BMAT
Moral Action Committee
Watchman Report
#61 - 12/09/2005BMAT
Moral Action Committee
Watchman Report
#61 - 12/09/2005
Click on an article to view OR scroll through the document:
1. Thank a Soldier week begins December 19th and runs through the 25th
2. There Are No Atheists in Hurricanes
3. Pope to Bishops: Make Everyone Understand the "Evil of the Crime of Abortion"
4. Study Links Teen Depression with Sexual Experimentation, Drug Use
5. Indiana State House of Representatives Prayer Ban Called 'Intolerable'
6. Fight Continues to Keep Bible in Houston Monument
7. Senate Democrats are holding a Vital Bill Hostage
8. Christian Liberty in Philadelphia: an appeal for Pastor's involvement
9. Anti-Christ declare War on Christmas and Christianity
10. Comedian and Jew Jackie Mason Stands Up For Christmas
11. Student organization at The University of Texas at San Antonio Exchanges porn for Scriptures
12. Liberty Counsel Files Suit over Banned Nativity Scene in Jacksonville, FL
13. Restoring 'Christmas' -- Walgreen's, Kroger Respond
14. Update: Target Boycott is Making an Impact
15. John Gibson and the War on Christmas
16. Concerned Women for America Files Amicus Brief to Uphold Marriage
18. TAKE ACTION NOW! Indecent Programming is Flooding Our Airwaves!
19. CWA's Crouse Supports Welfare money used to Marriage-Strengthening Bill in Congress
20. Judge Alito Fits in with Mainstream America
21. Ferocious attacks have begun on the Supreme Court nomination of Judge Samuel Alito
22. Pay Women not to have Abortions, say Italian MPs
23. South African Court Takes the Axe to Marriage
24. Ford Motor company Soothes Conservatives, Riles Homosexuals
25. Georgia Baptists Initiate Break with Mercer University over Homosexuality Issue
27. Religious Groups Split Over Same-Sex Unions in Britain
28. Palestinian Christians Persecuted in the Holy Land
|
|
|
Thank A Soldier Week starts December 19 |
American
soldiers are risking their lives all over the globe defending
America's interests and defending the freedoms that many of us take
for granted.
Do
you take soldiers for granted?
I will be the first one to admit that I have passed soldiers on the street and not gone out of my way to thank them. I've thanked soldiers in the past, but not as much as I should have and that was part of our inspiration for 'Thank A Soldier Week'.
Strange as it may sound, by creating a special week to thank soldiers for their duty to our wonderful country, people will go out of their way to do it. And that's what we want.
Leading up to 'Thank A Soldier Week' (December 19-25) Townhall.com is encouraging Americans to stop for a moment and give thanks to the men and woman risking everything for us.
Jonathan
Garthwaite
Editor-in-Chief, Townhall.com
Thank A Soldier Week
L
et
us remember our Soldiers this month and throughout next
year: The Moral Action Committee of the BMA of Texas is asking for
our Churches continual prayer for the safety our military men and
women, and for the victory of their mission.
The Moral Action Committee of the BMA of Texas.
A
new study from the Louisiana State University Public Policy Research
Laboratory takes a post-Katrina look at the responses of aid
organizations to the New Orleans area following the hurricane and
subsequent levee failure.
To the surprise of few,
religious organizations received high marks for the outpouring of
assistance to those affected. Also no surprise was the low marks
given to the local, state and federal government response. The study
found that Louisianans opened their homes to evacuees and contributed
time and money to religious groups, a blessing I personally witnessed
every day - and continue to witness. On a scale of 1-10 the
Louisianans surveyed ranked religious groups the most effective with
a rating of 8.1.
As we have seen in disasters both nationally
and globally the most effective first responders are generally among
the faith-based community. They rush to the front lines not because
they are told to or because it is their job but because their
relationship with God instructs them to reach out to those most in
need.
Government should remember the success of faith-based organizations as they work now to rebuild the devastated areas. Restoring city infrastructures, counseling the disaffected or educating children are all better done working with these non-profit organizations that have already proven effective, as long as the right of these groups to preserve their religious character is fully protected.
Dec. 5, 2005 John-Henry Westen LifeSiteNews.com
Emphasizes abortion "is also an act of aggression against society itself"
V
ATICAN,
In a meeting Saturday, with the presidents of the Latin American
Episcopal Commissions for the Family and Life, Pope Benedict XVI told
the gathered bishops "it is necessary to help everyone to
realize the intrinsic evil of the crime of abortion which, in
attacking human life at its beginnings, is also an act of aggression
against society itself."
Pope Benedict explained how, "also in the field of life, new attitudes are putting this fundamental right into question. ... The elimination of the embryo is being facilitated, as is its use in the name of scientific progress which, in not recognizing its own limits and not accepting all the moral principles that enable the dignity of the person to be protected, becomes a threat to human beings themselves."
The Pope observed how "in Latin America, as elsewhere, children have the right to be born and to grow up in the bosom of a family founded on marriage," and he emphasized how children are an expression of the wealth of a family. "Consequently," he said, "politicians and lawmakers, as servants of the social good, have the duty to defend the fundamental right to life, the fruit of God's love."
Dec. 5, 2005 Agape Press
A
prominent mental health counselor says depression may be the new
sexually transmitted disease. He points to a new study that finds
sexual experimentation and drug use often precede adolescent
depression.
Many mental health counselors assume students will medicate their depression with sex and drug use. However, a recently published study in the American Journal of Preventive Medicine finds that depression is actually a risk factor for sexual experimentation on the part of girls, and heavy drug use on the part of boys. The study, led by Dr. Denise Hallfors, followed more than 13,000 middle and high school students for two years in a row.
Dr. Warren Throckmorton, a psychology professor at Grove City College in Pennsylvania, says discussions of risks associated with teen sexuality need to include more than just STDs and pregnancy.
"Students who are depressed may owe their depression to their risky behavior," he observes, "which again is just one more reason why students should be warned about their behavior, that it does have consequences."
Throckmorton also contends that the findings expose some of the adverse effects of condom-based sex education in public schools, and should prompt parents and educators to discourage teen sexual relationships.
"Teenagers simply don't have the financial [or] the emotional resources to handle those kinds of relationships," the educator says. "And yet there are many people who are in the Planned Parenthood camp ... and [agree with] Advocates for Youth and groups like that who essentially say that sex if fine as long as it's physically safe. Well, this study should wake everybody up that it isn't safe."
While he acknowledges that more research is needed to isolate the causes and cures for the link between experimentation and depression, Throckmorton says "there is no reason for policy makers to wait to encourage abstinence." He says every health-care professional, school counselor, teacher, and parent should be doing that.
"Whatever we think about the morality of sexual behavior, can't we agree that teens should be given a clear and consistent message that it is best to wait to engage in sex until they are ready to accept the financial, relationship, and emotional consequences of making that choice?" he wonders. For nearly all teens, he adds, that would be adulthood.
Dec, 5, 2005 staff reports Citizen Link
Historian says court ruling violates separation of powers.
L
awmakers
and historians reacted negatively over the weekend to a federal
judge's ruling that the Indiana Legislature could no longer mention
the name of Jesus during prayer.
Republican Brian Bosma, speaker of the Indiana House, called it an "intolerable decision."
"The concern here is for the first time, at least here in Indiana, federal court is stepping forward and censoring prayer in the House of Representatives," he said. "For the first time in my knowledge, the specific name 'Jesus Christ' or references to the title of Christ are to be censored from all prayers offered here in the House chambers."
Of the 53 prayers offered in the 2005 session, 41 were given by clergy from Christian churches.
The Indiana Civil Liberties Union brought the suit. It argued that the prayers had sent "a powerful message of exclusion."
Bosma told Family News in Focus he strongly disagrees.
"I did not hear any exclusionary prayers," he said. "When the Jewish rabbi and the Islamic imam prayed in the fashion that they felt was appropriate, I felt it was enriching."
Bosma said dozens of pastors have contacted him offering support. He said he will look for ways to overturn the decision.
In the ruling, federal district court Judge David Hamilton said the prayers "amount in practical terms to an official endorsement of the Christian religion" and cited the separation of church and state as Constitutional proof of his findings.
David Barton, president of WallBuilders, said the ruling violates the separation of powers.
