BMAT
Moral Action Committee Watchman Report #70 02/10/2006
Click on an article to view OR scroll through the complete document:
1. President Bush: "Surrendering Our Will to God's Will, We Learn To Serve His Eternal Purposes"
2. Mr. Bush Signs $500 Million Law Funding Healthy Marriage Initiatives
3. Appellate Ruling Affirms Florida Citizen's Right to Host Home Prayer Meetings
4. Abortion is Big Loser in Confirmation Vote; Roe's Days are Numbered
5. A Corruption of Culture? Or the Corruption of our Culture
6. Christian Coalition Urges Senate to Stop Blocking Vote on 'Broadcast Decency Enforcement Act'
7. Victory! NBC pulls offensive "Cruci-fxins" segment!
8. Girls Assaulted After Posting Info Online
9. Senator Blanche L. Lincoln's Testimony at Commerce Committee Hearing on Internet Pornography
10. California Schools renounce Christianity but Proselytize for Allah
11. US Appeals Court: Schools Can Ban Nativity Display While Allowing Menorah and Islamic Crescent
12. HHS Responds abusively to some taxpayers concerns about Department's Homosexual web site
13. Anglican Archbishop of Sydney calls on Worldwide Communion to Declare Homosexuality a Sin
14. Researcher Questions Dobson's Endorsement of Pro-Gay Bill
15. New Republican House Leader Boehner Vows to Uphold Right to Life
16. Kentucky Lawmakers Eye Abortion Ban
17. Grant Will Fund Abortion-Prevention Work
18. Wal-Mart Sued Over Morning-After Pill
19. Christian Group to Expose Jihad in America
20. Prominent American commentator Stanley Kurtz on the Planned Abolition of Marriage in Canada
21. Hot Cross Buns Banned in English School
22. Euthanasia Rates Double in Belgium
23. Reaction to the Politicizing of Coretta King Memorial Service
24. Saddam Sent WMD to Syria, Former Iraqi General Alleges
25. An exposé on a Judge Gone Wild
President Bush: "Surrendering Our Will to God's Will, We Learn To Serve His Eternal Purposes"
Feb. 6 2006 John-Henry Westen LifeSiteNews.com
WASHINGTON, Feb. 6 2006 LifeSiteNews.com "Our nation is a nation of prayer," said Bush as he addressed the 54th annual National Prayer Breakfast last Thursday.
The American President demonstrated clearly that he holds to the traditional notion of the 'separation of church and state' which sought to keep the state out of the church affairs. The modern notion that the separation of church and state means a politician must divorce his religious convictions from his public life held no sway on President George W. Bush as he remarked, "By surrendering our will to God's will, we learn to serve His eternal purposes."
Bush recalled with great fondness the many times Americans have prayed for him. "I can't tell you the number of times out there traveling our country, people walk up, total strangers, and say, Mr. President, I'm praying for you and your family", he said. "It is one of the great blessings of the presidency, and one of the most wonderful gifts a person can give any of us who have the responsibility to govern justly."
Prayer, he said, "reminds us that when we bow our heads or fall to our knees, we are all equal and precious in the eyes of the Almighty." He stated, "Every day, millions of Americans pray for the safety of our troops, for the protection of innocent life, and for the peace we all hope for."
Bush concluded his remarks saying, "I pray that our nation will always have the humility to commend our cares to Providence and trust in the goodness of His plans. May God bless you all."
Back
Mr. Bush Signs $500 Million Law Funding Healthy Marriage Initiatives
Feb. 8 2006 Christian Newswire
Administration Credits Work Of Pioneering Couple in Passing Law
WASHINGTON, On the day President Bush signed the Deficit Reduction Act, allocating $100 million a year for five years to fund marriage, HHS Assistant Secretary Wade Horn said the law wouldn't have been passed without the pioneering work of "one couple: Harriet and Mike McManus" of Marriage Savers.
"Today, for the first time, the U.S. will dedicate a funding stream to strengthen marriages," said Horn, who added the government's "Healthy Marriage Initiative" is modeled on Marriage Savers' Community Marriage Policies (CMP). "The $100 million dollars a year would not be where it is today if it were not for the work of the McManuses who had a vision to better America," Horn said at a Family Research Council forum today in Washington. "Their vision is that churches need to do more to help marriage."
Congregations wed 86 percent of all couples, but "do little to help prepare couples for a lifelong commitment, enrich existing marriages or save troubled ones," says McManus.
When churches create Community Marriage Policies, "divorce rates decline by as much as 50 percent and cohabitation rates by one third compared to similar cities without CMPs." The McManuses have worked with 10,000 clergy to create CMPs in 42 states.
"We're glad the U.S. government is finally helping marriages succeed rather than break them up," said McManus. Welfare rules have helped spur a 48 percent decline in the marriage rate since 1970. The new funding will make it easier to create CMPs to save marriages.
Marriage Savers trains mentor couples to help other couples succeed. "Community Marriage Policies have the blessing of pastors; but it is mentoring couples who do a lot of the work," said Tony Perkins, President of The Family Research Council and host of today's forum. CMPs also require four to six months of premarital counseling, a premarital inventory and training in conflict resolution before a couple can tie the knot. That can slash couple divorce rates to 3 percent over a decade.
There's been one divorce for every two marriages in America since 1973, affecting a million kids annually. The Heritage Foundation says broken marriages and unwed couples having children cost $150 billion in federal and state costs. However, McManus estimates that the new program can actually save taxpayers $4.5 billion the first year and $9 billion in the second, for only $100 million a year.
Horn outlined a competitive grants process open to local governments and faith based organizations. With the 200th Community Marriage Policy signed last month, McManus hopes clergy across the country will seek this new funding to slash divorces by 50 percent over the next decade.
Visit www.marriage savers.org for more information.
Back
Feb. 2 2006 Allie Martin 
Agape Press
A Florida County will have to revamp its land use ordinance after the 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals found the law not only too vague but also in violation of a federal statute.
Five years ago, officials in Orange County, Florida, ordered Rabbi Joseph Konikov to stop holding prayer meetings in his home, claiming that in holding these gatherings he was violating local laws. Then, in May 2002, after officials refused to negotiate a settlement, Konikov sued the County.
A district court dismissed the case, ruling that the ordinance was permissible. However, the 11th Circuit ruled that the ordinance is not permissible, stating that it violated the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act.
Rick Nelson, head of the American Liberties Institute, feels the 11th Circuit's ruling proves that the County's ordinance was too vague. "Obviously the rabbi and all the churches across Orange County are very, very pleased," he says.
That is because, now, people of faith "can actually have Bible studies in their home or do any other kind of religious activity in their home without the government coming along and foreclosing on your house and throwing you in the street for doing so," Nelson explains.
Although the district court that initially heard the case sided with the County, the American Liberties Institute spokesman says the 11th Circuit sent the case back down to the lower court, in effect telling those judges, "You made mistakes -- and you need to resolve those mistakes." Also he points out the lower court was told it needed to determine one question, that being "how many times per week someone can meet in their home without being in violation of the code."
The Constitution of the United States gives Americans the right to meet in their homes for prayer or to study religious materials without the interference of the state, Nelson asserts. He says Orange County will now have to rewrite its land use ordinance.
QUOTEWORTHY: "I have often expressed my sentiments, that every man, conducting himself as a good citizen, and being accountable to God alone for his religious opinions, ought to be protected in worshipping the Deity according to the dictates of his own conscience." -- George Washington (letter to the General Committee of the United Baptist Churches in Virginia, May 1789)
Back
Abortion is Big Loser in Confirmation Vote; Roe's Days are Numbered
Jan. 31 2006 Christian Wire Service
WASHINGTON, Abortion supporters were dealt a crucial blow when the U.S. Senate voted 58- 42 to confirm judge Samuel Alito to the United Stated Supreme Court, increasing their fears that abortion may soon be declared unconstitutional.
