Watchman #68

he Primary Election in Texas is March 7, 2006. The Primary Election most often determines who will be your elected official. As we have seen during this past legislative session, it really does make a difference who is elected. Free Market Foundation is currently gathering candidate questionnaires for use in the 2006 Primary Election Voters' Guide. Many times candidates will dodge the tough questions because they do not want to be pinpointed on key issues. Don't let your candidate be one of them! Now it's your chance to turn up the heat on these candidates. We need your help getting the questionnaires back from all the candidates running in the 2006 Primary Election. We have several swing districts, and Texas voters deserve to know how these candidates stand on the issues.

lease CLICK HERE to see if any of your candidates have not returned the questionnaire. If so, please call immediately and urge them to be honest with Texans by participating in the largest Voters' Guide distribution in the state. If you are unsure what districts you are in, CLICK HERE to look it up based on your address. (The district number is listed above the incumbent candidates).

Gambling opponents warn of plans for Slot machines Texas

Jan. 22 2006 JOHN MORITZ Star-Telegram Austin Bureau

USTIN -- A proposed rule change to give the Texas Lottery Commission wider latitude to develop new games might open the door to legalized casino-style slot machines wherever lottery tickets are sold, anti-gambling forces say.

A spokesman for the Texas Lottery Commission said such a move is not the intention of the proposal, which could come up for a vote as early as next month. But Suzii Paynter, who monitors state government for the Baptist General Convention of Texas, said the measure contains language that would allow players to operate computerized instant games and eliminate the requirement that tickets be scratched to reveal a winning combination.

"When the game looks and plays like a slot machine you'd find at any casino in Las Vegas, it doesn't matter what you call it," Paynter said. "It's a slot machine."

Paynter cited a recent example in Iowa where officials implemented new rules to allow lottery games in computer terminals at stores, restaurants and bars. The move, which caught many lawmakers off guard, resulted in the installation of thousands of terminals that resemble casino-style slots popping up all over Iowa.

The outcry from gambling opponents and ordinary citizens prompted Iowa Gov. Tom Vilsack to declare a moratorium on adding more terminals until the matter could be investigated.

The proposed rule for the Texas lottery is designed to allow officials to swiftly respond to changes in technology and to give Texans new and innovative ways to play the games that generate about $1 billion a year for the state, lottery spokesman Bobby Heith said.

Currently, to make changes in games like Lotto Texas and Cash 5, notice must be given up to 60 days in advance, and then the three-member panel that oversees the lottery must vote on whether to implement the changes or go back to the drawing board.

"In any business environment, you want to be able to react to forces in the market as they are happening," Heith said.

Whether there was no intent to allow casino-style slot machines is of little comfort to Paynter, whose organization was a leading force in the Legislature's inability last year to pass a bill that would have put as many as 40,000 such terminals at racetracks and Indian reservations across Texas.

She said that the Iowa rule appeared to be nothing more than giving lottery players there a new way to enjoy the games. But instead of players having to scratch a ticket, the computer screen tells players instantly whether they have won or lost. Winners get a computer-generated slip of paper that they can redeem for cash.

Iowa state Sen. Jack Hatch, a Des Moines Democrat, said that even though lottery officials had briefed lawmakers on the plan to allow widespread computerized games beforehand, most had no idea that the terminals would look and operate like casino-style slots. More than 4,600 terminals are in operation at about 2,500 locations, and countless more are on order.

"It caught us all by surprise," Hatch said. "You go into any grocery store now and you'll see moms and dads sitting at those machines playing game after game with their kids right next to them. It's a huge expansion of gambling in our state."

Although retailers and lottery devotees love the new devices, Hatch said, many Iowans are livid that stores and neighborhood taverns are being transformed into small-scale casinos by the machines. That prompted Gov. Vilsack this month to order a 60-day moratorium on licensing additional terminals after the ones currently on order are installed.

Paynter said she is worried that Texas lawmakers will be caught similarly off guard if the rule awaiting the Lottery Commission's consideration is adopted.

"I'm not even sure that the Lottery Commission fully appreciates the magnitude of what could happen if these machines start coming in here," said Paynter, who has sent letters to lottery officials, key lawmakers and Gov. Rick Perry urging them to proceed carefully.

Commission Chairman C. Thomas Clowe said he is aware of the concerns raised by Paynter and other gambling foes, but said he would wait until the February meeting before addressing them. A date for the meeting has not been set.

"I'm certainly aware of those comments that are out there, and I am respectful of those comments," Clowe said. "I certainly hope and expect that we will deliberate those proposals at next month's meeting and, hopefully, take action on them."

State Rep. Will Hartnett, a Dallas Republican who opposes expanding legalized gambling, said he shares Paynter's concerns but takes lottery officials at their word that they are not planning to do an end run around the Legislature.

"They have assured me that they understand that the statutes prohibit this sort of activity," Hartnett said.

But state Rep. Corbin Van Arsdale, R-Tomball, who has butted heads with lottery officials on a range of issues in recent months, is not quite so sure.

"The bottom line is that the lottery industry, not necessarily the Lottery Commission, is very good about finding new and better ways to push the envelope, so to speak, on the types of games and devices that are available to players," Van Arsdale said.

"They know how to get things done. So we in the Legislature, the watchdog groups and the media really have to pay attention."

The notion to allow casino-style slots at select venues in Texas first gained traction in summer 2004 when Perry called the first special legislative session in the effort to overhaul the school-finance system and lower local property taxes. Perry's plan would have allowed the video terminals at horse- and dog-racing tracks and on Indian reservations.

State officials estimated at the time that the new games would generate up to $1.5 billion annually for the state. The Texas Lottery Commission went so far as to hire a Las Vegas law firm to draft legislation allowing such devices for lawmakers' consideration.

But the proposal soon polarized the Legislature. A House alliance of Republican social conservatives and Democrats managed to scuttle the proposal during that special session, and during the 2005 regular session and two special sessions that again dealt with school finance.

The devices that would have been made legal as part of the school-finance overhaul are known as video lottery terminals and are similar or even identical to casino slot machines in appearance. But they are controlled by a centralized computer so lottery officials would be able to ascertain exactly how many winning combinations would be hit each time a terminal is programmed.

