, Free Market's legal division informed the City of Plano once again that its decision to unfairly prefer a multi-faith group over a Judeo-Christian event is religious discrimination. Article

Intelligence Report Predicts Grave Dangers to Israeli Security in the Coming Year - The annual intelligence report submitted to the Israeli government Sunday, March 9, predicted grave dangers to Israeli security in the coming year. However, even in the short term, DEBKAfile’s military and Middle East sources report the Israeli army, police and security forces are on guard for stormy events in the second half of March. Both he and foreign minister Tzipi Livni are still carefully treading the line drawn by US secretary of state Condoleezza Rice, whose main preoccupation these days is to keep foreign crises at bay for the rest of the Bush presidency. In Jerusalem last week, Rice confided that to achieve a lull in the cross-border violence in Gaza, even concessions to Hamas were acceptable. This stance, which Israel accepted, substantially enhanced the Islamists’ bargaining position. More

Death Threats and Thousands of Hate Emails from Homosexual Activists Hit Oklahoma Politician - Rep. Kerns calls comments exercise of free speech, not hate speech - OKLAHOMA CITY, OK, - Oklahoma House Representative Sally Kern has received thousands of emails in light of a recorded speech posted on YouTube.com in which she called homosexual practices more dangerous to the United States than terrorism. The Oklahoma State Bureau of Investigation is examining the 17 thousand emails Kerns has received for legally threatening content. "It [the homosexual lifestyle] has deadly consequences for those people involved in it.... [they] have more suicides… there's more illness, their life spans are shorter… studies show that no society that has totally embraced homosexuality has lasted more than, you know, a few decades," said Kern in her speech. "This stuff-it's deadly and it's spreading, and it will destroy our young people. It will destroy this nation. Not everybody's lifestyle is equal, just like not all religions are equal," added Kern.

Kern's speech was accessed more than 500 thousand times the week after the Gay and Lesbian Victory Fund posted it on YouTube.com. More

Sneaking Same-Sex 'Marriage' Through the Hospital Door - Having failed to win a Massachusetts-style court mandate for same-sex "marriage" in Maryland, homosexual activists there have turned to the legislature to redefine our most basic social institution. Liberals in Maryland have adopted a strategy of throwing everything at the wall to see what sticks, having introduced bills to create same-sex "marriage," civil unions, domestic partnerships, and even one to abolish civil marriage. However, the one that appears to be sticking would allow both same-sex and opposite-sex couples to form "domestic partnerships" for the purpose of "health care facility visitation" and the making of "medical decisions."

Advocates of Senate Bill 566, which could receive final action this week, ignore the fact that it is completely unnecessary in light of the generous visitation policies hospitals already maintain and the expansive rights already granted to a "health care agent or surrogate decision maker" under state law. More

The Pro-Homosexual Gospel According to Obama - Clinton and Obama agree on the “change” they wish to bring to our nation--ushering in homosexual marriage and adoptions. The “change” Obama promises is more than his liberal social programs--he wants to change the teachings of Jesus and the Bible.

It is refreshing that both parties are more openly discussing faith, and even Christianity, in this election cycle. Hopefully, people of faith will make informed decisions on who will lead our nation. Obama told a crowd last week that he believes the Sermon on the Mount justifies his support for legal recognition of homosexual unions. He also told the crowd that his position in favor of legalized abortion does not make him "less Christian.” He went on to say, "If people find that controversial then I would just refer them to the Sermon on the Mount, which I think is, in my mind, for my faith, more central than an obscure passage in Romans." More

A Drunk and a bigot - What the US Presidental Hopeful Hasn’t Said About his Father - By offering up a conveniently potted account of his personal history in this way, he might even have made a pre-emptive strike on those sure to pose the awkward questions that inevitably face a serious contender for the White House. Yet an investigation by The Mail on Sunday has revealed that, for all Mr Obama's reputation for straight talking and the compelling narrative of his recollections, they are largely myth. We have discovered that his father was not just a deeply flawed individual but an abusive bigamist and an egomaniac, whose life was ruined not by racism or corruption but his own weaknesses. And, devastatingly, the testimony has come from Mr Obama's own relatives and family friends. Charismatic and with movie-star looks, Barack Obama Jnr has managed to steal some of Hillary Clinton's most influential supporters in the two weeks since he entered the US Presidential race. The 45-year-old lawyer depicts himself as a fresh voice for voters tired of the divisive rhetoric and self-serving ambition of established politicians on each side of the Democrat-Republican divide. His campaign to become the first black President is inspired, he says, by his love of the country that allowed his father to triumph against astonishing odds. More

Articles:

Liberals Mobilize $350 Million for 'Aggressive' 2008 Election Effort

March 19 2008 Monisha Bansal CNSNews.com Senior Staff Writer

A coalition of liberal organizations announced plans Tuesday to move "the most expensive mobilization in history this election season."

MoveOn.org, Rock the Vote, Acorn, National Council of La Raza, Women's Voices Women Vote Action Fund, and the AFL-CIO announced plans for a $350 million initiative for the 2008 elections at the Take Back America conference in Washington, D.C., sponsored by the liberal Campaign for America's Future.

Robert Borosage, co-director of the Campaign for America's Future, called it a "sea change election" on Tuesday, "one that we really haven't seen since 1980 when Reagan was elected and conservatives really changed the course of our country for the next three decades."