"That's the amazing thing about this is for a federal judge to say they can't do this, this happens before business begins," he said. "This involves only the state legislature itself, therefore you should not have the judiciary telling the legislative branch what they should do on their internal practices."
FOR
MORE INFORMATION:
The
American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) has waged war as religious
censors with scarcely a whimper of protest from most Americans and
with major media support. It has opposed parents who want to raise
their children with faith and values. It opposes the right of
churches to proclaim the uncensored Word of God. Learn how to
preserve your freedom and protect future generations in
"The
ACLU vs. America"
by Alan Sears & Craig Osten.
Dec. 7 2005 Free Market Foundation
T
he
5th Circuit Federal Court of Appeals heard arguments today
in the Harris County Bible Case, Staley v. Harris County. Free
Market's legal division participated significantly in the case as
well as filed a brief asking the court to return the Bible to the
monument in Houston. Free Market Foundation President Kelly
Shackelford and Staff Attorney Jonathan Saenz were at the court today
aiding in the oral arguments. The monument was donated in 1956 to
honor philanthropist William S. Mosher and serves as a reminder of
Mosher's hard work and dedication to helping the homeless and poor in
Houston. A Bible was a part of the monument meant to reflect that Mr.
Mosher's kindness and generosity were because of his faith and
commitment to Scripture. The monument, located among other memorials
and historical markers outside the Harris County Civil Courthouse, is
owned by the Star of Hope Mission.
"Excising the Bible from the monument honoring this man is hostility to religion," Shackelford said. "It is perfectly okay to memorialize great people and also recognize the crucial role their faith played in making them who they were."
Dec. 5 2005 Family Research Council
S
enate
Democrats are holding hostage a bill to expand life-saving research
on cord blood stem cells. The bill passed the House 431-1! Basketball
great Julius ("Dr. J.") Erving is backing the cord blood
bill. So is Congressional Black Caucus member Rep. Arthur Davis
(D-Ala.). One of many diseases cord blood stem cell research can
treat is sickle-cell anemia. The Senate Democrats want to force
action on a House-passed bill that would fund experiments on
embryonic stem cells. That means human lives would have to be
sacrificed for uncertain gains. But the cord blood bill is based on
ethical research that affords cures without endangering lives. It has
broad support. Even Arlen Specter (R-Penn.) and Orrin Hatch
(R-Utah)--both supporters of embryonic stem cell experiments--favor
this cord blood bill, too. Please call your U.S. senators. Urge them
to back S.1317, the Senate version of the House cord blood bill.
Please call the Capitol Switchboard at 202-224-3121.
Additional
Resources
Click
Here to Read FRC's David Christensen in the Washington Times
Dec. 5 2005 Family Research Council with Tony Perkins
I
had the honor to address more than a hundred pastors in Philadelphia
on Friday. We were all guests of Rev. Herb Lusk and his spirit-filled
Greater Exodus Baptist Church. It was truly heartening to receive
such a warm welcome in this amazing inner city church and ministry.
Rev. Lusk, a former Eagles football player, and his fellow Christians
are making a difference in the lives of Philadelphia's people.
Greater Exodus' outreach includes a day care, a credit union, a
charter school, and a computer lab. It is a great example of
faith-based ministry.
I shared our plans for Justice Sunday
III. It will take place on January 8th. That's the night before
Senate hearings begin on the Alito nomination. We're planning to
stage our simulcast from the beautiful sanctuary of Rev. Lusk's
church.
I asked my fellow pastors to pray for this important event. "Proclaim Liberty throughout the Land" is the theme of this Justice Sunday III event. Those stirring words are engraved on the base of our nation's Liberty Bell.
We are appealing to pastors to become involved before militant atheists and their judicial activist allies sandblast those words from Leviticus from the bell itself.
To get
more information about this exciting program, go to
www.JusticeSunday.com or click the link below
Additional
Resources
Click
Here for Information on Justice Sunday III
Dec.
5 2005 Religion News Service
First offensive features
New York Times and USA Today ads, DVD: "Guerilla
Giveaways"
CONTACT: Zoe Lee (323)
874-1517
L
os
Angeles, Beyond Belief Media has formally declared war on
Christmas, the December 25 holiday in which Christians
celebrate the birth of the mythical figure Jesus Christ,
the
company announced today.
“Christian conservatives
complain nonstop about the ‘War on Christmas,’ but
there really isn’t any such war,” said Beyond
Belief Media president Brian Flemming, a former
fundamentalist Christian who is now an atheist activist. “So
we have decided to wage one, to demonstrate what it would look
like if Jesus’ birthday were truly attacked.”
As
its opening salvo, Beyond Belief Media has purchased advertisements
this week in the New York Times, USA Today and the New Yorker
magazine. The company’s 300-member volunteer “street team”
is also descending on Christmas-themed public events with random
“guerilla giveaways” of Beyond Belief’s documentary:
The God Who Wasn't There.
“No Christmas pageant or
Nativity display is safe from our troops,” said Flemming.
“Wherever the mythical figure Jesus is celebrated as if he
were real, we will be there with an information barrage. We will
undercut the idea that there is any point at all to celebrating
the ‘birth’ of a character in a fairy tale.”
THE
GOD WHO WASN'T THERE is a taboo-shattering documentary that Newsweek
says “irreverently lays out the case that Jesus Christ never
existed.” The film includes interviews with some of the
top religion experts in the world. Directed by Flemming, the
movie is also highly critical of the modern Christian right and
explores the dangers that religious belief poses to society. The
movie has been praised by critics but condemned by pro-theocracy
groups such as James Dobson’s Focus on the
Family.
“Obviously our ‘War on Christmas’ is
a bit tongue-in-cheek,” said Flemming. “But the
Christian myth does dominate U.S. culture, and there’s no
time better than Christmas to take a fresh look at that myth and
see it for what it is.” Contact:
Zoe Lee (323) 874-1517
QUOTEWORTHY: ---- "The establishment of Civil and Religious Liberty was the Motive which induced me to the Field -- the object is attained -- and it now remains to be my earnest wish & prayer, that the Citizens of the United States could make a wise and virtuous use of the blessings placed before them." -- George Washington (letter to the Reformed German Congregation of New York City, 27 November 1783)
Dec 4, 2005 Mitch Marconi the Post Chronicle
J
ackie
Mason, the Jewish comic, called in on the Big Story, 12/1, to
announce his involvement with a new organization called 'Jews Against
The Anti Defamation of Christmas' (JAACD). Mason with his
trademark accent and smattering of Yiddish agreed with host David
Asman [sitting in for Jon Gibson] that Christmas is in danger and
Jews love Christmas too and don't want this to continue.
Jews Against the Anti Defamation of Christmas was organized by Don Feder, a self described Jewish Conservative. The 'Jews Against Anti-Christian Defamation' (JAACD) is an organization designed to come to the defense of Christians.
Jesus was a Jew as was his mother; and as Jews they defined love, courage, tolerance and forgiveness. At a time when Christians are under attack by the liberal media and Hollywood, while being marginalized by merchants, employers and local governments, it is nice to see members of the Jewish community standing by their Christian brothers and sisters.
George Soros on the other hand has been reported to be the money behind the attack on Christmas. Soros, the Secular Jewish Progressive, is being labeled the villain and you can usually trace these types of attacks on Christmas from Secular Jewish Progressives.
Dec 5, 2005 the Campus Crusade for Christmas
R
ecently,
an atheist student organization at The University of Texas at San
Antonio set up a “Smut for Smut” booth allowing students
to exchange their religious scriptures (mostly the Holy Bible) for
pornography. Unsurprisingly, they got the idea from another group at
The University of Texas at Austin.
If the “Smut for Smut” exchanges begin to spread across the country, many readers will undoubtedly ask why such displays aren’t banned by campus speech codes due to possibly “offensive,” “disrespectful,” or “demeaning” content. Of course, the answer to that question is simple:
Campus speech codes were not designed to preserve our Judeo-Christian heritage through an equal application of rules. They were designed to destroy it through a selective application of rules.
And that is why we observe that atheist students are free to call the Word of God “smut” and “pornography” in between campus showings of hard-core porn films, while religious students are prevented from using offensive terms like “Christmas.”