Slot machines found in casinos, on the other hand, can operate independent of any centralized computer system and winning combinations pop up randomly.

The devices that were recently introduced in Iowa are known as "monitor vending machines." But they are equipped with software files that predetermine when the winning combinations are hit, according to industry literature. Similarly, the manufacturers of traditional scratch-off tickets can determine exactly which tickets in the roll contain the winners.

State Rep. Charlie Geren, a Fort Worth Republican who serves on the House committee that oversees the lottery, has sponsored legislation allowing the casino-style slot machines in select venues. But Geren said he would be concerned about any measure that would expand any computerized games where lottery tickets are sold.

"I don't want them popping up in every convenience store on every street corner in Fort Worth," said Geren, adding that he is unsure if he would back any gambling legislation in the 2007 session.

The House Committee on Licensing and Administrative Procedures, the panel on which Geren sits that oversees the lottery, is scheduled to hold a hearing Feb. 16 in Fort Worth on whether casino-style slot machine legislation should be considered next year.

Paynter said that the Lottery Commission should reject the proposed rule change and wait for the Legislature to give the agency clear direction on whether computerized games are appropriate for Texas.

"This is just too big of a step for the Lottery Commission to be taking on its own," she said.

Christian Coalition Commends President Bush for Ensuring Military Chaplains May Pray in Name of Jesus

ASHINGTON, Christian Coalition of America commends President George W. Bush for ensuring that military chaplains will once again be able to pray at all times, in the name of Jesus, a practice which has been stifled by a politically-correct military establishment for a number of years. Congressman Walter Jones, (R-NC), is also to be commended for his hard work in working out the deal between the White House and the United States Congress. Some 75 Members of the House and Senate signed a letter to the President written by Congressman Jones urging him to issue an Executive Order.

The Honorable Claude Allen, the White House Domestic Policy Advisor, assured Congressman Jones that President Bush would indeed speak to Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld about this issue and the congressman agreed that this religious discrimination problem could be corrected without an additional executive order issued by the President.

The President of the Christian Coalition of America, Roberta Combs said, "Americans were surprised to learn last summer that the U.S. Air Force was about to issue unconstitutional guidelines which would have written into policy religious discrimination against evangelical and Catholic chaplains who wanted to pray in the name of Jesus. Navy Chaplain Gordon Klingenschmitt's discrimination case and the religious discrimination case in the Army's 10th Mountain Division, now in Iraq, have shown us that religious discrimination in the U.S. military is rampant. I thank President Bush, a man of great religious faith, for ensuring that such discrimination will no longer be able to continue. Our brave men and women serving all over the world; many in harm's way deserve a discrimination-free atmosphere when it comes to their faith."

core a victory for my friend, Rev. Don Wildmon, and the American Family Association (AFA). Rev. Wildmon was one of the earliest leaders to call on Christians to protest NBC television's plans to air "The Book of Daniel." Christians responded overwhelming by calling their local NBC affiliates and registering their outrage with this mockery. Our actions as a community led to the book being closed on "The Book of Daniel." This offensive dramatic series offered us a pill-popping Episcopal priest, his martini-swilling wife, their adulterous bishop, and their licentious kids. Back in December, AFA appealed to NBC: "It would be beneficial to all if NBC showed a little more respect for Christians who believe the Bible." It's hard to know whether NBC pulled the plug on this series because it was so offensive, or because it was such a loser in the ratings. "The Book of Daniel" also shows how Hollywood is trying to manipulate our culture. They want to shape America in their own image. It's good to see there's a pushback.

Additional Resources

AFA Says NBC's Pulling of "Daniel" Shows Power of Pocketbook

resident Bush addressed yesterday's March for Life--as he and his pro-life predecessors have done in the past--by remote hookup. He praised the marchers' "noble cause" and called for more work to build a "culture of life." He persuasively outlined his administration's record on life issues. I welcome the President's remarks--but he'd be more effective if he made them in person. Even Jimmy Carter doesn't phone in to Habitat for Humanity. Still, we are encouraged by yesterday's great outpouring of humanity. FRC was packed with Bloggers-for-Life. Our Charmaine Yoest got lots of ink in The Washington Post today when she said: "Consensus is building that we are moving into a post-Roe future, and we need to be ready." Even the liberal press seemed more open to stories about alternatives to abortion. Women who regret their abortions were more visible this year--and powerfully convincing. Young people massed in Washington. A Catholic pro-life Mass for youth two blocks from FRC was so crowded (over 20,000 youths) the sponsors had to turn people away. We all recognize that even with Sandra Day O'Connor's retirement, there are still five Supreme Court justices who have committed themselves to Roe v. Wade in one way or another. But we clearly see the momentum with the pro-life forces. Exploited women and young people are the hope for the future on this issue. And I thank God for them as President Bush said: "We will prevail."

Order Your Copy Now

Doesn't Everyone Deserve a BIRTH Day? - Bumper Sticker

ASHINGTON, Jan. 23, 2006 Terry Vanderheyden LifeSiteNews.com Thousands of pro-life Americans demonstrated throughout the US over the weekend, in anticipation of the national March for Life in Washington today to mark the 33rd anniversary since the US Supreme Court legalized abortion in its landmark ruling, Roe v. Wade.

In Minnesota, thousands braved the cold to call for a ban on public funding for abortion. Republican Gov. Tim Pawlenty addressed the crowd gathered at the Capital: “We have a dream today that someday soon this will not be an anniversary of sadness, but an anniversary of justice restored,” he said, according to an AP report. Minnesota’s Supreme Court imposed public funding for abortion on the state in 1995. A bill, called the Taxpayers’ Protection Act, to restrict funding failed to pass in the Senate last year after receiving approval in the House in April.

In California, thousands marched at the second annual Walk for Life West Coast, which began at Justin Herman Plaza in San Francisco, ending at Marina Green later Saturday. See pictures of the large crowd of demonstrators: http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/object/article?f=/c/a/2006/01/21/MNGUCGR3HF5.DTL&o=3 A popular message with the pro-lifers was a sign which stated: “Women deserve better than abortion.”

In downtown Los Angeles, pro-life Americans held a March for Life/Life Chain procession Sunday.

