Archive for May 26th, 2006

Re-Post: The ‘Da Vinci’ libel by Joseph Farah

Friday, May 26th, 2006

I don’t like writing about Hollywood, because, generally, it bores me to tears.

Sometimes I feel like I’ve said everything there is to say about the entertainment industry during a period 20-some years ago when I wrote about it full-time.

But then comes “The Da Vinci Code.”

Should I ignore it?

I had hoped I could get away with that approach. A national boycott of the film had been organized by several Christian groups. Maybe, I thought, Americans were too smart to fall for this insult to Jesus, His Apostles, His Word, His church and the Truth.

The first question some will ask me is: “Did you see the film?”

No, I wouldn’t torture myself so. Nor would I do anything that could potentially line the pockets of those involved with this lie from the pit of hell.

“But how do you know, Farah? If you don’t see the film, how can you criticize it?”

I know because it is a film based on a best-selling work of fiction – one that has been the subject of much scrutiny and discussion.

All you really need to know about Dan Brown’s fanciful novel and the movie upon which it is based is that the Bible is a great deception, rather than the inspired Word of God. There are some things we just didn’t know about the most well-chronicled life lived 2,000 years ago – like that he married Mary Magdalene and wanted to leave her in charge of the church rather than the Apostles he trained for more than three years before His crucifixion.

(If you want to know the specifics of the fraud of “The Da Vinci Code,” I would recommend a book, “Breaking the Da Vinci Code,” and a documentary of the same name.)

Unfortunately, after last weekend’s opening in theaters across the country and the resultant box-office success of the movie, it appears I cannot continue just to ignore it.

The film grossed $77 million its first weekend. While that’s no record, and may have even been disappointing to those who made it, it suggests there are plenty of lost Americans out there – lots and lots of people who are probably being led astray by this movie.

I remember back in the old days when Oliver Stone made “JFK,” a fictionalized movie about President John F. Kennedy’s assassination, that many saw it and believed they were watching history. I have no doubt many believe they are viewing truth when they watch “The Da Vinci Code.”

“But it’s just entertainment, Farah. Why are you getting so upset?”

I’m upset because so many Americans supported it. It reminds me of the Romans going to the Coliseum to watch Christians torn apart by wild animals. That’s what you are doing when you pay to buy the book or see the movie. You might as well be hammering nails into Jesus’ hands and feet all over again. That Americans would do this in such numbers in 2006 is disturbing.

This is, after all, the country birthed by freedom fighters declaring their independence from tyranny and marching into battle chanting “No king but Jesus!”

Years ago, when I was covering Hollywood, a movie called “The Last Temptation of Christ” was released. It, too, was based on a work of fiction. It, too, was blasphemous and offensive to all sincere followers of Jesus. But it died a quick death at the box office. There were mass marches in the street by Christians and Jews to protest its opening.

It suggests Christianity has lost ground in the battle for the hearts and minds of Americans in the last two decades. It suggests Christian clergy are not providing the salt and the light needed to keep this culture from rotting in darkness. It suggests biblical illiteracy is on the rise. It suggests moral relativism is the dogma of our day. It suggests our nation is in desperate need of a moral and spiritual revival if it is to avoid judgment.

Original Article.

Term-limits proposals for judges pondered

Friday, May 26th, 2006

We need to watch how this goes in Colorado. I have a feeling that as more people see and experience the current out of control judiciary, more states and even the federal government will consider this move.
I have always been for term limits. We do not need “professional politicians”. Think about it. Laws would have to simpler and more straight forward. We would have fewer laws. Is there really a downside to term limits?
I agree that getting this sort of thing passed by the very people who would be affected by it is a long shot, but maybe, just maybe…