It almost gets depressing when you look at schools like Auburn University – a school that is preparing for the lighting of a Holiday Tree, instead of the lighting of a Christmas tree – a term deemed too offensive and “under-inclusive” in the postmodern era of higher education. And this kind of thing is happening at Auburn, not merely at schools like Brown and Harvard.
But I said it “almost” gets depressing. Enter Laura Steele, a member of the Auburn Student Government Association (SGA). She and a few other members of the SGA have sent forth the following resolution – one that should serve as a model for students seeking to roll back the Tide of diversity that has consumed other southern schools like the University of Alabama:
RESOLUTION
Whereas, calling the tree a Christmas tree preserves historical correctness and embraces religious diversity; and
Whereas, in pursuit of Auburn’s spirit of diversity and tolerance of differing ideals, the Student Government Association Student Senate maintains that traditional symbols, religious and otherwise should not be suppressed; and
Whereas, labeling a Christmas tree as a “Holiday Tree” appears to be religiously intolerant toward those who celebrate Christmas; and
Whereas, even the display of a manger scene by a government body has been held to be constitutional to celebrate Christmas and its origins;
Therefore, Be it Further Resolved, that the decorated tree re-labeled a “Holiday Tree” be properly reinstated with its original, historical, traditional, intended, and common title and identified for what it actually is, a “Christmas Tree.”
Dec. 6, 2005 Liberty Counsel
J
acksonville,
FL - Today Liberty Counsel filed suit against two Florida cities
after both banned a private display of a nativity scene on public
property. The lawsuit was filed on behalf of Ken Koenig against
Neptune Beach and Atlantic Beach, situated near Jacksonville.
At the point where the towns of Neptune Beach and Atlantic Beach join each other is a shared Town Center Park ("Park"). Both towns exercise joint control over the Park. In the Park is a forum that contains a 25-foot-tall Christmas tree that was lit on December 3 during a "Tree Lighting and Holiday Celebration." Both towns have approved an application by Cahabad@the Beaches to erect a large Menorah in the park.
When Mr. Koenig requested to display a private nativity scene, measuring a mere 40 inches tall, his request was denied by both towns. The towns have taken the position that a Christmas tree and a Menorah are secular symbols while the nativity scene is religious, and both towns argue that religious symbols are not a permitted display of the holiday season.
Liberty Counsel's lawsuit was filed in federal court. The suit argues that the exclusion of the privately sponsored nativity scene from an open forum constitutes viewpoint discrimination in violation of the First Amendment. The suit requests the court to enter a temporary restraining order requiring the towns to permit the private display.
The Supreme Court has ruled that even government-sponsored displays of a nativity scene alongside a Christmas tree, or a Menorah alongside a Christmas tree, are constitutional. The constitutional right to display privately sponsored religious Christmas displays in an open forum is even clearer. Excluding them is unconstitutional.
Dec. 2, 2005 Jody Brown Agape Press
Y
ou
win some -- and you lose some. That adage seems to apply
appropriately to one group's ongoing efforts to keep "Christ"
in Christmas, at least on the retail front.
According to the founder of Mississippi-based American Family Association (AFA), it is apparent that at least one retailer -- Walgreen's -- has gotten the message that it is not in their best interest to continue avoiding use of the phrase "Merry Christmas" in its advertising campaigns and in-store promotions. Speaking earlier today (Dec. 1) on American Family Radio, Donald E. Wildmon said an AFA supporter had heard from Walgreen's, indicating that although it is too late to change this season's advertising materials, next year "things will be different."
He says a consumer response representative with Walgreen's is distributing a letter stating that "Next year, you can be assured our advertising will better incorporate 'Christmas' -- and our holiday trees will be called Christmas trees."
According to Wildmon, supporters of his organization continue to be effective in delivering the message that they are offended when retailers choose to promote the Christmas season without acknowledging it as such, choosing instead to remain "politically correct" by marketing such things as "holiday trees" and to be "inclusive" by prohibiting employees from issuing a traditional "Merry Christmas" greeting. Lowe's, a national home improvement outlet, recently got that message and announced it was going to "avoid confusion" and sell "Christmas trees" instead of "holiday trees".
But all is not well on AFA's score sheet. Another major retailer that has been the focus of the group's efforts on this topic -- Target -- has now been selected as the object of a boycott. Wildmon says his group had asked Target to make Christmas an "integral part" of its promotions and advertising in next year's Christmas season.
"Knowing that is was too late to make changes this season," he explains, "we told Target that if they would make that change in 2006 we would encourage our supporters to shop at Target. But we also said if Target refused, or did not respond, AFA would call for a boycott."
The retailer did not respond to the offer, says AFA -- and therefore the group has called upon its 2.8-million online supporters and listeners of its nearly 200 radio stations nationwide to avoid shopping at Target stores for the remainder of the Christmas shopping season.
"Target doesn't want to offend a small minority who oppose Christmas," Wildmon adds. "But they don't mind offending Christians who celebrate the birth of Christ, the Reason for the season."
AFA says via an online petition it has gathered nearly 600,000 signatures from individuals who have pledged to boycott Target. The goal, says AFA, is to get upwards of a million signatures.
Meanwhile, in a letter to AFA president Tim Wildmon, the Kroger Company has explained its company policy regarding use of the holiday greeting "Merry Christmas." The letter, signed by group vice president Lynn Marmer, says the stores wish to "reflect the diversity" of customers, employees, and society and to make sure every customer and employee feels "welcomed and appreciated."
For that reason, writes Marmer, Kroger uses a variety of greetings and advertising materials during December -- including Merry Christmas, Feliz Navidad, Happy Hanukkah, Happy Kwanzaa, Season's Greetings, and Happy Holidays.
"We have not and do not intend to ban any of these greetings, including Merry Christmas," the letter concludes.
Dec. 7 2005 Free market Foundation
T
hank
you for boycotting Target stores this Christmas season. According to
the New York Times, a spokeswoman for Target said that it did
not intend to ban Christmas and may use "Christmas"
greetings in advertising as early as this year. It is clear that
Target received many calls from concerned customers who planned on
boycotting the store until they discontinued their practices of
forbidding the word "Christmas" on any promotional
material. We received reports that Target actually created a
voice-mail account to address these concerns, showing the high volume
of calls generated from the ban. However, the fight is not over until
Target follows through and allows "Christmas" advertising
in stores nationwide. In addition, Target is still prohibiting The
Salvation Army from collecting donations outside stores across the
country. Please continue to communicate to Target stores and others
until their "Christmas" banning practices cease. This is
how the free market system should work.
Dec. 7 2005 Family Research Council
F
OX
News host John Gibson visited FRC yesterday to sign copies of his new
book, The War on Christmas. He said that there seems to be a
pushback this year. Many Americans are not just rolling over for the
grinches. But it's too soon to declare victory. In Memphis,
Tennessee, a public library manger scene had the animals and the
shepherds displayed, but baby Jesus, Mary, and Joseph were
conspicuously absent. It's almost funny. Do you know anyone else who
might be mangered at this time of year?
In Bellevue,
Washington, a suburb of Seattle, a Christmas tree at Medina
Elementary School was changed to something called a "Giving
Tree." But then, even the Giving Tree was banned. Too close to
you-know-what. Funny, isn't Washington called the Evergreen State?
Let's send a lump of coal to the politically correct legions at
Bellevue's public school office. We thank Mr. Gibson for identifying
our modern day Scrooges--the ACLU and People for the American Way,
two organizations on the naughty list. You can purchase your
own signed copy of The War on Christmas for a limited time, by
calling 1-800-225-4008.
12/5/2005 Emma Elliott Concerned Women for America
Decision in Washington state case expected any day.
T
he
Washington Supreme Court is expected to issue its ruling any day on
whether or not “gay” couples may “marry.”
Concerned Women for America (CWA) filed an amicus brief in the
case arguing for traditional marriage.
Oral arguments in the case, Anderson v. King County, were held on March 8, 2005.
Anderson v. King County consists of state appeals of two rulings by Superior Court judges. Thurston County Judge Richard Hicks in September of 2004 and King County Superior Court Judge William Downing in April of 2004 ruled that marriage licenses must be issued to same-sex couples. They ruled that limiting marriage to heterosexual couples violates the state constitution. These rulings came despite the fact that Washington had enacted a Defense of Marriage (DOMA) law, which says that marriages within the state must be between one man and one woman.
