I thought I would pass this along from LifeSiteNews.
California Supreme Court Will Begin Hearings on Homosexual Marriage Law
By Thaddeus M. Baklinski
SAN FRANCISCO, March 3, 2008 (LifeSiteNews.com) - The California Supreme Court will hear arguments tomorrow on the constitutionality of the state's homosexual marriage ban.
The California law that limits marriage to heterosexual couples is being challenged by 15 homosexual couples as well as the city of San Francisco and a homosexual-rights group, all of whom argue that the ban is unconstitutional discrimination.
Several California religious and conservative advocacy groups, including the California Catholic Conference, National Association of Evangelicals, the Union of Orthodox Jewish Congregations of America, and The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, will file a friend-of-the-court brief in defense of Proposition 22, a law passed in 1999 that defined marriage as between a man and a woman.
"Male-female marriage is the life-blood of community, society, and the state. We rely on this honored institution for the procreation and proper formation of the next generation. Social science demonstrates, and [our] own long experience confirms, that a child fares best when raised by caring biological parents who have the deepest stake in his or her well-being and who can provide both male and female role models," wrote the brief's author, Kenneth Star.
Others arguing in defense of the state law that prohibits same-sex marriage will be the State Attorney General Jerry Brown, a lawyer representing Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, and groups such as Campaign for California Families and Liberty Counsel.
"The court is not going to rule on the public-policy issue of whether same-sex marriage is a good or bad thing for society," said Supervising Deputy Attorney General Christopher Krueger, one of several state lawyers who will be defending the state law, in a San Diego Union-Tribune report. "The court is only going to rule on whether the state is compelled by the constitution to legalize same-sex marriage."
The California Court's ruling will have repercussions across the US, as other states watch the outcome carefully in order to determine how to deal with challenges to their own marriage laws.
The hearing tomorrow may be watched online at http://www.calchannel.com or on the Court's web site at http://www.courtinfo.ca.gov/courts/supreme/#cal from 9:00 a.m. - noon PST (noon - 3:00 p.m. EST).
Tuesday, March 4, 2008
Sunday, March 2, 2008
Parental Rights Lecture with Michael Farris and Steve Spencer
Last night I got to go to an informational lecture about parental rights in America. The first speaker was Steve Spencer. He gave his testimony as a parent facing 11 years worth of litigation from his wife's parents. He and his wife felt that her parents were exposing their children to immoral behavior so they stopped taking them to see the grandparents. Hence the grandparents have been suing every year for grandparent visitation. In Texas, there is a law that allows for that. It was supposed to be used by good grandparents to become the instant foster parents of their own grandkids if the parents were unfit. He said that there were 2 similar cases before the Texas Supreme Court. Then he pointed out that there are hundreds if not thousands of families that give up before long before the Texas Supreme Court.
Then Michael Farris spoke. He gave a compelling argument for adding a constitutional amendment stating:
SECTION 2
SECTION 3
Nor did the family's religious beliefs matter to the court.
Their "sincerely held religious beliefs" are "not the quality of evidence that permits us to say that application of California's compulsory public school education law to them violates their First Amendment rights."
"Such sparse representations are too easily asserted by any parent who wishes to homeschool his or her child," the court concluded.
The father, Phillip Long, said the family is working on ways to appeal to the state Supreme Court, because he won't allow the pro-homosexual, pro-bisexual, pro-transgender agenda of California's public schools, onwhich WND previously has reported, to indoctrinate his children.
"We just don't want them teaching our children," he told WND. "They teach things that are totally contrary to what we believe. They put questions in our children's minds we don't feel they're ready for.
"When they are much more mature, they can deal with these issues, alternative lifestyles, and such, or whether they came from primordial slop. At the present time it's my job to teach them the correct way of thinking," he said.
"We're going to appeal. We have to. I don't want to put my children in a public school system that teaches ideologies I don't believe in," he said.
Then Michael Farris spoke. He gave a compelling argument for adding a constitutional amendment stating:
SECTION 1
The liberty of parents to direct the upbringing and education of their children is a fundamental right.