The first loss to the abortion lobby came in the Senate on Tuesday night when it failed to muster the required 41 votes to block the confirmation vote of Judge Alito.
Alito faced stiffer opposition because, unlike Chief Justice John Roberts, he never admitted that Roe is “settled law.”
“This lack of capitulation to the pro-abortion crowd incited a feeble coalition of pro-abortion Senators to mount a filibuster attempt,” said Operation Rescue President Troy Newman. “That effort predictably failed, opening the way for today’s vote.”
Senators John Kerry, Barbara Boxer, Edward Kennedy and 21 other Senators pinned their failed hopes of defeating Alito’s confirmation on his opposition to abortion. But a number of Democratic Senators broke ranks with the abortion lobby and cast their votes in support of Judge Alito.
“Pro-life is a winning position,” said Newman. “Abortion lost today, abortion lost in the last two presidential elections, and abortion will continue to lose its death grip on the American people.”
“Support for abortion on demand is dying and Roe’s supporters are gasping for air. It is only the out- dated Senators, like Ted Kennedy, hanging on to the past who haven’t figured out that abortion’s days are numbered,” Newman said.
Back
Feb. 8 2006 Tony Perkins Family Research Council
President Bush's critics are yelling about "a culture of corruption" in Washington. I deplore the corruption of Jack Abramoff and his ilk, but I'm just as concerned if not more concerned about the corruption of our culture. My column on this topic ran in The Dallas Morning News this morning. I called upon Republicans not to spend this critical year giving top priority to lobbying reform bills alone. They need to address the deep concerns of the Values Voters who put them in office. These are national concerns. USA Today reported this morning that nineteen state legislatures are considering bills to inform young women about fetal pain and abortion. These values issues are not something to be trotted out every election cycle. They demand attention now. Americans give strong support to marriage as
the union of one man and one woman. They favor keeping Under God in our pledge. They want voluntary prayer at high school graduations. They oppose banning the Ten Commandments. And they want action to limit sex and violence on TV. Measures to accomplish these ends are being blocked on Capitol Hill. The Majority needs to pay close attention to the Values issues--or it may not continue to be the majority.
Additional Resources
What About Values?
Back
Christian Coalition Urges Senate to Stop Blocking Vote on 'Broadcast Decency Enforcement Act'
Feb. 3 Christian Wire Service
The “Broadcast Decency Enforcement Act” Passed by House by Margin of 389-38 and now the 2nd Anniversary of Super Bowl Half-time Outrage and the Senate Has Done Nothing
WASHINGTON, Christian Coalition of America is disappointed that the United States Senate has not acted on the “Broadcast Decency Enforcement Act” and for basically doing nothing since the 2004 Super Bowl half-time outrage when a performer exposed her breast before an audience of over 1 billion with tens of millions of young children watching. It is reprehensible that the United States Senate has not even had a vote on the "Broadcast Decency Enforcement Act" authored by Congressman Fred Upton, (R-MI), which passed in the U.S. House of Representatives overwhelmingly by a margin of 389-38 last year. Clearly, the American people want the United States Senate to act to stop indecency on television.
The President of the Christian Coalition of America, Roberta Combs said, "It has now been two years since the outrageous Janet Jackson incident during the Super Bowl half-time show. It is unbelievable that exactly 2 years ago today I made a statement saying, ‘Congress needs to move aggressively to pass legislation which will finally and severely sanction those individuals in broadcasting companies and stations which violate decency standards. The American people demand it.’ And yet the United States Senate has still stalled a vote on a commonsense bill giving tools to the Federal Communications Commission to take the offensive against such gross violations of decency standards.”
The bill sponsored by Senator Sam Brownback, (R- KS), the "Broadcast Decency Enforcement Act of 2005", S. 193, will increase fines to $500,000 per violation of decency standards from the current paltry level of $32,500 per violation. The Senate also needs to adopt the provisions in the House bill, which will eventually lead to license revocation for repetitive violations of the decency standards. The American people are demanding that the Senate take action now.
Back
Network issues misleading statement concerning their actions
Action by AFA Online supporters has caused NBC to pull the offensive upcoming segment scheduled for the April 6th episode of Will and Grace.
In an attempt to confuse the public, the network issued an intentionally misleading statement which left the impression that AFA had lied to our supporters. Here is the statement NBC sent to their affiliates for the affiliate to use in responding to emails and calls:
Some erroneous information was mistakenly included in a press release describing an upcoming episode of "Will & Grace" which, in fact, has yet to be written. The reference to "Cruci-fxins" will not be in the show and the storyline will not contain a Christian characterization at all.
NBC did not say that they (NBC) had issued the "erroneous information" but left the reader with the impression that AFA had issued the "erroneous information."
When NBC said that the script "has yet to be written," what they didn't tell you is that the "story board" had been completed and the offensive material was scheduled to be a part of the episode. The story board contains the outline of the program. That is the reason for the detailed description of the episode issued by NBC in their initial press release.
For a better understanding of this deception by NBC written by the Tyler (Texas) Morning Telegraph, click here: http://www.afa.net/sites/nbc_willandgrace.htm
The bottom line is that the actions taken by AFA Online supporters like you caused them to rewrite the episode and remove the offensive segment!
Thanks for caring enough to get involved.
Sincerely, Don
Donald E. Wildmon, Founder and Chairman
American Family Association
Back
Feb. 6 2006 staff reports Citizen Link
Experts say social blogs are a magnet for predators.
Eight underage girls in Connecticut have been assaulted by men who met them by way of their personal Web pages — commonly known as blogs.
The 12-to-16-year-old girls all had pages on a service popular with students called MySpace. All expected to meet boys close to their age, but instead met adults who lied. The girls placed too much personal information on their pages, enough to be tracked down and contacted in real life by predators.
Richard Blumenthal, Connecticut's attorney general, said he suspects the cases in his state are just a hint of what's happening nationally.
"I can only guess," he said, "but clearly this Web site is a predator's dream and a parent's worst nightmare."
His message to the companies behind the social blogs is to police themselves or he'll take action.
Experts say parents should have a serious conversation with their children if they have a page on sites such as MySpace, Xanga, FaceBook or Friendster.
Tom Neven, senior editor at Plugged In magazine, explained that something as simple as posting a school name can start the trouble.
"And then they'll post pictures of themselves with their friends," he said. "That's plenty of information for a very smart predator to be able to track you down and figure out who you are."
The craze over social blogs is growing. Staca Urie with Netsmartz is an expert at helping parents and teens navigate the dangers of the Internet. She said social blogs are extremely popular with middle and high school students and the interest keeps growing.
"They're comparing how many buddies and friends and links they have on these types of Web sites and that is only adding fuel to the fire and making them more popular," she said.
Daniel Weiss, senior analyst for media and sexuality at Focus on the Family Action, said parents have to come to grips with Internet danger.
"Parents need to understand," he said, "that anytime they let their kid go online alone, it's as if they allowed a stranger into their child's bedroom.
Back
Jan. 9 2006 Parents TV Council
Let me begin by saying that, without a doubt, we all know that parents are the front line of defense. Parents must closely monitor their children’s activities online and educate them about the potential dangers, whether its sexual predators or inappropriate material on adult websites.
But they can’t do it alone.
When I was growing up, I would walk down to the neighborhood drug store, and if I tried to buy something or do something my parents wouldn't approve of, you could be sure there were at least three or four other adults who would call my parents and let them know exactly what I was up to.
