Archive for September 5th, 2006

Marriage-protection plan OK’d by Arizona court

Tuesday, September 5th, 2006

I predict this will have no problem passing in November.

A court ruling in Arizona has given the green light to plans for voters there to join voters in at least six other states this fall in deciding whether to protect traditional marriage or allow for new definitions of the age-old institution.
“The Arizona Supreme Court rightly understood that this amendment is a clear, straightforward proposition with one purpose, protecting marriage,” said Glen Lavy, the senior counsel for the Alliance Defense Fund and a key contributor to the arguments over the issue.
“Those seeking to redefine marriage unsuccessfully tried to evade the democratic process by misusing a technical provision of the state constitution,” he said. “Arizona voters deserve to have a say in the matter of marriage and will have the opportunity to do so.”
The recent decision makes Arizona the seventh state with a constitutional amendment to protect marriage planned for this fall’s ballot. Other states include Idaho, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Virginia and Wisconsin, and Colorado has a plan pending but it still needs final approval.
Officials note that of the 20 times voters have been given the opportunity to amend state constitutions to protect traditional marriage – that including one man and one woman only – they have done so. And they’ve done so by average margins of 70-30, officials said.
Besides the 20 states with constitutional amendments protecting the Biblical definition of marriage, another 28 states have such protections in their statutes, too, officials said.
“There is no reason to believe that Arizona voters will break the string of victories for traditional marriage,” Jerry Falwell wrote in his “Weekly Confidential” newsletter to The Moral Majority Coalition.

-snip-

“I continue to believe we need a federal Marriage Protection Amendment,” Falwell wrote. “Such an amendment has twice fallen short of the required two-thirds majorities in both houses of Congress.”
But he noted that Rep. Louie Gohmert, R-Texas, has introduced another proposal, this one involving only one sentence: “Marriage in the United States shall consist only of the legal union of one man and one woman.”

-snip-

Mona Passignano, the state issues analyst of the Colorado Springs-based Focus on the Family Action earlier told WorldNetDaily that the “gay” marriage proponents consistently run up against a major hurdle: most people actually want to protect marriage.
She said their campaign this year will be to confuse voters. In Colorado, for example, there are expected to be as many as four ballot initiatives addressing marriage or civil unions.
“The campaign in Colorado already is to confuse the voters. The more confusion, the better the chance (for same-sex marriage being endorsed),” she said. “It’s not exactly a new campaign, it’s exactly the strategy that unfolded in Texas last year.”
During that battle, same-sex marriage supporters actually “tried to get people to vote against the marriage amendment by pretending they were from the attorney general’s office and telling people they were going to nullify actual marriages with their vote,” Passignano said. Senior citizens, especially, were targeted. (emphasis mine. -ed.)
The salvation of the Texas amendment came from Christian pastors, she said.
“What’s going to be the key is church participation,” she said. “The IRS has said pastors have the right to talk about that, despite what we commonly hear, because it is a nonpartisan ballot issue. Pastors can talk about it all they want.”

Original Link.