A proposed judicial term-limits measure would throw state Chief Justice Mary Mullarkey and six appellate court judges off the bench, several lawyers said Wednesday.
Former state Senate President John Andrews, who is leading the effort to curtail the length of judicial terms, is pushing two measures.
The first, Initiative 75, was approved for the ballot by the state Supreme Court on Monday. The second, Initiative 90, is pending before the high court.
Andrews said the tendency of sitting judges to go beyond the limits of judicial authority cuts across party lines.
“When they put those black robes on, there is this disturbing tendency to overstep the constitutionality of the judicial branch,” he said.
“It’s simple logic that you don’t term-limit two branches of your government (the executive and the legislative) and give a de facto life tenure to the third,” he added.
Andrews said Initiative 90 is worded so that it is retroactive, meaning it would require any sitting Supreme Court justice or appellate court judge with more that 12 years of service to step down by the 2008 general election.
Thus Mullarkey, with 18 years of service, and Appellate Court Judges Jose D.L. Marquez, Janice Davidson, Sandra Rothenberg, Daniel Taubman, James Casebolt and Arthur Roy would be forced to step down.
Initiative 75, however, would not affect the existing terms of sitting judges, he said.
The same group is behind both initiatives, Andrews said. If the Supreme Court also clears Initiative 90 for the ballot, the group will decide which one to pursue by gathering signatures, according to Andrews.
“We’re still evaluating which one would accomplish the judicial reform goals and which would find the greatest favor among voters,” he said.
The Denver Bar Association opposes both measures. (of course they do. -ed)
And while the Supreme Court has ruled that Initiative 75 would be “prospective,” meaning it would not curtail the terms of sitting judges, bar association officials contend the language is unclear.

Original Link.

Immigration Bill Is Worse Than You Think

Friday, May 26th, 2006

This article is a must read.

I am going to take some time tonight to inform my colleagues about some of the problems with the legislation before us. It is worse than you think, colleagues.

The legislation has an incredible number of problems with it. Some, as I will point out tonight, can only be considered deliberate. Whereas on the one hand it has nice words with good sounding phrases in it to do good things, on the second hand it completely eviscerates that, oftentimes in a way that only the most careful reading by a good lawyer would discover. So I feel like I have to fulfill my duty. I was on the Judiciary Committee. We went into this. We tried to monitor it and study it and actually read this 614-page bill, and I have a responsibility and I am going to fulfill my responsibility.

I think the things I am saying tonight ought to disturb people. They ought to be unhappy about it. It ought to make them consider whether they want to vote for this piece of legislation that, in my opinion, should never, ever become law.

Read the rest here.

40,000 women ‘sex trafficked’ for World Cup

Friday, May 26th, 2006

I did not know this, but apparently prostitution is legal in Germany. Now not that long ago, Germany was getting on the U.S. about our morality. Our morality? Isn’t that calling the kettle black? Yup, sure is.
Also, the thought of thousands of drunken soccer fans in one place is just downright scary. There has yet to be a Word Cup competition that has not resulted in riots with many people being injured and killed.
Europe, why don’t y’all just stay home and watch it on TV?
But all kidding aside, these more than forty thousand women being imported as prostitutes are being exploited and this practice should be stopped immediately. These (and all women) deserve respect.