That is not the world we live in today. Today it can be difficult for parents to know what their kids are up to, even when they are in the private confines of their own home. The Internet is literally transforming the experience of growing up in America in a way that is much different from the way parents of today grew up.
Unfortunately, despite filtering and blocking technologies, children are accessing more and more sexually‑explicit material at home ‑ on their family computer.
With the spread of wireless handheld devices, the Internet can also bring inappropriate materials to places like the school bus or the mall, where parents can't always be there to provide the necessary supervision.
It is this aspect of the Internet that has eroded the capacity of parents to control what their children are exposed to and at what age they are exposed to it.
According to a Third Way Report released last summer, the largest group of consumers of Internet pornography are youth ages twelve to seventeen. Perhaps most shocking, the average age at which children are first exposed to pornography on the Internet today is eleven years old.
Now I would be remiss not to acknowledge the exemplary efforts of many Internet Service Providers and other companies who have developed and improved the content‑filtering technology available to parents. And I have no doubt that without their efforts the statistics would be much higher than they are today. But there is more that we can do.
Last year, I introduced legislation, along with several of my colleagues, that would apply the same age verification requirements to pornographic sales over the Internet that are already applied to these same sales on Main Street.
The technology is available, yet too few adult websites are taking the extra step to create another obstacle that can keep minors from accessing – or stumbling upon – inappropriate online material.
By requiring adult sites to use age verification software, my legislation is a commonsense approach to help responsible vendors keep children from viewing material online that is already illegal for them to purchase on Main Street.
My bill would also provide the necessary resources to help law enforcement and others combat sexual predators and criminal activity online.
We know that billions of dollars are made each year on the Internet catering to the pornographic desires of pedophiles who in turn are using the anonymity of the Internet to approach and solicit our children.
The Wall Street Journal published an article earlier this week describing the extremely profitable business distributing child pornography online has become. Subscribers are willing to pay up to $75 dollars a month to access these illegal sites.
We must boost the budgets of law enforcement, so that they have the tools to crack down on this criminal activity. We also need to invest in research and development to encourage the creation of new and better blocking and filtering technologies for parents.
But in my view, Mr. Chairman, these are not costs that should fall on the backs of ordinary taxpayers and their families. These are costs that have arisen as a direct result of the rise of the online pornographic industry ‑ now an estimated $12 billion industry.
It is on those who profit from this business that the burden of paying for the associated costs should fall. This is why my bill creates a new Internet Safety and Child Protection Trust Fund, financed by a 25 percent excise tax on internet pornography transactions.
This excise tax could generate up to $3 billion in annual revenue to finance tougher law enforcement, better blocking and filtering technologies, and greater educational efforts to keep children safe online.
I recognize that my legislation is not a silver bullet. But I believe it is a necessary and important step forward in the effort to protect our children in the Internet age.
Back
California Schools renounce Christianity but Proselytize for Allah
Feb. 7 2006 FrontPageMagazine.com
If your child is unfortunate enough to study in California, he or she will be taught Islam is a fountain of modernity, liberty, and feminism. More importantly, he will be taught every aspect of the Islamic faith is historically accurate.
The Houghton-Mifflin textbook, currently in use in many schools, lists one Shabbir Mansuri, Founding Director of Council on Islamic Education, as its consultant. Mansuri is a businessman with a degree in chemical engineering, and not an academic. That did not prevent the California State Board of Education (SBE) from inviting Mansuri to a closed-door meeting, apparently to advise the board on Hindu edits, on January 6, 2006.
Revelation as history?
The textbook presents Islamic beliefs as verifiable history. A paragraph, introducing the origins of the Quran, begins innocuously, “The first verses of the Quran, believed by Muslims to be the written record of God’s words,” and makes the subtle shift to add, “were revealed to him at that time.” From there on, the textbook abandons any pretense of objectivity and begins indoctrination:
Then, in the cave, something more far-reaching happened. A being he [Prophet Muhammad] later identified as the angel Gabriel, or Jibril [juhBREEL] in Arabic, came to him, telling him to read, or recite. Trembling, Muhammad responded that he didn’t know how to read or what to read. [p. 58]
As the text progresses, the authors are absolutely convinced that revelations to Muhammad were indeed historical events: “Muhammad’s revelations occurred from 610 until his death in 632.” [p. 61]
For the followers of Islam, the Quran completes the earlier revelations of Old Testament prophets and Jesus. The Quran is the final revelation just as Muhammad is the final prophet…But Muslims considered these other religions [Christianity and Judaism] to be less correct. That is because the Quran teaches that the Bible has suffered loss and change with time. [p. 62]
California children will now grow up assured that revelations are a historically verifiable phenomenon – and other faiths (perhaps those of their families for generations) are inferior.
Holy Muhammad?
Textbook authors portray Prophet Muhammad as a righteous and just man and demonize those who refused to follow the diktats of Muhammad – even if these people may never have existed:
Failing to convince Muhammad and his followers to give up their beliefs, the Quraysh leaders refused to trade with them, causing the Muslims great suffering…Quraysh leaders plotted to kill Muhammad. [p. 59]
The basis for this “fact” is a 16th century Islamic hagiographic text written by chronicler, Ibn al Dayba`, who accuses the Quraysh of treachery after admitting that the Quraysh feared violence at the hands of Muslims. [Motzki, Harald: The Biography of Muhammad – the Issue of the Sources, p. 163]. Textbook writers did not bother to ascertain facts when they decided to demonize the Quraysh, solely based on this dubious claim.
The demonizing of the Quraysh is contrasted with the complete sanitizing of Muhammad’s conduct, after he seized Mecca in 630 A.D.:
One of the first things Muhammad did was to forgive all those who had opposed Muslims for long. He also removed the idols from the Kabah. [p. 60]
Muhammad “forgave” these less powerful people by invading their shrines and desecrating their idols. Likewise, a proposed textbook from Prentice-Hall depicts Muhammad as a virtuous man who militated against “depraved” pre-Islamic society:
But he [Muhammad] was critical of Meccan society. All around him, he saw greed, corruption and violence. Arab traditions of honor and duty were being ignored. [p. 69]
Historical facts about how Muhammad and his party raided caravans and butchered defenseless people are now interpreted as the struggle of a righteous man against the knave.
Whitewashing Terrorism
The textbook also apologizes for the violent Muslim terrorism of jihad:
An Islamic term that is often misunderstood is jihad [jeeHUHD]. It means “to struggle,” to do one’s best to resist temptation and overcome evil. [p. 64]
Having disingenuously defined jihad, the textbook continues with the sleight of hand:
The Quran and Sunna allow self-defense and participation in military conflict, but restrict it to the right to defend against aggression and persecution, Jihad, for example, was first carried out against the Meccans who had forbidden Muslims to practice or preach their religion.
In the early periods of Islamic conquest, Muslim forces gave others 24 hours to choose between Islam and death. California students now learn that Muhammad’s demolishing the idols of Kaba after terrorizing his opponents was as much “self-defense” as “forgiveness.”
Islam, the tolerant religion?
In the Orwellian world of California textbooks, destroying idols is self-defense, and forced marriage and conversion are tolerance:
While Islam forbade forced religious observance in the 600s, most rulers in the world at the time decided what religion their subjects would follow and persecuted those who refused. [p. 64]
Muhammad attacked the Jewish settlement of Khaybar, looted its wealth, massacred most of its men, and took as his “wife” [read: sex slave] the beautiful 17-year-old Safiyyah b. Huyayy, who had been wed for merely a month when Muhammad massacred her husband and father in cold blood. [Lings, M.: Muhammad, His Life Based on the Earliest Sources, p. 268] What does one make of the Quranic injunction urging Muslims to slay the pagans [9:5]?