"The conditions are similar -- that is, a ruinous economy at home and a ... ruinous war abroad," he said. "They have led Americans in large numbers and vast majorities to look for a dramatic change in course."

Borosage said the initiative would focus on voter registration, education and get out the vote drives.

"Needless to say, the stakes can't be higher," said Karen Ackerman, political director at the AFL-CIO. "Working families desperately need a new direction after years of failed policies designed to benefit the privileged few at the expense of the rest of us."

The AFL-CIO is contributing two-thirds of the money for the initiative. Ackerman called it the "most aggressive and ambitious grassroots organization effort in history."

"The union vote will be key on Nov. 4," Ackerman said. She also noted that one in four votes is from a union household. Ackerman's group is working to mobilize more than 13 million union voters.

Page Gardiner, president of Women's Voices Women Vote Action Fund, said her group would be targeting 1.3 million newly registered voters and 7 million other voters for turnout, particularly unmarried women.

Gardiner said this cycle is the first time unmarried women are an equal share of the electorate to married women.

"Unmarried women will be to progressives what evangelicals have been" to the Republican Party, she said.

Ilyse Hogue, communications director for MoveOn.org, noted that they will focus not only on the White House but also on electing 60 Democrats to the Senate.

Hogue said they would be highlighting Republicans' "wrong priorities" through paid advertisements and their field networks.

Due to various tax statuses within the coalition, Hogue noted that "to the extent that we are legally able to coordinate, we will" on efforts targeting different demographics.

Larry Hart, director of government relations at the American Conservative Union, however, told Cybercast News Service that the coalition would have a "marginal effect."

"It depends on how they utilize the money and how conservatives mobilize," he said, calling the groups "pretty far to the left."

Hart added that their message "does not resonate with the center."

He acknowledged, however, that "after eight years of any administration there is so much accumulated dissatisfaction that there is enthusiasm for change." Hart said, for conservatives, it is "harder to get that enthusiasm than it has been in the past."

In a Heap of Trouble, Planned Parenthood Funds Pro-Abortion Candidates

March 19 2008 Devon Williams, Associate Editor Citizen Link

Local affiliates accused of racism, overbilling and violating state abortion laws.

Amid high-profile criminal investigations, Planned Parenthood has announced plans to spend $10 million this election cycle to ensure it has support in government and in the courts. Its One Million Strong effort will attempt to recruit 1 million people to vote for pro-abortion candidates.

The massive recruitment campaign will begin at the national, state and local levels and accelerate over the final eight weeks before the election, The Wall Street Journal reported.

Jenn Giroux, president of Women Influencing the Nation, said it's clear Planned Parenthood has little regard for state laws.

“The reason Planned Parenthood is spending an unprecedented $10 million this election cycle is to elect pro-choice candidates who will overlook … racist and unethical business practices that continue to occur at their clinics across the country,” she said.

“Planned Parenthood receives over $300 million a year in tax dollars, totaling $3.9 billion since 1987 in taxpayer-financed abortion. They are ‘investing’ $10 million this election cycle to protect their billions in taxpayer subsidies in order to continue performing abortions, including late-term abortions, which are illegal in many states.”

A Kansas Planned Parenthood affiliate is facing 107 criminal charges after allegedly performing illegal late-term abortions. The charges include failing to report child abuse, failing to comply with parental consent requirements and failing to enforce the 24-hour waiting period.

An undercover investigation apparently caught Planned Parenthood of Idaho and six other affiliates accepting racist donations. And in California, Planned Parenthood clinics are being sued after allegedly overcharging the state and federal governments $180 million.

Dawn Vargo, associate bioethics analyst for Focus on the Family Action, said the allegations of wrongdoing continue to mount.

“Electing radical, pro-abortion and anti-women candidates to office is their assurance that the truth about their unethical practices won't be exposed,” she said.

Focus on the Family and nearly 60 other pro-life organizations have sent a letter urging Congress to suspend Planned Parenthood funding during the criminal investigations.

"Taxpayers should not be funding an organization under serious criminal investigation over falsifying documents, aiding and abetting child rape, committing fraud against citizens and enthusiastically advocating an increase in black abortions," Giroux said.

TAKE ACTION
Ask your lawmakers to suspend funding for Planned Parenthood while it is being investigated

Republican Lawmaker Proposes Amendment to Defund Planned Parenthood

March 18, 2008 Penny Starr CNSNews.com Senior Staff Writer

Rep. Mike Pence (R-Ind.) is proposing an amendment to the appropriations bill that funds the Departments of Labor and Health and Human Services to prohibit federal funding for Planned Parenthood.

"I just think it's wrong that the largest abortion provider in America is the largest recipient of non-abortion funding under Title X," Pence told Cybercast News Service. Listen to audio

Title X is the "family planning" program run by HHS that funds birth control clinics.

Pence said his amendment mirrors the so-called "Mexico City policy" that currently prohibits federal funding for family planning programs overseas that perform or promote abortions.

"We don't give any U.S. tax dollars to any foreign family planning organization that promotes or provides abortion as a means of birth control," Pence said.

"We do that because we recognize that whatever Americans believe about abortion, they understand that it's morally wrong to take the taxpayer dollars from millions of Americans who find abortion morally objectionable and use it to support organizations that promote abortion overseas," he added.

"There is, however, no domestic Mexico City," said Pence. "Organizations like Planned Parenthood can do non-abortion family planning, receive federal funding for non-abortion family planning, even though another part of the same organization provides and promotes abortion as a form of birth control.

