BMAT Moral Action Committee Watchman Report #89 06/23/2006

News Topics of a Particular Interest or Moral Concern

Click on an article to view OR hold Ctrl down and click to view OR just scroll through the Articles:

Christianity / Religion

House Church Involvement Is Growing

Charges Dropped Against Sacramento Mall Evangelist / Youth Pastor

Political Correctness Takes a Hit in Kentucky Schools

EEOC Cites Government Employee Union for Illegal Retaliation against Worker Exercising Religious Freedom

Husband and wife arrested for preaching to get brand new trial

 

Democracy / Security

Immigration enforcement was on the Front Page Once Again

Over 14 million aliens forecast to get amnesty

Enforce US Border First, Conservatives Tell Bush

Family / Social

Supreme Court to Expand Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Review

Marriage Amendments Make Progress in the States

Fathers linked to “healthy families"

Government / Legislation

Public Expression Of Religion Bill Must Be Passed

Flag-burning amendment heads to Senate floor

Holy Land Experience Wins Final Round of Property Tax Exemption Battle

Treasury Nominee Hank Paulson Needs to Answer Some Questions

Life Issues / Behavior

Government Promotion of Homosexuality

National Education Association Set to Endorse Homosexual Marriage

Update: Teachers Union Removes Endorsement of Gay Marriage

Good news in the fight against meth abuse, Meth lab seizures, workplace use decline

Homosexuality a Psychological Disorder: Pentagon Document

The New US Episcopal Church Leader says Homosexuality no Sin

Supposedly 'Tolerant' Republican Governor fires 'intolerant' Christian for views on Homosexuality

Harvard University researchers are attempting to clone human embryonic cells in rabbit eggs.

New Jersey Looking to Harvest More Organs by Easing "Brain Death" Criteria

Media / Internet / Entertainment

MySpace Takes Flimsy Action to Protect Youth

Congress weighs rules of Net access

Cheaper PCs Coming Soon?

Politics

Brownback Wants Senate to Debate Bioethics before Stem-Cell Vote

World / World Apostasies

U.S. leads fight to end human trafficking

Our Congress Misled About Real Threat to Christians in Palestine

Islamic Terror Movement's Infiltration of London Holds Significant Lessons for America

London Mega-church loses Land to Olympics

France's Choice for President: Gay "Marriage" or Re-Marriage between Church and State?

 

 

Christianity / Religion

House Church Involvement Is Growing

June 19 2006 the Barna Group

Ventura CA, Americans are increasingly designing their lifestyles in ways that meet their needs more efficiently. This is true even in the spiritual realm, as evidenced by the rapid growth of participation in house churches across the nation. Whereas most people continue to think of “going to church” as attending a service at one of the many church buildings located throughout their community, a new study from The Barna Group shows that millions of adults are trying out new forms of spiritual community and worship, with many abandoning the traditional forms altogether.

Large Numbers Attend

The new study, based on interviews with more than five thousand randomly selected adults from across the nation, found that 9% of adults attend a house church during a typical week. That is remarkable growth in the past decade, shooting up from just 1% to near double-digit involvement. In total, one out of five adults attends a house church at least once a month.

Projecting these figures to the national population gives an estimate of more than 70 million adults who have at least experimented with house church participation. In a typical week roughly 20 million adults attend a house church gathering. Over the course of a typical month, that number doubles to about 43 million adults.

While many religious professionals say they are unaware of such activity, it might be because the house church is in its “ramp up” phase in the U.S. One consequence is that millions of Americans are intermittently engaged in a house church, alternating back and forth between house church and conventional church. (For clarity, the survey distinguished between involvement in a house church and participation in a small group that is associated with a conventional church.) The Barna survey revealed that of those who attend a house church, 27% attend on a weekly basis, 30% attend one to three times per month, and 43% attend less than once a month.

One Foot in Each Camp

The study also discovered that church attendance patterns are being reshaped. Among those who attend a church of some type, 74% attend only a conventional church while just 5% attend only a house church. Another one-fifth (19%) attend both a house church and a conventional church. (The other 2% attend a small group that was not considered to be a house church.)

The people most likely to attend only a conventional church were women, people 60 or older, residents of the Midwest, and evangelicals. In contrast, the people most likely to attend a house church but not a conventional church were men, home-school families, residents of the West, and non-whites.

The Impact of the House Church

The study was directed by George Barna, whose current best-selling book, entitled Revolution, estimates that this trend will continue over the next two decades, substantially reducing the share of adults who call a conventional church their primary spiritual community.

“The house church now appears to have reached ‘critical mass’ in the United States,” commented Barna. “Analysts typically find that once a new tool or institution reaches 15% market penetration, and has evidenced a consistent or growing level of affirmation for at least six years, that entity shifts from fad to trend status. At that point, it becomes a permanent fixture in our society. Today, house churches are moving from the appraisal phase into the acceptance phase. We anticipate house church attendance during any given week to double in the coming decade, and a growing proportion of house church attenders to adopt the house church as their primary faith community. That continued growth and public awareness will firmly establish the house church as a significant means of faith experience and expression among Americans.”

Barna noted that this change is already reorienting the nation’s faith dimension. “By necessity, the transition from a nation exclusively offering a conventional church experience to one that offers a choice between conventional church and other forms of spiritual experience is changing the rules and roles. New leaders are emerging to represent and guide house churches – people whose names are unfamiliar to the bulk of the country, but whose ministries will become more mainstream and well-known as time goes on. A new body of spiritual resources is being developed and utilized by the expanding house church community. House church adherents make greater use of Christian radio, Christian books and online faith experiences than do people engaged solely in a conventional church. In addition, new patterns of faith participation are being implemented. The traditional ways of thinking about and experiencing ‘church’ are rapidly being revolutionized by a form of ‘religious choice’ in which people are taking greater personal responsibility for their spiritual experience and development.”

Research Details

The data in this report are based on interviews with 5013 adults from across the nation. The Barna Group conducted this study through the use of telephone surveys, implemented from January 2005 through May 2006, based upon a random sample of people 18 years of age and older living within the 48 continental states. The maximum margin of sampling error associated with the aggregate sample of adults is ±1.8 percentage points at the 95% confidence level. In the research, the distribution of survey respondents corresponded to the geographic dispersion of the U.S. population. Multiple callbacks were used to increase the probability of including a reliable distribution of qualified individuals. Statistical weighting was used to calibrate the aggregate sample to known population percentages. The number of adults in key subgroups, before statistical weighting, included 446 evangelicals, 2343 born again Christians, 663 blacks, 631 Hispanics, 1608 conservatives and 676 liberals.

