San Diego Follow-Up: City Officials Say Never Mind, We Won't Fine Home Bible Studies

After causing a firestorm of contraversy, San Diego county officials have backed down trying to restrict home Bible studies:

Chandra Wallar, the county's general manager of land use and environment, said the county has re-examined the situation and decided that the Joneses don't need a permit after all.

They folded like a cheap suit after given a 24-hr deadline by the pastor's lawyer.

She said the county was not targeting the Joneses because they were exercising their religion, but rather it was trying to address parking and traffic issues.

“We've advised the pastor he has the authority to continue to hold his meetings just as he's held them,” Wallar said. “My hope is we will be able to resolve the traffic concerns.”

I don't know what was in the minds of the county officials or the neighbor that complained about the amount of cars, but it sure reeks of an anti-Christian crusade. There was no legitimate reason for them to go after the couple in this way. If there really was 30-40 cars like the neighbor complained there were, the county could of approached them for a resolution before threatening them with fines.

Instead, they used a statute meant for churches to stop the peaceful religious assembling of a few people. They could of used other statutes that referenced residential parking issues, but they had to bring their religion into it. Why would they do that other than to show contempt for their beliefs?

San Diego Follow-Up: 24-Hour Deadline Given to the Officials That Sought End to Pastor's Home Bible Study

This is a follow-up of the story that broke yesterday of the San Diego officials that threatened a pastor and his wife with fines if they did not stop holding Bible studies in their house:

Code enforcement officials in San Diego who banned a pastor and his wife from holding Bible studies in their home or face fines have taken less than 24 hours to respond to a demand letter from a legal team representing the couple in what could be a major First Amendment dispute.

And now they have a deadline to withdraw statements that lawyers believe already have created an irreparable violation of the First Amendment.

This will be very interesting to watch. We'll probably see the officials issue a half-hearted attempt at an apology, and they will back off the couple.

I'll keep ya'll posted on this story.

California Supreme Court Actually Acts Like, Well, Judges Not Legislators

Yes, I know that this happened a few days ago, but so much has been happening that it slipped through the cracks. The state supreme court of California shocked the country:

The California Supreme Court on Tuesday upheld same sex marriages that were already performed but upheld voters' rights to ban gay marriage through the state constitution.

The court surprised me by actually recognizing their role of not making law but interpreting it.

Chief Justice Ron George, writing the 6-1 decision, said the people have a right, through the ballot box, to change their constitution.

"In a sense, petitioners' and the attorney general's complaint is that it is just too easy to amend the California constitution through the initiative process. But it is not a proper function of this court to curtail that process; we are constitutionally bound to uphold it," the ruling said.

The court is the same one that last May ruled it unconstitutional to deny gay couples the right to marry. That led to the constitutional amendment offered on the ballot last November.

"After comparing this initiative measure to the many other constitutional changes that have been reviewed and evaluated in numerous prior decisions of this court, we conclude Proposition 8 constitutes a constitutional amendment rather than a constitutional revision," the ruling said.

Why didn't they come to this conclusion last year when they made new law by overruling the measure passed by the people of California of not allowing gay marriage? The 6-1 vote was surprisingly one-sided, too. Maybe they saw the backlash that rained down on them last time, and it was too much to put on themselves again. Could they have realized that we want judges to intpret not make law? I can only hope the this will begin a chain reaction of change away from judicial activism.

San Diego: Freedom of Religion Attacked, Pastor & Wife Fined For Hosting Bible Study

Apparently, San Diego county is following Sotomayor's advice of choosing which of the Bill of Rights to follow because the Constitution doesn't apply to local governments:

A local pastor and his wife claim they were interrogated by a San Diego County official, who then threatened them with escalating fines if they continued to hold Bible studies in their home, 10News reported.

When did California cease to acknoledge the freedom of religious expression and assembly?