"I think it's time for a domestic Mexico City policy," he said. Listen to audio

Rep. Lois Capps (D-Calif.), who recently was honored by Planned Parenthood for her leadership in fighting the Pence Amendment last session, said in a statement to Cybercast News Service that she also plans a repeat performance.

"It is unfortunate that some of my colleagues continue to pursue their misguided attacks on comprehensive family planning programs in general and Planned Parenthood specifically," Capps said. "Title X funding is a wise investment of tax dollars that encourages effective family planning and helps reduce unintended pregnancies."

"Planned Parenthood has been a responsible steward of these Title X funds, providing vital reproductive health care and ensuring that everyone has access to safe, affordable and effective family planning services," she added.

"I hope my colleagues will again join me in voting against this ill-advised amendment in order to protect our constituents' access to proven, effective family planning services," Capps said.

But Pence said he is a staunch supporter of Title X.

"There are great things happening at federally funded clinics nationwide," Pence said. "Over five million individuals have been served, 90 percent of which come from low-income families. Additionally, it is estimated that over 900,000 unintended pregnancies were averted as a result of Title X family planning services."

The problem with Planned Parenthood being the largest benefactor of Title X funding, Pence said, is that "money is fungible."

Any federal money flowing into Planned Parenthoods coffers might as well go to pay for the abortions Planned Parenthood performs. According to its annual report, Planned Parenthood received almost a third of its annual $1 billion budget from federal grants and contracts. In 2005, it performed more than 260,000 abortions in the United States.

"I'm willing to take at face value (Planned Parenthood's) assertion that they are not using non-abortion Title X funding to actually perform or promote abortions," Pence said. "But I also want to recognize that money that they generate that would have to go to support non-abortion family planning can now be moved, because of the federal dollars, into providing and promoting abortion." Listen to audio

Pence added that while overturning Roe vs. Wade, the 1973 Supreme Court decision legalizing abortion, is most likely a long-term proposition that is dependent on the future composition of the court, his amendment could not only stop the funding of the largest abortion provider in the U.S., but because no funding will be cut from Title X, would also free up millions of dollars to support family planning programs around the country that don't include abortion services.

Pence plans to bring his amendment to the floor when the House considers the Labor, Health and Humane Services and Education appropriation bill this summer.

Although the Democratic majority controls the legislative schedule, Pence's amendment need only contain language that relates to the appropriation bill up for consideration in order to reach the floor.

"It's time the American people know that the largest recipient of Title X funding in America is the largest abortion provider as well," Pence said. "It's time to pass the Pence Amendment to keep taxpayer money out of the hands of Planned Parenthood."

Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton Join Senate against Parental Involvement on Abortion

March 13 2008 Steven Ertelt LifeNews.com Editor

Washington, DC - Led by votes from pro-abortion Democratic presidential candidates Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton, the Senate rejected a measure on Thursday night that would have promoted parental involvement when it comes to a minor teenager girl who is considering an abortion.

The Senate voted on an amendment from Sen. John Ensign of Nevada authorizing funds for the federal government to enforce the prevention of taking teens to another state for a secret abortion.

Congress has previously considered the Child Custody Protection Act, a bill to make sure someone can't take a girl to another state for an abortion that violates the parental consent or notification laws of her home state.

Because the Senate's pro-abortion leadership won't take up the bill, Ensign structured a budgetary amendment to essentially accomplish the same purpose as the legislation and pro-life groups considered the vote the same as a vote on the bill.

However, the Senate defeated the amendment on a 49-49 vote thanks to votes against it from both Obama and Clinton.

Most of the chamber's Republicans voted for the measure except pro-abortion Sens. Susan Collins and Olympia Snowe of Maine and Arlen Specter of Pennsylvania. Also, Sen. Thad Cochran of Mississippi, who normally votes pro-life, opposed the amendment as well.

Democrats opposed the parental involvement amendment except Sens. Bob Casey of Pennsylvania, Tim Johnson of South Dakota, Mary Landrieu of Louisiana, Ben Nelson of Nebraska, and Harry Reid of Nevada.

Senator John McCain, the likely Republican presidential nominee, and Sen. Robert Byrd, were not present at the time of the late vote.

ACTION: See how your members of the Senate voted by going here and then tell them how you feel about their vote.

Big Pharma Pushes Legislation to Use Taxpayer’s Funding to Brand Pregnancy as Mental Illness

March 13 2008 Byron J. Richards, NewsWithViews.com

The Mothers Act is pending legislation that will indoctrinate hundreds of thousands of mothers into taking dangerous psych drugs. It is a great example of how the Big Pharma lobby controls Congress to the detriment of health, as well as needlessly and dramatically inflating the costs of our health care system for everyone. Like any piece of legislation it purports to address a troubling issue – in this case the mood distress of mothers following birth known as postpartum depression. It is true that 10% - 15% of women need some assistance in dealing with this topic – but the majority of them sure don’t need it from Big Pharma. That is the Big Lie.

The Mothers Act (S. 1375: Mom's Opportunity to Access Health, Education, Research, and Support for Postpartum Depression Act) has the net affect of reclassifying the natural process of pregnancy and birth as a mental disorder that requires the use of unproven and extremely dangerous psychotropic medications (which can also easily harm the child). Urgent consumer action (see below) is needed to stop this atrocity, as the Senate could now vote any day.