Both rulings are being stayed and no marriage licenses are being issued to homosexual couples until the Washington Supreme Court hands down its decision.
The brief argues that limiting marriage to opposite-sex couples does not violate the Washington Constitution. Article 1 of the constitution provides that “[n]o law shall be passed granting to any citizen [or] class of citizens . . . privileges or immunities which upon the same terms shall not equally belong to all citizens.” The current state guidelines governing marriage licenses do not discriminate among “classes of citizens.” Any unmarried person who meets certain age qualifications may apply for a license to marry an unrelated unmarried person of the opposite sex who also meets the age qualifications. Neither homosexual nor heterosexual persons may marry someone of the same sex.
The brief warns the court of the murky waters society will enter if it eliminates the time-honored definition of marriage. “Human history, common sense and extant social science research demonstrate that it is in the best interests of children to be raised in a home with a mother and a father. … If couples are held to have a constitutional right to create children by whatever technology science affords, the concept of ‘mother’ and ‘father’ with all the legal rights and responsibilities that attach to such status would become all but irrelevant.”
The brief points out the novelty of introducing a “fundamental right” to marriage for homosexuals and the way such a right would clash with established jurisprudence. There is “virtually no history, legal tradition or practice which would support a contention that ‘marriage’ between persons of the same sex is a fundamental right.”
“If the Washington Supreme Court affirms the lower courts’ rulings, it will have to reject a 1971 ruling in Singer v. Hara upholding traditional marriage,” LaRue commented. “Sadly, it’s not unlikely, just unthinkable.”
Dec. 7 2005 Family Research Council
S
ome
top Republicans are opposing FRC-backed efforts to prevent
post-Katrina tax relief from going to Gulf Coast casinos, massage
parlors and liquor stores. They regard these groups as legitimate
businesses that are providing good jobs for area disaster victims.
Publicly, some say that exempting these businesses would set a
serious precedent in disaster relief funding. But that's just our
point: These outfits have never had favorable tax treatment in the
past. They shouldn't get it now. Unfortunately, the White House has
come down on the wrong side on this issue. Tax relief, said
Administration spokesman Scott McClellan, "should apply equally
and fairly to all those businesses."
Rep. Frank Wolf
(R-Va.) is showing courage in standing up to pressure. "Prohibiting
massage parlors, liquor stores, and casinos from getting tax breaks
is not a tough call," says Wolf. He's right. It's hard to
believe that we are just 13 months away from all the excited talk
about "Values Voters" who made such an impact last year.
Will those same Values Voters show up next November to return a
Congress that votes to fund shady outfits? Word to the wise: Don't
bet on it. Please call your Representative. Urge your Member to press
the House leaders to keep the Wolf language in the tax bill.
Additional
Resources
Contact
Your Elected Official
Dec. 6 2005 Parents TV Council
P
TC
President Brent Bozell was on Capitol Hill last week, fighting a
David versus Goliath battle against dozens of powerful television
industry lobbyists and insiders in a Senate hearing on TV indecency.
What's at stake is nothing less than control over our broadcast
airwaves and the sort of content that will be coming into our homes
through our television sets.
This fall we have seen more indecent and violent programming than we've seen in a long time. Obviously the broadcast networks don't think the FCC is serious about enforcing the law.
That's why we urgently need your help to send a loud-and-clear message to the FCC that they need to get serious about indecency enforcement.
On October 25 millions of families, including more than one million children under the age of 18, were subjected to a sick mixture of sex and violence on NCIS. What's even more shocking is the fact that this content happened in the first few seconds of this family-hour program.
The November 6 episode of Family Guy - one of the highest-rated shows among young children -- included animated nudity and explicit sexual dialogue.
The November 15 Vibe Awards included a performance of the sexually explicit hit Hip-Hop song "Play," during the Family Hour.
We simply can't let the broadcast executives at CBS, UPN and Fox get away with such vile programming content, or it will set a new and unspeakably low standard for all of prime time broadcast TV.
Last year, the PTC and its members hit the FCC with over 230,000 official Indecency Complaints. Because of your support in this campaign, the FCC is finally starting to take a hard look at indecency enforcement. But we need to sustain the pressure on the FCC to enforce the law and to punish broadcasters when they break the law.
And we need to send a loud and clear signal to these networks and their owned and affiliated stations that it will cost them dearly in FCC fines and - possibly - their broadcast licenses themselves, for their part in pushing TV standards into the gutter.
Together, with a national grassroots response, we can stem the flow of filth, foul language and sick, ultra-violence on TV.
If you agree that these broadcasts violate your community standards, we need you to help flood the FCC with formal Indecency Complaints about this outrageous material.
Please take a moment today to go to www.parentstv.org/ptc/action/sweeps/main.asp and file your formal complaint. The PTC will automatically forward your Indecency Complaint to the FCC.
With urgent thanks,
Tim Winter, Executive Director
PARENTS TELEVISION COUNCIL -- Because our children are watching.
A significant majority of the public, fully 75%, are in favor of tighter enforcement of government rules, according to a Pew Research Center survey. In addition, 69% of the survey's respondents said they favor steeper fines and 60% are in favor of extending over-the-air "network standards" to cable TV.
Dec 6 2005 Concerned Women for America
W
ASHINGTON,
Concerned Women for America's (CWA) Dr. Janice Shaw Crouse, Senior
Fellow of Concerned Women for America's Beverly LaHaye Institute,
joined in a letter released Monday by the Fatherhood and Marriage
Leadership Institute (FAMLI) to the Senate leadership. The letter
supports moving federal welfare funds (TANF) into
marriage-strengthening programs.
Dr. Crouse said, "With the success of welfare reform legislation, the nation can use some of the TANF money to address family breakdown and the crisis of father absence in America. Marriage rates are down and too many of our children are being raised without the presence of their father. We must restore and strengthen the married mother and father family as the basic unit of American society."
By reprogramming TANF money, the bill does not generate new spending. It designates half the money for competitive grants at the state level for marriage-strengthening initiatives. The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services will distribute the other half to local organizations for marriage education and public awareness programs.
Dr. Crouse concluded, "Children are paying a high price for family breakdown in America -- divorce is the top cause of child poverty. Adults, too, benefit from marriage. Married people are happier and healthier; they earn more money and live longer."
The U.S. House of Representatives budget reconciliation bill includes TANF funds for the Healthy Marriage Initiative; the Senate bill does not. Action is expected during this session of Congress.
Dec. 2 Free Market Foundation
N
ational
Journal Columnist Stuart Taylor Jr. wrote an article concluding
that U.S. Supreme Court Nominee Judge Samuel Alito's political and
moral views fit in with those of mainstream Americans. This direct
article contradicts the opinions of many left-wing reporters who
oppose Alito's nomination.
Dec. 6 2005 GOP.Com
f
rom
far-left attack groups and their liberal allies in the Senate. These
efforts to drag Judge Alito's name through the mud are now in full
swing. One Senator even went so far as to question the nominee's
truthfulness, suggesting a "credibility gap." And the name
of this Senator lecturing us about credibility? Ted Kennedy.
With each passing day, the attacks on Judge Alito grow more shrill and the smears more outrageous. These attacks are driven by liberal special interests like MoveOn.org who dictate Senate Democrat leader Harry Reid's every move in the confirmation process. When these liberal groups tell Reid to attack, he unleashes far-left Senators to smear Judge Alito. These attacks end here. Send Harry Reid a message - tell him to stop doing the bidding of the far-left and to allow a fair and dignified confirmation.
Senate Democrats call Judge Alito out of the mainstream and attack his credibility. Just who in this debate has the credibility problem? Judge for yourself:
On Sunday, Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-CA) lied about Judge Alito's record, suggesting he opposes the principle of "one man, one vote." But the chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee has confirmed that Judge Alito views one man, one vote as "settled and beyond attack." Sen. Boxer calls Judge Alito's views "very far out of the mainstream." If there's anyone who is far outside the mainstream of American life, it's San Francisco liberal Barbara Boxer.