“Born again Christians” are defined as people who said they have made a personal commitment to Jesus Christ that is still important in their life today and who also indicated they believe that when they die they will go to Heaven because they had confessed their sins and had accepted Jesus Christ as their savior. Respondents are not asked to describe themselves as “born again.”

“Evangelicals” meet the born again criteria (described above) plus seven other conditions. Those include saying their faith is very important in their life today; believing they have a personal responsibility to share their religious beliefs about Christ with non-Christians; believing that Satan exists; believing that eternal salvation is possible only through grace, not works; believing that Jesus Christ lived a sinless life on earth; asserting that the Bible is accurate in all that it teaches; and describing God as the all-knowing, all-powerful, perfect deity who created the universe and still rules it today. Being classified as an evangelical is not dependent upon church attendance or the denominational affiliation of the church attended. Respondents were not asked to describe themselves as “evangelical.”

The Barna Group, Ltd. (which includes its research division, The Barna Research Group) is a privately held, for-profit corporation that conducts primary research, produces media resources pertaining to spiritual development, and facilitates the healthy spiritual growth of leaders, children, families and Christian ministries. Located in Ventura, California, Barna has been conducting and analyzing primary research to understand cultural trends related to values, beliefs, attitudes and behaviors since 1984. If you would like to receive free e-mail notification of the release of each new, bi-monthly update on the latest research findings from The Barna Group website. www.barna.org.

Back

Charges Dropped Against Sacramento Mall Evangelist / Youth Pastor

June 20 2006 Pacific Justice Institute

Sacramento, CA— all charges against a local mall evangelist were recently dismissed after PJI affiliate attorney Greg Koonce appeared at a hearing on his behalf.

The evangelist, a youth pastor, regularly leads a group of young adults to a large shopping mall in a Sacramento suburb to pass out tracts and share the Word of God one-on-one with other individuals who congregate there. Although the mall had never received a single complaint from any customer, a security guard recently interrupted the pastor in the middle of a conversation with someone at the mall and demanded that he leave because he was “walking around and talking to people.” The youth pastor replied that he wasn’t doing anything wrong and politely declined to give in to the intimidation. By this time, a second security guard had joined the encounter, and the youth pastor was informed that he was being placed under citizen’s arrest for “trespassing.” At this point he agreed to leave peacefully, but instead the guards grabbed him, roughly shoved him against a storefront window, and handcuffed him tightly enough to draw blood. He was later taken to the police station, where he was booked like a common criminal and given an additional, bogus charge of battery.

With the youth pastor now facing a court date, the senior pastor at his church contacted Pacific Justice Institute. PJI enlisted the help of affiliate attorneys Gregory Koonce and Timothy Smith of the law firm McKinley & Smith, who provided representation at the court hearing. The DA’s office, likely realizing the arrest was illegal, decided to drop the case “in the interests of justice.” A civil suit is now being considered against the mall for violating the youth pastor’s clearly-established rights.

Brad Dacus, President of Pacific Justice Institute, added, “We salute the D.A.’s office and our affiliate attorneys Gregory Koonce and Timothy Smith for successfully defending this courageous youth pastor.” Mr. Koonce, while celebrating the victory for this youth pastor, remains concerned that, since the dismissal was not precedent-setting, this won’t be the last time a shopping mall tries to shut down evangelism. “I wish I could say this kind of thing won’t happen in the future, but we just can’t say for sure,” said Mr. Koonce. PJI therefore urges evangelists who encounter similar hostility to call our offices immediately.

Poll question: Please visit our website, www.pacificjustice.org , to respond to our poll question: Do you believe ministers should have the right to share their faith in the mall setting?

Back

Political Correctness Takes a Hit in Kentucky Schools

June 15 2006 Jim Brown and Jody Brown Agape Press

School Board Retains Traditional Historic Designations B.C. and A.D.

A conservative advocacy group is praising the Kentucky state school board for refusing to add the secular terms "Common Era" and "Before the Common Era" to school curriculum. The board has voted 10-0 to continue using the designations "B.C." and "A.D." to mark historical dates in textbooks and tests.

The unanimous vote overturns an April decision in which the board proposed changing the acronyms to "C.E." and "B.C.E." Since that decision was made, however, six new members have been appointed to the 11-member board by Governor Ernie Fletcher. A spokeswoman for the governor, who is an ordained Baptist minister, says Fletcher did not tell them how to vote on the matter.

But Associated Press notes that the April decision had drawn criticism from some ministers and religious groups who complained that it was an attempt to sterilize a reference to Christ. Richard Nelson with the Family Foundation of Kentucky says the board was responding to that criticism.

"The average Kentuckian felt that this was just another attempt to impose political correctness on our school children here in Kentucky schools -- and so there was an outcry," says Nelson. A spokesperson with the state Department of Education, he shares, indicated that office had received about 900 pieces of written testimony on the proposal, "most of it which was against the proposed change," he adds.

Martin Cothran, senior policy analyst with the Foundation, describes the board's turnaround as perhaps the "shot heard 'round the world in the battle against political correctness" in schools. He says those same Kentuckians who wrote to the Department of Education expressing their views were demonstrating they are "tired of seeing schools give in to every politically correct trend that comes down the pike."

Nelson notes an irony in one aspect of the debate. He accuses those who favor a change in the dating system of conducting a "sham" because they still use the birth of Christ as a reference point.

"I think it's disingenuous for these politically correct folks who want to impose this upon us [to be] saying [they] want to be neutral," he states. "Well, they're still using that central dating point in history, which is 2,006 years ago is when we recognize Christ was born -- they still want to use that but change the terminology."

Respectively, the designations "B.C." and "A.D." stand for "before Christ" and "Anno Domini" -- Latin for "in the year of the Lord." The terms "Common Era" and "Before the Common Era" are still being used in some Kentucky colleges and universities and on college entrance exams.

Back

EEOC Cites Government Employee Union for Illegal Retaliation against Worker Exercising Religious Freedom

June 20 2006 News Release - National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation

Action follows unprecedented suit by U.S. Department of Justice against union and State of Ohio for systematic religious discrimination against workers

Columbus, OH - following a related and unprecedented Department of Justice (DOJ) lawsuit, the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) issued a determination against the Ohio Civil Service Employees Association (OCSEA) union for illegal retaliation against a worker who objects to union affiliation on religious grounds.

Agreeing with National Right to Work Foundation attorneys, the EEOC found that OCSEA union officials’ retaliatory suit against Glen Greenwood – a 28-year Ohio Environmental Protection Agency (OEPA) employee – demanding that he repay the union for all raises and employment benefits he received for the past quarter century was unlawful retaliation for his complaint against the union requesting religious accommodation.

The EEOC found the retaliation to be so severe that it could seek up to $300,000 in punitive damages and ask the state to grant Greenwood a promotion.