It is my understanding that the process of birth, the intimate bonding of mother and child, and the placing of significant responsibility on the father is all part of a healthy culture and the backbone of the fabric that makes strong families and consequently our great nation. I fail to see why we need laws that force health care professionals to emphasize the idea that the process is some type of mental illness affecting 80% of all women – what a bogus pile of crap.

The Mothers Act proposes sweeping and dramatic changes in the delivery of pregnancy care by all health professionals. It demands that health professionals indoctrinate pregnant women into mental health treatment options for mild depression-like symptoms experienced during or following pregnancy, including moderate symptoms they call “baby blues” which they say affects 80% of pregnant women. In other words, this is a massive federate health mandate to get the majority of pregnant and nursing mothers on psych drugs – a new target market for Big Pharma.

The bill was obviously written by the Big Pharma lobby and its passage into law would be considered laughable except that it is actually happening. The bill seeks to require taxpayer-funded grants to treat postpartum mood and anxiety disorders, as defined in the latest edition of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders. For those of you who don’t know, this is the manual of vaguely defined mental health issues used by Big Pharma to allow the sale of their expensive psych drugs and get payment from Medicare and Medicaid at taxpayer expense. While some people certainly need help, this system racks up billions in fraudulent sales per year – including the sale of dangerous antipsychotic medications to our children. The Big Pharma lobby last year spent tens of millions to ensure the government would continue to cover vulnerable children so they could capitalize on this blatant scam.

As far as the Mothers Act goes, how can taxpayers be expected to pay for drug treatments when the problem that isn’t even understood? As the bill freely acknowledges “The causes of postpartum depression are complex and unknown.” In a mysterious leap of faith the bill says that this condition requires medication to treat it even though such medication has never been proven clinically effective and carries serious side effect risks for the mother and baby, including cardiovascular birth defects.

The bill goes on to set up a system of taxpayer-funded grants to pay for the treatments. It even commits you the taxpayer to funding “clinical research for the development and evaluation of new treatments for postpartum conditions, including new biological agents.” This means taxpayers will now foot the bill of Big Pharma drug development including the most dangerous new category of totally unproven pie-in-the-sky biological drugs that cost hundreds of billions of dollars to develop and can irreparably injure within minutes!

Yes, and once you have paid a fortune to develop these biological gene-altering agents then you will pay the drug companies price so that they can be freely dispensed to hundreds of thousands of pregnant and nursing mothers. Taxpayers will be on the hook for tens of billions of wasted dollars.

Immediate Consumer Action is Needed:

The Mothers Act has already passed the House (H.R. 20, the Melanie Blocker Stokes Postpartum Depression, Research and Care Act). Word has it that it is being snuck out of the HELP committee on Thursday or Friday of this week and may be rammed through the Senate without any debate before the Easter break.

Supreme Court Will Examine Profanity Rules

March 18 2008 Church Report

WASHINGTON (AP) -- The Supreme Court on Monday stepped into a legal fight over the use of curse words on the airwaves, the high court's first major case on broadcast indecency in 30 years. The Supreme Court announced it would hear its first broadcast indecency case since its landmark 1978 ruling in FCC v. Pacifica Foundation.

The case concerns a Federal Communications Commission policy that allows for fines against broadcasters for so-called "fleeting expletives," one-time uses of the F-word or its close cousins.

Fox Broadcasting Co., along with ABC, CBS and NBC, challenged the new policy after the commission said broadcasts of entertainment awards shows in 2002 and 2003 were indecent because of profanity uttered by Bono, Cher and Nicole Richie.

A federal appeals court said the new policy was invalid and could violate the First Amendment. No fines were issued in the incidents, but the FCC could impose fines for future violations of the policy.

The case before the court technically involves only two airings on Fox of the "Billboard Music Awards" in which celebrities' expletives were broadcast over the airwaves. NBC is separately challenging an FCC decision that rapped the network for airing Bono's use of the F-word during a Golden Globes awards show in 2003. The case will be argued in the fall.

The FCC appealed to the Supreme Court after the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in New York nullified the agency's enforcement regime regarding "fleeting expletives." By a 2-1 vote, the appeals court said the FCC had changed its policy and failed to adequately explain why it had done so.

The appeals court, acting on a complaint by the networks, nullified the policy until the agency could return with a better explanation for the change. In the same opinion, the court also said the agency's position was probably unconstitutional.

The court rejected the FCC's policy on procedural grounds, but was "skeptical that the commission can provide a reasoned explanation for its fleeting expletive regime that would pass constitutional muster."

Solicitor General Paul Clement, representing the FCC and the Bush administration, argued that the decision "places the commission in an untenable position," powerless to stop the airing of expletives even when children are watching.

The FCC has pending before it "hundreds of thousands of complaints" regarding the broadcast of expletives, Clement said. He argued that the appeals court decision has left the agency "accountable for the coarsening of the airwaves while simultaneously denying it effective tools to address the problem."

The appeal also argued that the FCC's explanation of its policy was well reasoned and that the appeals court decision was at odds with the landmark 1978 indecency case, FCC v. Pacifica Foundation, the last broadcast indecency case heard by the Supreme Court.

Lawyers for the networks said the old policy worked well for 30 years and that broadcasters had no reason suddenly to allow for an explosion of expletives.