Gov. Arnold urged to cancel sexual indoctrination

Tuesday, September 5th, 2006

With the “hearts and minds” of 6.5 million schoolchildren on the line, a pro-family group has called a news conference today to protest a series of bills approved by the Legislature that would turn the California public school system into “sexual indoctrination centers.”
The event is being held by the Campaign for Children and Families, which has been active in lobbying against the changes in state law, at the state Capitol in Sacramento.
“The simple message for (Gov. Arnold) Schwarzenegger will be: Veto these bad bills or turn off family-values voters,” the group said in its announcement Monday.
“(The bills) will turn California schools into sexual indoctrination centers that mess with children’s minds behind their parent’s backs,” said CCRF President Randy Thomasson.
“Governor, unless you veto these bad bills, the people will veto you,” he said.
Among the speakers will be Thomasson, Robla school board President Craig DeLuz, Pastor Phillip Goudeaux of Calvary Christian Center, Pastor Adam Bondaruk of Bethany Slavic Missionary Church, Pastor Peter Park of Living Stone Community Church, and CCF Latino spokesman Luis Galdamez.
The bills would force California public schools to change curricula (SB1437) and policies (AB606) to promote transsexuality, bisexuality and homosexuality to children as young as kindergarten without their parents’ permission.
AB1056 also would spend $250,000 to turn 10 schools into “sexual indoctrination centers,” officials said.
The governor already has signed one bill that will require private schools including Christian colleges and others to promote homosexuality if any of their students receive state grants.
Full information on the bills is at SaveCalifornia.com.
Charles B. Lowers, of Considering Homeschool earlier told WorldNetDaily in an interview that what should happen is that Christian parents would just start homeschooling.
There would be “panic in the streets,” he said.
“Instead of the traditional three R’s in California’s public schools, children are learning Rebelliousness, Relativism, and an R-rated lifestyle,” he said.

Original Link.

IDF Officers May Face War Crime Charges in Europe

Tuesday, September 5th, 2006

Don’t expect any terrorist to be brought before this court. They are free to rain rockets down on civilians, blow them up in cafes and malls, and behead them with impunity.

Israel has learned that certain European and international organizations have already begun working towards compiling cases against IDF officers and government officials, planning to file war crimes charges against them for Israel’s actions in Lebanon. Officers are being warned against visiting Europe as a result.
Foreign Ministry legal advisor Ehud Keinan, who distributed the memorandum, warns soldiers of the impending legal threat, one that may result in criminal charges against both senior and junior military officers alike.

Original Link.

Palestinians train to kidnap more Israelis

Tuesday, September 5th, 2006

Look at what the world’s actions towards terrorism has taught slimy pali terrorist.

TEL AVIV – Palestinian terror organizations are currently training in the West Bank and Gaza Strip to carry out operations aimed at kidnapping Israeli soldiers, said a terror leader whose group in June abducted Israeli Defense Forces soldier Gilad Shalit.
The leader thanked the international community for what he said was its recognition that kidnappings of Israeli soldiers are not considered terrorism but “military operations that bring very big results.”
He told WorldNetDaily the “best way” to gain the freedom of thousands of Palestinians being held in Israeli jails, including convicted terrorists, is by more kidnappings of Israeli soldiers.
“We are now planning and training for the next kidnappings. Even if [Israel] releases hundreds of prisoners in exchange for Shalit, we still have thousands more to liberate. More Israeli soldiers must be abducted,” said the terror leader, who spoke on condition of anonymity amid reports Israel is considering releasing hundreds of Palestinian prisoners in exchange for Shalit.

Original Link.

Latinos lead rally opposing ordinance

Tuesday, September 5th, 2006

OK, let’s understand the Hazleton, PA ordinance first. It makes English the official language and imposes heavy fines on the landlords and employers of illegal immigrants. It does not arrest or detain illegal immigrants. It only punishes those who may rent to them or hire them.
I’m really confused why people want to support illegal immigration. What part of illegal don’t they understand? The way the city of Hazleton is addressing the problem seems fairer to me then any other form of enforcement. Again, going against the people who hire and house illegal immigrants is better then rounding up illegal immigrants at random, isn’t it?
Listen, I support anyone who wants to come to this country (except criminals or terrorist) legally. But come here legally. It’s better for everyone in the long run.
I also find it somewhat amusing that a Rabbi would quote Leviticus (the book of laws, laid down by God to the Israelites), encouraging people to break the law. When Leviticus was written, there were no laws against foreigners entering the Israelite community. Foreigners could come into the community and live freely, as long as they followed the laws that God gave to the Israelites. God addressed, very clearly, what foreigners were allowed to do or not do while they lived with the Israelites. I think my Jewish friends might have problems with what this Rabbi is encouraging, but I’ll let them comment for themselves.
Jesus said “Give to Caesar what is Caesar’s, and to God what is God’s” (Matthew 22:15-22 – New International Version). In this, Jesus is telling us to obey the laws of the country we live in. To say that it is OK to break the laws, in this case, is putting words in God’s mouth. Words that I don’t believe God ever said. If anyone can find something in the Bible to the contrary, please let me know and we’ll discuss it.