An earlier charge, also filed for Greenwood with free legal assistance from the Foundation, had already led to a finding by the EEOC that the OCSEA union and the OEPA were guilty of religious discrimination. Despite the EEOC finding, the state’s agencies and the OCSEA union have maintained their practice of denying religious objections to the payment of forced union dues from employees who is not members of certain state-approved churches.

As a devout Presbyterian, Greenwood believes that supporting the OCSEA union violates his sincerely held religious beliefs because of the union’s support for abortion on demand and special rights for homosexuals.

Previously, recognizing a pattern and practice of civil rights infringement, the DOJ filed an unprecedented lawsuit in federal court against the State of Ohio and several state agencies in September 2005 for systemic religious discrimination. The DOJ suit – filed in U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Ohio – names the State of Ohio, the OEPA, the Ohio State Employment Relations Board, the OCSEA union, and the Ohio Department of Administrative Services as defendants.

“This determination from the EEOC and the unprecedented involvement by the DOJ in a case of this nature demonstrates the seriousness of the abuse that Ohio employees face when objecting to union affiliation on religious grounds,” stated National Right to Work Foundation Vice President Stefan Gleason.

The actions of OCSEA union officials and the aforementioned state agencies violate Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act. Under Title VII, an employee may not be forced to financially support a union if doing so violates his or her sincerely held religious beliefs. To avoid the conflict between an employee’s faith and a requirement to pay fees to a union he or she believes to be immoral, the law requires union officials to attempt to accommodate the employee – most often by designating a mutually acceptable charity to accept the funds.

The National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation is a nonprofit, charitable organization providing free legal aid to employees that may have had their human or civil rights violated by compulsory unionism abuses. The Foundation, which can be contacted toll-free at 1-800-336-3600, is assisting over 250,000 employees in over 200 cases nationwide.

Back

Husband and wife arrested for preaching to get brand new trial

June 20 2006 Alliance Defense Fund Media Relations

ADF attorneys to defend Christian couple arrested and charged with trespassing and disorderly conduct

KANSAS CITY, Mo. — Attorneys with the Alliance Defense Fund are defending a husband and wife arrested while preaching on the corner of a city block in downtown Kansas City.  After ADF filed an appeal regarding the charges brought against the couple, the court granted a brand new trial in the case.

It’s hard to believe that we’ve come to a point in our country where Christians are arrested for sharing the Gospel on a public street corner,” said ADF Litigation Counsel David LaPlante. 

“Religious speech is not second-class speech, and Christians should not be arrested for exercising their First Amendment rights,” said ADF Litigation Counsel David LaPlante.  “Unfortunately in this case, a Christian husband and wife were arrested for trespassing and disorderly conduct for sharing the Gospel in a public place.”

Michael and Joy Wheeler spent a night in jail after being arrested at the Kansas City Area Transit Authority’s Transit Plaza on the corner of 10th and Main streets.  A municipal court denied ADF’s motion to dismiss the case, but upon appeal the Wheelers were granted a brand new trial.

On Nov. 7th, 2005, Michael Wheeler was sharing his faith at the Transit Plaza park area alongside his wife, who was quietly praying, when a Metro bus supervisor approached them and told them to leave.  The Wheelers began to pray, and police soon arrived to arrest the couple.  Michael Wheeler was charged with trespassing and disorderly conduct and Joy Wheeler was charged with disorderly conduct.

“The First Amendment protects religious speech,” said LaPlante.  “Mr. Wheeler has been sharing his faith in public at that location and locations across the country for the past 21 years.  It’s hard to believe that we’ve come to a point in our country where Christians are arrested for sharing the Gospel on a public street corner.”

The new trial in City of Kansas City v. Wheeler is scheduled for August 11th, 2006 in Jackson County Circuit Court.

ADF is a legal alliance defending the right to hear and speak the Truth through strategy, training, funding, and litigation.

Back

Democracy / Security

Immigration enforcement was on the Front Page Once Again

June 19 2006 Gary Bauer American values

Immigration was on the front pages of Washington’s newspapers once again this morning. (Somehow I expect that won’t be unusual in the days ahead!) The liberal Washington Post reported on the lack of enforcement of existing U.S. immigration law with this headline: “Illegal Hiring Is Rarely Penalized.” You may want to sit down for this because it is sure to send your blood pressure through the roof. According to the Post:

“Between 1999 and 2003, work-site enforcement operations were scaled back 95 percent by the Immigration and Naturalization Service, which subsequently was merged into the Homeland Security Department. The number of employers prosecuted for unlawfully employing immigrants dropped from 182 in 1999 to four in 2003, and fines collected declined from $3.6 million to $212,000, according to federal statistics. In 1999, the United States initiated fines against 417 companies. In 2004, it issued fine notices to three.”

In its defense, the Department of Homeland Security, which now has responsibility for enforcing immigration law, says that resources were redirected to counterterrorism efforts after 2001. However, as I have often argued, most Americans do not see these two issues as mutually exclusive, but rather directly related. In addition, enforcement measures have been on the rise in recent months. But the Post story also notes how one enforcement program that was tested in Georgia and Nebraska in 1999, Operation Vanguard, became a victim of its own success. After raids in Georgia netted over 4,000 illegal immigrants and hundreds more in Nebraska, politicians in both parties went ballistic and the program was killed. It is precisely this lack of will to enforce existing law that makes it very difficult for the American people to trust our politicians when it comes to so-called “comprehensive reform” plans. In a post-September 11th world, when homeland security is supposedly our focus, there is simply no excuse for failing to enforce the law.

That approach was the focus of the second immigration story that appeared in today’s Washington Times. Dozens of loyal Republicans recently sent a letter to President Bush urging him to get on board with the plan supported by his own party, which is enforcement first. According to the Times, signers included William J. Bennett, Robert H. Bork, Ward Connerly and Newt Gingrich. Noting that 85% of congressional Republicans voted either for the House’s “get tough” bill or against the Senate’s lax “comprehensive reform” bill, these high profile Republicans are asking the president to drop his insistence on a quasi-amnesty plan, which includes a so-called “path to citizenship.” Doing anything else, according to the signers of this letter, simply repeats the mistakes of the past. I agree.