The Prentice-Hall textbook has similar things to say about the spread of Islam:
Another factor helping Arabs was their tolerance for other religions. The Arabs generally allowed people to practice their own customs and beliefs. Before capturing Damascus, the Arab general Khalid ibn al-Walid made the following promise:
“This is what Khalid would grant the inhabitants of Damascus if he enters therein: he promises to give them security for their lives, property, and churches. Their city wall shall not be demolished, neither shall any Muslim be quartered in their houses. Thereunto we give them the pact of Allah and the protection of His Prophet. So long as they pay the poll tax, nothing but good shall befall them.” [p. 79]
Islam spread by imposing the debilitating poll tax, or jizya, on those who refused to convert to Islam under duress. They were reduced to dhimmitude, and in places like India, Syria, and Egypt, subject to terrible humiliations. They were nearly as “tolerant” as the Taliban.
QUOTEWORTHY: "The Christian religion is the religion of our country. From it are derived our notions on character of God, on the great moral Governor of the universe. On its doctrines are founded the peculiarities of our free institutions. From no source has the author drawn more conspicuously than from the sacred Scriptures. From all these extracts from the Bible I make no apology." -------- William Holmes McGuffey: The author of the McGuffey Reader, which was used for over 100 years in our public schools with over 125 million copies sold until it was stopped in 1963. President Lincoln called him the "Schoolmaster of the Nation."
Back
US Appeals Court: Schools Can Ban Nativity Display While Allowing Menorah and Islamic Crescent
Feb. 4 2006 LifeSiteNews.com
NEW YORK, A sharply divided panel of the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit ruled that it is constitutionally permissible for New York City public schools to ban the display of the Christian nativity during Christmas, while permitting the display of the Jewish menorah and the Islamic star and crescent during Hanukkah and Ramadan.
The legal challenge to this policy was brought by the Thomas More Law Center on behalf of Ms. Andrea Skoros and her two children, who attend public elementary schools in New York.
Richard Thompson, President and Chief Counsel of the Thomas More Law Center, called the decision another outrageous example of federal courts discriminating against Christians. Said Thompson "Many federal courts are using the contrived endorsement test to cleanse America of Christianity. This unprincipled test allows judges to impose their ideological views under the pretext of constitutional interpretation. Thus, the majority opinion says it is legitimate to discriminate against Christians in the largest public school system in the country, with over one million students enrolled in its 1200 public schools and programs. This should be a wake-up call for Christians across this nation."
Judge Straub was equally critical in his dissenting opinion. In his separate and lengthy, 46-page dissent, Judge Straub stated, "It is my view that the policy of the New York City Department of Education to arrange for the children to celebrate the holiday season in schools through the use of displays and activities that include religious symbols of the Jewish holiday of Chanukah and the Muslim commemoration of Ramadan, but starkly exclude any religious symbols of the Christian holiday of Christmas, fails under the [Constitution], both on its face and as applied."
Judge Straub concluded, "I find it clear that the current policy and displays violate the Establishment Clause insofar as a reasonable student observer would perceive a message of endorsement of Judaism and Islam and a reasonable parent observer would perceive a message that Judaism and Islam are favored and that Christianity is disfavored."
The policy at issue expressly states that the display of "secular holiday symbol decorations is permitted" and it lists as examples the menorah and the star and crescent. The policy specifically excludes the display of the Christian nativity scene. The City defended its policy by arguing that the menorah and star and crescent were permissible symbols because they were "secular," whereas the nativity scene had to be excluded because it was "purely religious." Even though the majority recognized that the City's argument was fallacious, stating that the policy "mischaracterizes" these symbols, it still upheld the discriminatory ban on the Christian nativity.
Judge Straub strongly disagreed with the majority, arguing that this aspect of the policy was itself a violation of the Constitution. He noted that the nativity scene or crèche "depicts a historical event and thus, has some non-religious aspects to it." He concluded that the City's "action in defining a menorah and star and crescent as secular, and a crèche as 'purely religious,' is impermissible insofar as it takes positions on divisive religious issues."
Robert Muise, the Law Center's attorney handling the case, commented, "This is a shocking decision and Christians should be outraged by it. We strongly believe that the majority decision is fundamentally flawed, as pointed out by the dissent, and we intend to take this fight to the next level. This battle is far from over."
See the full ruling online here:
http://www.ca2.uscourts.gov:81/isysnative/RDpcT3BpbnNcT1BOXDA0LTEyMjktY3Zfb3BuLnBkZg==/04-1229-cv_opn.pdf#xml=http://10.213.23.111:81/isysquery/irl8f29/1/hilite
Quoteworthy: ------ "Your love of liberty - your respect for the laws - your habits of industry - and your practice of the moral and religious obligations, are the strongest claims to national and individual happiness." -- George Washington (letter to the Residents of Boston, 27 October 1789)
Back
HHS Responds abusively to some taxpayers concerns about Department's Homosexual web site
Feb. 2 2006 Tony Perkins Family Research Council
We've reported to you on the homosexual website at the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS). When some of you wrote to HHS to criticize this misuse of taxpayer dollars, you received anonymous, abusive, and even threatening responses. I protested this vigorously in a letter to HHS Secretary Mike Leavitt. Recently, I received a call from Rick Campanelli, legal counsel to Leavitt. He acknowledged that the website had been taken down and that the unidentified contractor employee responsible for the abusive replies had been fired. That's fine--as far as that goes. But Mr. Campanelli did not explain how HHS became involved in promoting the unhealthy homosexual lifestyle in the first place. We had pointed out the medical inaccuracies that were promoted by the website. Nor did Mr. Campanelli explain to me how HHS could
allow a contractor to speak for the largest federal department on such a vital matter. To be fair, many of the replies received to your expressions of concern were civil and respectful--if noncommittal.
What this episode shows us is that even under a friendly, pro-family administration, the bureaucracy can run amok. As a former elected official, I understand the importance of public servants truly serving the public in both word and deed. I share the outrage of those who received the abusive responses from HHS. I can assure you, FRC will not turn a blind eye to the abuse of tax dollars or tax payers.
Back
Anglican Archbishop of Sydney calls on Worldwide Communion to Declare Homosexuality a Sin
Feb. 6 2006 LifeSiteNews.com
SYDNEY, Peter Jensen, the Anglican Archbishop of Sydney Australia, has called upon the Worldwide Anglican Communion unequivocally to condemn homosexual behavior as sinful. Jensen warned of a slippery slope toward acceptance of homosexual practice among Anglicans.
To bless homosexuality, said Jensen to the Sydney Morning Herald on February 3rd “would be to call holy what God calls sin to be repented on.”
Jensen’s call comes at a time in the Anglican Communion that concessions are being made not only to civil laws legitimizing homosexual partnerings but in which the official US and Canadian Anglican churches are blessing homosexuality and same-sex partnerships as an acceptable lifestyle for Christians.
Jensen is a signatory to a letter with 18 Anglican leaders supporting comments by the bishop of Rochester that gay unions were inconsistent with “traditional teachings” on marriage. Jensen told a group of British evangelists that homosexuality is a “life and death” matter for the Anglican Church.
Responding to the frequent accusation that Christian leaders are “obsessed” with sex, Jensen said, “Our culture is obsessed with sex so we should not be embarrassed by engaging this issue. If we did not engage we would be divorced from our culture. Scripture declares this to be a matter of life and death.”
Jensen’s comments appeared on the website of the Anglican Mainstream, a group “committed to promote, teach and maintain the Scriptural truths on which the Anglican Church was founded.”