Richard Durbin, the Senate's number two Democrat, calls Judge Alito's rulings "controversial" and feigns concern about Judge Alito bringing an "extreme" agenda to the Court. Sen. Durbin should know a few things about controversy and extremism, having likened the actions of U.S. troops in the War on Terror to those of the Soviet Gulag.
And Chuck Schumer, Senate Democrats' campaign chief, suggests that a filibuster is more likely because of contrived "new revelations." This from the same Chuck Schumer who never fails to put politics before his obligation as a Judiciary Committee member not to pre-judge a nominee - and who has had to contend with "revelations" that his staff at the DSCC illegally obtained the credit report of a Republican Senate candidate.
Far-left Senators are attacking because they're afraid of judges who interpret the law, and don't invent it. They can't get a majority of Americans to support their extreme agenda, so they want activist judges who will impose that agenda by circumventing the legislative process. Judge Alito's record is just the opposite - studious, respectful of precedent, and committed to the rule of law.
Dec. 2, 2005 John Hooper The Guardian
'Baby
bonus' proposal gets cross-party endorsement, low fertility rate
threatens to undermine Italian economy.
A proposal to pay
women in Italy not to have abortions was rapidly gaining momentum
yesterday as politicians of right and left alike gave it their
endorsement.
The scheme - put forward by the left - came against a background of mounting pressure from the Roman Catholic Church for a rethink of the country's 1978 abortion law. With a general election due in four months, both sides are keen to woo the decisive Catholic vote.
Under the scheme women in straitened economic circumstances would get between €250 (£170) and €350 a month for up to six months before giving birth. The plan is outlined in a proposed amendment to next year's budget sponsored by a group of MPs that includes two former women ministers - one an ex-Communist and the other from the centre-left.
Their move is the latest development in a burgeoning controversy over abortion in Italy. Last month Silvio Berlusconi's health minister, an opponent of the 1978 law, said he wanted to put pro-life volunteers into state-funded abortion advice centers to discourage women from terminating their pregnancies.
The language issuing from the Vatican has grown stronger in recent weeks with one cardinal describing abortion as "the worst kind of murder". On Wednesday a parliamentary committee gave the go-ahead for a commission of inquiry into the workings of Italy's act, passed at a time when the feminist lobby in Italy was stronger and more active than today.
One reason why the latest initiative has gathered support is that it addresses Italy's failure to produce enough children. In 2003 the fertility rate - the number of children per woman of childbearing age - was only 1.27, one of the lowest in the world. A slight increase in recent years has been due to immigrant mothers.
The low fertility rate threatens to undermine competitiveness and make Italy's welfare system unsustainable. Giuseppe Fioroni, one of three MPs sponsoring the budget amendment, said: "We want to prevent children being considered as luxury goods in the way that they are now."
Italy's legislation provides for abortion on demand in the first 12 weeks of pregnancy. However, last year a cross-party majority of MPs succeeded in bringing in a law on assisted fertilization that gave embryos full rights from the point of conception. Since then supporters of the existing legislation have been expecting that it could be used to pries open the 1978 law. Controversy erupted again last month when the church criticized trials of the abortion pill, Mifepristone.
Dec. 5 2005 Family Research Council
T
here
is an African proverb that states, "A family is like a forest;
when you are outside it is dense, when you are inside you see that
each tree has its place." The blueprint for this forest has been
around since the beginning - a mother and father providing the best
and most stable environment for their "saplings" to grow.
In one African country this proverb is currently lost since South Africa's highest court yesterday gave the country's Parliament one year to extend marital rights to all homosexual couples. Once again judicial fiat, as seen in this country in Vermont and Massachusetts, ignores the will of the people and imposes radical cultural change. While it appears the South African court looked to other countries for inspiration, it is obvious they did not look close enough.
This past fall one of the first countries to grant full marriage rights to homosexuals, the Netherlands, granted three people civil union rights, giving credence to slippery slope arguments that same-sex "marriage" will lead to polygamy and "anything goes" unions. Recognition of these false unions undermines society at large and the traditional family structure, denying children the opportunity of having parents of both sexes. By accepting these "wooden nickel" marriages and civil unions, we honor the desires of adults, not the needs of kids, and risk reducing the institution itself to ash.
Dec. 06, 2005 Susan Jones Senior Editor CNSNews.com
A
homosexual advocacy group said it is "deeply dismayed" by
reports that Ford Motor Company has quietly agreed to stop
advertising in lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) media
outlets.
Parents, Families and Friends of Lesbians and Gays
(PFLAG) has joined with like-minded organizations in issuing a "unity
statement" opposing the "confidential agreement"
between Ford and the American Family Association.
"If
there is an agreement with AFA, we expect Ford to disavow it,"
PFLAG said in a press release. "We expect Ford to publicly
reaffirm its historic support for our community. And we expect Ford
to meet with LGBT representatives this week to resolve these
concerns."
More than a dozen LGBT groups signed the
unity statement.
A report in the New York Times on Tuesday
said Ford has agreed to pull ads for its Jaguar and Land Rover brands
from "gay-oriented" publications, after the American Family
Association threatened to boycott the company in May.
Ads for
Volvo, another Ford unit, will continue to run in those publications,
the New York Times said.
But a Ford spokesman quoted by the
New York Times said the ads were eliminated to cut costs, not because
of boycott concerns.
AFA Chairman Donald Wildmon seems to
think otherwise, however. He says that Ford is "acting on our
concerns."
The AFA called for a boycott of Ford in late
May, because of Ford's support for the homosexual agenda, including
donations to homosexual advocacy groups, sponsorship of "gay
pride" events, and diversity training that requires employees to
accept homosexuality.
The planned boycott never happened,
however. The American Family Association said at the request of Ford
dealers, it agreed to give the company six months to address
conservatives' concerns.
Wildmon said his group has met with
Ford several times in recent months: "They've heard our
concerns; they have responded, we think, in a very positive way.
We've opened lines of communication, [and] we think those lines of
communication will stay open."
Wildmon credits Ford
dealers with "opening up a line of communication" between
AFA and Ford Motor Company. "The dealers are basically our kind
of people who share many of our concerns," he said.
Last
week, Wildmon announced that the Ford boycott -- suspended from the
outset -- had officially ended.
Nov.29 2005 Prophecy Watch
S
outhern
Baptists in Georgia are disassociating themselves from a historically
Baptist school that employs two Christianity professors and several
other faculty members who support homosexual student activism on
campus.
By a 98 percent vote, the Georgia Baptist Convention
recently decided to sever ties with Mercer University in Atlanta
because of the school's endorsement of the homosexual lifestyle. The
school hosted a "gay pride" event whose supporters
reportedly included faculty and members from the school's Department
of Christianity. If the Convention votes in a similar fashion next
November, Mercer will no longer be considered a Georgia Baptist
school or receive $3.5 million a year in funding from the
Convention.
Dr. Tony Romans is the pastor of North Peachtree
Baptist Church in Atlanta. He says theological liberals are at home
in an academic setting -- and likely could not survive in the
pulpit.
"A lot of the men who go through seminary and get
the academic training who are liberal in their theology cannot make
it as a pastor in most of the local churches," Romans exclaims.
"They can't go to their pulpit and preach that liberal theology;
the people won't stand for it."
To support his point, he
notes that pastors' sermons in "even the most liberal
congregations that vote in a liberal way on a lot of issues" are
not as "overtly liberal as some of these types of things
are."
Part of the problem at Mercer, he explains, is that
the Georgia Baptist Convention has been prevented from determining
who is nominated to the school's board of trustees. "Basically
Mercer has a board that is self-perpetuating in that sense,"
Romans says.
"So the ideology that has come to the
campus, as we've seen through these recent events, just demonstrates
that the people who are leading that institution do not share the
historical Baptist roots or the historical Baptist beliefs that we as
Georgia Baptists do."
Romans recommends: that Georgia
Baptists who want their college-age children to receive a solid
Christian education consider schools like Shorter College in Rome and
Brewton-Parker College in Mount Vernon. Mercer currently has
approximately 7,000 students.
Dec. 6 2005 Christian Wire Service
F
RONT
ROYAL, Va., The Rev. Thomas J. Euteneuer, president of Human Life
International, issued the following response to the release of
Concerning the Criteria of Vocational Discernment Regarding
Persons with Homosexual Tendencies in View of their Admission to
Seminaries and Holy Orders by the Congregation for Catholic
Education.