SECTION 2
Neither the United States nor any state shall infringe upon this right without demonstrating that its governmental interest as applied to the person is of the highest order and not otherwise served.
SECTION 3
No treaty nor any source of international law may be employed to supersede, modify, interpret, or apply to the rights guaranteed by this article.
He pointed out that much of the wording has been taken from Supreme Court decisions already on the books so that it is well understood and won't be misinterpreted. He also pointed out that the amendment doesn't federalize parenting because there is no section saying congress shall make laws enforcing these sections. He said the amendment merely takes a right that has been found to be "fundamental" and makes it "explicit" in the US Constitution. I encourage every one to become a citizen sponsor of this amendment. Go to http://www.parentalrights.org/ for more information.
As one more example why we need this amendment, I am also posting some snippets from yesterday's WorldNetDaily article.
A California court has ruled that several children in one homeschool family must be enrolled in a public school or "legally qualified" private school, and must attend, sending ripples of shock into the nation's homeschooling advocates as the family reviews its options for appeal.
The judges ruled in the case involving the Longs the family failed to demonstrate "that mother has a teaching credential such that the children can be said to be receiving an education from a credentialed tutor," and that their involvement and supervision by Sunland Christian School's independent study programs was of no value.
Nor did the family's religious beliefs matter to the court.
Their "sincerely held religious beliefs" are "not the quality of evidence that permits us to say that application of California's compulsory public school education law to them violates their First Amendment rights."
"Such sparse representations are too easily asserted by any parent who wishes to homeschool his or her child," the court concluded.
The father, Phillip Long, said the family is working on ways to appeal to the state Supreme Court, because he won't allow the pro-homosexual, pro-bisexual, pro-transgender agenda of California's public schools, on
"We just don't want them teaching our children," he told WND. "They teach things that are totally contrary to what we believe. They put questions in our children's minds we don't feel they're ready for.
"When they are much more mature, they can deal with these issues, alternative lifestyles, and such, or whether they came from primordial slop. At the present time it's my job to teach them the correct way of thinking," he said.
"We're going to appeal. We have to. I don't want to put my children in a public school system that teaches ideologies I don't believe in," he said.
As and interesting aside, Alan Keyes was at this meeting. It was an honor to get to hear him speak at the reception before the speakers. I really like him, and (of course) I didn't tell him that I already voted for Huckabee on Friday. ;)
Friday, February 29, 2008
Vaccines Linked to Autism
WorldNetDaily has a story about the recent ruling in "vaccine court". The ruling was made in favor of an autistic child. She developed autism after her 18-month well baby visit. She had received several shots some of which contained thermosil. Here are some clips from the article.
This case echoes the stories of thousands of children across the country," said NAA President Wendy Fournier. "With almost 5,000 similar cases pending in vaccine court, we are confident that this is just the first of many that will confirm what we have believed for so long – vaccines can and do cause children to regress into autism."
Fournier called on the Centers for Disease Control "to acknowledge that the current vaccine schedule is not safe for every child and as with the administration of any medicine, individual risks and susceptibilities must be considered for each patient."
The Department of Health and Human Services said its Division of Vaccine Injury Compensation, or DVIC, "has reviewed the scientific information concerning the allegation that vaccines cause autism and has found no credible evidence to support the claim. Accordingly, in every case under the Vaccine Act, DVIC has maintained the position that vaccines do not cause autism, and has never concluded in any case that autism was caused by vaccination."
Kirby said that for most affected families, the fine distinction between claiming that vaccines did not "cause" autism but instead aggravated a condition to "manifest" as autism is a fine distinction that is not so important.
While it's too early to tell, he said, "this concession could conceivably make it more difficult for some officials to continue insisting there is 'absolutely no link' between vaccines and autism."
It also puts the federal government's vaccine court defense strategy somewhat into jeopardy, he said.
"DOJ lawyers and witnesses have argued that autism is genetic, with no evidence to support an environmental component," he pointed out. "And, they insist, it's simply impossible to construct a chain of events linking immunizations to the disorder. Government officials may need to rethink their legal strategy, as well as their public relations campaigns, given their own slightly contradictory concession in this case."