The attorney for the pastor and his wife that were hosting the Bible study was aghast at the audacity of the of San Diego county's actions:

(Attorney Dean) Broyles said, "The county asked, 'Do you have a regular meeting in your home?' She said, 'Yes.' 'Do you say amen?' 'Yes.' 'Do you pray?' 'Yes.' 'Do you say praise the Lord?' 'Yes.'"The county employee notified the couple that the small Bible study, with an average of 15 people attending, was in violation of County regulations, according to Broyles.

Broyles said a few days later the couple received a written warning that listed "unlawful use of land" and told them to "stop religious assembly or apply for a major use permit" -- a process that could cost tens of thousands of dollars.

The county was refering to the law that was meant to pertain to churches not a small group of people. If they get away with this, what will stop them from stopping any group of 15 or more from assembling peacefully?

Fluke or Trend? Poll Shows Support For Abortion Falls to Lowest Point Since 1995

These are some interesting results to a recent poll by Pew:

The latest national survey by the Pew Research Center for the People & the Press, conducted March 31-April 21 among 1,521 adults, finds President Barack Obama's abortion advocacy could be sparking a shift to the pro-life side of the abortion debate.

The Pew poll found 46 percent of Americans say abortion should be legal in most cases (28%) or all cases (18%) and 44 percent of Americans believe that abortion should be illegal in most (28%) or all cases (16%).

That two point margin in favor of abortion is the lowest margin since 1995 as Pew, and other polling firms, have been asking the same polling question of Americans across the country every year.

This shift towards pro-life was shown in all age groups and most other demographics. Hopefully, this will become a trend and the shame of abortion will come to an end.

N. Dakota: Bill Giving Unborn Basic Human Rights Goes Down in Senate

'Personhood' bill defeated in North Dakota Senate
By DALE WETZEL Associated Press Writer
Apr 4, 3:50 AM EDT

BISMARCK, N.D. (AP) -- North Dakota's Senate has rejected legislation to bestow human rights on fertilized human eggs, whether they be in the womb or in a laboratory.

Senators voted 29-16 Friday to reject legislation that sought to define as a human being "any organism with the genome of homo sapiens." The "personhood" status would include a developing embryo from the moment of conception, whether inside or outside the womb.

A handful of states are considering similar proposals, and the measure generated an intense lobbying campaign from abortion opponents and people who favor abortion rights.

Sen. Curtis Olafson, a Republican, spoke out frequently against the bill, saying it would make it difficult for doctors to treat problem pregnancies that could threaten the woman's life because both she and her unborn child would have equal status under the law.

At a Senate hearing on the legislation, two reproductive endocrinologists testified that the bill would complicate the practice of in vitro fertilization, which involves removing eggs from a woman's body, fertilizing them in a laboratory, and implanting a fertilized egg inside the womb.

The bill's sponsor, Rep. Dan Ruby, a Republican, sent an e-mail message to Democratic senators before Friday's vote, offering to write letters to the editor to vouch for their anti-abortion credentials if they backed the legislation.

"I will demonstrate my belief that this issue is more important than partisan politics," Ruby wrote.

© 2009 The Associated Press.

---------------------------------------------------------------
http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/A/ABORTION_RESTRICTIONS?SITE=PASUN&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT
---------------------------------------------------------------

My Thoughts

N. Dakota has had pro-life bills like this voted on many times over the last few years by both the legislature and the people. They've been defeated everytime. Many believe that it is because they don't want to be the first to challenge Roe V. Wade. If another state took the lead, N. Dakota would be more likely to follow suit.

The result isn't unexpected, but there is some hope for the future that the travesty of abortion holocaust will end, and the unborn will receive basic human and civil rights that we all enjoy.

Kansas: New Abortion Law Requires Offering Ultrasounds Before All Abortions

New Kan. law: Before abortions, offer ultrasounds
Mar 27, 6:10 PM EDT

TOPEKA, Kan. (AP) -- Gov. Kathleen Sebelius has signed a bill ensuring that clinics give women and girls seeking abortions a chance to see ultrasound images before performing the procedure.