Back

Over 14 million aliens forecast to get amnesty

June 16 2006 Jerry Seper, the Washington Times

More than 9.9 million illegal aliens now in the United States will receive amnesty under an immigration-reform bill passed by the Senate, though about a quarter will do so fraudulently, and the bill allows for 4.5 million family members to join them in the United States, according to a report.
    "Of the 14.4 million illegals and their family members who will receive amnesty, we estimate that 13.5 million will eventually become permanent residents, which means they can stay as long as they wish and apply for citizenship," according to the report released yesterday by the Washington-based Center for Immigration Studies (CIS).
    The report, written by CIS Research Director Steven A. Camarota, said the projected 14.4 million figure does not include other expected increases in legal immigration allowed by the bill. The Heritage Foundation predicted in a report last month that the number could total 193 million in the next 20 years.
    The Senate bill still faces conference hearings with House members, who passed immigration-reform legislation in December focusing on border security.
    The CIS report, which based its findings on the 1986 Immigration Reform and Control Act (IRCA) that granted amnesty to about 3 million illegal aliens and their relatives, said that about 7.4 million illegals eligible for amnesty under the Senate bill will come forward and receive amnesty legitimately.
    The report said there will be one fraudulent amnesty awarded for every three legitimate ones -- meaning that more than 2.5 million illegals will become legal fraudulently. In addition to the amnesty beneficiaries, the bill will allow an estimated 4.5 million family members currently living abroad to join their newly legalized relatives, the report said.
    "Our assumption that the share of illegals who come forward will be similar to the share in 1986 may be too low because, unlike the last legalization, illegals now know that amnesties are real and not a ruse by the government to deport them," Mr. Camarota said. "Moreover, because the border is now more difficult to cross illegally, legalization is a more attractive option."
    The report cautioned that its estimate of more than 2.5 million fraudulent amnesties, based on IRCA, may be too low, as well, because the false-document industry "is now more developed." It said the "overworked immigration bureaucracy already" has a severe fraud problem, according to a report by the Government Accountability Office.
    "As its workload mushrooms with amnesty, fraud will become even more difficult to detect," Mr. Camarota said.
    The CIS report also predicted that if the Senate bill were to become law, nearly 8 million more illegal aliens still would enter the country by 2016.
    The report does not describe the illegal aliens affected by the bill as "guest workers," noting that amnesty applies to people who are given some kind of legal status, are not subject to deportation and can work in the United States.
    "In our view, any policy or legislation that does not require those who break the law to abide by it, but instead suspends the normal penalty and in some way changes the law to accommodate violators is an amnesty," Mr. Camarota said. "An amnesty in the immigration system is any change that allows people who would otherwise be subject to deportation to stay in the country."

Back

Enforce US Border First, Conservatives Tell Bush

June 21 2006 Sarah Larkins, CNSNews.com correspondent

President Bush received another blunt reminder this week about the dissension within his own party over the issue of illegal immigration.

Former U.S. House Speaker Newt Gingrich, former U.S. Education Secretary William Bennett and former U.S. Supreme Court nominee Robert Bork joined with 38 other conservative leaders in urging Bush and the current Republican leadership in Congress to enforce the U.S. southern border before reforming the immigration system.

A letter, signed by the conservative leaders and addressed to the president, Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist (R-Tenn.) and House Speaker Dennis Hastert (R-Ill.) states that "border and interior enforcement must be funded, operational, implemented, and proven successful" before the debate can shift to current illegal immigrants and the need for new guest worker programs.

"We need proof that enforcement (both at the border and in the interior) is successful before anything else happens," the letter declares.

"The debate is among Republicans," John Fonte, senior fellow and director of the Center of American Common Culture at the Hudson Institute and organizer of the letter, told Cybercast News Service. "The White House is on one side, 85 percent of congressional Republicans are on the other."

Some Democrats, 36 in the House and four in the Senate, also support enforcement first, Fonte said.

"[The letter's] purpose is to strengthen the hand of the people who are interested in the enforcement of America's borders first," Fonte said. "Do the enforcement; let's see if that works, then we'll talk about the other stuff."

The letter from the conservative leaders also labels the 1986 immigration reform law a "mistake."

That series of reforms, according to the letter, "included amnesty for around 3 million illegal immigrants, border enforcement and interior enforcement."

"Amnesty came, but enforcement was never seriously implemented either at the border or in the interior," the conservative leaders state in their letter.

"[Enforcement] didn't happen," Fonte said. "We don't want to be fooled again. This time we're saying, trust, but verify. Let's see enforcement. Let's make sure it's proven and then we'll discuss the other stuff."

In May, the Senate passed the Hagel-Martinez immigration reform bill, which would establish a temporary guest-worker program and grant permanent resident status for qualifying immigrants who have been living and working in the United States for five years. The House passed a tougher version of immigration reform in 2005. That bill would make illegal presence in the U.S. a crime and subject those who harbor illegal aliens to a criminal penalty as well.

As Cybercast News Service previously reported, Speaker Hastert argued in March that border protection should be the first priority in handling the illegal immigration problem, but that a guest-worker program was also needed for some sectors of the U.S. economy.

Frist shares Hastert's view.

"Senator Frist believes that border security is the most important piece of immigration reform, and has said that continuously," Carolyn Weyforth, spokesperson for Frist, told Cybercast News Service in an e-mail response. "However, he does think that we need comprehensive reform in order to effectively deal with border security, employer enforcement and the 12 million illegal immigrants in our country."

Fonte said the letter should strengthen an issue that affects all Americans.

"This is about strengthening America, it's about border enforcement, it's about protecting America, so all Americans should be interested," Fonte said.

Back

Family / Social

Supreme Court to Expand Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Review

June 19 2006 John Jalsevac, LifeSiteNews.com

WASHINGTON, D.C., June 19 2006 John Jalsevac LifeSiteNews.com The Supreme Court is set to revisit a second Bush Administration appeal that seeks to reinstate a ban on partial birth abortion, reports the American Center for Law and Justice (ACLJ).

The ACLJ, which specializes in constitutional law, said it is pleased the Supreme Court has decided to hear the case, which involves the constitutionality of the national ban on partial-birth abortion. 

“The Supreme Court took a significant step today that clearly puts the issue of partial-birth abortion front-and-center,” said Jay Sekulow, Chief Counsel of the ACLJ, which litigates pro-life issues.  “By taking a second case involving the constitutionality of the national ban on partial-birth abortion, the Supreme Court puts the spotlight on one of the most horrific medical procedures in existence today.  The high court not only will determine whether Congress acted appropriately in enacting the ban, but the high court also has a critical opportunity to bring to an end – once and for all – the barbaric practice of partial-birth abortion.  Taking a second case clearly elevates one of the most culturally significant issues of our time.  The stakes are high and we are very pleased that the Supreme Court now has two opportunities to abolish what can only be described as infanticide.”

In 2000, five justices of the Supreme Court, including retired Justice Sandra Day O'Connor, ruled that the abortion right originally created in Roe v. Wade allows an abortionist to perform a partial-birth abortion any time he sees a 'health' benefit, even if the woman and her unborn baby are entirely healthy. (Stenberg v. Carhart, June 28, 2000). This ruling struck down the ban on partial-birth abortion that had been enacted by Nebraska, and rendered unenforceable the similar bans that more than half the states had enacted.