Separately, CBS is challenging a $550,000 fine the FCC imposed for the "wardrobe malfunction" that bared Janet Jackson's breast during a televised 2004 Super Bowl halftime show. The 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Philadelphia is considering whether the incident was indecent or merely a fleeting and accidental glitch that shouldn't be punished.

The case is the second recent test of the federal government's powers to regulate broadcast indecency. Last June, a federal appeals court in New York invalidated the government's policy on fleeting profanities uttered over the airwaves.

The new policy was put in place after a January 2003 broadcast of the Golden Globes awards show by NBC.

The Fox programs at issue are a Dec. 9, 2002, broadcast of the Billboard Music Awards with singer Cher and a Dec. 10, 2003, Billboard awards show in which reality show star Nicole Richie.

The cases will be argued in the fall.

Texas State Education Commissioner Seeks Attorney General’s Opinion on Bible Course

March 16 2008 Gary Scharrer Express-News

AUSTIN — Fiercely debated legislation last year to put a Bible course in public schools has landed in the hands of Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott for an opinion on what it means.

And that's hardly a surprise, since state lawmakers couldn't agree on what the wording of the bill meant last May when they passed House Bill 1287, the so-called "Bible bill."

Just about everyone agrees the Bible course cannot be used to endorse, promote or disparage any particular religious faith — and that the purpose of the class is to help students understand the Bible as literature.

But Texas Education Commissioner Robert Scott has called on Abbott to referee one of the bill's most contentious points: Are public high schools required to offer a Bible course if at least 15 students request it?

The bill's author, Rep. Warren Chisum, R-Pampa, and Sen. Craig Estes, R-Wichita Falls, who carried the legislation in the Senate, emphatically contend it was intended to obligate school districts to offer the course in high schools if the 15-student threshold is met.

"If a certain number of students request it, yes, they must do it. I don't think if a group gets together and says, 'Yes, we want to do this,' the school system should have to say, 'No, you can't,'" Estes said.

Chisum also referred to a separate State Board of Education rule requiring school districts to offer courses if requested by 10 students.

But Rep. Scott Hochberg, D-Houston, an acknowledged expert on public education issues, said the mandatory provisions of the bill were removed before it passed.

"It's totally permissive," Hochberg said. "There is no course requirement. Under the rules of legislative construction, I don't know any other way to read it."

The bill says school districts "may" offer the course to high school students. But the word "shall" shows up in another section.

"Must all school districts and charter schools offer the course ... during any school year in which 15 students at a campus request the course?" the education commissioner asked in his letter to the attorney general.

House Public Education Chairman Rob Eissler, R-The Woodlands, circulated a memo last May clarifying several amendments to the bill, including one respecting local control "by giving school boards the right to decide" whether to offer the Bible course.

"What about 'local control' is confusing here?" said Kathy Miller, president of the Texas Freedom Network, which fought to keep the bill from being mandatory and to ensure standards. "Chairman Eissler's memo makes it clear that the committee's amended bill left the decision to local schools to make."

The purpose of the elective Bible course, as expressed in the bill, is to expose students to biblical content and characters as key to understanding contemporary society and culture, including literature, art, music, mores, oratory and public policy.

"Whether a person is religious or not, we can all benefit from being literate in the Bible, the best-selling book of all time," said Estes, the Wichita Falls senator.

The education commissioner said his agency needs clarification. The bill is structured to take effect for the 2009-10 school year.

"We're waiting to see what the attorney general says, anxiously waiting," Scott said. A ruling could take six months.

Another uncertainty hovering over the Bible bill is the absence of funding for the required teacher training, estimated by the Texas Education Agency to cost $250,000 the first year, $500,000 the second year and $50,000 annually after that.

"Due to that lack of funding ... the agency is not developing that training," Scott said in his letter to Abbott.

Proper training for a Bible course taught in public schools is imperative, Hochberg said.

"Teaching biblical history separately from preaching the Bible requires thought and planning and knowledge — particularly in an environment where you are attempting to teach to people with very different views on religion," Hochberg said. "If we're going to do this right, which is what everybody hopes to do, then you don't merely hand a teacher a Bible and say, 'Go teach this.'"

The notion that lawmakers did not fund the training requirement baffles Chisum, who is not only the bill's author but who heads the House Appropriations Committee that writes the state budget.

"I can't imagine not funding one of my deals," Chisum said. Agency leaders could have checked with him, Chisum said.

"I'm very disappointed that TEA would take that attitude. It virtually looks like a delay on their part and maybe a purposeful delay on their part to implement the program," Chisum said.

Regardless of how the attorney general responds, Chisum and Estes speculate that lawmakers will bring up the Bible bill again next year.

"It could've been better, and I think we'll work on it next session to kind of clean it up," Estes said.

The bill is to take effect in the fall semester of 2009.

Thinking Outside the Box...Office

March 13 2008 Tony Perkins Family Research Council

Just how much impact do family values have on Hollywood? A lot, according to a study released this morning by the Nielsen Company. In its research of 400 films from 2005-2007, the amount of profanity in a PG movie was the biggest indicator of how well it did at the box office.

On a scale of one to 10--10 being the most offensive--movies that scored a 0.8 on the profanity scale made an average of $69 million.

On the flip side, the profits for a film that scored a 2.8 were nearly slashed in half, drawing an average of only $38 million.

Surprisingly, the amount of profanity--more than sexuality or violence--was the most significant indicator of how well a PG film would fare.

