Daily Archives: August 6, 2010

Center for Reproductive Rights: “Today, the Center for Reproductive Rights filed a federal challenge against two abortion restrictions recently passed by the Louisiana state legislature. One measure excludes doctors who perform abortion services from participating in a medical malpractice fund administered by the state even though that coverage is provided to all other medical professionals. The other measure amends the current requirement in Louisiana that a woman seeking an abortion after twenty weeks of pregnancy receive an ultrasound. It requires women at all stages of pregnancy receive an ultrasound and a photograph of the ultrasound image, even if the woman is a rape or incest victim or diagnosed with a fetal abnormality . . . ”

“California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger and Attorney General Jerry Brown filed motions Friday calling for resumption of same-sex weddings in the state.”

WorldNetDaily: “A decorated military officer who is challenging – in military court – President Obama’s eligibility to be president was taken into custody and escorted under guard back to Walter Reed Army Base today after a hearing, apparently so he could not talk to the press or his attorney about his case, according to his defense attorney.”

Peter Sprigg writing at the FRC Blog: “This week San Francisco federal Judge Vaughn Walker, in the case of Perry v. Schwarzenegger, ruled that the U.S. Constitution protects a right of same-sex couples to ‘marry.’ This has sparked speculation about how the case might fare on appeal if and when it reaches the Supreme Court. Some commentators argue that the court’s decision striking down sodomy laws, in the 2003 case of Lawrence v. Texas, implies that the court would also back same-sex ‘marriage.’”

PR-USA.net: “Gay and lesbian consumers are more optimistic than many Americans about the overall direction of the country, its future economic growth, the job market and their own personal financial condition, according to survey results published in ‘Gay and Lesbian Market in the U.S.: Trends and Opportunities in the LGBT Community’ by market research publisher Packaged Facts. Armed with this confidence and $743 billion in estimated 2010 buying power, the U.S. population of lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) adults is expected to amp up discretionary spending on products and services in the wake of the recession and emerging recovery.”

Yahoo (AFP): “Reykjavik’s comedian-turned-politician mayor, Jon Gnarr, opened the Icelandic capital’s gay pride festival this week in drag, in a blond wig and with bright red lipstick.”

The New Ledger: “(1) Judge Walker’s decision is internally, logically inconsistent in its treatment of the worth of cultural values, arguing that morality and tradition are not a valid basis for supporting the legal status of marriage, but at the same time finding a Constitutional violation from the fact that the same-sex alternative (domestic partnerships) lacks the social and cultural status that marriage has . . . and which it derives from its grounding in longstanding moral, cultural and religious traditions; (2) Judge Walker’s decision ignores the compelling state interest in promoting childbearing and childrearing within the context of opposite-sex marriage, and the absence of such an interest in same-sex marriage, specifically ignoring the fact that heterosexual relationships produce many more children than homosexual relationships; and (3) the whole idea of leaving core judgments about a society’s most central and longstanding values to a single judge rather than respect the collective wisdom of a diverse electorate is fundamentally anti-democratic.”

National Review Online Editorial: “[T]he deeper game Judge Walker is playing unfolds in those many pages of ‘fact finding’ that make up the large middle of his ruling. There, through highly prejudicial language that bears little relation to any fact, the judge has smuggled in his own moral sentiments — in precisely the part of his opinion that would normally be owed a large measure of deference in the appellate courts. To take one example: It is hardly an incontrovertible fact that ‘Proposition 8 places the force of law behind stigmas against gays and lesbians.’ But there it is, as finding No. 58. With ‘facts’ like these, and appellate judges disinclined to question them, Judge Walker plainly hopes to propel this case toward a gay-marriage victory, regardless of how transparently weak his legal conclusions are.”

Christian Post: “On an island off the coast of East Africa where the local government limits the ability of Christians to obtain land, officials in one town have colluded with area Muslims to erect a mosque in place of a planned church building.”

“They are judicial theologians . . . ”

LifeNews: “The summit ended with Member States extending the controversial, non-binding Maputo Plan of Action (PoA) for an additional five years and expanding new initiative called the Campaign on Accelerated Reduction on Maternal Mortality in Africa (CARMMA). Pressure was placed on the AU from UN agencies and foreign non-governmental organizations (NGO).”