Nevertheless, in 2003 Congress approved and President Bush signed a national law, the Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act. When he signed the ban, the President called partial-birth abortion "a terrible form of violence [that] has been directed against children who are inches from birth."

The federal law has faced legal challenges in three different federal circuits, and its enforcement has been blocked by court orders. Federal district courts in all three circuits ruled that the federal law violated the 2000 Supreme Court ruling. In all three cases the adverse judgments were affirmed by the appellate courts. 

The ACLJ has filed an amicus brief with the Supreme Court representing 78 members of Congress and more than 320,000 Americans asking the high court to uphold the constitutionality of the national ban on partial-birth abortion in a case out of Nebraska. 

In its brief filed in the Nebraska case, the ACLJ asserts:  “Partial birth procedures represent the beachhead of this assault on postnatal life, the bridge between abortion and infanticide.  Absent strong legal barriers and vigorous societal condemnation, partial birth procedures open the way to legal infanticide.”

Abortion Action: The Supremes and South Dakota By Tony Perkins

The U.S. Supreme Court has expanded its planned review of a challenge to the federal Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act, which was passed by Congress and signed by President Bush in 2003. The Court now says it will consider an appeal of a case that comes from the Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.

The Court will address the question whether the challenged law is "unconstitutionally vague" or if it imposes an "undue burden" on women. Meanwhile, South Dakota Secretary of State Chris Nelson has certified that opponents of the ban on almost all abortions recently passed by the state legislature and signed by Gov. Mike Rounds (R) will be placed on the November ballot.

Opponents submitted 38,000 petition signatures. State law requires only 16,728 valid signatures. A challenged law does not go into effect if opponents have qualified a ballot proposition. Instead, the law is suspended in its operation until voters have spoken.

Now South Dakota will have three vitally important measures to decide on Nov. 7th--abortion, marriage, and gambling. Abortion supporters, hoping to paralyze the growing culture of life, are marshalling their forces to focus on South Dakota

Back

Marriage Amendments Make Progress in the States

June 19 2005 Kylan Lamont, Concerned Women for America

While the Marriage Protection Amendment’s recent failure in the U.S. Senate seemed disappointing, tremendous things are happening for traditional values in the states.

 On June 6, Alabama became the 20th state to pass a state constitutional amendment defining marriage as only a union between one man and one woman. Alabamians voted 81 percent in favor of their state marriage amendment.  The vote, the highest approval rating of any marriage amendment thus far, was a huge victory for traditional values.
  On June 7, the Pennsylvania House of Representatives passed a constitutional amendment, 137 to 60, to ban homosexual marriage and civil unions.  If the amendment continues with its success, it will be on the November 2007 ballot.

Celebrating the success in Pennsylvania, Concerned Women for America (CWA) of Pennsylvania State Director Nancy Staible says, “We are thrilled with the outcome! We worked with a panel of legal experts for the past two and half years to make sure [the language] was as tight as it possibly could be.  Despite the fact that they tried to amend and change it …, it does not allow for civil unions and is straightforward on what marriage is.  We are delighted that the language was upheld.”

 The fight continues with liberal judges.  Just last month, a Georgia state judge struck down the constitutional amendment passed in 2004.  A lone judge reversed the decision of 76 percent of Georgia voters who approved of banning homosexual marriage and civil unions.  Georgia serves as a sound example of how activist judges have decided to take the power out of the hands of the people and legislate from the bench. Eight other states currently face lawsuits challenging defense of marriage laws and amendments.

 As for measures on the ballot, six states, Idaho, South Dakota, South Carolina, Tennessee, Virginia and Wisconsin, have the opportunity to pass marriage amendments this fall.

 November 2006 voter turnout is vital to the success of the amendments.  It is up to churches and pro-family supporters to announce to the country how we feel about the sanctity of marriage.

 CWA’s Virginia State Director Patricia Phillips is working hard get this message across.

 “We are building a grassroots network to campaign at county fairs, parades and community events where we can have a table, a wedding cake and distribute literature,” she says. “Today we asked volunteers to pass out information about the marriage amendment at the primary polling places in Virginia and we were pleased with the good reception from many voters.”

 Now, more than ever, America must fight to uphold the traditional values on which our country was founded.

Back

Fathers linked to “healthy families"

June 16 2006 the Patriot Post

Headlines such as the one above this essay should be relegated to the "Keen Sense of the Obvious" files. What cadre of nescient dolts does not already know that fathers are essential to healthy families, and who among us would waste good money on a study to affirm that which is so abundantly clear?

Alas, certain enlightened folks out there insist that holding the institution of fatherhood in high esteem is tantamount to misogyny. In fact, many liberals have, for the past four decades, insisted that mothers can do it all. One of the high priestesses of the so-called women's movement, Gloria Steinem, once declared, "A woman without a man is like a fish without a bicycle." And last fall, uber leftist Feminista Maureen Dowd published a book entitled, "Are Men Necessary?" which has become the manifesto of the man-hating movement.

Worse yet, academicians are spending large sums of your tax dollars to research this very question, despite the plethora of family research indicating that children raised in homes with their biological fathers have a much higher chance of succeeding in life. Unfortunately, some 25 million American children live absent or apart from their biological fathers. One in three children—and only one in five inner-city children—are in homes with their fathers.

Of course, many moms have no choice but to do it all. This is because many biological fathers have abdicated their responsibility for proper love, discipline, teaching, support, moral guidance and protection of their family. (Memo to divorced dads and assorted victims of feminist rage and unfair family courts: Please hold your mail—we know that women file almost 70 percent of divorces, most without any claim of abandonment infidelity or abuse.)

"The lack of effective, functioning fathers is the root cause of America's social, economic and spiritual crises." —Dr. Edwin Cole.

The disastrous social consequences of this abdication are clearly evident and well documented. Though many single moms do manage to bring up relatively well-adjusted kids with the help of extended families, churches and schools, the correlation between social deviancy and fatherless homes is irrefutably linked.

"The lack of effective, functioning fathers is the root cause of America's social, economic and spiritual crises," writes Dr. Edwin Cole.

To wit, the truth—and it is a hard truth for men who have abandoned their families, but a harder truth for their children: According to the CDC, DoJ, DHHS and the Bureau of the Census, the 30 percent of children who live apart from their fathers will account for 63 percent of teen suicides, 70 percent of juveniles in state-operated institutions, 71 percent of high-school dropouts, 75 percent of children in chemical-abuse centers, 80 percent of rapists, 85 percent of youths in prison, and 85 percent of children who exhibit behavioral disorders. In addition, 90 percent of homeless and runaway children are from fatherless homes. In fact, children born to unwed mothers are 10 times more likely to live in poverty as children with fathers in the home.