"Engaging in homosexual acts is a grave,
mortal sin that endangers the immortal soul of the practitioner and
such a lifestyle compromises a man's ability to competently serve as
a priest," stated Fr. Euteneuer. "The statement released
last week with the approval of Pope Benedict XVI clearly restates the
Church's longstanding teaching that men who struggle with disordered
passions or suffer from the burden of homosexual sin cannot be
admitted to the priesthood, and we are grateful to the Vatican for
this document . . ."
"The Church recognizes that
people with 'homosexual tendencies' can be good Christians, social
workers, and administrators, but being a priest is all of these
things and much more.
"The Church does not deny that those with homosexual tendencies cannot be chaste. It just makes a clear distinction between chastity and celibacy. Christians are called to live sexually chaste lives regardless of any personal tendency or disorder. Celibacy however requires that men renounce marriage for the sake of the kingdom of God-- something homosexuals cannot do. The Church is within her rights to ask that her priests make this sacrifice in imitation of Christ" concluded Fr. Euteneuer.
Founded in 1981, Human Life International is the world's largest pro-life, pro-family organization that is dedicated to defending life, faith and the family, with branches and affiliates around the world.
Dec. 02,
2005 Kevin McCandless CNSNews.com
A
s
the United Kingdom prepares to legalize same-sex civil partnerships
next week, religious leaders appear to have mixed views on whether to
embrace or condemn what activists are hailing as "gay
marriage."
From Monday on, homosexuals and lesbians will
be able to register their unions, giving them many of the same rights
as married heterosexuals. Given a government-mandated waiting period,
the first civil partnership ceremonies are scheduled to be held on
Dec. 21.
Researchers estimate that up to 22,000 couples will
go through the ceremony in the next five years.
This week, the
country's smallest branch of Judaism announced that it would allow
same-sex couples to "marry" in its synagogues.
Rabbi
Danny Rich, head of the Liberal Judaism movement, said on Wednesday
that couples could choose a ceremony that closely follows the
traditional Jewish marriage ritual, complete with huppah (cloth
canopy) and breaking of a wine glass at the end.
They could
also opt for their own unique version of the service.
With 33
synagogues, the Liberal branch accounts for 12,000 of the nation's
267,000 Jews.
Leaders of the much larger Orthodox branch have
refused to allow their rabbis to perform civil partnership
ceremonies, while the Reform movement has yet to state its official
view.
Rabbi Mark Solomon, one of the creators of the new
Liberal liturgy who plans to officiate at a handful of "weddings"
at his north London synagogue, said he expected the Reform movement
eventually to adopt its own ceremony, "once the civil
partnership has been established as legal fact."
Members
of the Church of England continue to argue publicly over the issue,
leading to further talk of a worldwide schism in the already-fragile
Anglican Communion.
Dec. 6 2005 Chris Mitchell CWNews
Two thousand years after the birth of Christ, Christians are leaving the Holy Land in record numbers. Now, a new report suggests persecution against Palestinian Christian believers is getting worse.
Charred ruins are all that remain of 14 homes set a blaze in the West Bank village of Taybeh. An angry Muslim mob, from a neighboring village, attacked the Christian town last September. They said they were avenging the dishonor of a Muslim woman allegedly impregnated by her Christian employer from Taybeh.
Taybeh is the only West Bank village completely inhabited by Christians, about 2,000 of them. Originally, it was called Ephraim in the Old Testament; and in the book of John it is mentioned as a village where Jesus stayed.
David Khoury is the Mayor of Taybeh. He says the attack would not have occurred if Taybeh were a Muslim village instead of a Christian one.
Khoury said, "It’s happened many times between a Muslim and a Muslim; and what they did was, most times, just marry the girl off. Had they given us a chance, and proved this pregnancy was by the man from Taybeh, maybe we would have married him to that girl."
Palestinian officials are downplaying what happened here, depicting it as a dispute between families, the result of an out-of-wedlock romance. But some villagers insist the incident was "pure religious hatred"—that Taybeh Christians were used as scapegoats. Some of the 400 attackers were reportedly heard shouting "Allahu akbar—‘Allah is great’”—as they threw molotov cocktails at Christian houses.
We've hidden the identity of a West Bank evangelist for his protection. We'll call him Nadeem. He suggests Palestinian authorities are covering up a larger problem: a rising tide of Muslim intolerance and violence directed against the Christian minority.
‘Nadeem’ said, "It's a down play in order to avoid a bigger issue which would be a fight on the village level, when you have villages attacking other villages. It's easier for them to downplay it, to avoid the bigger problem. Which, I don't know if there will be enough officials around to handle it, if that happens."
The attack on the village of Taybeh is one more example of the precarious position of Christians in the West Bank and throughout the Middle East."
Last February, hundreds of Druze Muslims attacked Palestinian Christians in the northern Israeli village of Mughar. Rioters damaged 125 homes and businesses after a Druze teenager spread the false rumor that Christians had posted pornographic images of Druze women on the internet.
International Human Rights attorney Justus Weiner has researched the plight of Palestinian Christians for more than eight years. His findings were recently published by the Jerusalem Center For Public Affairs.
Weiner warned, "Palestinian Christians are in very dire straights…"
He also says Palestinian Christians are now living in fear because persecution against them is increasing.
Weiner added, "I think the situation has been on a steep downhill for at least 12 years—since Israel withdrew from the Palestinian populated areas of the West Bank and Gaza. The Christians fear for their own lives, they fear for their own family, they fear for the future of their community."
The Christians are a community that many of their fellow Christians believe will be marginalized as the Palestinians move toward statehood.
As Palestinians continue to gain more land from the Israelis, many Arab Christians fear the persecution against them will only get worse. In some cases it's already starting to happen.
One recent population study shows that the Christian presence in Israel, Syria, Lebanon, Jordan and the Palestinian Authority has declined from 26 percent in 1914 to 9 percent today.
The
city of Bethlehem—the birthplace of Jesus—was once a
Christian city.
Several decades ago it was more than 80 percent
Christian, but today it is less than 15 percent Christian
While their numbers may be fewer, and persecution against them is increasing, thousands of Christians have chosen to remain in the Holy Land….and some are quietly leading Muslims to Christ…
Nadeem said,” When the person's faith is true, and they realize that their suffering doesn't go unnoticed by God, and they see that they're doing something for the cause of Christ and furthering his kingdom, then they grow with more courage and the work goes on."
In his second letter to Timothy, the Apostle Paul said that those who live a godly life in Christ will be persecuted. Nearly 2000 years later, those words are ringing true for Palestinian Christians in the Holy Land, where persecution is now a way of life.
Dec. 06, 2005
Susan Jones Senior Editor CNSNews.com
T
he
head of the Democratic Party told a San Antonio radio station on
Monday morning that the U.S. can't win the war in Iraq. Howard Dean's
comment drew a sharp response from Republicans later in the
day.
Dean told radio station WOAI, "The idea that we're
going to win this war is an idea that unfortunately is just plain
wrong." Dean said he's seen such a scenario before -- in Vietnam
-- and "I don't want to do down that road again."
Republicans
expressed outrage:
"In predicting that America will lose
the war in Iraq, Howard Dean is the latest national Democrat leader
to embrace retreat and defeat in the central front in the war on
terror," said Republican National Committee Chairman Ken
Mehlman.
"His outrageous prediction sends the wrong
message to our troops, the enemy, and the Iraqi people just 10 days
before historic elections. Democrats across the nation should stand
up and reject the pessimism of their chairman and strategy of defeat
by their Congressional leaders."
During his radio
interview, Dean advocated the "redeployment" of U.S. troops
over two years, with 80,000 National Guardsmen coming home "now"
because "they don't belong in a conflict like this
anyway."
Dean said he would not use the word
"withdrawal," but he also insisted the U.S. cannot keep
troops in Iraq permanently.
Dean said he wants to see U.S.
troops moved out of Iraq to a friendlier country where they won't
have a target on their backs.
"Now that we're there,
we've got to figure out how to leave because we cannot have a
permanent commitment [in Iraq]."