In response to reports that 40,000 young women will be brought to Germany from Central and Eastern Europe to “sexually service” men attending the World Cup soccer championship next month, a Catholic group warns that many are desperately poor and will be “sex trafficked” against their will.
The Catholic Family and Human Rights Institute, or C-FAM, has launched a “Stop World Cup Prostitution” campaign on its website.
An estimated 3 million soccer fans – mostly men – are expected to descend on 12 German cities for the quadrennial sports event June 9 to July 9. Prostitution is legal in Germany.
Most of the women are told “they are going to be models, waitresses or some other harmless occupation,” says C-FAM. “Many will be brutally assaulted by intoxicated fans.”
The group comments: “Whatever their circumstances, each and every one of these young women is someone’s daughter, a child of God and deserves our protection! They do not deserve to be exploited and sentenced to a life of misery to satisfy the sexual appetites of soccer fans.”
What “makes this crime particularly appalling,” adds C-FAM, “is the open support it is receiving from the German government. The same government that likes to lecture America on morality!”
The Catholic group is far from alone in its condemnation of the mass prostitution campaign. Before German Chancellor Angela Merkel’s visit to the White House earlier this Month, U.S. Rep. Chris Smith, R.-N.J., said: “It is an outrage that the German government is currently facilitating prostitution and we believe women who will be exploited will be treated as commodities.”
According to the Christian Science Monitor, Brunhilde Raiser, director of the National Council of German Womens’ Organizations, said: “Forced prostitution has yet to become a public issue of concern as a severe violation of human and women’s rights. Our goal is to bring it as far up the political agenda as possible.”
Even Sweden’s “equality ombudsman,” Claes Borgström, has reportedly called for a boycott of the World Cup by the Swedish team to highlight the problem.
Because the German red light districts are too small to accommodate the soccer fans, the country’s sex industry has built a massive prostitution complex, including a “mega-brothel” in Berlin, next to the main World Cup venue, that can accommodate 650 male clients.
Wooden “sex huts” or “performance boxes” have been built in fenced-in areas the size of a football field, with condoms, showers and parking and a special focus on protecting the customers’ anonymity.
Some sources estimate that as many as 30 percent of the soccer fans will visit prostitutes at least once.
The Catholic group is collecting names on a petition to be delivered to the German missions to the U.N. and European Parliament, German Embassy in the U.S., members of the German Parliament and the governing body of the World Cup.
In December, the U.S. Senate overwhelmingly passed a bill that strengthens the nation’s current human trafficking law and authorizes new funds for investigation and prosecution of domestic trafficking within the United States.
Each year, an estimated 600,000 to 800,000 people are trafficked across international borders, and millions more are trafficked internally. Worldwide, more than 3,000 traffickers were convicted last year.
A report issued in 2004 estimated 10,000 people in the United States are being forced to work against their will under threat of violence. Researchers found that almost half of forced laborers are in prostitution or the sex industry, close to a third are domestic workers, and one in 10 works in agriculture.

Original Article.

California Governor Says He’ll Veto ‘Gay History’ Bill

Friday, May 26th, 2006

A ray of hope for morals and traditional values in California? Keep praying that there is!!

(CNSNews.com) – Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger reportedly plans to veto a “gay history” bill if it reaches his desk.
A conservative advocacy group that led opposition to the bill called the report good news for parents:
The bill, SB 1437, would have required social studies textbooks used in California public schools to include “the role and contributions of…people who are lesbian, gay, bisexual, or transgender…with particular emphasis on portraying the role of these groups in contemporary society.”
The bill also would have barred textbooks and school-sponsored activities from “reflecting adversely” on transsexuality, bisexuality, or homosexuality.
Conservative critics said the bill would have forced schools to promote same-sex marriage and even sex-change procedures.
“The governor believes that school curriculum should include all important historical figures, regardless of orientation,” Schwarzenegger’s director of communications, Adam Mendelsohn, told Thursday’s Sacramento Bee. “However, he does not support the Legislature micromanaging curriculum.”
A conservative advocacy group that lobbied against SB 1437 said it is pleased that Gov. Schwarzenegger is listening to the concerns of parents.
But that’s not the end of the story, the Campaign for Children and Families said: “Now the governor needs to pledge to veto the two remaining sexual indoctrination bills, AB 606 and AB 1056. Parents and grandparents are demanding it.”
“This terrible trio of bills would promote cross-dressing and sex-change operations to children as young as kindergarten,” said CCF President Randy Thomasson. “Schools should be about academics, not about promoting alternative sexual lifestyles to impressionable schoolchildren.”
AB 606 would require school districts to establish and publicize an antidiscrimination and antiharassment policy that is based on specified characteristics, including “actual or perceived gender identify and sexual orientation.”
In other words, conservative critics say, the bill would withhold state funds from any school district that does not adequately promote transsexuality, bisexuality, or homosexuality in its school policies.
AB 1056 would spend taxpayer money on a “Tolerance Education Pilot Program,” providing one-time $25,000 grants to ten schools that would either purchase instructional materials or provide staff development — “to promote tolerance and intergroup relations.”

Original Article.