"[The causal link between fatherless children and crime] is so strong that controlling for family configuration erases the relationship between race and crime and between low income and crime," notes social researcher Barbara Dafoe Whitehead. David Blankenhorn, president of the Institute for American Values, adds, "[The absence of fathers] from family life is surely the most socially consequential family trend of our era."

So, fathers do matter—as if that were a recent revelation. In 295 BC, Mencius wrote, "The root of the kingdom is in the state. The root of the state is in the family. The root of the family is in the person of its head."

Of course, the traditional family model is clearly ordained by God as evidenced throughout the Old and New Testaments. In fact, every major religion in the world recognizes an identical family order.

Tragically, the pages of history—especially 20th-century history—are rife with the terrible misdeeds of those who were raised without fathers, or with abusive fathers: Adolf Hitler, Joseph Stalin, Mao Zedong, Saddam Hussein, Osama bin Laden and many others of lesser infamy.

Never let it be said, however, that the Left allows the facts to get in the way of its agenda. Indeed, a strong case can be made that liberal social policies are directly responsible for generations of fatherless children—particularly black children. And Democrats, as we have noted many times previously, have a vested interest in keeping blacks and other "victimized" constituencies dependent on the state.

This Sunday, many American families will observe Father's Day. Yet in addition to paying tribute to the irreplaceable institution of fatherhood, we hope that these families might also determine how their fathers might extend their roles in outreach to fatherless children: By mentoring through Boy Scouts, Girl Scouts, Big Brothers-Big Sisters, youth groups, Boys Clubs, and Girls Incorporated; or by coaching little-league sports, or teaching in Sunday school, or becoming a school tutor, or volunteering to work with high-risk kids through inner-city ministries, to name just a few.

THE FOUNDATION

"The foundation of national morality must be laid in private families... How is it possible that Children can have any just Sense of the sacred Obligations of Morality or Religion if, from their earliest Infancy, they learn that their Mothers live in habitual Infidelity to their fathers, and their fathers in as constant Infidelity to their Mothers?" —John Adams

Back

Government / Legislation

Public Expression Of Religion Bill Must Be Passed

June 22 2006 Traditional Values Coalition

Congress is expected to hold a hearing today on passage of H.R. 2679, the Public Expression of Religion Act of 2005. This bill will prohibit groups like the ACLU from collecting damages, attorney’s fees, and costs when they bring lawsuits claiming violations of the Establishment Clause to the Constitution. They can be entitled to an injunction but not fees.

The ACLU and other anti-Christian groups make millions a year in awards from these lawsuits. The threat of having to pay the ACLU for these lawsuits often causes local governments to cave to ACLU demands instead of litigating frivolous suits.

Mat Staver with the Liberty Counsel is testifying in support of H.R. 2679. His testimony is available on the LC web site: http://www.lc.org/attachments/congress_testimony_PERA.pdf

Staver says: “The Public Expression of Religion Act is long overdue. The threat of attorney’s fees and damages has been wielded like a bully club to beat local government officials into submission, even when the church-state claims are outrageous and frivolous.”

TVC urges its supporters to contact their legislators and urge them to vote YES on H.R. 2679. “This bill will deal a serious blow to the ACLU and its attacks on religious freedom by cutting off a huge source of money for them,” said TVC Chairman Rev. Louis P. Sheldon. “Frivolous lawsuits have been a cash cow for the ACLU in the past. Governments and churches will no longer have to fear being extorted by the ACLU once H.R. 2679 is passed!

The live webcast of the H.R. 2679 hearing is available here: Schedule. This will also be archived for later viewing.

TAKE ACTION: Read Mat Staver’s excellent legal analysis of the need for H.R. 2679 and write a letter to your U.S. Representative asking him or her to support passage of this legislation: CapWiz

Back

Flag-burning amendment heads to Senate floor

June 15 2006 Andy Sullivan, Reuters

A measure that would change the U.S. Constitution to let Congress ban burning the American flag was sent to the Senate floor on Thursday, setting up an election-year debate.

The amendment has already passed the U.S. House of Representatives by the needed two-thirds margin. The bill's sponsor, Utah Republican Sen. Orrin Hatch (news, bio, voting record), said he believes it will pass the Senate.

"I know we have more than 67 votes, if people are allowed to vote their conscience," Hatch said after the Judiciary Committee's 11-7 vote, which fell largely along party lines.

The flag debate comes shortly after the Senate defeated a constitutional amendment to prohibit same-sex marriages. Democrats say Republicans are scheduling votes on a string of similar issues to win support from conservatives who might otherwise not vote in the November congressional elections.

The Supreme Court ruled in 1989 that flag burning was protected under constitutional free-speech guarantees, invalidating laws in 48 states and outraging veterans' groups and others who say that an important national symbol should be protected from defacement.

"You can't shout 'fire' in a crowded theater. There are restrictions on everything," said Richard Pedro, an adjutant with the American Legion of New York who observed the committee debate.

Other veterans' groups say the amendment would erode the freedom of expression that they fought for, a point echoed by Sen. Patrick Leahy (news, bio, voting record), a Democrat from Vermont.

"In America you do not stamp out a bad idea by repressing it, you stamp out a bad idea with a better idea," he said.

Leahy said veterans' groups should focus on improving health care and other government services owed them.

According to a CNN poll released on Wednesday, 56 percent of American adults support the flag-burning amendment, while 40 percent oppose it.

The amendment, which must win approval from at least 38 states within seven years, would not prohibit flag desecration but give Congress the power to say how the flag can be protected and what penalties should apply.

The Senate is expected to take up the amendment before the July 4 recess.

Back

Holy Land Experience Wins Final Round of Property Tax Exemption Battle

June 16 2006 News Release Liberty Council

Orlando, FL - Governor Jeb Bush has now signed into law a bill that would grant theme parks that display, exhibit, illustrate and interpret biblical manuscripts an exemption from local property taxes. This is the second defeat for Orange County Property Appraiser Bill Donegan, who fought vigorously to tax the Holy Land Experience, a Christian ministry. Last year an Orange County Circuit Court ruled that under the then-existing law, The Holy Land Experience is exempt from property taxes. Orange County appealed the decision, but has now decided to dismiss its appeal. Liberty Counsel represents The Holy Land Experience.

The Holy Land Experience, located off I-4 in Orlando, is a living biblical museum that conveys its religious message through teaching, preaching, dramatic enactments, special music and performances, and multimedia presentations. The biblical museum contains a walk-through replica of the Holy Land, including a towering temple. The Scriptorium houses the largest private collection of ancient biblical manuscripts.