According to Research and Marketing Director Dan O'Toole, PG language is what makes the difference between a box office winner and loser.

Hollywood is no different from any other industry when it comes to the bottom line. Money talks, and we can only hope that more producers start listening.

Additional Resources
Study: Profanity Affects PG Box Office

City of Plano Prevents Pastor from Using Council Room on National Day of Prayer

March 19 2008 Free Market Foundation

When it comes to government authority, religious discrimination can take all kinds of forms. That's why Willowcreek Fellowship Senior Pastor Roy Frady's decision to send a demand letter to the City of Plano last Friday was an important move for the protection of religious freedom.

For years, Pastor Frady has represented a group of Dallas area churches and synagogues who reserve the Plano Council Chambers for a National Day of Prayer event. The City requires anyone who wants to reserve the room to submit a request 90 days from the scheduled event, and awards the room on a first-come, first-serve basis.

In Friday's letter, Free Market's legal division informed the City of Plano once again that its decision to unfairly prefer a multi-faith group over a Judeo-Christian event is religious discrimination.

Intelligence Report Predicts Grave Dangers to Israeli Security in the Coming Year

March 13 2008 Prophecy News Watch

The annual intelligence report submitted to the Israeli government Sunday, March 9, predicted grave dangers to Israeli security in the coming year. However, even in the short term, DEBKAfile’s military and Middle East sources report the Israeli army, police and security forces are on guard for stormy events in the second half of March.

1. To bring reluctant Arab rulers to the Damascus Arab League summit on the 29th, Syria has quietly slipped the word that the contentious Lebanese issue will be left off the agenda. Deliberations would be confined to the Gaza crisis. The Saudis were therefore persuaded to accept the Syrian invitation on March 9 after several refusals.

Israeli intelligence has warned that in the interim Hamas and Jihad Islami would make every effort to ignite the Gaza front in order to unite the Arab rulers behind a dramatic Arab resolution in support of the Palestinian Islamists. This tactic would transfer the Gaza issue’s center of gravity from Cairo, which is brokering a Hamas-Israel ceasefire deal, to radical Damascus.

Egged on by Syria and Iran, Hamas keeps on stalling this track and raising its demands. Amos Gilead, security adviser in Israel’s defense ministry, who traveled to Cairo Sunday to try and break the deadlock, came back empty-handed. He said the coming summit was the key to progress and warned that the current slowdown in Palestinian rocket and missile attacks from Gaza in the last two days was extremely fragile. Hamas was poised to generate a flare-up at any time that it suited the book of Syria and Iran. Nevertheless, Israel has scaled down its anti-rocket operations in the Gaza Strip.

2. Most of all, the coming Arab League summit will for the first time host an Iranian head of state. Mahmoud Ahmadinejad will be seated beside Syrian president Bashar Assad as guest of honor to parade the Tehran-Damascus axis’ pre-eminent role in Arab Middle East affairs, with Iran setting the pace.

This prospect has raised the military barometer across the region and injected a radical note in “moderate” Arab utterances.

Egyptian president Hosni Mubarak suddenly declared Monday, March 10, that Israel continues to be responsible for the Gaza Strip after its pull-out and its status in both Gaza and the West Bank is that of an occupation force. In an interview, he endorsed the Hamas line which called on Israel to halt military operations not only in Gaza but also on the West Bank.

The Lebanese impasse may have been left off the formal agenda, but it looms large over the Arab world as the key divisive element. Over the weekend, the US navy built up its deployment opposite the Lebanese coast with the USS Ross guided missile destroyer and the USS Philippine Sea cruiser.

Syria responded by placing its air and naval bases, where too Russian warships are docked, on a state of preparedness.

Israel’s new national intelligence report affirms that the United States’ declining role in the region has left a vacuum for radical elements to fill. Its authors, the chiefs of military intelligence, the Mossad, Shin Bet and the foreign ministry’s intelligence unit, warned of the heightened threat from missiles in the arsenals of a future nuclear-armed Iran (within two years) and Syrian. A Hizballah attack and a stronger Hamas were also in prospect.

In the coming two weeks, Syria, Iran, Hizballah and Hamas will be further tightening the military and terrorist loop around Israel – to the north, the south, and among Palestinians and Israeli Arabs, at the expense of Israel’s deterrent strength.

According to our military sources, Hizballah is completing its preparations for revenge on Israel, whom it accuses of killing its military commander Imad Mughniyeh last month. The latest estimate is that the Shiite terrorists will strike on the border and/or inside Israel, rather than hit overseas targets.

Israel’s prime minister Ehud Olmert steadily refuses to look these facts in the face and insists that Israel’s security situation has never been better.

Both he and foreign minister Tzipi Livni are still carefully treading the line drawn by US secretary of state Condoleezza Rice, whose main preoccupation these days is to keep foreign crises at bay for the rest of the Bush presidency.

In Jerusalem last week, Rice confided that to achieve a lull in the cross-border violence in Gaza, even concessions to Hamas were acceptable. This stance, which Israel accepted, substantially enhanced the Islamists’ bargaining position.

3. Syria is in the midst of "intensely" arming itself, placing into position rockets and missiles capable of striking the entire Jewish state, according to an assessment presented to the Knesset today by multiple Israeli security agencies.

The announcement follows a WND exclusive report last month quoting security officials stating Syria, aided by Russia and Iran, has been furiously acquiring rockets and missiles, including projectiles capable of hitting any point in Israel.