BBC: “Western-based anti-abortion campaigners are undermining efforts to improve sexual and reproductive health education in Africa, according to some international agencies.”

LifeSiteNews: “A new study has found that only 13.4% of doctors in Nigeria would be willing to do abortions, if Nigerian abortion law were liberalized. Abortion is currently illegal in Nigeria except to save the life of the mother.”

The Case Against Public Sector Unions
John O. McGinnism, Max Schanzenbach

“Public employees unions have wielded huge influence to gain perquisites for themselves at the expense of the public. Early retirement, job tenure, high wages, and generous defined-benefit pension plans have gained increasing attention from commentators and voters, though many public sector perks are intentionally shrouded and confuse the public debate. What has received far less attention is the pernicious effect of public sector union privileges on the provision of public goods in the United States. Public sector unions have greatly distorted state spending priorities and made it more difficult for states to devise innovative public goods that would benefit their citizenry as whole. For example, prison guard unions have directly influenced penal policy, fighting reduced sentences or decriminalization of drugs. Teachers’ unions fight charter schools and merit pay. The strong organizational rights of these unions, protected or abetted by statute and regulations, enables their outsized influence on public policy.”

Associated Press: “Ah, the cruelty. Veteran lawmakers who toiled for years in Congress waiting for a chance at political promotion have discovered an inconvenient truth: This election year, Washington experience is a career-ender.”

Adrian Vermeule reviews Keeping Faith with the Constitution by Goodwin Liu, Pamela S. Karlan, and Christopher H. Schroeder and The Living Constitution by David Strauss in The New Republic: “Justice Holmes described the Constitution as an ‘organism,’ and some people say that ‘we have a living constitution.’ What do such metaphors mean? Two new books lay out two different accounts of living constitutionalism: ‘constitutional fidelity’ in the first book, ‘common-law constitutionalism’ in the second. These living constitutionalisms have a common enemy—originalism, roughly the idea that the Constitution should be read according to the public meaning the founding generation understood it to have. But once that enemy is slain, the two versions of living constitutionalism face new challenges. In the case of constitutional fidelity the challenges are insuperable, while for common-law constitutionalism they are merely daunting.” | Via Rick Garnett

David Opderbeck writing at Law, Religion, and Ethics: “The opinion surreptitiously establishes a conflict between faith and science by suggesting that a social-scientific definition of ‘harm’ must trump any theological concept of harm. Judge Walker, it seems to me, clearly wishes to pour out moral approbation on Christianity for employing the category of ‘sin’ in private sexual matters. To do so, he assumes a metaphysical stance that waves away any concerns beyond the here and now. But when Christian churches issue pastoral statements about sin, they assume an anthropology that extends beyond the world we presently inhabit.”

The Christian Institute: “Harrow Council in London has provoked a storm of protest after announcing plans to prefer Islamic halal-only menus in the borough’s state primary schools.”

The Christian Institute: “A transsexual man who harassed his neighbours for five years will not be jailed because a judge has agreed that prison would be ‘awkward and dangerous’ for him. Jan Krause, who lives as a woman, monitored his neighbours’ movements and even erected a roof-mounted device which emitted a high-pitched whine in the direction of his neighbours’ house, a court heard.”

The Christian Institute: “A Labour leadership candidate has slammed Christian registrar Lillian Ladele – who was bullied at work and disciplined for her religious stance on homosexual civil partnerships. Diane Abbott also told homosexual news website, pinknews.co.uk, that she is ‘in favour of same-sex marriage’ and removing the safeguards on homosexual men giving blood.”

The Christian Institute: “Many mainstream Islamic groups who denounce violence and terrorism still want to bring Britain under Islamic control, a leaked security report warns. The report, called ‘Preventing terrorism, where next for Britain?’, was produced confidentially by think-tank Quilliam and given to the Government’s Office for Security and Counter Terrorism.”

The Christian Institute: “Something must be done to stop the alarming ‘Talibanisation’ of young British muslims, warns the chair of the British Muslims for Secular Democracy (BMSD) . . . Mrs Alibhai-Brown cites a number of concerning cases in which Muslim children have been brutally beaten and disciplined for participating in simple school activities such as theatre or music.”