Waco, Texas, organizers held a march Sunday. The march coincided with the unveiling of the first of several planned national memorials, the “Rachel’s Park Memorial,” to commemorate the casualties of abortion. “The Lord laid on my heart a vision to create a Memorial to the Unborn called Rachel’s Park Memorial,” explained organizer Rusty Lee Thomas, who is with Operation Save America. “The inspiration for the park is based upon the Scripture in Jeremiah 31 where Rachel is weeping for her children, who were no more (Jeremiah 31:15).” Read Thomas’ moving testimony about why the memorial was created: http://www.operationsaveamerica.org/rpm/testimony-of-rpm.htm

About 1,000 people marched Saturday in Tucson, Arizona, at the state’s annual March for Life.

Dallas marchers commemorated not only the 1973 Supreme Court decision, but also the 1970 case that got the ball rolling. “Jane Roe,” of Roe v. Wade is Texan Norma McCorvey, who is now a pro-life. Her landmark court case was first launched in Texas; “Wade” was state attorney general Henry Wade. Catholic Bishop Charles Grahman described abortion as akin to terrorism: “It takes you at your most vulnerable moment and snuffs out life from you like a terrorist does.”

In Rochester, New York, pro-lifers held a Sanctity of Life Sunday to commemorate the anniversary, while Rescue Rochester demonstrated at the federal building downtown Friday and again Saturday in front of a local abortuary.

In Mississippi, several hundred people jammed the rotunda at the state capitol in Jackson Saturday night to pray and sing hymns to commemorate Roe v. Wade. Lieutenant Governor Amy Tuck, addressing the group, said that state lawmakers are overwhelmingly pro-life. “We did pass six bills in the ‘04 session, and I think we can do it again if people call or write their elected officials,” she said.

Pro-Life Mississippi has plans to propose five new pro-life bills this year, including one that would mandate women listen to the heartbeat of their unborn child and see an ultrasound before being allowed to abort the child.

The Yakima (Washington) Herald said about 300 marchers took part in the 18th annual March for Life there. “We’re walking because they (unborn babies) can’t,” said youth minister Jenny Escobar.

Ohio Secretary of State, Republican Ken Blackwell, marched alongside about 400 participants who walked from Cincinnati City Hall to the Hamilton County Courthouse Saturday. Blackwell is running for governor of the state this year. Immaculate Conception pastor Father William Jenkins spoke at City Hall.

“The real evil of abortion is not that it is a crime against man, but it is a sin against God,” Fr. Jenkins said. It was Ohio’s 22nd annual march. A record 600 people plan to attend the national March for Life in Washington from the Cincinnati area, traveling on 11 buses.

In Reno, Nevada, about 100 people gathered outside St. Therese of the Little Flower Catholic Church at an annual Life Chain to commemorate Roe v. Wade.

In La Crosse, about 20 people from Wisconsin Right to Life protested outside the Gundersen Lutheran hospital. They were there to commemorate Roe v. Wade and to protest the hospital’s decision to commit abortions.

In Quincy, Illinois, about 120 people carried electric candles in a vigil march covering six-blocks of downtown Sunday. The annual march is in its 26th year. Daniella Kendrick told The Whig that she has been involved in pro-life activities for over 30 years. She described how a miscarriage at three months made her realize the sanctity of life. She was expecting a “blob of tissue,” as was described to her. Instead, she saw a perfectly formed little person. “He looked like my other children,” Kendrick said. “I recognized his facial features. It showed me that life exists from conception. I got involved. . .”

More than 100 people from San Juan Right to Life joined a protest Friday night in Montrose, Colorado, to commemorate the anniversary of Roe v. Wade.

President George W. Bush is expected to address the annual March for Life in Washington today by phone. This will be the 33rd year for the annual event which is expected to draw tens of thousands of marchers from across the US.

Jan. 19 2006 Virginia Armstrong, Ph.D., National Chairman Eagle Forums Court Watch

ast Sunday, we observed the thirty-third anniversary of the U. S. Supreme Court's headlong plunge into barbarism with its decisions in Roe v. Wade and Doe v. Bolton. The supreme significance of these egregious decisions in current law has been burned into the public mind by the recent Senate Judiciary Committee hearings about the Supreme Court nominations of now Chief Justice John Roberts and nominee Samuel Alito.

Furthermore, the Court has just voted unanimously in the Ayotte decision concerning parental notification in minor abortion cases. The Court sent the case back to the First Circuit Court of Appeals, which had invalidated the entire New Hampshire law. The Supremes have given the Appellate Court the opportunity to consider whether a more narrow decision upholding part of the law is proper.

No issue in the abortion law debates is more controversial than the argument that Roe is precedent /"stare decisis" — settled law — and must be followed. This argument is made with particular fervor in Casey v. Planned Parenthood of Pennsylvania (1992) and Stenberg v. Carhart (the partial-birth abortion decision of 2000). But a number of compelling reasons exist for overturning Roe.

This court and its recent predecessors have been generous in over-turning their own precedents.

David O'Brien reports the following statistics for the Warren Court: 236 over-turned acts (including 45 Supreme Court decisions); the Burger Court: 293 overturned acts (including 52 Supreme Court decisions); the Rehnquist Court through 1998: 134 overturned acts (including 30 Supreme Court decisions). For the current Court to overturn a prominent case such a Roe would not be inconsistent with the Court's history.

The Court, in Roe, Casey, and Stenberg, misconstrued the nature of stare decisis.

Stare decisis is not the ultimate governing principle in American law, especially at the level of constitutional decision-making. The Constitution is the ultimate precedent; and all court decisions must be measured against our basic organic law. The Court's over-emphasis on precedent and meager reference to the Constitution per se in both Casey and Stenberg provide no solid foundation for arguing the continued application of Roe.

Furthermore, the age of a court decision is not necessarily an indicator of its constitutional quality, or its legitimacy. For example, Plessy v. Ferguson (1896) survived for fifty-eight years before being overturned by Brown v. Topeka Board of Education (1954). Roe's life-time of thirty-three years is substantially less than Plessy's.

Casey and Stenberg, especially Casey's plurality, express the deepest concern about overturning Roe. Roe, however, had no precedent. Furthermore, several of Roe's important features have already been changed. These include abandonment of the trimester framework, alteration in the classification of the right to an abortion as a "fundamental right" and an elevation in the importance of the unborn child's interests.