QUOTEWORTHY: "It is an indispensable duty, my brethren, which we owe to God and our country, to rouse up and bestir ourselves, and, be animated with a noble zeal for the sacred cause of liberty, to defend our lives and fortunes, even to the shedding of the last drop of blood." -- Samuel West, 1776
|
Eagle Forum November 2005 PHYLLIS SCHLAFLY REPORT Eagle Forum American Citizenship Is Precious |
B
irthright
Citizenship, Dual Citizenship and the Meaning of Sovereignty were the
subjects of a House hearing on September 30 presided over by Rep.
John Hostettler (R-IN). It is unfortunate that this important subject
received little media coverage.
Birthright citizenship statistics are shocking. At least 383,000 babies are born in the United States every year to Illegal Aliens, that's 10% of all U.S. births and about 40% of indigent births. The cost to the U.S. taxpayers is tremendous because all those babies, called anchor babies, claim birthright citizenship. Their mothers and other relatives then sign up for a vast stream of taxpayer benefits.
At least 12 million persons now live in the United States illegally. In addition, smugglers operate a thriving business of bringing in pregnant women from all over the world just in time to give birth and claim citizenship and citizens' benefits. Why does the United States allow this racket to continue? Congress has failed to do its duty to protect American citizenship, sovereignty, and taxpayers.
The Citizenship Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment states that U.S. citizens are "all persons born or naturalized in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof." Federal law uses almost identical language. "Subject to the jurisdiction thereof" is an essential part of the definition. History emphatically confirms the importance and necessity of those five words.
American Indians with allegiance to their tribes, despite the obvious location of their birth, did not receive U.S. citizenship until it was conferred by congressional acts in 1887, 1901 and 1924. Babies born to diplomats or their wives who happen to be in the United States at the moment of birth are not U.S. citizens.
The purpose of the citizenship clause of the Fourteenth Amendment was to assure that blacks are citizens, thus overturning the U.S. Supreme Court's infamous Dred Scott decision that blacks could not be citizens. Congress thus rejected stare decisis in overruling that most supremacist decision in history.
The U.S. Constitution, in Article I, Section 8, and in the Fourteenth Amendment, gives all authority over citizenship and naturalization to Congress, not to the courts. Congress should end its silence and pass a law stating that a child born to an illegal alien is not a U.S. citizen because his parent has not made herself subject to U.S. jurisdiction.
The peculiar notion that foreigners residing illegally in the United States should enjoy the same rights as American citizens is found nowhere in the U.S. Constitution or federal law. This anomaly was created by supremacist judges who encouraged and protected the large-scale entry of illegal aliens into the United States.
One of President Dwight Eisenhower's mistakes, Supreme Court Justice William Brennan, created a brand-new addition to the Fourteenth Amendment. Brennan's 5-4 opinion in the case of Plyler v. Doe (1982) struck down a Texas law and created the requirement that the State of Texas must provide free public education to illegal-alien children. The Plyler decision gave foreigners a powerful incentive to sneak into our country, enroll their children in our public schools, and start demanding other benefits paid for by U.S. taxpayers. This decision opened our borders to a stampede of illegal aliens, aided and abetted by one bad court decision after another.
Dual citizenship is a problem because some immigrants have falsely been led to believe that they are or can be dual citizens. Mexico has even named a cabinet minister whose mission is to encourage Mexicans (both illegal and naturalized U.S. citizens) to vote in Mexican elections and, as he said, to "think Mexico first."
Congress has never legislated a specific prohibition about dual citizenship and the Supreme Court has never ruled on this precise point. But to become a U.S. citizen, immigrants are required by our law to swear allegiance to the United States and to absolutely renounce any and all allegiance to the nation from which they came.
There is no ambiguity about the solemn oath that all naturalized Americans must take: "I hereby declare, on oath, that I absolutely and entirely renounce and abjure all allegiance and fidelity to any foreign prince, potentate, state, or sovereignty, of whom or which I have heretofore been a subject or citizen; that I will support and defend the Constitution and laws of the United States of America against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I will bear arms on behalf of the United States when required by the law; . . . and that I take this obligation freely without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; so help me God."
Any naturalized U.S. citizen who claims dual citizenship with his native country betrays his solemn oath. We want immigrants to come to America and become Americans; we want patriotic assimilation.
Congress should pass a law stating that if naturalized U.S. citizens vote, hold office, or serve in the armed forces of their native country, they forfeit their American citizenship.
The
Policy of Bait-and-Switch
Americans are not
naive enough to believe the sensational headline and opening
paragraphs of news accounts about Homeland Security Secretary Michael
Chertoff's October 18 testimony to the Senate Judiciary Committee. He
was reported to have said that Homeland Security will now "Return
every single illegal entrant — no exceptions."
That's a correct quote, but Chertoff's prepared text proves that he certainly won't start tomorrow to expel and exclude "every single" illegal alien who crosses our border. His statement refers only to the Other Than Mexicans (OTMs) whom our undermanned Border Patrol agents actually catch. Those are the aliens who are the beneficiaries of a Bush Administration racket called "catch and release." OTMs are caught, charged as immigration law violators, and then immediately released on their own recognizance — which allows them to disappear into the American population.
On October 24, CBS Evening News showed pictures of these OTMs sneaking over the border. The announcer explained that these aliens don't try to evade capture but actually want to be caught because they know they will enjoy "catch and release" and then can immediately proceed to their destinations anywhere in the United States and live illegally indefinitely.
Chertoff admitted that 130,000 OTMs received this treatment in 2005 alone. He acts as though he just discovered this travesty when in fact "catch and release" has been government policy for years. Furthermore, Chertoff didn't promise immediate action; he is just "taking steps" to change it, "reengineering" our removal process, and expecting "significant progress in less than a year." Meanwhile, Chertoff admitted that "catch and release" acts as an enticement for additional illegal to enter our country.
Chertoff told the Senate committee that he already has "aggressive efforts underway" to ensure that employers who violate current laws "face appropriate punishment." Really? At least 12 million illegal aliens are now working in the United States, but only three employers in the entire nation were fined in 2004. In President Bush's Saturday radio address, he bragged that "we've doubled the resources for work site enforcement since 2004." Does that mean we can expect six employers to be fined next year?
Obviously, Chertoff has no plans to do anything about the illegal entrants who already slipped over our border and are now living across the country from Maine to California.
It's hard to take Chertoff's promises seriously when they are prefaced by the false braggadocio that "President Bush has placed the utmost importance on border security." The latest 28-question opinion survey circulated to donors by the Republican Party does not include even one question about illegal aliens or immigration, further manifesting the Bush Administration policy of sweeping this issue under the rug. The latest 15-question survey distributed by the Democratic National Committee likewise has not a single question about illegal aliens or immigration. Both parties are pretending that this issue doesn't exist.
In signing the giant Homeland Security spending bill in October and in his Saturday radio broadcast, President Bush for the first time gave us some tough talk about getting "control of our borders," but tucked at the end of his border-security rhetoric was a renewed demand that we offer American jobs to "willing workers from foreign countries." The most accurate way to describe his sales talk is bait-and-switch.
Bush didn't put any numbers limit on the "willing workers" he would like to invite to come and join the U.S. job market. How many "willing workers" around the world would jump at the chance to come to the United States and work for a dollar an hour? Maybe 5,000,000,000?
Conservative Republicans in Congress have wised up to the Administration's bait-and-switch plan. More than 80 House members recently sent a letter to the President stating that "the American people need to see that the current laws against illegal immigration are being enforced before any guest-worker program can be considered."
The letter said we have lost control of our borders and endangered the lives of Americans by not enforcing existing immigration laws. The letter cited the 1996 Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act that mandated a national exit-entry tracking system for all aliens but, nine years later, the system is still not near completion.
Illegal aliens are responsible for a terrible crime wave that includes the spread into our cities and suburbs of criminal gangs from El Salvador, Guatemala and Honduras. The gang called MS-13 (Mara Salvatrucha), with an estimated 10,000 members in 33 states, deals in narcotics, gun trafficking, prostitution, and murder by machete after torture and mutilation.
U.S. taxpayers are paying a heavy burden of costs to provide illegal aliens with health care, public schools, in-state college tuition, housing subsidies, and treatment for Third World diseases. The failure to enforce our immigration laws results in a general disrespect for all laws, plus the destruction of private property of Americans along our southern border.