Christian Today: “A church council fighting for the rights of Dalit Christians in India has called on churches and Christian organisations to observe August 10 as ‘Black Day.’ It was on August 10, 1950, that a presidential Order prevented ‘low-caste’ Christians from enjoying the economic and educational benefits authorised by the government for those of the Hindu faith.”

ABC: “Free condom machines would be planted in high schools across the nation as part of a plan to tackle sexually-transmitted diseases and reduce the abortion rate. Family Planning Victoria (FPV) is calling on the Federal Government to fund contraception in Australia as a way of encouraging safe sex and preventing unplanned pregnancies.”

Houston Chronicle: “State leaders on Thursday threatened to sue the federal government over a restriction Congress is placing on $830 million in education funding for Texas . . . Texas congressional Democrats inserted an amendment they say is necessary to ensure the money goes to school children and Texas teachers. Educators remain unhappy that some $3 billion in federal stimulus money for Texas education last year was used to replace state money instead of increasing the investment in public education.”

Democrat and Chronicle: “U.S. District Judge Charles Siragusa ruled Thursday that the prayers at the board meeting are not unconstitutional . . . In 2008 Americans United for Separation of Church and State sued the town on behalf of residents who objected to the prayers at the board meeting. The town was represented by Alliance Defense Fund attorneys.”

Christian Science Monitor: “A new poll of Arab opinion finds that for the first time a majority of the public across the region – including a sizable minority in Saudi Arabia – believes a nuclear-armed Iran would be a positive development in the Middle East.”

KCAUTV: “Bob Vander Plaats announced Friday morning he will embark on an initiative to unseat the three Iowa Supreme Court justices up for retention this November . . . Vander Plaats has been outspoken regarding the court’s decision that struck down the 1998 Defense of Marriage Act.”

Sam Schulman writing at the Christian Science Monitor: “[P]roviding benefits to couples is not the whole purpose of marriage. It’s not even its primary purpose. And that’s what’s wrong with Mr. Walker’s ruling, and the arguments on both sides of Perry vs. Schwarzenegger. They’ve been arguing over marriage’s benefits. Instead, we need to be thinking about marriage’s role in sustaining the existence of the human species. When we do that, we’ll see the fundamental wisdom of the decision of the majority of California voters . . . As a species, we need to protect female sexuality in order to assure ourselves of a future.”

LifeNews: “A federal judge held a hearing on a lawsuit filed by the Archdiocese of Baltimore against the Maryland city yesterday over a law that attacks pregnancy centers that help women find abortion alternatives.”

LifeNews: “Senator John McCain fired off the first volley in what is expected to be a fierce battle over the bill to authorize funding for the Defense Department. Because of abortion and other issues, he objected today to September consideration of the legislation.”

FindLaw (AP): “The man who once served as Saddam Hussein’s leading lieutenant has appealed to the United States to extend its presence in Iraq, saying that President Barack Obama is abandoning the country, according to a British newspaper interview published Friday.”

Associated Press: “The government announced Thursday that it has charged 14 people as participants in ‘a deadly pipeline’ to Somalia that routed money and fighters from the United States to the terrorist group al-Shabab.”

Sacramento Bee: “After Walker issued a landmark ruling Wednesday that overturned California’s Proposition 8 ban on gay marriage, his detractors took issue with the fact that the judge is gay.”

Peter Roff writing at U.S. News & World Report: “The debate over gay marriage is, for some, a case in which government policy is being misused as a way to secure popular validation of a lifestyle to which some people, on moral grounds, strongly object . . . Those who argue that the government should not be in the business of rendering what are, in effect, moral judgments about behaviors can do so only by ignoring the evidence. The government renders judgments all the time, and not just in the criminal code–by, for example, holding that an adult who engages in sexual relations with a child can be jailed as a result of their actions.”

Chuck Colson writing at BreakPoint (includes audio) ”Garlow points to the weakening of parental rights, of course the attack on religious freedom and individuals practicing their faith in public. People who oppose same-sex marriage will be forced to choose between full participation in public life and fidelity to their convictions. So what comes next? An appeal to Ninth Circuit, the most liberal circuit court in America, and an expedited appeal to Supreme Court. But my hopes are instead in the groundswell of public outrage and resistance. This is re-writing the Constitution of the United States and undermining the most basic institutions of civilized society.”