The legislation was signed Friday and takes effect July 1. It also requires clinics to offer abortion patients a chance to listen to the fetal heartbeat.

Sebelius signed the measure as she awaits U.S. Senate confirmation as federal Health and Human Services secretary. Anti-abortion groups in Washington have criticized her nomination because she supports abortion rights.

The bill amends a state law requiring doctors to obtain a patient's informed consent before performing an abortion.

© 2009 The Associated Press.

-----------------------------------------------------------
http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/K/KANSAS_ABORTION?SITE=PASUN&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT
-----------------------------------------------------------

My Thoughts

Kansas had a weird day with the abortion issue. First, Dr. Tiller was exonerated, and now the NARAL favorite and Obama's HHS department nominee signed an odd amendment to the abortion law.

I'm not quite sure what they are trying to accomplish with the new law. Why give an ultrasound to a baby that your going to kill anyway? I suppose they are trying to reduce the number of abortions by pulling on the mother's heart strings by having them see and hear the baby alive.

Kansas: Late-Term Abortionist Found Not Guilty

Jury finds Kan. doctor not guilty in abortion case
Mar 27, 5:07 PM (ET)

By ROXANA HEGEMAN
WICHITA, Kan. (AP) - One of the nation's few late-term abortion providers was acquitted Friday of misdemeanor charges stemming from procedures he performed, but moments after the verdict was announced the state's medical board announced it was investigating similar allegations against him.

Prosecutors had alleged that Dr. George Tiller had in 2003 gotten second opinions from a doctor who was essentially an employee of his, not independent as state law requires, but a jury took only about an hour to find him not guilty of all 19 counts.

Tiller, who could have faced a year in jail for even one conviction, stared straight ahead as the verdicts were read, with one of his attorneys patting his shoulder after the decision on the final count was declared. His wife, seated across the courtroom, fought back tears and nodded. The couple declined to speak to reporters afterward.

Tiller, 67, has claimed that the prosecution was politically motivated. An attorney general who opposed abortion rights began the investigation into Tiller's clinic more than four years ago, but both his successor, who filed the criminal charges, and the current attorney general support abortion rights.

Soon after the verdict was announced, the state's Board of Healing Arts made public a complaint against Tiller on allegations similar to those at issue in the criminal case. The complaint was filed in December but not released until Friday.

The board, which regulates doctors, could revoke, suspend or limit Tiller's medical license, or fine him.

Tiller has been a favored target of anti-abortion protesters, and he testified that he and his family have suffered years of harassment and threats. His clinic was the site of the 1991 "Summer of Mercy" protests marked by mass demonstrations and arrests. His clinic was bombed in 1985, and an abortion opponent shot him in both arms in 1993.

Kansas law allows abortions after a fetus can survive outside the womb only if two independent doctors agree that it is necessary to save a women's life or prevent "substantial and irreversible" harm to "a major bodily function," a phrase that has been interpreted to include mental health.

Dr. Ann Kristin Neuhaus provided second opinions on late-term abortions before Tiller performed them.

According to trial testimony, Tiller's patients paid Neuhaus $250 to $300 in cash for providing the consultation and the only way patients could see her was to make an appointment with Tiller's office.

Tiller testified that he used Neuhaus based on advice from his lawyers and from Larry Buening, who was then executive director of the Board of Healing Arts.

Prosecutors tried to show that Tiller ultimately relied on his lawyers' advice - an important distinction because the judge told attorneys before their opening statements that relying on the advice of an attorney cannot be used as a legal defense to criminal charges. They also questioned Tiller about the conversation with Buening, noting that Tiller had testified that Buening said he couldn't quote him.

Tiller also testified that in about five cases each year, Neuhaus would disagree with him about the necessity of a late-term abortion. When she declined to concur, the abortion was not done, he said.