Orange County sought to tax the property, but in July of 2005 after four years of litigation, the Orange County Circuit Court issued an Order stating, "The property on which The Holy Land Experience sits is exempt from ad valorem taxation due to being used predominately for religious purposes and not for a profitmaking purpose." In November, Liberty Counsel filed a motion for contempt, requesting the Court to hold Mr. Donegan in contempt for refusing to abide by the Court's Order. Orange County appealed the Order and sought to impose almost one million dollars in back taxes. While the appeal was pending, the Florida legislature passed a bill that specifically exempts ministries like The Holy Land Experience. Following Governor Bush's signature this week, Orange County has now announced that it will withdraw its appeal and finally accept the judgment of the court and the new law.

Mathew D. Staver, Founder and Chairman of Liberty Counsel, commented on the case: "We are pleased that a five-year legal battle has now come to an end. Now The Holy Land Experience can focus on its Christian mission, rather than worrying about the next move of Orange County officials. The law, even before this new bill, clearly recognized The Holy Land Experience as tax exempt because it is a religious ministry. This battle had broad implications for religious ministries. Orange County sought to impose its own view of religious activities, and had it won, every religious ministry would be subject to the changing views of county officials searching for more tax revenue. The power to tax is the power to destroy, and had the Property Appraiser won this case, The Holy Land Experience would have been destroyed. We are happy to move forward."

Back

Treasury Nominee Hank Paulson Needs to Answer Some Questions

June 13 2006 Steven J. Milloy: article in Human Events

There are many unanswered questions that the Senate Finance Committee ought to pose to Treasury Secretary Nominee Henry Paulson during his confirmation hearing.

Key inquiries should involve an unusual land deal Paulson oversaw while simultaneously serving as chairman and CEO of Goldman Sachs and as vice chairman and, later, chairman of The Nature Conservancy (TNC), which is an environmental group that acquires private lands to place them permanently off-limits to commercial and residential uses.

Goldman's board of directors expressly denied at its 2006 annual shareholder meeting that TNC was involved in the investment bank's dealings pertaining to the 680,000 forested acres on the Chilean side of Tierra del Fuego. But tax records show Goldman paid TNC $144,000 to consult on the deal.

In January 2004, one month after Goldman’s public announcement that the land -- a $35-million asset rightly belonging to Goldman shareholders -- would be donated to establish a nature preserve, TNC elevated Paulson to the post of chairman. Additionally, Goldman announced in September 2004 that the Wildlife Conservation Society (WCS) had been selected as the recipient of the land gift. WCS's 2004 annual report lists Paulson's son, Merritt Paulson, under its "advisors and trustees." WCS also appears on TNC's website as an "organizational partner."

The Chilean land originally belonged to Washington State-based Trillium Corp., which acquired it in 1993. Trillium's original permits would have allowed for traditional harvesting of lumber. Instead, Trillium voluntarily undertook to design a "sustainable" forestry plan, regarded by conservation experts as innovative, highly pro-environment, and unprecedented in terms of scale and promise. Despite having clamored for sustainable development projects for decades, environmental groups mounted a nine-year-long opposition campaign, eventually forcing Trillium into financial difficulty that left the land vulnerable to takeover.

In January 2002, Goldman placed the winning bid on a portfolio of distressed debt that included a $30-million note of Trillium secured by the land. In November 2002, Goldman sued Trillium to collect on the defaulted note. One month later, Goldman took title to the land in settlement of the debt.

Bird-Watching

Although Goldman stated in a December 2003 media release that it "did not originally intend to acquire [the Chilean] land" and it had explored options for selling the notes or the land itself, a Dec. 26, 2005, article in Pensions and Investments paints a somewhat different picture. The article notes that Paulson and his wife were camping and bird-watching on the Chilean land during the Christmas holidays.

"The 680,000-acre reserve was donated for permanent preservation by Goldman Sachs to the Wildlife Conservation Society, which manages the preserve along with a Chilean advisory board,” reported Pensions and Investments. “The real triumph for Mr. Paulson is the big role Goldman Sachs played in this conservation saga. Mr. Paulson -- who is chairman of the board of governors of The Nature Conservancy and well connected in the global conservation community -- said he was aware that a private equity company had amassed a large parcel on Tierra del Fuego that included a rare hardwood forest slated for logging. Goldman Sachs' distressed debt team came to him in 2002 with a loan portfolio that just happened to contain a loan that was secured by 680,000 acres of this very forest. 'I kissed them on both cheeks!' he exclaimed. Goldman purchased the land in 2003 to donate it for conservation and preservation."

Citing concerns over the apparent use of shareholder assets for Paulson's personal benefit, a shareholder group that I co-manage asked Goldman's board in January 2006 to review the Chilean land deal concerning potential conflicts of interest. Goldman's board was unresponsive, so we pursued the matter at Goldman's annual shareholder meeting on March 31.

Except for its denial of TNC's involvement, Goldman continues to stonewall inquiries about the land deal, most recently in an exchange of letters in the Wall Street Journal, responding to an April 4 op-ed criticizing Paulson's actions.

The Senate now has the unique opportunity to explore this matter with all parties under oath. Questions to consider asking include:

1. Do the minutes of Goldman's board meetings support Goldman's contention that the financial and ethical aspects of the land deal, including Paulson’s potential conflict of interest, were fully disclosed to, and reviewed by, its board?

2. What light do other documents and records of Goldman Sachs, The Nature Conservancy and the Wildlife Conservation Society shed on acquisition and donation of the Chilean land?

3. How and when did Goldman, TNC and WCS first become involved in the pursuit of the Chilean land?

4. Why was the $35-million land gift funneled through a little-known Goldman charitable fund set up for the purpose of awarding small academic scholarships?

5. Why did Goldman value the land at $35 million (for tax donation purposes) when the Chilean government valued it at $100 million?

6. Did Goldman/Paulson make any false/misleading public statements about the land deal?

Back

Life issues / Behavior

Government Promotion of Homosexuality

June 20, 2006 Tony Perkins Family Research Council

Most Americans identify the month of June with graduations and weddings, but a number of federal agencies have given in to pressures from the homosexual lobby to proclaim and celebrate "gay pride" month. Among those bowing to the pressure of homosexuals; the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), the Bureau of the Census, the National Institutes of Health (NIH), and even the Departments of Agriculture, Justice, State, and Transportation. All of these agencies are in the executive branch and report to the President.

Closer to home, the National Education Association (NEA) is trying to advance the homosexual agenda in your child's classroom. The NEA, at it annual convention this week in Orlando, FL, is poised to approve resolutions that call for recognition and promotion of "civil unions and/or marriage" for all the diverse groups it generally panders to. This means more King and King books in second grade classrooms. Please contact your NEA state affiliate and register your opposition to sexual radicals taking over the nation's schools.

Back

National Education Association Set to Endorse Homosexual Marriage

June 19 2006 American Family Association

Teacher's union begins plans to promote homosexual marriage in public schools

The National Education Association is set to endorse homosexual marriage at their convention coming up in Orlando June 29 through July 6.