The President can no longer get by with saying "trust me." His record of failure to enforce our immigration laws is too scandalous and too costly for us to be satisfied with mere plans to do better sometime in the future.
Congressional candidates preparing for the 2006 elections should beware: amnesty, guest-worker, and willing worker are all red-flag words that voters find offensive.
A
Phone Call from Newt Gingrich
I was sitting
at my computer when I received a phone call asking me to listen to an
important recorded message from our old friend Newt Gingrich.
Expecting to get more information about his new alliance with Hillary
Clinton to change health care as we know it, I stayed on the line.
But no, Newt was telling me about the danger from illegal aliens coming across our open borders. He talked about the threat this poses to our national security in an era of terrorism, the high costs to U.S. taxpayers, the follies of multiculturalism, and the urgent need for everyone in our country to be able to speak our English language.
The message was skillfully designed to appeal to Americans who are outraged at our government's failure to protect us from the invasion of illegal. But slyly buried in the middle of Newt's message was an endorsement of a "guest-worker" plan to invite even more aliens to take U.S. jobs.
The politicians and business executives, who are determined to continue bringing in foreigners to work for lower wages than Americans expect, have gotten smart. The plan to import "willing workers" from other countries is now being packaged in the language of concern about border security.
This strategy is obvious in the new White House-backed coalition called Americans for Border and Economic Security, organized by Republican lobbyist (and former Republican National Committee Chairman) Ed Gillespie. Admission to this coalition costs $50,000 to $250,000, fees that will finance a political-style campaign to sell the American people on a guest-worker program wrapped in a few border-security measures.
This bait-and-switch maneuver is also the approach of the legislation sponsored by Senators John Cornyn (R-TX) and John Kyl (R-AZ). It's called the "Comprehensive Enforcement and Immigration Reform Act," and it is very comprehensive; the advance summary runs a dozen pages of fine print.
The Cornyn-Kyl bill starts off with authorizing 10,000 more Border Patrol Agents. But more agents were congressionally authorized months ago and the Bush Administration refused to add them.
The Cornyn-Kyl bill increases criminal penalties for alien smuggling, document fraud, gang violence, and drug trafficking. But that only applies to criminals who are caught; our Border Patrol is catching less than half of the illegal coming over the border, and we inspect only a tiny percent of the Mexican trucks which NAFTA has forced us to allow on our highways.
What about the incredible costs to U.S. taxpayers of illegal aliens, such as health care at our hospitals, schooling for their children, subsidized housing, Earned Income Tax Credit subsidies, and in-state college tuition rates? The Cornyn-Kyl bill would deny taxpayer benefits only to aliens found to pose a threat to national security (not to those who threaten our pocketbooks).
The comprehensive Cornyn-Kyl bill contains dozens of excellent and necessary proposals that should have been ordered years ago, such as eliminating the Diversity Visa Program.
But buried in the middle of this vast bill is Title V, which creates a "Nonimmigrant Temporary Worker Category." That's the euphemism for giving amnesty to some 12 million illegal aliens already in the United States, plus creating "guest worker" status for them and for millions more aliens who will be invited into our country to take U.S. jobs.
"Amnesty" means a general pardon for offenses against the government. The Cornyn-Kyl bill includes no punishment whatsoever for the crimes committed by illegal aliens, by makers and users of fraudulent documents, or by employers who hire the cheap labor.
The Cornyn-Kyl bill would establish a new visa category called "W" that would allow aliens to enter the United States "when there are no available U.S. workers." The bill would require employers to pay "W" aliens the minimum wage but not require the market wage. In other words, Silicon Valley corporations could advertise in "America's Job Bank" for computer specialists at the U.S. minimum wage, no American engineers would apply, and thousands of computer specialists from India and Pakistan would board planes to take the jobs for which, allegedly, "there are no available U.S. workers."
The "W" workers would be allowed to extend their time in the United States up to six years, during which period their family members may come and visit for 30 days at a time. The bill doesn't answer the question of what happens when the "W" worker is visited by his wife and they produce an "anchor baby," i.e., a U.S. citizen, with all the rights and taxpayer benefits for the baby and all his relatives.
Amnesty, even under the phony label "guest worker," is highly offensive to the American people. It cannot be made palatable by hiding it in a bill that pretends to be about "enforcement" or "reform" of border security.
Importing
Third World Diseases
Dr. Madeleine Cosman,
Esq. is a national authority on the diseases brought into our country
by illegal aliens, who of course are not given health examinations
required of all legal immigrants. Her message should be heard by all
Americans. She says that 84 California hospitals closed between 1994
and 2003 because EMTALA, the Emergency Medical Treatment and Active
Labor Act, requires every emergency room to treat every patient
coming with an "emergency" (including childbirth) even if
unable to pay and even if illegally in the United States. The law is
tough; hospitals and doctors are fined up to $50,000 for refusing to
treat. This unfunded federal mandate has caused dozens of hospitals
to go bankrupt.
Dr. Cosman, who is both a Ph.D. and a lawyer, describes the infectious diseases now spreading across the United States. The Centers for Disease Control reports that illegal immigrants account for over 65% of communicable diseases.
Contagious diseases that our country wiped out years ago, such as malaria, polio, tuberculosis, and hepatitis, and rare diseases of Third World poverty such as leprosy, Chagas disease, and Dengue Fever, are coming in. Seven thousand cases of leprosy have been reported in the U.S. since 2001, the majority of which came from Mexico, Brazil and India.
The Centers for Disease Control reported 38,291 California cases of tuberculosis that included Multiple Drug Resistant Tuberculosis, which is 60% fatal and for which treatment costs $200,000 to $1,200,000 per patient. Illegal aliens are also bringing in syphilis and gonorrhea. Bedbugs have invaded the United States for the first time in 50 years, with 28 states reporting recent infestations. Although bedbugs are common in many counties, they were all but eradicated in our country after World War II.
It is a mystery to those of us in heartland America what President Bush must be thinking of when he continues to push for his unpopular guest-worker/amnesty plan to allow millions of illegal aliens in our country to stay here without punishment, and to invite millions more "willing workers" to come on in. How many "willing workers" do you think there are in the rest of the world?
The Pew Hispanic Center has just provided a clue. A Pew survey in May of migration attitudes in 120 locations in Mexico showed that 46% of Mexicans (that means 49 million people) said they would live in the United States if they had the opportunity, and two out of ten are willing to come here illegally.
Two Democratic Governors, Bill Richardson of New Mexico and Janet Napolitano of Arizona, have declared a state of emergency and asked for federal help to deal with the costs of the violence and property damage caused by illegal aliens coming over their southern borders. If President Bush lets those partisan Democrats get to the right of him on the immigration issue, all Republicans will suffer in the 2006 election.
Words
of wisdom from Theodore Roosevelt:
We
should insist that if the immigrant who comes here does in good faith
become an American and assimilates himself to us, he shall be
treated on an exact equality with everyone else, for it is an outrage
to discriminate against any such man because of creed or birthplace
or origin. But this is predicated upon the man's becoming in very
fact an American and nothing but an American. . . . There can be no
divided allegiance here. . . . We have room for but one flag, the
American flag, and this excludes the red flag, which symbolizes all
wars against liberty and civilization, just as much as it excludes
any foreign flag of a nation to which we are hostile. . . . We have
room for but one language here, and that is the English language . .
. and we have room for but one sole loyalty, and that is a loyalty to
the American people. (Speech to American Defense Society, 1-3-19)
We should provide for every immigrant, by day-schools for the young and night-schools for the adults, the chance to learn English; and if after, say, five years he has not learned English, he should be sent back to the land from whence he came. . . . (New York Times, 9-10-17)
Never under any condition should this Nation look at an immigrant as primarily a labor unit. He should always be looked at primarily as a future citizen . . . (Kansas City Star, 12-1-17)
We cannot afford to continue to use hundreds of thousands of immigrants merely as industrial assets while they remain social outcasts and menaces any more than 50 years ago we could afford to keep the black man merely as an industrial asset and not as a human being. . . . We cannot afford the low wage rates and the merely seasonal industries which mean the sacrifice of both individual and family life and morals to the industrial machinery. (Speech to Knights of Columbus, 10-12-15)
Howard Wilson hwilson@texasmoralaction.org