Newspaper Cartoons Lampooning Jesus Spark Outrage

Friday, May 26th, 2006

The offices of a student-run newspaper at the University of Oregon was burned to the ground and the staff severely beaten after rampaging Christians rioted over two cartoons published by the paper, one showing Jesus in sexual arousal and the other showing him kissing another man.
The protestors (a.k.a. rioters) burned cars, overturned dumpsters and smashed windows. An orangutan from the local zoo was also sought out and beaten when protestors became aware that he might have been, at one time, a proofreader and guest columnist for the paper. Also an Amazon parrot suffered tail feather damage as a result of the riots, but authorities have determined this was the result of random violence and had nothing to do his tenure as a former chief editor of the newspaper.
Oh wait…this never happened. I mean yeah, the paper did publish obscene cartoons of our Lord, Jesus Christ, but the rioting Christians…nope, never happened. Let’s read about what the response was from the Christians.

(CNSNews.com) – A pro-family organization is lashing out at a student-run newspaper at the University of Oregon for the publication of two cartoons, one showing Jesus in sexual arousal and the other showing him kissing another man.
It’s “one of the strongest attacks on Christianity” that the American Family Association (AFA) claims it has ever seen. It’s _one of the strongest attacks on Christianity_ that the American Family Association (AFA) claims it has ever seen. The AFA has launched a campaign to urge its members to speak out against the cartoons, which ran in The Student Insurgent newspaper.
Dan Goldman created the cover for the newspaper’s March edition. “I did the one of Jesus with a boner,” he said. Goldman told Cybercast News Service that Johnny Correa created the other “piece of art,” the one portraying Jesus kissing another man. The two cartoons were among 12 overall that were published in the newspaper.
Randy Sharp, director of special projects for the AFA, said the group’s members, especially those living in Oregon, are angry about the cartoons. “They want to do more than just send an email,” Sharp said. “They want phone numbers so that they can make sure their voice is heard. The taxpayers of Oregon don’t want their taxes being used this way.”
According to Sharp, $191 of the mandatory semester student fees at the University of Oregon are set aside to fund the Associated Students of the University of Oregon (ASUO), which is the student body government for the university. ASUO then decides how much money is allocated to various events and publications at the school.
Sharp said ASUO directed that $18,349 go the student newspaper this year. This is money given “to a paper at a school that is on government property and is under the control of the state government,” Sharp said.
An official grievance over the cartoons was filed by Students of Faith on April 21. But the University of Oregon ruled that, _The Student Insurgent did not practice discrimination._ The university also declared that the newspaper, _through its publication, continues to add to the cultural and physical development of The University Community._
“There are no grounds for demanding an apology from The Student Insurgent,” the university concluded.
The grievance quotes Insurgent editor Jessica Brown as allegedly saying that “it is really fun to offend people.”
“It is fun to break the rules. If it pisses people off,” Brown allegedly said, “good. That’s the point!!!”
University President Dave Frohnmayer released a statement, indicating to Students of Faith that he shared their concern “about the offensive nature of the content contained within the publication.”
“I understand why it may seem as if the University should have prevented publication or should take some action against those responsible for the publication. The Student Insurgent is not owned controlled or published by the University of Oregon and is funded with student fees. Therefore, the University cannot exercise editorial control over its content,” Frohnmayer stated.
He also explained that the university, based on Supreme Court rulings, cannot “exercise control over content by using a threat of removal of fee support.”
“Simply put, neither content nor viewpoint is a lawful basis for denying an allocation of incidental fees to a student group,” Frohnmayer wrote.
Sharp agreed that Frohnmayer is unable to control the content of The Student Insurgent, but said the university president does have the authority “to make sure incidental fees are not used to spread hate-filled messages on his campus.” If the Insurgent had run cartoons with messages disparaging other religions or homosexuals, Frohnmayer could have and would have done something in response, according to Sharp.
In an April 27 statement, Goldman and the other employees of the Insurgent claimed that the cartoons were a form of satire.
“Our March issue, 17.4, satirizes and critiques Christianity, which has proved to be controversial,” Goldman stated. “You may be aware that a Danish newspaper published 12 cartoons last fall depicting Islam in a way intended to be humorous. Muslims around the world found the cartoons offensive and blasphemous, provoking angry protest in many countries. Western media picked up this story. The Insurgent decided to present its own perspective.”
The statement added that Christianity needs to be “lampooned.”
“People have asked why we chose to target Christians. As the dominant religion in the US, Chrisitianity (sic) forces its morals on us all. Christian ideas pervade every aspect of our lives and government. We decided such a force needed to be lampooned, so we published 12 satirical cartoons, an art piece centerfold and some opinion pieces,” Goldman explained.
“This has created a gathering storm of outrage from Christian groups who are claiming to be victimized.” However, Goldman wrote, “Christianity in this country is NOT marginalized in any way and using their power to claim victim status is ridiculous.
“Fortunately we have the right to speak against this. We are attacking ideas, not people, and in no way did we promote violence or hatred, yet we are accused of hate speech. We anticipated these criticisms and dealt with them in our March issue and the cartoons are clearly intended as humor,” he stated.
The full March edition of the Insurgent, with all 12 cartoons, can be viewed here.