The new NEA proposal essentially says schools should support and actively promote homosexual marriage and other forms of marriage (two men and one woman, three women, two women and three men, etc.) in their local schools.

The new proposal, expected to pass overwhelmingly, is found under the B-8 Diversity paragraph:

The Association... believes in the importance of observances, programs and curricula that accurately portray and recognize the roles, contributions, cultures, and history of these diverse groups and individuals.

The Association believes that legal rights and responsibilities with regard to medical decisions, taxes, inheritance, adoption, legal immigration, domestic partnerships, and civil unions and/or marriage belong to all these diverse groups and individuals.

Translated, that means the NEA will promote homosexual marriage in every avenue they have available, including textbooks, to all children at all age levels and without the permission or knowledge of parents. Their plans will include every public school in America.

Take Action

First, please forward this to all parents with children in public schools. They need to be aware of the plans the NEA has to indoctrinate their children with their pro-homosexual, homosexual marriage agenda.

Click here to send your email to your NEA state affiliate.

Please forward this to public school teachers you know so they can be aware of the NEA's plans. In fact, their membership dues will be used to help implement the new NEA plan.

AFA encourages teachers who do not approve of their dues going to the NEA to find an alternative teacher's group to help them retain their benefits. Teachers might want to give the CEAI home page a look http://www.ceai.org/index.htm or find another alternative in their state.

 

 

Update: Teachers Union Removes Endorsement of Gay Marriage

June 21, 2006 Citizen Link – American Family Association

The National Education Association (NEA) has pulled a resolution in support of gay marriage after it was highlighted by a pro-family group.

The national teachers union posted the following on its Web site:

"The Association believes that legal rights and responsibilities with regard to medical decisions, taxes, inheritance, adoption, legal immigration, domestic partnerships and civil unions and/or marriage belong to all these diverse groups and individuals."

According to Don Wildmon, chairman of The American Family Association (AFA), once people were made aware of the statement and shared their displeasure with the union, the NEA removed it from the site — much to the chagrin of gay activists.

"Homosexual groups are angry at the NEA because of the action," Wildmon said. "The NEA was trying to sneak this resolution past teachers and administrators, as well as the general public. But they got caught."

Back

Good news in the fight against meth abuse, Meth lab seizures, workplace use decline

Jun 19 2006 Sam Hananel, Associated Press Writer

Good news in the fight against meth abuse came on two fronts Monday, with reports showing a major drop in methamphetamine lab seizures nationwide and a similar decline in the spread of the drug into the workplace.

Local law enforcement officials say there is still a strong appetite for the highly addictive drug and warned that meth makers in Mexico and other countries are moving to fill the supply void.

The number of meth lab busts plummeted more that 30 percent last year as most states put in place laws to restrict the sale of over-the-counter cold medicines used to make meth, according to the Drug Enforcement Administration's El Paso Intelligence Center.

Meanwhile, the nation's largest drug testing company said Monday that the number of job applicants and workers who tested positive for meth plunged 31 percent over the first five months of this year.

Those figures are based on the results of more than 7 million drug tests in 2005 and about 3 million tests from January to May 2006, conducted by New Jersey-based Quest Diagnostics Inc.

White House drug policy director John Walters called the data an encouraging sign of progress.

"The practices that have been taking place in our states are working, not only on small toxic labs but also what we're trying to do with demand," said Walters, head of the Office of National Drug Control Policy.

Meth lab seizures fell from 17,562 in 2004 to 12,185 last year, with western and central western states like Oklahoma, Montana and Washington seeing some of the sharpest declines. Missouri, which leads the nation in the number of lab seizures, saw a 22 percent decline.

In Oregon, where lab busts fell 60 percent, the biggest reason is a state law requiring cold medicines to be placed behind pharmacy counters, said Capt. Craig Durbin, former head of the Oregon State Police's drug enforcement section. The law has helped stop meth makers from buying large quantities of cold pills to extract pseudoephedrine, the ingredient used to cook meth with other household chemicals.

A tougher law taking effect later this year will require cold sufferers in Oregon to get a doctor's prescription for pseudoephedrine-containing drugs.

Durbin said the demand for meth still remains high and is increasingly fed by supplies from Mexico and Canada.

"When we talk to our task forces, they're still able to go out at a moment's notice and purchase meth," Durbin said. "Until we see start seeing that change, I don't think we can say we've got anything close to being under control."

Oregon is among at least 37 states with laws that restrict the sale of cold medications in an effort to starve meth manufacturers of their key ingredient. The federal Combat Meth Act, signed into law in March, will enforce similar restrictions across the country by Sept. 30.

A study last week by the Sentencing Project — a nonprofit group that supports alternatives to prison terms for convicted drug users — concluded that reports about meth use are exaggerated.

Citing figures that show less than 1 percent of the nation's population uses meth, the group said meth abuse remains a "highly localized" problem compared with abuse of other drugs like cocaine.

Still, 58 percent of the nation's counties say meth is their largest drug problem. Rural law enforcement officers are often overwhelmed by the cleanup of toxic chemicals used to make meth and welfare agencies must deal with the displaced children of meth-addicted parents.

While the drug czar praised the "robust response nationwide" for the good news, some federal lawmakers said much of the credit to state and local governments working without much national direction.

Rep. Mark Souder (news, bio, voting record), chairman of the House drug policy subcommittee, said the administration has refused to make the fight against meth abuse a priority. He also criticized a White House budget proposal to slash federal spending for state and local law enforcement to fight meth.

"Efforts to continue to downplay the threat, after working to cut funding for anti-meth efforts, are only making those who fight the meth epidemic daily more angry at this administration," said Souder, R-Ind.

Sen. Jim Talent (news, bio, voting record), R-Mo., agreed that the administration's budget requests this year were "fundamentally inadequate," but he said it is now "catching up in other respects and doing better."

In Jefferson County, Mo., a rural area on the fringes of suburban St. Louis, Sheriff Glenn Boyer said success in busting meth labs is directly related to federal grant money.

"We live and die by the grants, especially in the rural areas," Boyer said. "They don't have the resources that you would have in a major city where you have a huge tax base."

Earlier this month, the White House drug policy office set a goal to cut meth use by 15 percent by 2009 and increase seizures of meth labs by 25 percent. A priority is stemming the flow of meth from superlabs in Mexico, which supply about 80 percent of the drug to the United States.

Back

Homosexuality a Psychological Disorder: Pentagon Document

June 20 2006 John Jalsevac, LifeSiteNews.com

WASHINGTON, D.C., a pro-homosexual group known as Center for the Study of Sexual Minorities in the Military (CSSMM), a