The bottom line, he said, is that the public will demand to know what is going on inside the U.S. federal health establishment.
"The significance of this concession will unfortunately be fought over in the usual, vitriolic way – and I fully expect to be slammed for even raising these questions," Kirby writes. "Despite that, the language of this concession cannot be changed, or swept away."
The key words contained in the concession, he says, are "aggravated" and "manifested."
"Without the aggravation of the vaccines, it is uncertain that the manifestation would have occurred at all," Kirby argues.
"When a kid with peanut allergy eats a peanut and dies, we don't say 'his underlying metabolic condition was significantly aggravated to the extent of manifesting as an anaphylactic shock with features of death,'" he continues. "No, we say the peanut killed the poor boy. Remove the peanut from the equation, and he would still be with us today."
Whatever the government's further explanation, says Kirby, "they cannot change the fundamental facts of this extraordinary case: The United States government is compensating at least one child for vaccine injuries that resulted in a diagnosis of autism. And that is big news, no matter how you want to say it."
This case echoes the stories of thousands of children across the country," said NAA President Wendy Fournier. "With almost 5,000 similar cases pending in vaccine court, we are confident that this is just the first of many that will confirm what we have believed for so long – vaccines can and do cause children to regress into autism."
Fournier called on the Centers for Disease Control "to acknowledge that the current vaccine schedule is not safe for every child and as with the administration of any medicine, individual risks and susceptibilities must be considered for each patient."
The Department of Health and Human Services said its Division of Vaccine Injury Compensation, or DVIC, "has reviewed the scientific information concerning the allegation that vaccines cause autism and has found no credible evidence to support the claim. Accordingly, in every case under the Vaccine Act, DVIC has maintained the position that vaccines do not cause autism, and has never concluded in any case that autism was caused by vaccination."
Kirby said that for most affected families, the fine distinction between claiming that vaccines did not "cause" autism but instead aggravated a condition to "manifest" as autism is a fine distinction that is not so important.
While it's too early to tell, he said, "this concession could conceivably make it more difficult for some officials to continue insisting there is 'absolutely no link' between vaccines and autism."
It also puts the federal government's vaccine court defense strategy somewhat into jeopardy, he said.
"DOJ lawyers and witnesses have argued that autism is genetic, with no evidence to support an environmental component," he pointed out. "And, they insist, it's simply impossible to construct a chain of events linking immunizations to the disorder. Government officials may need to rethink their legal strategy, as well as their public relations campaigns, given their own slightly contradictory concession in this case."
The bottom line, he said, is that the public will demand to know what is going on inside the U.S. federal health establishment.
"The significance of this concession will unfortunately be fought over in the usual, vitriolic way – and I fully expect to be slammed for even raising these questions," Kirby writes. "Despite that, the language of this concession cannot be changed, or swept away."
The key words contained in the concession, he says, are "aggravated" and "manifested."
"Without the aggravation of the vaccines, it is uncertain that the manifestation would have occurred at all," Kirby argues.
"When a kid with peanut allergy eats a peanut and dies, we don't say 'his underlying metabolic condition was significantly aggravated to the extent of manifesting as an anaphylactic shock with features of death,'" he continues. "No, we say the peanut killed the poor boy. Remove the peanut from the equation, and he would still be with us today."
Whatever the government's further explanation, says Kirby, "they cannot change the fundamental facts of this extraordinary case: The United States government is compensating at least one child for vaccine injuries that resulted in a diagnosis of autism. And that is big news, no matter how you want to say it."
Thursday, February 28, 2008
Planned Parenthood Again Linked to Racism
FRC's Washington Update has a very revealing article today.
A shocking set of recordings was released this week that could prove disastrous for Planned Parenthood's ties with the African-American community. Lila Rose, a pro-life student and reporter at UCLA, launched an undercover investigation aimed at exposing the racism of the nation's largest abortion merchant. With the help of an actor, she contacted Planned Parenthood clinics in seven states, inquiring if they would be willing to accept a donation earmarked for the abortion of black babies. The results were jaw-dropping.