So unlike the response from the world muslim community, the Christians protested the cartoons legally and through appropriate channels. There were no riots, no car burnings, no deaths and no violence.
One strange thing is that the muslims are silent about this too. Isn’t Jesus an important person to them too? (answer: yes)
Gotta love that duplicity.

Original Article.

Senate Passes Immigration Bill in ‘Do Something’ Spirit

Friday, May 26th, 2006

If the government lives up to my expectations, when this becomes law, it will just be another piece of worthless words on paper legislation. You can see that I don’t have very high hopes in our government to do the right thing and secure our borders.

(CNSNews.com) – The Senate voted 62-36 to pass an immigration reform bill on Thursday, with 23 Republicans voting for it, four Democrats voting against it, and just about everyone saying it’s unclear what the final bill will look like, once the Senate and the House try to hammer out a compromise on their very different bills.
The Senate bill establishes a path to citizenship (amnesty, critics insist) for millions of people who came to this country illegally, and that provision is anathema to some conservatives.
Nevertheless, Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist (R-Tenn.), who voted for the bill, said he’s “proud” that the Senate has acted.
“We’ve taken a bill, and we’ve made it better [through amendments],” Majority Leader Frist said in a statement. “We’ve taken a bill that the American people would have concluded was amnesty — and by my lights, we took the amnesty out while we put the security in.”
Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-Ala.), a leading opponent of the Senate immigration bill, said it certainly does include amnesty.
“Unfortunately, the United States Senate today let the American people down by passing a deeply flawed bill that gives the illegal alien population every benefit our nation can bestow on its citizens, including participation in the Social Security System based on their illegal work histories.”
According to Sessions, the bill has numerous fatal flaws aside from amnesty, including flawed border security and ineffective workplace enforcement.
Furthermore, Sessions said, the bill increases future immigration levels to at least three times the current level; it does nothing to ensure that the nation’s future immigration policy reflects U.S. needs; and then there’s the price tag.
According to Sessions, various analyses indicate the bill “might have costs as great as half a trillion dollars in any future 10-year period.” Sen. Sessions called the bill “a huge, monumental budget buster.”
Mexican President Vincente Fox, called the bill “a moment that millions of families have been hoping for.”
The Democratic National Committee hailed the bill’s passage, congratulating Senate Democrats for their “continued leadership” on immigration reform.
“Democrats have consistently fought for immigration reform that strengthens our borders, protects U.S. workers and their wages, reunites families and allows hard-working immigrants who pay taxes and obey the law the opportunity to earn the right to apply for the responsibilities of citizenship,” DNC Chairman Howard Dean said in a statement.
“While the Senate bill is better than the Republican bill passed by the House with the President’s backing, the next important step of reconciling these measures could erase any progress already made,” Dean warned.
He urged President Bush and Senate Republican Leader Bill Frist to reject the “anti-immigrant and un-American elements of the House bill.”
The U.S. Chamber of Commerce also endorsed the bill, saying it addresses both the security and economic needs of the country.
However, the Chamber — while hailing the bill as a “major step” toward fixing the nation’s immigration system — said there are some significant issues that need to be resolved, including the new employment verification system and the prevailing wage requirements.