The Worldwide Anglican Communion has been in a state of crisis, with a formal schism imminent, after the 2004 consecration of an open and unrepentant homosexual, Gene Robinson, as bishop of New Hampshire. Anglican leaders in Africa have begun to offer sanctuary to North American Anglicans who wish to retain the Christian teaching on sexuality and marriage, setting up alternate episcopal structures for individual congregations.
In England, the House of Bishops, the governing body of the Church of England, agreed to allow the civil unions of its openly homosexual clergy on the proviso that the clergyman gives his bishop a written promise that the relationship will be chaste. This decision followed the legalization of homosexual partnerships in England, Northern Ireland and Wales and was condemned by traditional Christians around the world as a transparent and cynical capitulation to militant secularism.
Back
Researcher Questions James Dobson's Endorsement of Pro-Gay Bill
Feb. 6 Christian Newswire Dr. Paul Cameron
COLORADO SPRINGS, Co., Dr. Paul Cameron -- Chairman of the Family Research Institute, a Colorado-based think tank -- has challenged Dr. James Dobson’s endorsement of a bill before the Colorado legislature that would grant to gay partners many of the legal rights currently reserved to married couples. These rights would include property-sharing, decision- making powers over funerals and organ donations and, potentially health-care policy benefits. If adopted, the proposed legislation could force employers to cover gay partners – no matter how ill.
Cameron said, "This is madness. Currently there is one voluntary relationship that immediately confers these benefits – marriage between a man and a woman. Married couples receive these benefits because they make substantial contributions to society. They are more economically productive, provide the best environment in which to raise children, and are the least likely to commit crimes. Homosexuals, on the other hand, are less economically productive, seldom produce children or raise them well, and are more likely to commit criminal acts. In addition, society should not reward relationships that tend to spread disease."
Noting the Christian dimensions of Dobson’s Focus on the Family organization, Cameron pointed out that conferral of any part of marriage benefits to homosexuals is without precedent in the history of the Church. "Moses and St. Paul condemned homosexuality. As soon as the Church gained political power in the Roman Empire it outlawed homosexuality. Now Dobson tells society to give gays ‘marriage lite’ benefits. During the confirmation fight over Harriet Meyers, Dobson, in a somewhat ambiguous manner, told his radio audience that he was in favor of gay rights. His support of this ‘marriage lite’ bill removes the ambiguity. When the Denver Post, one of the most anti-family, anti- traditional newspapers on the planet, says it is "pleasantly surprised" by Dobson’s support for "expanded legal benefits for same-sex couples," you know that a betrayal has occurred."
Dobson and Cameron were both prominent in getting Amendment 2 passed in Colorado in 1992. The Advocate, the premier gay rights magazine, listed Dobson #1 and Cameron #2 on the gay "enemies list" (1/31/06).
Sen. Shawn Mitchell, R carries the bill; the Denver Post celebrated Focus on the Family’s new position in its lead editorial, Feb. 6, see: A Fresh Focus on Domestic Partners
Back
Feb. 3 2006 Terry Vanderheyden LifeSiteNews.com
WASHINGTON, New Republican House Leader, John Boehner, declared his intention to uphold the right to life of the unborn before his election.
Boehner, who has been re-elected eight times in his Western Ohio district, defeated Missouri Congressman Roy Blunt and John Shadegg of Arizona Thursday in a secret-ballot election by Republican members of Congress. Blunt, who replaced Tom Delay temporarily as house leader since September, lost on second ballot, by a vote of 122 to 109. Blunt retains his previous position as Majority Whip, the No. 3 leadership position in the House.
Boehner, a Roman Catholic and graduate of Xavier University in Cincinnati, declared his intention to continue to fight for the rights of the unborn. He addressed a House Values Action Team by letter Tuesday, in which he affirmed that he believes life begins at conception, reiterating his commitment to protect life at all stages. “It is a commitment I have felt deeply throughout my life, and a commitment I will uphold unapologetically,” Boehner wrote, as reported by the Washington Times.
“I am humbled and honored by the confidence my Republican colleagues have expressed in me with today’s vote,” he wrote in a statement Thursday. “This afternoon, House Republicans are united behind our Speaker, eager to renew our commitment to the principles that prompted Americans to put us in the majority.”
Boehner also promised that as majority leader he would advance bills banning human cloning, to introduce an amendment to protect marriage, and to table fetal pain legislation. Boehner has acted as Republican education ad workforce chairman for five years.
Back
Kentucky Lawmakers Eye Abortion Ban
Feb. 6 2006 Citizen Link
Nearly 40 members of the Kentucky House have signed on in support of legislation that would ban abortion in the state, The Associated Press reported.
Rep. Addia Wuchner, R-Burlington, is the sponsor of a bill that would outlaw abortion and directly challenge the 1973 Supreme Court Roe v. Wade ruling.
"(To) create a challenge," Wuchner said, "is how change begins -- and it begins right here at the state level."
Back
Feb. 3 2006 Citizen Link
Lawmakers in Florida have allocated $2 million in grant money to help support pregnancy-resource centers and fund a program that provides assistance for those facing unplanned pregnancies.
The new state program, administered by the Florida Pregnancy Care Network (FPCN), will use the services of
The Option Line -- a toll-free number: that receives more than 10,000 requests for help each month from women seeking advice.
Kurt Entsminger, president of Care Net, co-owner of the phone service, praised the state for its innovation.
"By utilizing the Option Line, this program will involve a call center that has proven effectiveness in connecting them with local help and, ultimately, helping to reduce the number of abortions," he said. "Care Net is enthusiastic about this new program, which allows meaningful participation by faith-based organizations."
The funding will also reimburse qualified pregnancy-resource centers for counseling services that stay within the boundaries of the state's faith-based initiative guidelines. Pregnancy centers can receive funding to participate in training to qualify for the reimbursement.
"We believe that if this program is tested over time," Entsminger said, "we will see a significant reduction in the number of abortions in the state of Florida."
Back
Wal-Mart Sued Over Morning-After Pill
Feb. 3 2006 staff reports Citizen Link
Pro-abortion groups want to force the company to stock it.
Three women in Massachusetts filed suit against Wal-Mart on Wednesday because its pharmacies do not stock or sell Plan B, the so-called morning-after pill.
Plan B is controversial because it can sometimes cause an early abortion.
Wal-Mart called it a bad business decision to carry the seldom-used drug, and pro-life groups say no business should be forced to participate in an abortion.
Samuel Perkins, the attorney for the women, accused Wal-Mart of breaking a Massachusetts regulation requiring every pharmacy to carry all “commonly prescribed medicines.”
Patrick Gillen of the Thomas More Law Center said Plan B does not fit under that requirement.
“I think that’s an improper understanding of the word ‘commonly prescribed,’ ” he told Family News in Focus.
Not surprisingly, the Planned Parenthood Federation and NARAL are also behind the suit.
“The reason why they’re in this suit is because they are against abortion," Perkins claimed. "They want to do everything they can to reduce the abortion rate by having contraception and emergency contraception make abortion unnecessary.”
Jim Sedlak with the American Life League scoffed at that purported argument.
“It’s absolutely ridiculous that any claim this would lower abortion rates should be made," he said, "because this acts by killing children in the womb.”
Back
Feb. 3 2006 Christian Action Network Press Release
“How American Mosques are Grooming Home-Grown Terrorists”
Forest, VA – The Christian Action Network will host a seminar in Washington, D.C. titled, “Jihad in America,” on February 10, 7:30 p.m. at the Omni-Shoreham Hotel.
The seminar will feature keynote speaker, Dr. Ergun Caner, the Dean of Theology at Liberty University and author of “Christian Jihad.”
“This seminar,” explains Martin Mawyer, president of CAN, “will alert attendees about the growing rise of radical Mosques in America which are recruiting, training and grooming home- grown Muslim terrorists.”