Despite these changes, the Casey plurality avers that a major reason for clinging to Roe is because of the "reliance" placed upon it as a precedent. But the "reliance" concept is deficient. Whose reliance is the ultimate standard? How much must a party rely on a precedent for the precedent to outweigh other values and interests? What kind of reliance is worthy of judicial notice — economic, psychological, social, physiological, all of the above, some of the above, or other forms? And how can the Court justify upholding Roe's right to an abortion because of "reliance" when the Court has overruled so many other decisions (and portions of Roe) without any mention of "reliance." The "reliance" idea is unclear, uncertain, and inconsistent with other abortion precedents as well as the Constitution.

The limits on stare decisis have been aptly described by the high-ranking British Judge, Alfred Lord Denning, who reminded us in 1959, that "If lawyers hold to their precedents too closely, forgetful of the fundamental principles of truth and justice which they should serve, they may find the whole edifice comes tumbling around them." In the United States, the "fundamental principles of truth and justice" which protect us are found in the correct interpretation of the Constitution. Court decisions to the contrary are not valid. American judges in future abortion cases should certainly reflect on the truth and justice of the fact that pregnancy is for nine months; abortion is forever.

QUOTEWORTHY: --------------------- "When People are universally ignorant, and debauched in their Manners, they will sink under their own weight without the Aid of foreign Invaders." --Samuel Adams

Abortion Ban Considered in Growing Number of States: South Dakota, Indiana, Ohio

outh Dakota is introducing a bill that will ban abortion in the state. The bill, called the Woman’s Health and Life Protection Act, will make abortion a crime, but will not allow prosecution for a doctor who performs an abortion when a woman’s life is in danger.

The bill is a direct attempt to over-turn Roe vs Wade. Changes in the US Supreme Court are encouraging the fight to regain legal protection for unborn children.
A growing number of states are introducing anti-abortion legislation, attempting to force the Supreme Court to revisit the 1973 decision of Roe vs. Wade that made abortion a constitutional right.

Indiana, Ohio, Tennessee and Georgia are all in the process of introducing legislation that would place broad limits on abortion.

In the state of Indiana, Bill 1096, under consideration, would ban abortion except when the woman’s life or physical health would be in danger of “substantial permanent impairment.”

That wording is in direct conflict with the wording of Roe vs Wade, which gave doctors the freedom to consider “all factors…relevant to the well-being of the patient,” which included emotional and psychological health, in effect granting a free slate for abortion access.

Troy Woodruff, Republican representative for Indiana who wrote bill 1096, deliberately worded it to conflict with Roe vs. Wade. He wants to see states given the power to criminalize abortion.

''On an issue that's this personal, it should be decided as local as possible," Woodruff told the Globe. ''We either want these procedures, or we don’t…and I don't."

At least a dozen states have criminal laws banning abortion, but they cannot be enforced under Roe vs Wade.

South Dakota rep. Roger Hunt, who is introducing the bill criminalizing abortion, said abortion should be banned.

"DNA testing now can establish the unborn child has a separate and distinct personality from the mother,” said Mr. Hunt. “We know a lot more about post-abortion harm to the mother."

LECTIONS '06 AUSTIN - Both sides on the abortion issue have looked to the future and agree on a scenario: Individual states will probably decide its legality.

Today marks the 33rd anniversary of the Roe vs. Wade decision legalizing abortion. In Texas, those who have long argued over the issue believe that President Bush's appointees to the U.S. Supreme Court eventually will push abortion back to the states to decide.

And while abortion might not dominate this season's elections, these elections could dominate the abortion debate. "When it comes back to the state, it really does matter who your state rep is," said Sarah Wheat, executive director of Pro-Choice Texas.

Joe Pojman, director of Texas Alliance for Life, said his hope is that the abortion issue returns to states, where legislators are closer to the voters.

Abortion restrictions have been "extremely important in the Republican and Democratic primary for the past 15 years, and I expect that to continue this cycle," he said.

But beyond party activists, once the vote moves to the general election, the issue loses some of its heft among the voters, Mr. Pojman said.

"It's probably on their short list, but it's among other issues that are important to voters in a general election," he said. But if the abortion question does become a state issue, he expects it to dominate the governor's race and statehouse contests.

Mr. Pojman remains confident that the restrictions won in recent Texas legislative sessions - parental consent for a minor's abortion, health restrictions for abortion facilities, 72-hour waiting periods and mandatory dissemination of materials that are aimed at dissuading women from having an abortion - would continue in broader limits.

But if abortions were banned in Texas, he said, they would still be available elsewhere. "Not all state legislatures vote the way we would like them to vote," Mr. Pojman said.

Ms. Wheat said that she is concerned that if the Supreme Court overturns federal rights to a legal abortion, "each state will probably have a very different set of laws regarding abortion, and frankly contraception, too.

"The vast majority of Americans want abortion to be safe, legal and rare," she said. But most voters are not energized by the issue and probably won't be until the Supreme Court changes the legal availability of abortion, she said.

"Right now, this is very much perceived as a federal issue and something that is out of the hands of the governor," Ms. Wheat said.

The BMAT MAC "Upholding God's Standards" join 'The Texas Alliance For Life,' by Taking a Stand against Abortion

Come to the Texas Rally for Life Saturday, January 28 at Austin! A march from Republic Square to the Capital building at! 1:00 PM.

And a Rally at the State Capital building at 2:00 PM, some of the Moral Action Committee of the BMAT and I will be there and we hope to see you.

A Pro-Life Group Launches Campaign to Halt Tax Funding of Planned Parenthood

January 23, 2006 Randy Hall CNSNews.com Staff Writer/Editor

A

pro-life organization is marking the 33rd anniversary of the Roe v. Wade Supreme Court decision to begin a nationwide effort to stop taxpayer money from being used to fund the country's most frequent provider of abortions.

"Millions of Americans are sick and tired of their tax dollars being used to underwrite Planned Parenthood -- the largest abortion chain and most aggressive promoter of sexual immorality in our nation," said David Bereit, executive director of American Life League (ALL).

"On this anniversary of the Roe v. Wade Supreme Court decision that forced abortion upon all 50 states, ALL is launching an aggressive nationwide campaign to stop every dollar of Planned Parenthood taxpayer funding at the local, state and national levels," Bereit added.