Original Article.

Supremes Hearing from Pro-Lifers as Court Considers Partial-Birth Abortion Case

Friday, May 26th, 2006

For those of you who don’t know what partial birth abortion is, let me fill you in.
Partial birth abortion is the practice of partially delivering a late term baby, feet first, leaving only the head in the mother’s birth canal. The abortionist then stabs a hole in the back of the baby’s head and sucks the brain out of the skull. Without the brain, the baby’s head collapses and the corpse is then pulled the rest of the way out of the birth canal.
It sounds like a grade ‘B” horror film, but regrettably, this horror is not only true, but also occurring with great regularity in our country right now.
People, we need to pray about this so much. Please pray that the Supreme Court will put an end to this barbaric practice.

(AgapePress) – The U.S. Supreme Court is hearing from those who survived abortions as it decides whether to uphold a ban on partial-birth abortions.
Texas-based Liberty Legal Institute has filed a brief on behalf of two victims who survived late-term abortions and who now speak out on the partial-birth abortion case. The case, Gonzales v. Carhart, was picked up by the high court when the Eighth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals struck down the federal abortion ban, also known as the Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act of 2003.
Hiram Sasser, director of litigation at Liberty Legal, says his firm’s brief is unique. “This is the first time in this partial-birth abortion arena that the U.S. Supreme Court’s going to hear from survivors of late-term abortions,” he explains.
“One of our clients was a victim of saline abortion,” Sasser continues. “Her mother thought that she was dead, and the doctor thought she was dead. [But] when she came out she was alive and, miraculously, was able to be saved and go into a nice family home.” The abortion survivor is now 30 years old.
According to the Liberty Legal attorney, members of the Supreme Court — for the first time — are going to be see the faces of children who are affected by late-term abortions.
“[The justices are] going to see that [these individuals’] lives are worthy of a chance to live and that they have a story to tell,” he says. And that story, says Sasser, is a story of survival — “that they are alive and [that] they, through their lives, represent those many children who are lost through these late-term and partial-birth abortions.”
Sasser says there is no difference between killing a baby that is partially delivered, as in the gruesome partial-birth procedure, and one that is completely delivered.
Another pro-family legal group, Liberty Counsel, also filed a brief with the Supreme Court earlier this week, arguing that Congress was correct when it passed the PABA legislation in 2003 — that is, babies who are only inches away from birth must be granted the same inalienable right to life that is granted to children who complete the birth process. The brief also contends that right should be interfered with by a claim that the “health” of the mother somehow justifies killing the child.
Erik Stanley with Liberty Counsel says the procedure is never necessary to protect the health of the mother. “Abortion doctors use the health exception, which contains no standards, to justify the procedure,” he states. “This is a classic case of the fox guarding the henhouse.” In addition, he says, if the same procedure were performed on a convicted criminal, it would constitute cruel and unusual punishment. “The partial-birth abortion procedure is gruesome and barbaric,” Stanley notes.
Liberty Counsel filed its brief on behalf of Jill Stanek, an Illinois nurse who witnessed first-hand — and subsequently testified before Congress about — babies who were born alive and then set aside to die. Stanek’s strong pro-life stand and personal accounts played a prominent role in bringing the disturbing practice to public attention.
The U.S. Supreme Court agreed in late February to hear Gonzales v. Carhart. It represents the first opportunity for the John Roberts-led court to consider the issue of abortion — and the first chance for Associate Justice Samuel Alito to vote on such a case. The justices could issue their ruling next year.

Original Article.