As Dr. Caner will explain, Saudi Arabia has spent millions of dollars in the United States to purchase American Mosques for the sole purpose of converting Muslims into the Wahhabi brand of Islam.
Wahhabism is an 18th century ideology that states Islam should be spread throughout the world by engaging in violent Jihad (Holy War).
“This is an extremely important seminar,” Mr. Mawyer says, “because America must understand the true nature, goal and extremism of what is being taught and preached inside American Mosques.”
Mr. Mawyer said American Mosques are preaching four main objectives of Islam to their congregants. First, Muslim must liberate lands from non-Muslim powers. Second, Muslims must reunite under a single, common border. Third, once united Muslims must restore the caliphate. Fourth, once the caliphate is restored, Muslims must resume the task of converting and conquering the rest of the world into Islam.
“Dr. Caner is an expert, as a former Muslim and specialist on Islam, to speak intelligently, precisely and factually about the growing alarm of radical Mosques in America. His keynote speech will certainly engage all who hear him on this home-grown Muslim threat that is poised against all Americans, right in their backyards.”
The seminar, which will be held in the “Blue Room Prefunction” at the Omni-Shoreham is open to the public.
Christian Action Network is a non-profit, pro-family organization based in Forest, VA with 250,000 members nationwide.
Back
Prominent American commentator Stanley Kurtz on the Planned Abolition of Marriage in Canada
Feb. 7 2006 Terry Vanderheyden LifeSiteNews.com
WASHINGTON, Prominent American conservative commentator Stanley Kurtz has uncovered a chilling plot for Canada – the former Liberal government, in collusion with liberal courts, has been attempting to “abolish marriage” entirely.
The first obvious reality is that the past Liberal governments, with the courts, have already caused critical damage to marriage – the advent of so-called same-sex marriage is a major step towards abolishing marriage. A next step will be legalization of polygamy, as the Liberals have already considered. (See http://www.lifesite.net/ldn/2006/jan/06011301.html for more on a Liberal government-sponsored study that promotes polygamy as a norm for Canada).
As Kurtz describes, “Legalize gay marriage, followed by multi-partner marriage, and pretty soon the whole idea of marriage will be meaningless. It’s like this,” he adds. “The way to abolish marriage, without seeming to abolish it, is to redefine the institution out of existence. If everything can be marriage, pretty soon nothing will be marriage.”
Kurtz explains that the introduction of polygamy, arguably because that would appeal to Muslims in our multicultural society, would lead to “the creation of a modern, secular, ‘non-patriarchal’ relationship system that would allow for marriage-like unions in any combination of number or gender.”
“That would mean the effective abolition of marriage,” Kurtz adds. “But to get to the post-modern version of multi-partner unions, Canada’s old-fashioned anti-polygamy laws have got to go.”
Kurtz’ emphasizes that same-sex “marriage” and the legalization of polygamy are means for the “social elite” to achieve their real goal: “the slow-motion abolition of marriage.”
“And radical as that goal may seem, Canada is a whole lot closer to abolishing marriage than you realize,” he warns. “Canada’s liberal courts have already knocked down most of the legal distinctions between marriage and unmarried cohabitation. Given time, growing public tolerance, increased pressure from Muslim immigrants, incremental court decisions, continued growth in Canada’s already burgeoning polyamory movement, and the return of a Liberal government, Martha Bailey (author of the pro-polygamy report linked to above) and friends may yet achieve their goal.”
Back
Hot Cross Buns Banned in English School
Feb. 7 2006 Hilary White LifeSiteNews.com
IPSWICH, The UK’s mania for political correctness has struck again where a school has banned hot cross buns, a traditional sweet pastry associated with Good Friday. A representative of Oaks Primary School in Ipswich, said the buns, which include two strips of decorative icing intersecting in the middle, might offend Jehovah’s Witnesses who attend the school.
Hot cross buns, a spicy currant or raisin studded yeast bun, topped with a "Cross" of lemon-flavored icing, have been a feature of English culture since the Middle Ages.
The Suffolk Evening Star reported that the head teacher of the school, Tina Jackson, asked the supplier to provide the buns without the crosses. “Obviously, the hot cross bun is a celebration of Easter but it is not Easter yet,” she told the paper. Jackson did not say whether she would expel students who chanted the traditional English nursery rhyme, “One a penny; two a penny; hot cross buns.”
The local pastor of the Jehovah’s Witness congregation applauded the school’s decision. “I can understand why the school has done this and I support the decision. Hot cross buns are a pagan symbol of fertility no different to bunnies, eggs and Easter. The Bible states we should not worship things of a pagan origin.”
No information was available about what sort of services the school had been planning to allow students to worship the buns or whether they had been cancelled. Moreover, the school did not say whether the buns would be inspected by the local Muslim of Catholic authorities for possible accidental appearances of religious figures in the patterns formed by the currants in the buns.
Contact info for the school:
The Oaks Community Primary
01473 684994
Aster Rd
Ipswich, IP2 0NR, United Kingdom
Back
Feb. 7 2006 Gudrun Schultz LifeSiteNews.com
FLANDERS, Belgium, Four hundred people were reported killed by euthanasia in Belgium in 2005, double the rate of four years ago.
Belgium legalized euthanasia in 2002, following the Netherlands to become the second European country to do so. In the first year two hundred people were killed. Since then rates have steadily risen. Last year deaths reportedly reached 360.
Figures published today indicate one third of “assisted suicides” involve a surgical procedure, reported the Evening Echo News.
In some cases, medical treatment is stopped, or not started at all, said Wim Distelmans, chairman of Belgium’s euthanasia evaluation committee.
80% of all reported cases of euthanasia take place in the northern Flanders region, where there is a network of doctors involved in the practice.
Back
Reaction to the Politicizing of Coretta King Memorial Service
Feb. 8 2006 Christian Newswire
Jason T. Christy, CEO of Christy Media, publishers of The Church Report magazine has this reaction to the funeral service of Mrs. Coretta Scott King:
SCOTTSDALE, Arizona, "It is now clear to me that the Democrats have sunk to a new low that wherever an audience gathers and cameras are present, they feel as though they must politicize the event. From Katrina to King, and from Alito to Al Queda, the 2006 democratic strategy of attacking the President in a forum in which he simply could not and would not respond is tactic that will not work. Politicizing an event that was a celebration of Mrs. King’s life and somber day of mourning for the family was simply the most disgusting political ploy this country has witnessed in decades.
"Shame on you Rev. Lowery! Shame on you President Carter! Shame on you President Clinton! The only thing this funeral-turned Democratic circus was missing was Howard Dean’s screaming!"
Back
Feb. 2 2006 Sherrie Gossett CNSNews.com Staff Writer
A former Iraqi general alleges that in June 2002 Saddam Hussein transported weapons of mass destruction out of the country to Syria aboard several refitted commercial jets, under the pretense of conducting a humanitarian mission for flood victims.
That's one of several dramatic claims made in the book by former Iraqi General Georges Sada: "Saddam's Secrets: How an Iraqi General Defied and Survived Saddam Hussein." Since the launch of Operation Iraqi Freedom, Sada has served as the spokesman for Iraqi Prime Minister Iyad Allawi and continues to serve as national security advisor. He is the former vice marshal of the Iraqi Air Force. Sada was interviewed at the headquarters of Cybercast News Service on Jan. 30.
Sada contends that Saddam took advantage of a June 4, 2002, irrigation dam collapse in Zeyzoun, Syria, to ship the weapons under cover of an aid project to the flooded region.