ALL launched the first public phase of its campaign on Monday by educating, recruiting and mobilizing concerned citizens from amongst the hundreds of thousands of people who have gathered in Washington, D.C., to mark the anniversary of the Roe decision.

Additionally, a new Website has been established at StopPlannedParenthoodTaxFunding.com.

"Since the Roe v. Wade decision, Planned Parenthood has aborted more than three million innocent American children and scarred countless women for a lifetime," said Bereit.

"Six states have already blocked Planned Parenthood taxpayer funding -- Colorado, Missouri, Ohio, North Dakota, Mississippi and Texas -- and American Life League is working to build on this momentum and achieve similar results in the remaining 44 states," he noted.

According to its latest annual report, Planned Parenthood took in more than $265 million in federal, state and local tax funding in the last fiscal year, amounting to approximately one-third of the organization's income.

"Planned Parenthood will not survive without our taxpayer dollars," said Bereit. "That's why people of faith and conscience are uniting in historic numbers to hit the abortion giant where it hurts the most -- in the pocketbook."

Bereit added: "We will not stop until Planned Parenthood ceases to receive taxpayer funding and shuts its doors forever."

awmakers in Massachusetts are being asked to consider a bill that would require every church to file financial disclosure forms for any money taken in, The Boston Herald reported.

Democratic Sen. Marian Walsh proposed the legislation in response to the scandals that have rocked the Catholic Church -- namely evidence of widespread sexual abuse. For example, the Archdiocese of Boston has paid out millions in restitution and filed bankruptcy. Walsh wants it to be accountable from this day forward.

Critics of the legislation say that collecting information about how churches spend the money they take in could ultimately lead to more government regulation.

s Alabama legislators contemplate endorsing Bible literacy courses in public schools, they need to consider why the proposal may not be a good idea.

The problems are numerous. For starters, in mandating the particular textbook that would be used, the legislation would contradict existing state law.

In addition, statements in the textbook raise some serious questions; and the book contains some outright error.

What Alabama legislators do with the proposal matters elsewhere in the country because other states will be watching, as will the national news media.

The new textbook, titled "The Bible and Its Influence," was produced by the Bible Literacy Project, which says it wants to "encourage and facilitate the academic study of the Bible in public schools."

However, statements in the new book raise some serious questions. For example, it states that most Christians and Jews don't read Genesis as a literal account of God's creation of the world, and asks students to "look up some examples of other ancient literature and mythology of the origins of the world."

Because of the word "other," one could get the impression that Genesis is mythology.

Moreover, students are asked, "Do you think Adam and Eve received a fair deal as described in Genesis?" In other words, students are told to consider the possibility that God is unfair.

The book also says that "it is always good to remember not to try to apply current standards to the biblical accounts." The word "always" could mean that a standard of being honest today should not be applied to any biblical account.

Students are further asked, "If God allows evil things to happen, can God honestly be described as good?" And then they are told, "This puzzle remains essentially unsolved."

Actually, there is no puzzle. For God to be "good," we could not be his slavish puppets. Thus, allowing man to have "free will" requires the "allowance" of man's choice to commit evil acts, though God doesn't cause the evil acts.

Besides undermining the traditional biblical instruction many parents give their children at home, and that which they receive at church, "The Bible and Its Influence" includes just plain false information.

It states that "Jesus taught with parables to put his message about God's reign into language that all his hearers would grasp immediately." This contradicts Matthew 13:10-13, and Luke 8:9-10 tells us that Jesus told his disciples: "To you it has been given to know the mysteries of the kingdom of God, but to the rest it is given in parables, that 'seeing they may not see, and hearing they may not understand.'"

The Bible Literacy Project had already been under scrutiny by many Christians and Jews when its "The Bible and Public Schools: A First Amendment Guide" was endorsed by the liberal National Education Association. The Bible Literacy Project's partner in that project was Charles Haynes, senior scholar of the Freedom Forum's First Amendment Center. The Bible Literacy Project's press statement said that Haynes "was able to craft a document emphasizing the common ground shared by a broadly diverse group of people." Haynes came to the attention of traditional Christians and Jews when he worked for Americans United for Separation of Church and State.

The Bible Literacy Project is trying to get "The Bible and Its Influence" legislated into Alabama schools and use its success to promote similar efforts in other states.

House Bill 58 -- which comes up for a hearing this week in Rep. Yvonne Kennedy's education committee -- authorizes Alabama high schools to offer an elective course on the Bible, and mandates "The Bible and Its Influence," as the textbook if such a course is given.

This would contradict Alabama Code 16-36- 61, which requires that the State Board of Education adopt textbooks, and Alabama Code 16-36-63, which requires bids for statewide textbook contracts.

All Americans should be watching the Bible Literacy Project's efforts in Alabama and warn their boards of education about the problems with "The Bible and Its Influence."

Massachusetts' Romney says "errors in judgment were made" concerning 11-year-old Haleigh Poutre.

he decision whether to remove a comatose 11-year-old Massachusetts girl from a ventilator and feeding tube will have a broader impact on the right to life.

The Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts ruled that the Department of Social Services (DSS), acting as Haleigh Poutre's guardian, can remove her from life support. Her brainstem suffered such severe injuries from abuse that she is not expected to make a complete recovery. However, on Friday it was announced she was breathing on her own and responding to medical stimuli.

Today, Gov. Mitt Romney called for an independent review of the case. He added that the state has no immediate plans to take away the devices that are keeping her alive.

Denise Monteiro, with the Massachusetts DSS, told Family News in Focus the department is also stepping back from the state Supreme Court ruling.

"We're also getting a second opinion," she said, "because obviously we were first told she was in a vegetative state and an irreversible coma."

Monteiro won't say whether DSS will pursue removing life support should Poutre's condition begin to worsen, but Wesley Smith, attorney for the International Task Force on Euthanasia and Assisted Suicide, said that would be the medical protocol.

"We're in a situation where the sanctity of life doesn't mean what it once did," he said.

A couple in Michigan have already lost in a court battle to save the life of their premature child, even though they had done nothing to contribute to the child's condition. Smith says the concept is becoming popular in euthanasia circles.