LifeSiteNews: “Two Albuquerque late-term abortionists who worked for George Tiller’s Women’s Health Care Services (WHCS) in Wichita, Kansas, before it permanently closed last year have dumped their Kansas medical licenses. Troy Newman, the president of Operation Rescue, has speculated that the move was deliberately made in order to place the pair outside the disciplinary jurisdiction of the Kansas State Board of Healing Arts (KSBHA).”

Robert P. George writing at The Washington Examiner: “Two federal judges who have recently issued rulings adverse to the historic definition of marriage as the conjugal union of husband and wife show what results-oriented jurisprudence is all about. One judge claimed to base part of his ruling on a federal constitutional requirement that Congress yield to the states on their definition of marriage. The other judge ruled that the constitution requires that a state’s democratically enacted definition of marriage be struck down.”

Toronto Sun: “Officials would have difficulty determining the sincerity of anyone applying to legally smoke pot in a church dedicated to its use as a holy sacrament, an Ontario Superior Court judge said Friday in Toronto.”

ADF attorneys secure victory for religious expression in iconic American parks, monuments

ADF attorney Jeremy Tedesco appeared on WTBN with Bill Bunkley to discuss the Julia Ward case. | MP3 11:56 mins | ADF Media: Ward v. Wilbanks resource page

On 3TV Jim Campbell discusses the ruling’s potential impact on Arizona. | Austin R. Nimocks on CNN.

Sydney Morning Herald: “The main adoption agency for infants in Sydney, Anglicare, has written to state MPs urging them to vote against a bill that would allow same-sex couples to adopt when it is debated in Parliament later this month . . . Last year, a Legislative Council committee recommended by a narrow margin that same-sex couples be allowed to adopt. However, the committee also said faith-based adoption agencies should be exempt from anti-discrimination legislation, so long as they refer any same-sex couples who seek their services to another adoption agency.”

Jordan Lorence on KPAM 860 with Bob Miller – MP3 3:44 | Jordan on BBC Radio Scotland – MP3 4:57 mins.

ACLU: “Wednesday’s landmark decision by U.S. District Judge Vaughn R. Walker striking down California’s Proposition 8 as an unconstitutional violation of the rights of gay and lesbian couples provided President Obama and his administration with the perfect opportunity to finally embrace fairness in marriage. Such a position should not be a far leap for a man who has repeatedly stated his support for the rights of LGBT Americans and is a constitutional scholar, yet it has sadly eluded him, at least publicly, up to this point.”

Cato @ Liberty: “Judge Walker was first appointed to the federal bench by President Ronald Reagan in 1987, at the recommendation of Attorney General Edwin Meese III (now the Ronald Reagan Distinguished Fellow in Public Policy and Chairman of the Center for Legal and Judicial Studies at the Heritage Foundation) . . . this ‘liberal San Francisco judge’ was recommended by Ed Meese, appointed by Ronald Reagan, and opposed by Alan Cranston, Nancy Pelosi, Edward Kennedy, and the leading gay activist groups. It’s a good thing for advocates of marriage equality that those forces were only able to block Walker twice.”

” . . . a recent account from an active-duty U.S. chaplain working with one of those militaries shows religious liberty will not fare well in the face of normalized homosexual conduct.”

Los Angeles Times editorial: “We strenuously hope that Walker’s decision will be upheld by the high court. But no matter what happens, the trial in San Francisco delivered an unforgettable lesson in what Proposition 8 and same-sex marriage really mean. From now on, it will be harder for opponents of same-sex unions to continue mouthing canards. The public as well as the courts have had an opportunity to hear the facts. The debate over same-sex marriage will never be quite the same again.”

Associated Press: “Republican Sharron Angle believes the clergy should be allowed to endorse candidates from the pulpit and opposes laws allowing gays to adopt children, according to a questionnaire by the Nevada Senate hopeful that was obtained by The Associated Press.”

Global Post: “Uganda’s ‘Anti-Homosexuality Bill,’ which raised a worldwide uproar over its death penalty for gay sex, has stalled in parliamentary committee and it is unlikely to be passed in the current session, according to gay activists here.”