HAZLETON, Pa. – Two days after the Poconos community of Hazleton agreed to delay its crackdown on illegal immigrants, about 400 members of a statewide Latino coalition yesterday rallied there to voice their continued opposition to the city’s efforts.
Hazleton drew national attention – and a federal lawsuit – this summer by passing an ordinance that makes English its official language and imposes heavy fines on the landlords and employers of illegal immigrants.
Municipalities across the country, including Riverside, N.J., copied the ordinance, saying they were so fed up with the federal government’s failure to tackle illegal immigration that they would act locally.
The constitutionality of the ordinances has been challenged in federal court, but the demonstrators in Hazelton yesterday, including an interfaith group of clergy, focused on what they said was the immorality of the ordinances.
“Any law that opposes the law of God is not a law that should be obeyed, even though it may lead to incarceration,” said Agapito Lopez, a Hazleton ophthalmologist and an outspoken opponent of the ordinance.
A prayer vigil emphasizing the Bible’s call to “welcome the stranger” followed, with readings and speeches by a local pastor, rabbi and priest and the Rev. Miguel Rivera, leader of the National Coalition of Latino Clergy and Christian Leaders.
“It’s an honor and blessing to work with all the Latinos in Hazleton,” said the Rev. John Ruth, a priest who ministers to Spanish speakers at St. Gabriel’s Church. “We are all sons and daughters of God.”
“When a stranger resides with you in your land, you should not oppress the stranger,” said Rabbi Michael Michlin, quoting a passage from Leviticus. “You should love the stranger as yourself.”
Demonstrators, at least half of whom came from Philadelphia and Allentown, carried signs that read, “Love thy Neighbor” and “We are Called to Welcome the Stranger.”
A similar rally two weeks ago in Riverside grew ugly with the arrival of counterdemonstrators, some bearing Confederate flags, and some spitting and hurling slurs.
That raised the specter of trouble in Hazleton, with rumors that skinhead groups and the Ku Klux Klan might come to town.
Police blocked off roads and encircled the block-long park downtown. The Hazleton Crime Watch formed its own protective ring around the prayer vigil. The Pennsylvania Statewide Latino Coalition provided lookouts in red T-shirts bearing the word Security.
But no problems materialized.
A few protesters waved flags and held up home-made signs reading “Illegal is Illegal.”
“I don’t have any problem with the Latino population,” said Tom Lombardo, 18, of Hazleton. “If you’re illegal, I don’t care if you’re Polish, Italian or Latino. You shouldn’t be coming in here messing with our order of things.”
Dominican immigrant Alexandra Martinez, 23, said she hoped the rally would show her fellow Hazleton residents that “we are not here to do anything wrong.
We are here to work to have a better life for ourselves and our children.”
On Friday, the city agreed to postpone implementing its Illegal Immigration Relief Act, which was supposed to take effect on Sept. 11.
Instead, the city will change the language in the ordinance to help it weather legal challenges from the Puerto Rican Legal Defense and Education Fund and the American Civil Liberties Union of Pennsylvania.
It will not change the substance of the law, which calls for $1,000 fines and five-year suspensions of business permits and licenses as penalties against those who rent to or hire illegal immigrants.

Original Link.

Outrage as Australian Leaders Tell Muslims to Fit In

Tuesday, September 5th, 2006

(CNSNews.com) – Australian Muslim representatives are voicing outrage at comments by the country’s two top politicians, who urged immigrants from Islamic societies to fit in, learn English, treat women with respect, and shun extremism.

Well sure, why on earth would an immigrant want to do any of those things? English is only the national language of Australia. Why on earth would they want to respect women? They wouldn’t be able to beat their wives if they did that. Why would they want to shun extremism? They wouldn’t be able to bully people into Islam, by threatening to hurt or kill them.