"There's something in bioethics that is being promoted around the country called 'futile care theory'," he said, "which would give doctors the right to stop wanted life-sustaining treatment based on their belief of the quality of the patient's life."

QUOTEWORTHY: - "You believe, as I do, that every human life has value, that the strong have a duty to protect the weak, and that the self-evident truths of the Declaration of Independence apply to everyone, not just to those considered healthy or wanted or convenient. These principles call us to defend the sick and the dying, persons with disabilities and birth defects, all who are weak and vulnerable, especially unborn children." -- President Bush addressing the March for Life by phone, Jan. 23, 2004

altimore City, MD – Today, Baltimore City trial judge M. Brooke Murdock struck down Maryland’s law that bans same-sex marriage. In 1972, the Maryland attorney general issued an opinion that a ban on same-sex marriage was implicit in Maryland’s laws. In November 1972, Maryland voters ratified Article 46 of the Maryland Declaration of Rights, referred to as Maryland’s Equal Rights Amendment (“ERA”). The ERA states that the “equality of rights under the law shall not be abridged or denied because of sex.” In 1973, the General Assembly passed a law which states: “Only a marriage between a man and a woman is valid in this State.”

Today, Judge Murdock found that the state’s marriage law violated the ERA. The court ruled that the law discriminates based on sex. The court found no “compelling interest” to ban same-sex marriage, and was “unable to even find that the prohibition of same-sex marriage rationally relates to a legitimate state interest.” “The court concludes that the prohibition of same-sex marriages is not rationally related to the state interest in the rearing of biological children by married, opposite-sex parents.” The court also stated that it was “unable to find that preventing same-sex marriage rationally relates to the [sic] Maryland’s interest in promoting the best interest of children.”

Judge Murdock stated that “the General Assembly may have assumed that opposite-sex marriages less frequently end in divorce, that opposite-sex couples are better parents, or that opposite-sex couples focus more on their children’s education.” But, he said, “these assumptions are not rational speculation; they are broad unsupported generalizations that do not establish a rational relation between same-sex marriage and the state’s interest in promoting procreation, child-rearing, and the best interest of children.”

Mathew D. Staver, President and General Counsel of Liberty Counsel, stated: “It is outrageous for a judge to morph into a legislator. It is even more incredible to conclude that there is no conceivable basis to promote marriage between a man and a woman. To conclude that there is no relationship between male-female marriage and child-rearing, or the best interest of children, shows a lack of respect to the legislature, to common sense and to social science. Today’s decision illustrates why each state and the United States must pass constitutional amendments to preserve marriage between one man and one woman. Marriage should not depend on the stroke of a single judge’s pen.” The case will now be appealed. Liberty Counsel will file an amicus brief at the appellate court.

Quoteworthy: "No man is allowed to be a judge in his own cause, because his interest would certainly bias his judgment, and, not improbably, corrupt his integrity." -- James Madison (Federalist No. 10, 23 November 1787)

Millions of Christians around the World to Rally in Prayer for State of Israel Jan. 29

HICAGO, On Sunday, Jan. 29, millions of Christians in thousands of churches around the world will pray for the peace and security of Israel. This massive event, which will also feature noted Christian and Israeli dignitaries speaking from the pulpits of mega-churches throughout the United States, will mark the fourth annual International Day of Prayer and Solidarity with Israel, sponsored by the International Fellowship of Christians and Jews (IFCJ).

“Whether in suburban mega-churches with thousands of members or small rural congregations, Christians are uniting in their solidarity with Israel,” said Rabbi Yechiel Eckstein, IFCJ’s founder and chairman. Evangelical Christians are increasingly concerned with the imminent threats facing Israel and her struggle for survival. The Fellowship’s Day of Prayer gives Christians a unique opportunity to “express their concern for Israel, expand their awareness of Israel’s critical importance in both Biblical history and the geopolitical issues of our day, and pray for the peace of Jerusalem.”

Entire Christian denominations, including the 16 million member Southern Baptist Convention – America’s largest protestant group – and Bethel World Outreach have committed their congregations to participate in the Fellowship’s Day of Prayer.

Headquartered in Chicago and Jerusalem, the Fellowship mobilizes support for Israel among churches, individual Christians, and religious and political leaders in America and around the world.

The Israeli government, which last year dispatched more than 20 envoys to large U.S. churches for The Fellowship’s Day of Prayer, is participating this year as well. Israel’s Ambassador to the U.S., Daniel Ayalon, will this year address the congregants of Bethel World Outreach Church in Brentwood, Tennessee. His remarks will be beamed throughout the Bethel World Outreach Fellowship of 1,000 churches in 50 countries around the world.

Rabbi Eckstein will speak at New Life Church in Colorado Springs, a mega-church headed by Pastor Ted Haggard, who also serves as the president of the National Association of Evangelicals. Rabbi Eckstein will also announce IFCJ’s new President, Dwight “Butch” Maltby, who will also address the congregation.

“The U.S-Israel relationship is stronger than it has ever been,” Eckstein said, “and it is due in large part to the simple fact that evangelical Christians are virtually the only non-Jews who continue to visit Israel and advocate on her behalf. While some mainline Protestant denominations call for divestment from the Jewish State, Israel’s evangelical friends speak, act, and pray for the Jewish embattled nation. The level of their commitment to Israel’s strength and security is astounding.”

The International Fellowship of Christians and Jews, founded in 1983, is based in Chicago and Jerusalem and fosters understanding between Christians and Jews, solidarity with Israel, and cooperation on issues of shared concern.

To schedule an interview with Rabbi Yechiel Eckstein or Butch Maltby, contact Michelle Farmer at (770) 813-0000 or mfarmer@DeMossGroup.com

Countries and geographic areas where individuals and congregations will turn their focus to Israel on the Fellowship’s International Day of Prayer and Solidarity with Israel (January 29) are:

Back

Have You No Sense of Decency Senators?