WorldNetDaily: “Officials with the Alliance Defense Fund said the decision is radical. ‘Its impact could be devastating to marriage and the democratic process,’ said Senior Counsel [Brian Raum]. ‘It’s not radical for more than seven million Cailfornians to protect marriage as they’ve always known it. What would be more radical would be to allow a handful of activists to gut the core of the American democratic system and, in addition, force the entire country to accept a system that intentionally denies children the mom and the dad they deserve.’”

Austin R. Nimocks on the Vicki McKenna Show – MP3 16:39 mins | Austin with Kitty O’Neal on KFBK – MP3 5:21 mins | Austin on the Dave Ross Show – MP3 7:30 mins | Jim Campbell on the Janet Mefferd Show – MP3 18:15 mins | Doug Napier on AFR Focal Point with Bryan Fischer – MP3 21:55 mins | Jim Campbell with Chris Daniels on KMJ – MP3 14:54 | Austin with Pat Morrison on KPCC Southern Cal. Public Radio.  Austin responds to the question of why this is different than race.  MP3 4:35 mins.

Politico: “When Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) laid out his opposition to Elena Kagan’s Supreme Court nomination, someone in the chamber appeared to be moving around in his chair, gasping and rolling his eyes. It was Al Franken . . . Republicans have accused Reid of trying to bypass the committee process, shield his party from tough votes and centralize power in the majority leader’s office at the expense of the Senate. Some Democrats have expressed disappointment in Reid’s handling of an energy bill.”

ADF attorneys secure favorable decision in legal attack filed by Americans United for Separation of Church and State

The Blog of LegalTimes: “As one of its last acts before skipping out of Washington for a month, the U.S. Senate late Thursday confirmed James Wynn Jr., a North Carolina state judge, to a seat on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 4th Circuit. It also confirmed three district court judges and nine U.S. attorneys.”

Macon.com (AP): “[Jody Hice] finished second in Georgia’s July 20 primary, when he faced seven other Republicans competing for a chance to succeed retiring GOP Rep. John Linder. As the runner-up, he advances to a Tuesday runoff against front-runner Rob Woodall, Linder’s former chief of staff . . . The pastor may have crossed a line when he used the show – which is produced and broadcast by tax-exempt Christian organizations – to give a brief update on his runoff campaign a week after the primary.” Read more: http://www.macon.com/2010/08/05/1219101/ga-minister-hammers-obama-in-bid.html#ixzz0vqdOse6G” | Via Religion Clause

Ken Blackwell and Ken Klukowski writing at Townhall: “Although not explicitly mentioned in the Constitution, marriage is an implied fundamental right. The test for whether a right is a fundamental right is whether it is rooted in the history and tradition of the American people, and essential to an Anglo-American scheme of ordered liberty . . . The problem for the district court is that same-sex marriage shares the same problem as all those others when it comes to the constitutional test: None of them are found in the history and tradition of the American people. And none of those types of marriage have been found essential to an American concept of liberty. Therefore none of them are part of the fundamental right of marriage.”

Pat Buchanan writing at Townhall: “But the issue here is not religious tolerance. There are a hundred mosques in New York City. The issue here is the appalling insensitivity, if not calculated insult, of erecting a mosque two blocks from a World Trade Center where 3,000 Americans were massacred by Islamic fanatics whose Muslim religion was integral to their identity and mission.”

Religion Clause: In Claire Headley v. Church of Scientology International, (CD CA, Aug. 5, 2010), plaintiff was a member of Scientology’s Sea Org. Sea Org members live communally, are assigned physically difficult tasks, and are subject to strict discipline. They are not allowed to raise children and remain Sea Org members. Plaintiff says she had two abortions under the pressure of this policy. In Marc Headley v. Church of Scientology, (CD CA, Aug. 5, 2010), plaintiff was also a Sea Org member and alleged instances of physical abuse and acts of discipline.

“August is off to an interesting start, with liberal elites telling large majorities of Americans that they are bigots if they oppose a mosque at Ground Zero or same sex marriage in California.”