The assessment came after Prime Minister Ehud Olmert announced last week negotiations between the Jewish state and Syria should be seriously considered it if would bring an end to Syrian-sponsored terrorism and Damascus' "involvement in the axis of evil."

The negotiations would aim for some sort of Israeli evacuation from the Golan Heights strategic, mountainous territory looking down on Israeli and Syrian population centers twice used by Damascus to launch ground invasions into the Jewish state.

Syria openly provides refuge to Palestinian terror leaders, including the chiefs of Hamas and Islamic Jihad, and has been accused of shipping weapons to Hezbollah.

Damascus is also accused of supporting the insurgency against U.S. troops in Iraq.

Death Threats and Thousands of Hate Emails from Homosexual Activists Hit Oklahoma Politician

March 17 2008 Michael Baggot LifeSiteNews.com

Rep. Kerns calls comments exercise of free speech, not hate speech

OKLAHOMA CITY, OK, - Oklahoma House Representative Sally Kern has received thousands of emails in light of a recorded speech posted on YouTube.com in which she called homosexual practices more dangerous to the United States than terrorism. The Oklahoma State Bureau of Investigation is examining the 17 thousand emails Kerns has received for legally threatening content.

"It [the homosexual lifestyle] has deadly consequences for those people involved in it.... [they] have more suicides… there's more illness, their life spans are shorter… studies show that no society that has totally embraced homosexuality has lasted more than, you know, a few decades," said Kern in her speech.

"This stuff-it's deadly and it's spreading, and it will destroy our young people. It will destroy this nation. Not everybody's lifestyle is equal, just like not all religions are equal," added Kern.

Kern's speech was accessed more than 500 thousand times the week after the Gay and Lesbian Victory Fund posted it on YouTube.com.

"While this speech is remarkable in its statements, it is not unique. For every bit of hateful rhetoric we hear, scores of other anti-gay statements go unchallenged," stated the Victory Fund of Kern's speech.

"Her comments are so inappropriate and beyond the pale that she's demonstrated that she's not fit for service in public office," said Patrick Sammon, president of the gay and lesbian advocacy group Log Cabin Republicans.

Openly gay House Representative Al McAffrey has called for a public apology from Kern.

Kern rejected accusations that her comments were hate speech. "I am totally against hate speech. The account given on YouTube took my words out of context and omitted other parts stringing certain words together to make it appear I was engaging in hate speech. I was not and would never do such a thing," wrote Kern in an email to PamsHouseBlend.com, a gay and lesbian political advocacy blog.

"The homosexual agenda is real, the movement is aggressive, and it is a very real threat to the sacred institution of marriage and the traditional family unit. They are actively seeking to remove conservatives from the political arena. My talk was to a Republican group and I was speaking about the homosexual agenda to defeat conservative Republicans," Kern told PamsHouseBlend.

"They want to silence anyone who does not approve their lifestyle. They want their freedom but don't want those who disagree to have their freedom," continued Kern.

"I have said and will continue to say that they have every right to choose that lifestyle and I will defend their right to do so. But I do not have to agree with it and speaking against it is not hate speech," added Kern.

"There are indisputable facts that show it's a deadly lifestyle.... What is wrong with me as an American exercising my free speech rights on a topic that is a very big issue today?" Kern told New9.com.

Learn more about Rep. Sally Kerns:
http://www.okhouse.gov/Committees/Member.aspx?MemberID=87

Sneaking Same-Sex 'Marriage' Through the Hospital Door

March 19, 2008 Tony Perkins Family Research Council

Having failed to win a Massachusetts-style court mandate for same-sex "marriage" in Maryland, homosexual activists there have turned to the legislature to redefine our most basic social institution.

Liberals in Maryland have adopted a strategy of throwing everything at the wall to see what sticks, having introduced bills to create same-sex "marriage," civil unions, domestic partnerships, and even one to abolish civil marriage. However, the one that appears to be sticking would allow both same-sex and opposite-sex couples to form "domestic partnerships" for the purpose of "health care facility visitation" and the making of "medical decisions."

While making little practical change within medical facilities, the creation of "domestic partnerships" under the law would be the camel's nose in the tent for the future expansion of rights and benefits to the point where they are virtually marriage by another name.

In California such "partnerships" are now serving as a stepping-stone toward imposition of same-sex "marriage," not an alternative to it.

Additional Resources
Homosexuality Is Not a Civil Right

The Pro-Homosexual Gospel According to Obama

March 14 Rick Scarborough Vision America

Clinton and Obama agree on the “change” they wish to bring to our nation--ushering in homosexual marriage and adoptions. The “change” Obama promises is more than his liberal social programs--he wants to change the teachings of Jesus and the Bible.

Obama told a crowd last week that he believes the Sermon on the Mount justifies his support for legal recognition of homosexual unions. He also told the crowd that his position in favor of legalized abortion does not make him "less Christian.” He went on to say, "If people find that controversial then I would just refer them to the Sermon on the Mount, which I think is, in my mind, for my faith, more central than an obscure passage in Romans."

It is hardly proper to speak of the Sermon on the Mount as a digest of the teaching of Jesus, for it does not include any reference to some very important subjects discussed by our Lord on other occasions in the course of His ministry. Every scripture is the inspired Word of God and should be treated as such, not thrown about to justify personal preferences.