"[Saddam] said 'Okay, Iraq is going to do an air bridge to help Syria," Sada recounted. Two commercial jets, a 747 and 727, were converted to cargo jets, in order to carry raw materials and equipment related to WMD projects, Sada said. The passenger seats, galleys, toilets and storage compartments were removed and new flooring was installed, he claimed. Hundreds of tons of chemicals were reportedly included in the cargo shipments. [See Video]
"They used to do two sorties a day," said Sada. "Fifty-six sorties were done between Baghdad and Damascus."
Sada said he obtained the information from two Iraq Airways captains who were reportedly flying the sorties. "They came immediately and they told me," said Sada.
This is not the first time that the possibility of a transfer of WMDs from Iraq to Syria has been raised. Two years ago, U.S. Sen. Pat Roberts, (R-Kan), chairman of the Select Committee on Intelligence acknowledged that "there is some concern that shipments of WMD went to Syria." No details were forthcoming. The claims have also been made by the U.S.-based Reform Party of Syria.
Sada told Cybercast News Service that he has not been debriefed by U.S. officials regarding his allegations that Saddam smuggled WMDs to Syria. He anticipates, now that his book has been released, that he will be meeting with U.S. officials regarding the information.
U.S. Rep. Peter Hoekstra (R-Mich.), chairman of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, plans to meet with Sada to discuss the allegations.
Back
Feb 3 2006 A Citizen Special Report
Ruling against parental rights is just one way Judge Stephen Reinhardt is trying to overturn American values.
He’s the judge who says parental rights end at the schoolhouse door and that the Pledge of Allegiance in public school classrooms is unconstitutional.
He admires an Israeli judge who’s outlawed spanking and radically expanded the power of the federal judiciary.
He considers an opinion he wrote in 1996 in favor of assisted suicide his greatest achievement.
He’s Judge Stephen Reinhardt of the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals—the most infamous member of the most radical court in America. He’s notorious because he’s caused real harm—to parental rights, public safety and the reputation of the federal courts. But one of his colleagues says he’s a “mastodon,” soon to be “extinct.” President Bush could hasten that day by appointing more conservatives to vacancies on the 9th Circuit, but Reinhardt and his political allies aren’t quite ready to surrender. They’re intent on transforming America with Reinhardt the master architect.
Hollywood and the Holocaust
Reinhardt, whose courtroom is in Los Angeles, was immersed in Hollywood society as a child.
Before Reinhardt was 12, his mother, a screenwriter named Silvia, divorced his father and married a successful movie director named Gottfried Reinhardt, who produced Greta Garbo’s final movie. Young Stephen visited Hollywood movie sets and met glamorous stars who came to his home for dinner, including Marilyn Monroe. (According to one of Reinhardt’s ex-wives, Reinhardt is still a big fan of Monroe.)
His parents also taught Reinhardt about his Jewish heritage and Nazi persecution. His step-grandfather, Max Reinhardt, was one of several German artists who fled Hitler and immigrated to America. Once in the United States, Max gained renown for directing a stage production of “A Midsummer Night’s Dream” featuring James Cagney and Mickey Rooney.
Warner Bros. later turned that production into a major motion picture.
Divorced parents, Hollywood friendships and tales of horrific violence that lacked the redemptive power of Christ’s atonement—Reinhardt’s childhood was the perfect recipe for the making of a leftist judicial activist.
“He thinks about his Jewish heritage a lot, very much so,” Reinhardt’s ex-wife, Maureen Kindel, the founder and senior managing director of the Los Angeles public affairs firm, Rose & Kindel, told Citizen. “He also thinks about the discrimination against Jews that he suffered, of course, when he was younger. ... I’m sure that has formulated his views about being protective of people’s rights.”
And in his current position as a 9th Circuit judge, he has openly discussed his view that “social justice” and “individual rights” should serve as a “guiding principle of the judicial branch.”
Reinhardt himself credited his liberalism to early exposure to the Holocaust and discrimination. “It would be hard not to feel very strongly about fairness and justice after all that,” he told the Los Angeles Times in 1986.
Problem is, those personal emotions seem to have skewed Reinhardt’s legal logic—especially on the court, where he has repeatedly exalted “individual rights” above other principles.
Reinhardt is not alone in that bias, said Rabbi Daniel Lapin, president and founder of Toward Tradition, a nonprofit that defends traditional, Judeo-Christian principles.
“Many American Jews have mistakenly embraced liberalism ... for instance, a majority of the leadership of the American Civil Liberties Union is Jewish,” he told Citizen. “They’ve gone all the way over to the compassion end” and neglected justice. Yet Talmudic writings specifically espouse the principle that “you should not make law as a consequence of experiences either sad or happy.”
When Jews forget their religious heritage and focus entirely on secular, individual-rights thinking, they open the door to societal chaos, Lapin said.
Disdain for the LAPD
Reinhardt’s confirmation to the 9th Circuit in 1980 was not a smooth process. In fact, it was a “torturous” ordeal, according to Reinhardt’s ex-wife, Maureen Kindel, who told Citizen that law enforcement in Los Angeles launched a vigorous opposition to his court appointment—delaying it for at least a year.
Why? Police officers had gotten an up-close view of Reinhardt’s version of “social justice” when he served as president of the Los Angeles Police Commission.
Just talk to Joe Gunn, a former LAPD commander during Reinhardt’s commission term. He told Citizen that Reinhardt had “open disrespect or disdain for the staff. … If somebody said something at a commission [meeting] that he didn’t agree with, he would just openly sneer.”
Another retired LAPD deputy chief, Dan Sullivan, said Reinhardt “saw us as a necessary evil.”
Several sources also told Citizen that Reinhardt was complicit in then—Mayor Tom Bradley’s decision to cut the budget for a community relations program in high-crime neighborhoods.
“We were all told [by police captains] that … [Reinhardt] didn’t want the police in the community getting too cozy” with the public, former LAPD assistant police chief Bob Vernon told Citizen. “We were pretty upset about that. We complained to the brass above us that this was a bad decision,” because “it was really a powerful program that reduced crime and brought the people close to the police.”
At the time, Vernon pointed out he only had second-hand reports from captains about Reinhardt’s involvement. But those reports are also backed up by former Washington Post reporter Lou Cannon in his book Official Negligence: How Rodney King and the Riots Changed Los Angeles and the LAPD. Cannon reveals that Bradley and Reinhardt wanted to retain control over Los Angeles politics. So they tried to prevent the police from building a power base by approving the elimination of the community-relations lieutenants—which ultimately contributed to further alienation of minorities from the police.
“The issues-oriented Reinhardt thought it a ‘very dangerous system’ because CROs [community-relations officers] might influence people to oppose court decisions restricting the power of the police,” wrote Cannon.
As the source of his information, Cannon credits an “interview with Stephen Reinhardt” in January 1994.
Reinhardt and his liberal allies also damaged the LAPD’s intelligence-gathering effort.
During the 1970s, radical anti-war terrorist groups were setting off bombs. And the LAPD tried to infiltrate some of those groups by attending left-wing political meetings where the terrorists would go to recruit new members.
The commission Reinhardt was on began limiting the amount of intelligence gathering the police could do. Meanwhile, under the leadership of Ramona Ripston (who would later become Reinhardt’s third and current wife), the ACLU launched its own attacks against the LAPD’s intelligence gathering from 1978 to 1984. By the time all was said and done, the ACLU and its plaintiffs received nearly $2 million from those lawsuits.
The cumulative effect was the disbandment of the LAPD’s Public Disorder Intelligence Division. “We lost our ability to gather intelligence, period,” said former LAPD Chief Daryl Gates.