Rose was appalled to discover that every last clinic agreed. Not one employee objected or questioned the request, even when the actor insisted that the purpose was to "lower the number of black people" in America. When the caller phoned an Ohio branch, he was told that Planned Parenthood "will accept the money for whatever reason." Read the outrageous transcript from the Idaho clinic, which is also available with Rose's other recordings in a montage at http://www.frc.org/get.cfm?i=LK08B57&f=WA08B46.
Actor: ...I really faced trouble with affirmative action, and I don't want my kids to be disadvantaged against black kids.
Planned Parenthood: Yes, absolutely.
Actor: And we don't, you know, we just think the less black kids out there the better.
Planned Parenthood: (Laughs) Understandable, understandable... This is the first time I've had a donor call and make this kind of request, so I'm excited and want to make sure I don't leave anything out.
Students at UCLA are so infuriated by the investigation that they are petitioning the university to cut all affiliation with Planned Parenthood. What few people realize is that the organization has a history of racism that has been ingrained since Planned Parenthood's earliest days, when founder Margaret Sanger advocated negative eugenics and spoke to a woman's branch of the KKK (Margaret Sanger, An Autobiography, 1938, p. 336-367). However, as is customary for Planned Parenthood, the organization has managed for decades to cover its tracks--and the facts. That task has just been made monumentally more difficult. Abortion has taken the innocent lives of over 14 million black children--a national tragedy that has begun uniting and mobilizing African-Americans across party, state, and financial lines.
Today, FRC hosted a press conference to kick off the National Black Pro-Life Gathering in Washington, D.C. which drew pastors, parents, leaders, and activists from across America to commemorate Black History Month by calling on abortion merchants like Planned Parenthood to stop preying on their community. As these abortion clinics continue to demonstrate that blood money is not colorblind, we call on Congress to de-fund and disavow Planned Parenthood. Taxpayers should not be forced to spend over $300 million on an organization whose scruples are for sale, even to those who seek racial genocide.
Additional ResourcesYouTube videos: Planned Parenthood Racism Investigation
A shocking set of recordings was released this week that could prove disastrous for Planned Parenthood's ties with the African-American community. Lila Rose, a pro-life student and reporter at UCLA, launched an undercover investigation aimed at exposing the racism of the nation's largest abortion merchant. With the help of an actor, she contacted Planned Parenthood clinics in seven states, inquiring if they would be willing to accept a donation earmarked for the abortion of black babies. The results were jaw-dropping.
Rose was appalled to discover that every last clinic agreed. Not one employee objected or questioned the request, even when the actor insisted that the purpose was to "lower the number of black people" in America. When the caller phoned an Ohio branch, he was told that Planned Parenthood "will accept the money for whatever reason." Read the outrageous transcript from the Idaho clinic, which is also available with Rose's other recordings in a montage at http://www.frc.org/get.cfm?i=LK08B57&f=WA08B46.
Actor: ...I really faced trouble with affirmative action, and I don't want my kids to be disadvantaged against black kids.
Planned Parenthood: Yes, absolutely.
Actor: And we don't, you know, we just think the less black kids out there the better.
Planned Parenthood: (Laughs) Understandable, understandable... This is the first time I've had a donor call and make this kind of request, so I'm excited and want to make sure I don't leave anything out.
Students at UCLA are so infuriated by the investigation that they are petitioning the university to cut all affiliation with Planned Parenthood. What few people realize is that the organization has a history of racism that has been ingrained since Planned Parenthood's earliest days, when founder Margaret Sanger advocated negative eugenics and spoke to a woman's branch of the KKK (Margaret Sanger, An Autobiography, 1938, p. 336-367). However, as is customary for Planned Parenthood, the organization has managed for decades to cover its tracks--and the facts. That task has just been made monumentally more difficult. Abortion has taken the innocent lives of over 14 million black children--a national tragedy that has begun uniting and mobilizing African-Americans across party, state, and financial lines.