As reported by Cybercast News Service, Obama published on his Web site an "open letter concerning LGBT (Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender) equality in America." In that letter, Obama said he favored same-sex unions that were equal to marriage--including adoption rights--and that he was open to states codifying same-sex marriages.

"As your president, I will use the bully pulpit to urge states to treat same-sex couples with full equality in their family and adoption laws." ( View the full letter here)

Ironically, Obama’s distortions of the Bible’s teachings come as he fends of suspicion of his loyalty to Islam. Clinton is charged with leaking Muslim dressed pictures of Obama and she left open whether he is a Christian or a Muslim in a recent interview. Yet, homosexual marriage and adoptions pushed by both are not acceptable in Christianity or Islam.

A Drunk and a bigot - What the US Presidental Hopeful Hasn’t Said About his Father

January 27 2007 Sharon Churcher – Cathie Adams

It is a classic story of the American dream made real: an impoverished Kenyan goatherd rising to become a brilliant Harvard-educated economist.

On the way he fights racial prejudice at home and corruption at work, survives the heartbreak of a broken relationship and, despite it all, leads the fight to rid Africa of its colonial legacy.

This extraordinary story is told by US Presidential hopeful Barack Obama as he recalls the life of the man who inspired him to political success - his father.

Mr Obama's book, Dreams From My Father, is flying off the shelves of US book stores, exciting and astonishing readers in equal measure. It is a bestseller, and no wonder - because the story just gets better and better.

Mr Obama is already Democratic Senator for Illinois. Now he is in the running to be the first black President in the country's history.

"My story is part of the larger American story," he declared in the electrifying speech that won him his Senate seat just two years ago. "In no other country on Earth is my story even possible."

Many believe Mr Obama is a serious threat to Hillary Clinton's hopes of becoming the Democrats' choice for their next Presidential candidate - and his lovingly written account of the debt he owes his father, also called Barack Obama, will do no harm at all to his Presidential hopes.

Indeed, by offering up a conveniently potted account of his personal history in this way, he might even have made a pre-emptive strike on those sure to pose the awkward questions that inevitably face a serious contender for the White House.

Yet an investigation by The Mail on Sunday has revealed that, for all Mr Obama's reputation for straight talking and the compelling narrative of his recollections, they are largely myth.

We have discovered that his father was not just a deeply flawed individual but an abusive bigamist and an egomaniac, whose life was ruined not by racism or corruption but his own weaknesses.

And, devastatingly, the testimony has come from Mr Obama's own relatives and family friends.

Charismatic and with movie-star looks, Barack Obama Jnr has managed to steal some of Hillary Clinton's most influential supporters in the two weeks since he entered the US Presidential race.

The 45-year-old lawyer depicts himself as a fresh voice for voters tired of the divisive rhetoric and self-serving ambition of established politicians on each side of the Democrat-Republican divide.

His campaign to become the first black President is inspired, he says, by his love of the country that allowed his father to triumph against astonishing odds.

Barack Obama Snr started life with the advantage of being able to read and write, but he also felt a profound sense of injustice. His father was a cook for British settlers in Kenya, who demeaningly called him their 'personal boy'.

Grandfather Obama sent his son to a missionary school but after completing his education, the youth could find little work except goatherding in his remote village of Nyangoma Kogela, in the roadless hills of Western Kenya.

At 18, he married a girl called Kezia. But Obama Snr was more interested in politics and economics than his family and his political leanings had been brought to the notice of leaders of the Kenyan Independence movement.

He was put forward for an American-sponsored scholarship in economics, with the idea being that he would eventually use his Western-honed skills in the new Kenya. At the age of 23 he headed for university in Hawaii, leaving behind the pregnant Kezia and their baby son.

Relatives say he was already a slick womaniser and, once in Honolulu, he promptly persuaded a fellow student called Ann - a naive 18-year-old white girl - to marry him. Barack Jnr was born in August, 1961.

Two years later, Obama Snr was on the move again. He was accepted at Harvard, and left his little boy and wife behind when he moved to the exclusive east coast university.

At the time, Ann explained to their son that his father had gone because his meagre stipend would not support the family if they lived together. But finance was the least of her worries.

Mr Obama Jnr claims that racism on both sides of the family destroyed the marriage between his mother and father.

In his book, he says that Ann's mother, who went by the nickname Tut, did not want a black son-in-law, and Obama Snr's father 'didn't want the Obama blood sullied by a white woman'.

In fact Ann divorced her husband after she discovered his bigamous double life. She remarried and moved to Indonesia with young Barack and her new husband, an oil company manager.

Obama Snr was forced to return to Kenya, where he fathered two more children by Kezia. He was eventually hired as a top civil servant in the fledgling government of Jomo Kenyatta - and married yet again.

Now prosperous with a flashy car and good salary, his third wife was an American-born teacher called Ruth, whom he had met at Harvard while still legally married to both Kezia and Ann, and who followed him to Africa.

A relative of Mr Obama says: "We told him[Barack] how his father would still go to Kezia and it was during these visits that she became pregnant with two more children. He also had two children with Ruth."

It is alleged that Ruth finally left him after he repeatedly flew into whisky-fuelled rages, beating her brutally.

Friends say drinking blighted his life - he lost both his legs while driving under the influence and also lost his job.

However, this was no bar to his womanising: he sired a son, his eighth child, by yet another woman and continue