Ironically, though, Gates said, it was that intelligence gathering that actually helped clear Reinhardt’s name during his 9th Circuit confirmation hearings. Reinhardt came under investigation because he “had relationships with several [labor union bosses] who were questionable,” Gates told Citizen. But police intelligence revealed that Reinhardt himself never actually committed a crime.
And Gates ended up defending Reinhardt’s record. “I used to joke with him about it,” Gates said. “I said, "We protected your civil rights by showing through our investigations that you have not done anything improper … you’ve just got stupid friends.”
Recruiting gays
Among Reinhardt’s other questionable friends were gays and lesbians who wanted the LAPD to cater to their community.
Ex-wife Maureen Kindel told Citizen that “gay rights” was another of Reinhardt’s legacies on the police commission.
Asked how that affected the LAPD, former chief Gates said that, from the time he was hired in 1978 when Reinhardt was on the commission and beyond, he was pressured to recruit homosexuals. “I wouldn’t do it. I said, ‘I don’t go recruit Baptists … or Catholics or heterosexuals; I go out and recruit people who I think can do the job, and I am not interested in their sexual proclivities.” (After Gates left, an ACLU-assisted lawsuit eventually forced the LAPD to recruit homosexuals at gay-rights events).
The commission Reinhardt served on also promoted women’s and minority-rights in a way that was often detrimental to the LAPD. “There were attempts at the time,” said former commander Gunn, “to lower the standards of people going into the [LAPD] academy in order to get more minority officers in the department.” It was “unfair” to minorities “who did go through the system and were good,” he said.
The ACLU also sought to make the LAPD more responsive to the concerns of feminists and special interest groups. It pressured the federal government to issue a mandate forcing the LAPD to collect data on the ethnicity of every single person they stop on the road, “also identifying information for the officers involved and the date and time of the stop, the reason for the stop, the circumstances of the stop,” bragged a press release.
But the federal mandate hindered the quality of police work.
One of Reinhardt’s former law clerks, Heather Mac Donald—an author who’s written on the politicizing of police departments (Are Cops Racist?, 2003)—said the data collection “greatly diminished the LAPD’s capacity to protect the city against crime. … [I]n a city where the police force has always been inadequate—to spend time in a completely useless task of collecting data on police behavior … I think it’s a great, great disservice to the people of Los Angeles.”
His favorite judicial tyrant
Reinhardt helped diminish the LAPD’s community presence and intelligence gathering, but he wants “a substantial increase in the size of the federal judiciary,” by which he means at least doubling it. It would only cost, after all, “slightly more than one stealth bomber”—a “drop in the bucket,” he wrote.
Perhaps that’s one of the reasons he esteems Aharon Barak, president of the Israeli Supreme Court. Under Barak’s leadership, the Israeli Supreme Court has usurped considerable authority from the executive and legislative branches of government and blurred the separation of powers, in which each branch serves as a check and balance on the others.
Professor Ruth Gavison, an internationally renowned constitutional scholar and founder of the Association for Civil Rights in Israel, has referred to the court as “a self-perpetuating cult.” Unlike in the United States, where the president nominates and the Senate confirms, Israeli justices are selected by a committee of nine, one third of them fellow justices—led by Barak.
In 2000, the Barak court outlawed corporal punishment—spanking—of children by parents. The court declared that all corporal punishment is “completely unacceptable—a residue of a social-educational outlook that has become obsolete.”
‘Ferocious’ liberalism
Someone who knows Reinhardt quite well is fellow 9th Circuit Judge Alex Kozinski, who’s publicly referred to his colleague as a “mastodon,” “a disappearing breed” and the type of judge who will eventually, he hopes, be “extinct.” And yet, he also has a healthy professional respect, even admiration, for the 74-year-old judge.
“It’s sort of like watching a master at work,” he said. “You may not be a Picasso fan, but watching Picasso work would have been something itself, even if you didn’t appreciate his art. He’s [Reinhardt] very good at what we do—at law, at argument. And he’s a ferocious guy if you get into a tussle with him. He is ferocious.”
Kozinski told Citizen that he and Reinhardt differ over what to do when presented with a case for which there is no clear U.S. Supreme Court precedent. Kozinski said he tries to extrapolate how the Supreme Court would regard the matter, while Reinhardt opts for what he thinks the law “ought to be.”
“The judgments about the Constitution are value judgments,” Reinhardt said at a recent public speaking event (reported by the Los Angeles Jewish Journal). “You reach the answer that essentially your values tell you to reach.”
Reinhardt has helped give the 9th Circuit a unique distinction: the circuit court that’s been reversed more than any other by a unanimous vote of the U.S. Supreme Court. A study by Richard Posner, the chief judge of the 7th Circuit, found that the 9th Circuit’s frequency of unanimous reversals indicated a problem existed that couldn’t be explained away by the sheer size of the 9th Circuit or the number of cases it decided. Its waywardness reached its zenith in 1996, according to Yale law professor Akhil Reed Amar, when it was reversed by the Supreme Court 24 times, 16 of them unanimously. Judge Reinhardt’s opinions accounted for 11 of those reversals, and five of the unanimous ones.
Reinhardt has not been quite as conspicuous in the last several years, although he was on two panels whose judgments were reversed during the 2004-05 term. The 9th Circuit’s unanimous reversals continue to stay high, totaling nine out of 14 for the 2004-2005 term.
Suicide and sex
Two cases that highlight Reinhardt’s extreme bent are his 1996 opinion on assisted-suicide, and his most recent parental-rights opinion involving school sex surveys.
In the 1996 case of Compassion in Dying v. Washington, terminally ill patients wanted doctors to hasten their deaths by administering lethal drugs, an illegal act under Washington law. Several court decisions later, Reinhardt and seven other 9th Circuit justices created what they hoped would be a new constitutional right to assisted suicide, in an opinion that Reinhardt called his “all-time favorite” (“20 questions for Circuit Judge Stephen Reinhardt,"; February 2004).
Reinhardt’s opinion makes reference to a Supreme Court case, Planned Parenthood v. Casey, in which Justice Anthony Kennedy created “the right to define one’s own concept of existence, of meaning, of the universe, and of the mystery of human life.” Emboldened by Casey, Reinhardt swept aside the fact that no court had ever recognized assisted suicide as a right.
The U.S. Supreme Court in 1997 reversed Reinhardt’s views by a 9-0 vote. Yet Reinhardt wasn’t dismayed; he predicted that physician-assisted suicide “will someday become the governing law in this country.”
More recently, Reinhardt was repudiated by the U.S. House of Representatives, which voted 320-91 in November 2005 to condemn his ruling in Fields v. Palmdale School District, in which he said parents’ rights to protest a sex survey given to their first-, third- and fifth-graders were “substantially diminished” once they decide on a school for their children.
The 3rd Circuit faced a case with similar parental-rights issues (C.N. v. Ridgewood Bd. of Ed.) but a three-judge panel, including Supreme Court nominee Samuel Alito, rejected Reinhardt’s sweeping declarations on the limits of parental rights.
Bitter disappointment
Reinhardt’s radicalism may be fueled by his bitterness, according to Sheldon Sloan, a governing board member for California’s state bar association who knew Reinhardt for many years—their sons even attended the same grammar school and were playmates.
“He was focused on climbing the ladder,” Sloan,who is also a former municipal judge, told Citizen. “I think during the Clinton administration that he really and truly believed he was going to get appointed to the Supreme Court. And I think he was terribly disappointed when he wasn’t.” As a result, “he turned even more activist. … He got much more public with his decisions.”
Reinhardt hasn’t exactly kept his frustration with former President Clinton a secret, publicly complaining that the president “blew it” by not appointing die-hard liberals like Reinhardt to the high court.
Nevertheless, Reinhardt found another outlet for political activism: his law cler