Today, FRC hosted a press conference to kick off the National Black Pro-Life Gathering in Washington, D.C. which drew pastors, parents, leaders, and activists from across America to commemorate Black History Month by calling on abortion merchants like Planned Parenthood to stop preying on their community. As these abortion clinics continue to demonstrate that blood money is not colorblind, we call on Congress to de-fund and disavow Planned Parenthood. Taxpayers should not be forced to spend over $300 million on an organization whose scruples are for sale, even to those who seek racial genocide.
Additional ResourcesYouTube videos: Planned Parenthood Racism Investigation
Wednesday, February 27, 2008
McCain-Feingold May Bite McCain in the Butt
Hat tip to www.ktracy.com for pointing this out. Read the whole thing here.
Assuming that it’s legal for Senator McCain to break his agreement with the FEC without permission (which it’s not), the man has two difficult choices. First, he can stay on the Ohio and Deleware ballots and probably win most of those delegates but be required to stay within the spending restraints set up by the FEC. Or, Senator McCain can hand those delegates over to Huckabee and hope to lock up the nomination further down the road.
If McCain loses both Texas and Ohio, he faces a serious risk of losing the nomination. If McCain wins at least Ohio, he’ll be more likely to lock up the nomination still, but he will be limited to spending about $50 million dollars between now and the GOP convention in September, which the party ironically moved back a month because they thought it would give them an edge in November.
Odds are, of course, John McCain will continue to violate Campaign Financing laws, some of which he wrote when he pushed McCain-Feingold. He’ll be on the Ohio Ballot and he’ll break his legal spending agreements because he figures he’s above the law.
Democrats really don’t care if he’s on the ballot or not. Their interest is in keeping McCain’s spending at a minimum by forcing him legally to comply to spending caps of the FEC. Howard Dean and dozens of liberal lawyers are already hard at work seeing to it that McCain obeys the law.
Since the Huckabee campaign is trying to bury this, the only chance for justice will come from the Democratic Party. They’ve already put McCain’s application on their website. Click here to view it.
http://www.democrats.org/page/-/pdf/20080104_mccainfiling.pdf
Page 6 explains that McCain’s name is on the ballot because he was accepting matching funds.
I personally hope the take McCain's name off of the Ohio ballot. I usually don't agree with the Dems., but here I am glad they are following up on this.
Assuming that it’s legal for Senator McCain to break his agreement with the FEC without permission (which it’s not), the man has two difficult choices. First, he can stay on the Ohio and Deleware ballots and probably win most of those delegates but be required to stay within the spending restraints set up by the FEC. Or, Senator McCain can hand those delegates over to Huckabee and hope to lock up the nomination further down the road.
If McCain loses both Texas and Ohio, he faces a serious risk of losing the nomination. If McCain wins at least Ohio, he’ll be more likely to lock up the nomination still, but he will be limited to spending about $50 million dollars between now and the GOP convention in September, which the party ironically moved back a month because they thought it would give them an edge in November.
Odds are, of course, John McCain will continue to violate Campaign Financing laws, some of which he wrote when he pushed McCain-Feingold. He’ll be on the Ohio Ballot and he’ll break his legal spending agreements because he figures he’s above the law.
Democrats really don’t care if he’s on the ballot or not. Their interest is in keeping McCain’s spending at a minimum by forcing him legally to comply to spending caps of the FEC. Howard Dean and dozens of liberal lawyers are already hard at work seeing to it that McCain obeys the law.
Since the Huckabee campaign is trying to bury this, the only chance for justice will come from the Democratic Party. They’ve already put McCain’s application on their website. Click here to view it.
http://www.democrats.org/page/-/pdf/20080104_mccainfiling.pdf
Page 6 explains that McCain’s name is on the ballot because he was accepting matching funds.
I personally hope the take McCain's name off of the Ohio ballot. I usually don't agree with the Dems., but here I am glad they are following up on this.