Online Smut Peddlers Using Dirty Tricks to Lure Kids, Pastor Warns

Friday, May 26th, 2006

It’s amazing how easy it is to get mistakenly directed to porn on the Internet. It’s also amazing what they are allowed to show without any age verification. Parents, we really have to be active in our children’s lives (no matter how much they don’t want us to be and how much they fuss at us for being “too” involved). We must protect our children from what I consider to be as big of a problem, if not worse, than drugs.

(AgapePress) – A black pastor affiliated with a ministry that trains churches and low-income or underprivileged citizens in computer literacy is sounding the alarm about how Internet pornography websites often use deceptive tactics to target certain demographic groups.
Pastor Bill Mooney-McCoy is director of TechMission’s Safe Families program, which provides filtering software and educational materials at its website — resources designed to help children and families stay safe online. He is also a member of the Black Ministerial Alliance of Greater Boston, a group that recently sponsored an online safety workshop.
During this information session, Mooney-McCoy took the opportunity to warn listeners about some of the sneakier practices of porn peddlers, including using disingenuous web addresses or false website descriptions in efforts to target particular ethnic communities or age groups.
“Basically, pornographers don’t care how you get there,” the pastor points out. “They just care that you get there, and so they will use many, many deceptive tactics. One of them is the actual use of misleading URLs or misleading descriptions.”
For instance, Mooney-McCoy points out, some Internet pornography sites lure web surfers with universal resource locators (URLs) named after well-known black leaders or historical figures. “MartinLutherKing.com and JesseJackson.com are classic examples of that,” he says. Unsuspecting web surfers, possibly even students looking for material for a school report, may go to these sites expecting to find information about the individuals named but instead find themselves linking to obscene material.
And sometimes, the minister adds, Internet pornographers are even bolder in their efforts to entice and entrap kids. “There was another case of, I think, almost thousands of names of children’s cartoons that were used for the same kind of thing,” he notes.
These practices, as well as spamming and many other unethical tricks, are designed and used by Internet porn profiteers specifically to pursue the youth market, Mooney-McCoy warns. Online purveyors of filth have all kinds of “dirty tricks,” the pastor notes, and he urges parents to utilize all the Safe Families tools to educate and protect their families.

Original Article.

Schools Blasted for Holding Separate Graduations for Homosexual Students

Friday, May 26th, 2006

Just another example of the how the activist homosexuals are cramming their lifestyle choice down our throats and how the liberal “anything goes” schools are helping them.

(AgapePress) – USA Today reports that a growing number of colleges and universities are holding so-called “lavender graduations” to honor their “gay,” lesbian, and transgendered graduates; but one campus watchdog group spokesman says schools should not be making ideological statements by sponsoring these separate ceremonies.
At the lavender graduations, students are often given awards and typically receive rainbow-colored tassels to put on their mortarboards during their commencement activities. But while these ceremonies are often touted as celebrations of cultural diversity and equality, Jason Mattera with the Virginia-based Young America’s Foundation (YAF) feels these exercises actually turn true equality on its head.
“I thought the homosexual agenda was just ‘Leave us alone,’ right?,” Mattera observes. “That’s what they’re saying: ‘Oh, we don’t want the government involved in our lives. We just want to be treated normally.’ Well, here is an obvious example where they’re looking for special treatment.”
But rarely, the YAF spokesman points out, does any group of students get its own graduation ceremonies as a separate class. “Imagine,” he says, “if the Christian club at any of the schools mentioned — let’s take the University of North Carolina — if the Christian club gathered together and said, ‘We want a separate ceremony in which we were going to read passages from Leviticus and passages from Rick Santorum’s It Takes a Family.’
“Not only would they have been probably flogged by the diversity deans and multicultural deans on the college campus,” Mattera asserts, “but they would be [charged with] hate speech incidents. They would be reported to the human resource department.”
In any case, the conservative campus watchdog adds, the idea of lavender graduations is not a very inclusive one, since the schools that hold these separate ceremonies are in effect promoting segregation. Nor, he asserts, do such ceremonies truly respect homosexual students by honoring their achievements.
“I would even think the homosexual students on these campuses should be offended,” Mattera says. Homosexual students should consider these separate ceremonies to be a slap in the face, he contends, because the “honorees” are not being rewarded for their academic merits but for their sexual behavior.
Ultimately, the YAF spokesman believes the lavender graduations that are being held by schools like Duke University, UCLA, the University of Georgia, and the University of Washington are rooted in anti-Christian hostility. But even if they are, as some homosexuals claim, simply celebrations of equality, he feels these ceremonies fail on that level as well.
If these and other colleges and universities are truly interested in equality, Mattera suggests, they could show it by doing away with race-based preferences and special rights for certain classes of students. And instead of trying to ring in a new, so-called “civil rights era” for homosexuals, he says, schools need to stop segregating people on the basis of sexual behavior.