American Constitution Society: “If upheld by the U.S. Supreme Court, which almost certainly wouldn’t address this case for at least two years (if it hears an appeal in this case at all), the legal approach taken by Judge Walker would have a dramatic impact across the nation. Currently, there exists a bizarre patchwork of recognition and non-recognition for same-sex relationships across the country . . . If the Supreme Court embraces the two arguments at the heart of Judge Walker’s decision, this patchwork (which is actually considerably more complicated than the picture I have painted here) will disappear because it would be unconstitutional for any state to refuse to marry same-sex couples.”

Rasmussen: “The latest Rasmussen Reports telephone survey of Likely Voters in the state finds Brown with 43% support and Whitman earning 41% of the vote. Six percent (6%) prefer another candidate, and 10% are undecided.”

Associated Press: “They said the political makeup of the three-judge panel will make all the difference, playing even a bigger role than Walker’s opinion in shaping the future of gay marriage. Legal experts said the case could easily end with a politically conservative panel of the 9th Circuit reinstating the marriage ban and the U.S. Supreme Court refusing to get involved.”

Care Net National Pregnancy Center Conference

Associated Press: “Two Phoenix pastors have been indicted for not reporting that a girl told them her father was sexually abusing her and her sister.”

Associated Press: “Rumors have circulated for months that Walker is gay, fueled by the blogosphere and a San Francisco Chronicle column that stated his sexual orientation was an ‘open secret’ in legal and gay activism circles.”

National Secular Society (UK): “ADF lawyer [Roger Kiska], who is located in Croatia, said . . . ‘It means that we become players with all of the draft committees on conventions and treaties, from things like the international criminal court statutes to things potentially like the Convention on the Rights of the Child, where we as legal experts can come in and provide input on the things that we feel are important.’” | ADF News Release

The city of Woodruff adopted an invocations policy Tuesday recommended by Alliance Defense Fund attorneys, which ensures local officials can continue their constitutionally protected practice of prayer before public meetings despite recent threats from the Freedom From Religion Foundation.

“Judge Vaughn Walker ruled, among other things, that not one single person who voted for Proposition 8 had any rational reason for so doing. Yes, if you voted in favor of marriage in any of the states that have taken up this question, you’ve now been officially labeled as an irrational bigot, your voice being ‘nothing more than a fear or unarticulated dislike of same-sex couples,’ according to Judge Walker.”

Crosswalk: “‘It’s not just marriage that was put on trial,’ said [Daniel Blomerg], an attorney with the Alliance Defense Fund, ‘but the fundamental freedom of having your vote count and having the liberty to express and live by your religious beliefs. It’s pretty shocking.’”

Daily Bruin: “‘Essentially, in America, we respect the right for free people to make policy choices through the democratic system – in this case, defining marriage between a man and a woman,’ said Sara Tappen, litigation counsel for the Alliance Defense Fund, the legal alliance that defended the proposition in court.”

Chicago Pride: “Attorneys with the anti-gay Alliance Defense Fund said they will go to the Supreme Court if necessary to keep the stay in place while Walker’s decision is appealed.”

The Christian Post: “‘A university cannot censor professors’ speech – including classroom speech related to the topic of the class – merely because certain ideas ‘offend’ an anonymous student,’ commented ADF Senior Counsel [David French].”

New York Times: “‘We’re working very closely with the county clerk’s office to make sure that everybody who wants to get married Friday, if the stay is removed, can do so,’ Mr. Ting said Thursday in an interview . . . [Jim Campbell], a lawyer with the Alliance Defense Fund, which defended Proposition 8, said that if a stay was not issued, ‘uncertainty’ from any same-sex marriages would be ‘harmful to the public interest’ while the case was under appeal. That could include the administrative burden if government officials had to annul marriages, he said.”

Sacramento Bee: “Judge Vaughn R. Walker — who found the measure unconstitutional — may take additional time to decide whether to keep a temporary stay on his judgment in place . . . ‘We’ll even go up to the U.S. Supreme Court to get a stay,’ said [Austin Nimocks], attorney with the Alliance Defense Fund, an Arizona group that helped defend Proposition 8 before Walker. The request for a stay filed by Nimocks’ group and other attorneys argues that they think they have a strong chance of winning on appeal, and that if same-sex marriages are allowed to take place they ‘would be licensed under a cloud of uncertainty.’”