An Islamic leader warned that the remarks could antagonize Muslims and lead to a repeat of incidents such as the rioting in a Sydney beachside suburb last December, when groups of youngsters — described as having a Middle Eastern background — fought with whites.

Yup, ya got to love the so-called “religion of peace” and the way they ALWAYS drop threats of violence when things don’t go their way. As a matter of fact, it doesn’t actually take an act of anyone actually doing anything to them for them to become violent.

Prime Minister John Howard late last week said migrants should integrate into the way of life in their new country but that a minority of Muslims was opposed to accepting Australia’s values.
“Fully integrating means accepting Australian values — it means learning as rapidly as you can the English language if you don’t already speak it,” he said in a radio interview.
“People who come from societies where women are treated in an inferior fashion have got to learn very quickly that that is not the case in Australia.”
Howard’s remarks drew a swift and critical response from Muslim leaders.
Ameer Ali, chairman of an advisory group set up by the government to combat extremism in the 300,000-strong Muslim community, told a radio station the remarks could stoke violence.
“We have already witnessed one incident in Sydney recently in Cronulla,” he said in reference to last December’s riots. “I don’t want these scenes to be repeated because when you antagonize the younger generation … they are bound to react.”
Other Muslim community representatives said the line adopted by Howard was encouraging racial tension.
But Howard stood by his position, denied he was singling out Muslims, and refused to apologize.
“No matter what the culture of the country from which they came might have been, Australia requires women to be treated fairly and decently and in the same fashion as men,” he told reporters later.
“If any migrants coming to this country have a different view, they’d better get rid of that view pretty quickly.”
Howard said while “99 percent” of Muslims in Australia had integrated, it was “self-evident” that a small section was unwilling to do so. “It’s up to all of us to try and overcome that resistance.”
He said the critical Muslim spokesmen were “missing the point.”
Howard also addressed the issue in an op-ed piece published Saturday, in which he said those who reject integration viewed calls to integrate “as some kind of discrimination.”
“It is not. It is commonsense and, importantly, it is also a powerful symbol of a new migrant’s willingness and enthusiasm about becoming an Australian.”

Original Link.

Parents See Internet as Greatest Media Risk

Tuesday, September 5th, 2006

It all comes down to parental involvement. Know what your children are looking at. Keep them away from the chat rooms and other questionable sites. Use parental filters and other utilities to block bad content.
But most of all, be involved.

(AgapePress) – A recent survey of parents revealed that the Internet is feared as posing the greatest risk to their children, ages 11-16, even while those same parents understood the power of the Web as a learning resource.
According to eMarketer.com, the nationwide poll conducted by Common Sense Media found that 85 percent of U.S. parents were concerned that the Internet would expose their children and teens to hazards, such as sexual predators, wrong values, and “ideas that children are too young to see.” Television was second, with 13 percent of parents saying it was the riskiest media outlet. Magazines, DVDs/videos, and radio were all tied at 1 percent. (Percentages add up to 101 because of rounding.)
However, 91 percent of parents also said they believed the Internet helped their children find information about things that interested them, while 77 percent said the Web was an important educational tool.
“It’s a double-edged sword,” said James P. Steyer, CEO of Common Sense Media. “Parents view the Internet as a learning tool, but are scared that they do not know how to make it safer for their kids.”
Steyer said many parents felt especially unequipped to deal with some of the Internet bells and whistles that are popular with kids, such as “social networking sites, chat rooms. ITunes and [Instant Messaging],” which are “unfamiliar territory to many parents.”
Still, parents feel it is their duty to be the Internet gatekeeper. The survey found that 82 percent of parents said they were responsible for learning what they needed to know in order to protect their children.
“Parents need easy-to-use information to help them teach their kids to be Internet safe and smart,” Steyer says. Toward that end, his group’s website offers “The Internet Survival Guide for Parents.”

Original Link.