Jan. 20 2006 Family Research Council

On June 9, 1954 Boston lawyer Joseph Welch, representing the U.S. Army during the Joe McCarthy hearings, asked the Wisconsin senator, "Have you no sense of decency?" "Where is the decency?" can be asked of a different committee chairman today. On February 1, 2004 Janet Jackson exposed herself on national television during the Superbowl. The public outcry helped to overwhelmingly pass the Broadcast Decency Enforcement Act, which would increase fines levied by the FCC, in both the House and the Senate, but the legislation mysteriously died in Conference. On February 16, 2005 the bill (H.R.)(310) once again overwhelmingly passed the House, 389-38. Chairman Ted Stevens (R-AK) of the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation has held hearings on November 29, 2005; December 12, 2005; and January 19, 2006 with broadcast companies overrepresented relative to family and consumer groups. The results from the hearings have been the same: another chorus of "it's not my fault; it's the parents' fault." The Chairman has admitted that H.R. 310 does not need to go through his Committee to be voted on by the full Senate. For too long decency has been put off by the Senate. The people, the FCC and a majority of Congress want to see this bill become law. The question today is, "Chairman Stevens, where is the decency?"

Additional Resources
Stevens Touts Progress on TV, Radio 'Indecency'

Back

Congressman Robert Aderholt's bipartisan "Constitution Restoration Act of 2005" and Senator Richard Shelby's Similar Bill Gaining Support in Congress

Jan. 20 2006 Christian Coalition of America

The "Constitution Restoration Act of 2005" (HR 1070) authored by Congressman Robert Aderholt, (R-AL) and by Senator Richard Shelby, (R-AL), (S. 520) is gaining momentum in the United States Congress with 45 co-sponsors in the U.S. House of Representatives and 8 co-sponsors in the U. S. Senate. Their outstanding bill "amends the Federal judicial code to prohibit the U.S. Supreme Court and the Federal district courts from exercising jurisdiction over any matter in which relief is sought against an entity of Federal, State, or local government or an officer or agent of such government concerning that entity's, officer's, or agent's acknowledgment of God as the sovereign source of law, liberty, or government."

The "Constitution Restoration Act of 2005" also "provides that any Federal court decision relating to an issue removed from Federal jurisdiction by this Act is not binding precedent on State courts" and finally, the bill "Provides that any Supreme Court justice or Federal court judge who exceeds the jurisdictional limitations of this Act shall be deemed to have committed an offense for which the justice or judge may be removed, and to have violated the standard of good behavior required of Article III judges by the Constitution." The following Members of the House and Senate are co-sponsors.

Rep Akin, W. Todd [MO-2] - 6/8/2005; Rep Alexander, Rodney [LA-5] - 4/5/2005
Rep Bachus, Spencer [AL-6] - 3/3/2005; Rep Barrett, J. Gresham [SC-3] - 3/3/2005
Rep Bishop, Rob [UT-1] - 3/3/2005; Rep Boustany, Charles W., Jr. [LA-7] - 12/13/2005
Rep Brown, Henry E., Jr. [SC-1] - 6/8/2005; Rep Cannon, Chris [UT-3] - 3/3/2005
Rep Cantor, Eric [VA-7] - 3/3/2005; Rep Davis, Jo Ann [VA-1] - 3/3/2005
Rep Deal, Nathan [GA-10] - 5/3/2005; Rep Duncan, John J., Jr. [TN-2] - 9/27/2005
Rep Emerson, Jo Ann [MO-8] - 6/28/2005; Rep Everett, Terry [AL-2] - 3/3/2005
Rep Foxx, Virginia [NC-5] - 3/3/2005; Rep Gingrey, Phil [GA-11] - 4/5/2005
Rep Goode, Virgil H., Jr. [VA-5] - 3/3 /2005; Rep Hall, Ralph M. [TX-4] - 3/3/2005
Rep Herger, Wally [CA-2] - 3/3/2005; Rep Jenkins, William L. [TN-1] - 6/8/2005
Rep Jindal, Bobby [LA-1] - 10/18/2005; Rep Jones, Walter B., Jr. [NC-3] - 3/3/2005
Rep King, Steve [IA-5] - 7/28/2005; Rep Lewis, Ron [KY-2] - 3/3/2005
Rep McCotter, Thaddeus G. [MI-11] - 3/3/2005; Rep McIntyre, Mike [NC-7] - 3/3/2005
Rep Myrick, Sue [NC-9] - 6/30/2005; Rep Norwood, Charlie [GA-9] - 4/5/2005
Rep Otter, C. L. (Butch) [ID-1] - 7/25/2005; Rep Pearce, Stevan [NM-2] - 6/28/2005
Rep Pence, Mike [IN-6] - 3/3/2005; Rep Pitts, Joseph R. [PA-16] - 3/3/2005
Rep Poe, Ted [TX-2] - 6/28/2005; Rep Price, Tom [GA-6] - 3/3/2005
Rep Rogers, Mike D. [AL-3] - 3/3/2005; Rep Ryun, Jim [KS-2] - 3/3/2005
Rep Schmidt, Jean [OH-2] - 11/15/2005; Rep Shimkus, John [IL-19] - 9/27/2005
Rep Sodrel, Michael E. [IN-9] - 4/14/2005; Rep Souder, Mark E. [IN-3] - 3/3/2005
Rep Stearns, Cliff [FL-6] - 6/17/2005; Rep Sullivan, John [OK-1] - 4/5/2005
Rep Wamp, Zach [TN-3] - 3/3/2005; Rep Weldon, Dave [FL-15] - 3/3/2005
Rep Wilson, Joe [SC-2] - 3/3/2005

Call your Congressman and 2 Senators if they are not listed on the above list at 202-225-3121 or you can go to http://www.cc.org/contactcongress.cfm and email them and urge them to co-sponsor the "Constitution Restoration Act of 2005" (HR 1070 in the House and S. 520 in the Senate).

The Aderholt/Shelby bill also "prohibits a court of the United States from relying upon any law, policy, or other action of a foreign state or international organization in interpreting and applying the Constitution, other than English constitutional and common law up to the time of adoption of the U.S. Constitution."

This was a subject raised at the Senate Judiciary Committee hearings of Judge Samuel A. Alito Jr. to replace Sandra Day O'Connor on the Supreme Court. Unlike his predecessor, Judge Alito made it crystal clear that he would not use -- in his decision-making -- the laws or policies of foreign state or international organizations.