Trasgender and Homosexuality and YOUR Government School
I saw this first story several days ago, but didn't do anything with it because I was torn. Here is the story from OneNewsNow and then I will give my thoughts.
Pro-family activist Peter LaBarbera says the case of a second-grade boy in one Colorado school who wants to be identified as a girl shows that the country has normalized deviance.
Staff at a public school in Highlands Ranch are preparing to accommodate the second-grader, who wants to attend classes dressed as a girl and be addressed with a girl's name. The school will allow the boy to use a unisex bathroom, and they are giving parents packets of information on transgendered people.
Peter LaBarbera, president of Americans for Truth, says the real victims of the supposed "diversity policy" are the young man's classmates. "If the parents are so misled to encourage their child in this gender-confused behavior, they should not be allowed to teach that same behavior to all the other students in the school," argues LaBarbera. "I think it's a terribly sad situation. This boy needs help, the parents need help, obviously."
The pro-family advocate says it is also troubling that the pro-homosexual group "Trans-Youth Family Advocates" has been working with the school district. He says such groups are "in the business of mainstreaming gender confusion" -- but somehow manage to work their way into the schools under the guise of being "consultants."
When I put myself in the position of the public school officials, I am not sure what I would do. I mean this child and his parents do need help, but that doesn't mean I could bar him from public school entry. I guess that I could have some sort of dress code that included no cross dressing and demand that he use the boys' room. I think that one of the many sad things this story illustrates is that in many ways the public school systems are bound by law and fear of law suits. The world view that they will teach and administrate from is enforced from the outside.
On a slightly different note, I got word today that a homosexual activist day called "Day of Silence" is coming to many schools. If you would like to find out more about it, go here. The link also has a list of schools that are participating. Don't be suprised if your "good" school is on there.
I went two years to a "bad" high school in liberal California. Then I went two years at a "good" high school in conservative West Texas. I can tell you from experience that the world views presented were the same. Even the education was not better at the "good" school. The main differences were external (newer building, grounds, etc.) and the kinds of social problems (gangs and pregnancy vs. prejudice/white supremacy and abortions).
All in all, one more reason to homeschool.
Pro-family activist Peter LaBarbera says the case of a second-grade boy in one Colorado school who wants to be identified as a girl shows that the country has normalized deviance.
Staff at a public school in Highlands Ranch are preparing to accommodate the second-grader, who wants to attend classes dressed as a girl and be addressed with a girl's name. The school will allow the boy to use a unisex bathroom, and they are giving parents packets of information on transgendered people.
Peter LaBarbera, president of Americans for Truth, says the real victims of the supposed "diversity policy" are the young man's classmates. "If the parents are so misled to encourage their child in this gender-confused behavior, they should not be allowed to teach that same behavior to all the other students in the school," argues LaBarbera. "I think it's a terribly sad situation. This boy needs help, the parents need help, obviously."
The pro-family advocate says it is also troubling that the pro-homosexual group "Trans-Youth Family Advocates" has been working with the school district. He says such groups are "in the business of mainstreaming gender confusion" -- but somehow manage to work their way into the schools under the guise of being "consultants."
When I put myself in the position of the public school officials, I am not sure what I would do. I mean this child and his parents do need help, but that doesn't mean I could bar him from public school entry. I guess that I could have some sort of dress code that included no cross dressing and demand that he use the boys' room. I think that one of the many sad things this story illustrates is that in many ways the public school systems are bound by law and fear of law suits. The world view that they will teach and administrate from is enforced from the outside.
On a slightly different note, I got word today that a homosexual activist day called "Day of Silence" is coming to many schools. If you would like to find out more about it, go here. The link also has a list of schools that are participating. Don't be suprised if your "good" school is on there.
I went two years to a "bad" high school in liberal California. Then I went two years at a "good" high school in conservative West Texas. I can tell you from experience that the world views presented were the same. Even the education was not better at the "good" school. The main differences were external (newer building, grounds, etc.) and the kinds of social problems (gangs and pregnancy vs. prejudice/white supremacy and abortions).
All in all, one more reason to homeschool.
Sunday, February 24, 2008
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)