Original Article.

Diverse Faith Groups Unite to Push for Federal Marriage Amendment

Friday, May 26th, 2006

This truly is a charged issue when so many religious groups, of very diverse beliefs, can come together this way. I believe that people are tired of having homosexuality crammed down our throats.

(AgapePress) – Several major religious denominations have come together to urge the U.S. Senate to approve a marriage amendment to the Constitution of the United States. The Religious Coalition for Marriage has released a statement signed by 50 leaders and expressing support for the proposed federal marriage protection amendment.
The Coalition is comprised of all eight U.S. Catholic cardinals, as well as officials of the Southern Baptist Convention, the Church of God in Christ, the Greek Orthodox Church, the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints, the Union of Orthodox Jewish Congregations, and the National Association of Evangelicals. While diverse in many ways, the groups represented share a singleness of purpose — the protection of traditional marriage.
As Dr. Richard Land of the Ethics & Religious Liberty Commission of the Southern Baptist Convention notes, this alliance of faith groups is “truly an historic coalition.” He notes that this is the first time these churches, religious leaders, and institutions have coordinated their efforts on this scale.
Land says this has happened because a constitutional amendment is needed to preserve marriage from “radical activists acting through activist courts.” These activists who are pushing to legalize marriage between homosexuals are, he asserts, “determined to reinterpret this fundamental institution in novel ways and against the will of the American people.”
American Family Association founder and chairman Don Wildmon believes the united effort of these groups is a testament to the importance of one-man, one-woman marriage to all of society. He says the groups involved are representing countless other pro-family Americans who want traditional marriage protected from those seeking to redefine it.
“People are getting fed up with having homosexual marriage crammed down their throats by activist judges across the country,” Wildmon says, “and we are absolutely thrilled that all of these groups have come together.” While many of the coalition’s members “have very divergent and different theological perspectives,” he notes, “they do agree that marriage should be only between one man and one woman.”
Also, the AFA spokesman contends, the coalition members realize that pastors and other faith community leaders cannot remain silent on this crucial issue any longer. He warns those who choose to stay quietly on the sidelines while biblical marriage is under attack that “the day will come” when they may wish they had spoken out.
“Because of your silence,” Wildmon says, “if this thing passes — if homosexual marriage becomes legal — the day will come when you will be silenced, and it will be too late to do anything about it at that point in time. That’s just the bottom line.”
The Federal Marriage Amendment was voted out of the Senate Judiciary Committee last week. Next, Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist will bring the marriage protection measure, known as Senate Joint Resolution 1, to the floor for a vote on June 6.
The Religious Coalition for Marriage is mounting a major grassroots campaign of support in advance of the vote. A letter has gone out to all Catholic bishops from the U.S. Conference and the Knights of Columbus have alerted their members nationwide as well.
Meanwhile, the highest authority in the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints, the Quorum of Twelve, has endorsed the marriage amendment. And at the same time, all 43,000 Southern Baptist churches are being asked to take part in the campaign to advance the marriage protection measure and see it approved.
The Coalition has also launched a website (ReligiousCoalitionforMarriage.org) that enables church members to send messages urging their senators to approve the Federal Marriage Amendment, and a major grassroots postcard writing campaign is under way as well. Campaign organizers are predicting the Senate will receive millions of postcards and messages expressing support for the amendment.

Original Article