Co-sponsors of Senator Richard Shelby's bill

Sen Allard,Wayne [CO] - 5/10/2005
Sen Brownback,Sam [KS] - 3/3/2005
Sen Bunning,Jim [KY] - 5/10/2005
Sen Burns,Conrad R. [MT] - 4/4/2005
Sen Burr,Richard [NC] - 3/3/2005
Sen Craig,Larry E. [ID] - 3/8/2005
Sen Inhofe,James M. [OK] - 5/10/2005
Sen Lott,Trent [MS] - /8/2005
Senator David Vitter, (R-LA), also has made a commitment to support the bill.

Back

National Pro-Life Memorial in Senate Building a Great Success

Jan. 23 2006Christian Newswire

WASHINGTON, The 12th annual National Memorial for the Pre-born and their mothers and fathers, the premier indoor pro-life event on Capitol Hill, drew an overflow crowd today in the prestigious US Senate Russell Building Caucus Room. The Caucus Room has been the site of numerous historic events including hearings on the infamous Teapot Dome scandal, the sinking of the Titanic and more recently the beginning of hearings for Chief Justice John Roberts.

The tone of this year's Memorial Service was upbeat. Co-founder of the event Rev. Rob Schenck of the National Clergy Council along with other speakers emphasized the shifting of the social and political tide in favor of Life. Steven Paroutka of the National Pro- Life Action Center said the change signals the beginning of the end of Roe v. Wade, sparking a thunderous standing ovation.

More than 50 clergy representing numerous denominations lead in prayers and the reading of scripture. A 25-voice Baptist youth choir sang, while Father Frank Pavone, president of the National Clergy Council, ended his sermon by chanting in Latin a prayer he had sung to brain injury victim Terri Schiavo during her last hours of life.

Terri Schiavo's mother and father, Bob and Mary Schindler, and her brother Bobby were present and received an award from the National Pro-Life Religioius Council, the sponsor of the event.

The Memorial Service was founded by fellow pro-life activists and twin brothers Paul and Rob Schenck (pronounced SHANK).

Back

Roadmaps for Illegal Aliens a new Service?

January 24, 2006 Bobby Eberle gopusa.com

There’s something quite mind-boggling about the ongoing debate over illegal immigration. Countless examples point to illegal aliens receiving tax-payer-funded health care, education, and other services. In some states, illegal aliens are receiving tuition discounts for colleges. In all their efforts to aid and abet these people, many left-wing groups apparently forget the “illegal” part of the equation. Now, an Arizona group is taking the illegal service industry one step further by providing roadmaps to illegals so that their travels will be easier.

According to Activists to provide migrants Ariz. maps in the Arizona Republic, a human rights agency in Mexico plans to “give out detailed maps of the Arizona desert, including rescue beacons and water stations” in order to guide “migrants” from Mexico through Arizona.

The maps were designed by a Tucson-based group, Humane Borders, which plans to hold a joint press conference today with the National Human Rights Commission in Mexico City to announce its strategy.

The maps are the latest effort by activists to aid undocumented immigrants as they trek across the border, helping to fuel a raging debate over illegal immigration in Arizona and other parts of the United States.

The problem with this plan, outside of the fact that it clearly aids in illegal activity, is that it also encourages illegal activity. It should be harder to get into the U.S. illegally, not easier. The Arizona Republic quoted Rep. J.D. Hayworth (R-AZ) as saying that “maps and water jugs do nothing but give illegal crossers false hope.”

“Either we convince potential crossers not to make the journey or, failing that, we stop them from crossing the border,” Hayworth added.

If America is serious about security, then we must be serious about putting a stop to illegal immigration. We must enforce our existing laws; we must increase the number of border patrol agents; we must invest in new surveillance technology; and clearly, we must not encourage illegal activity with complementary roadmaps to go along with defacto promises of amnesty.

Back

Celebrating Gay Pride at the US Department of Health and Human Services

Jan. 11 2006 Family Research Council

The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) has sponsored a taxpayer-funded website that prominently features classic symbols of the pro-homosexual activist movement--an inverted triangle in rainbow colors with the word PRIDE above it. The website, dedicated to preventing alcohol and drug abuse, includes the admission that "lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender people are more likely to smoke, drink, and use other drugs than...non-lgbt peers." Rather than warning that homosexual conduct is itself a significant health risk, the website blames society for the "high-risk choices" that homosexuals make, citing "homophobia," "heterosexism," and "stigma, alienation, and discrimination." The website also uses material from pro-homosexual activist groups such as the Gay, Lesbian and Straight Education Network (GLSEN) and Parents, Families, and Friends of Lesbians and Gays (PFLAG), while ignoring groups with a different perspective, such as Parents and Friends of Ex-Gays (PFOX). Let HHS know that you don't want this kind of propaganda being supported by your tax dollars. You can e-mail Nancy Kennedy of the Center for Substance Abuse Prevention at nkennedy@samhsa.gov

Additional Resources
U.S. Government website "Celebrating the Pride and Diversity Among and Within the Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender Populations

Back

European Bishops Speak Out Against EU’s ‘Homophobia’ Resolution

Jan. 20, 2006 Gudrun Schultz LifeSiteNew.com

STRASBOURG, The secretary-general of the Council of European Bishops’ Conferences said the EU has overstepped its role in urging all states to stamp out “homophobia” and enshrine homosexual ‘rights’ through legislation, in an interview on Radio Vatican.

The EU’s adoption of the resolution showed “an aversion for certain values of our tradition, notably religious values,” said Aldo Giordano.

”It should be clear that certain subjects, especially those relating to the family, are not within the direct competence of the European Union but are the recognized competence of nations. Such resolutions risk de-legitimizing the European Parliament."

The resolution, which was passed on Wednesday by a majority of 468 to 149, has been sharply criticized by concerned groups, including the pro-family organization Euro-Fam. In particular, Euro-Fam said in a newsletter, members are alarmed by the resolution’s condemnation of “hate speech” against homosexuals, without offering any definition of the term.

“It is important to note that quoting biblical passages dealing with homosexuality have led to imprisonment and to legal actions in the past on the basis of so-called homophobia,” Euro-Fam’s statement said. “It is disturbing that the resolution does not clearly re-affirm the freedom of religion…for those who wish to refer to the Bible.”

Writing in the Vatican newspaper L'Osservatore Romano last November, Msgr. Tony Anatrella, a F