Tiller estimated that he performed 250 to 300 late-term abortions in 2003, each costing an average of $6,000.

Tiller said he is one of three doctors in the U.S. who currently perform late-term abortions. The others are in Boulder, Colo., and Los Angeles, he said.

---

Associated Press Writer John Hanna in Topeka contributed to this report.

-----------------------------------------------------------
http://apnews.myway.com/article/20090327/D976JVSG4.html
-----------------------------------------------------------

My Thoughts

This is a sad day for unborn babies. As an employee of Tiller, Neuhaus is nothing but a rubber stamp for a second opinion of late-term abortions.

Texas: Judge Upholds "Under God" In Pledge of Allegiance

Judge Rules 'Under God' May Stay in Texas Pledge of Allegiance
Saturday, March 28, 2009

DALLAS —  A federal judge has dismissed the claims of a parent who wanted to remove the words "under God" from the Texas pledge of allegiance recited each morning by public schoolchildren.

U.S. District Judge Ed Kinkeade ruled Thursday the state pledge may continue to reference God because the national pledge and four other states reference God or divine grace in their pledge, The Dallas Morning News reported Friday.

"A voluntary recitation of the Texas Pledge of Allegiance simply does not coerce students in the same way a school-sponsored prayer might," Kinkeade wrote in his opinion.

David Croft had argued that inserting the words were unconstitutional and amounted to a violation of separation of church and state. He and his wife, Shannon, sued on behalf of their three children who are enrolled at the Carrollton-Farmers Branch Independent School District.

Previously, the Crofts unsuccessfully sued after an elementary teacher told one of their children to keep quiet because a minute for silence after the pledge was a "time for prayer."

A provision that took effect September 2003 changed the way schools start their days in Texas. Children are now allowed to "reflect, pray, meditate or engage in any other silent activities" for one minute after the state and national pledges of allegiance have been recited. A federal appeals court ruled last week that the law is constitutional.

-----------------------------------------------------------
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,511196,00.html
-----------------------------------------------------------

My Thoughts

As this is my hometown of Carrollton, Texas, I was very interested in this story. I'm glad to see that the childrens' freedom of religious expression was held up in this case.

Although, I don't agree with the judge that the school sponsored prayer wouldn't be voluntary or would coerce anyone to pray. That didn't make sense.

Our freedoms our under fire by liberals and judicial activists. We must stand up and fight to make sure that we get the freedoms that we have lost and keep them from taking more freedoms away.

Tolerance Bullies Go After St. Patrick

From St. Patrick's Day to Shamrock Day?
By Terri Jo Ryan
Tribune-Herald staff writer

Faith and begorrah, is nothing sacred?

Some folks are trying to transform the name of Tuesday's holiday from St. Patrick's Day to "Shamrock Day."

Card shops have banners proclaiming the occasion; the Disney Channel is using the term; and some places in this country have changed the name of their community celebrations of Celtic heritage to the "nonoffending" terminology.

And that offends some folks.

"I'm afraid I could use all kinds of expressions that wouldn't be principled to describe this trend," said Monsignor Mark Deering, 88, senior-most Catholic cleric in these parts.

Deering, retired pastor of St. Louis Catholic Church of Waco, came here from Ireland in 1953 as a freshly minted missionary priest and never left.

"I don't think that would ever be a success to call it Shamrock Day," he said.

People the world over, of every culture and race, enjoy being Irish for the day, he added. And he said he's heard no one take great umbrage before at having a Christian saint's name attached to the day of merriment.

"In fact, in New York City, when the parade comes down Fifth Avenue, the Jews take more joy in it than almost anyone," Deering said.

But the organizers of Shamrock Day celebrations, such as the Habitot Children's Museum in California, cite the need for "cultural diversity to our audience without broaching religious boundaries."

"A number of modern-day celebrations have their origins in religious holidays but have become broadly celebrated by everyone. Halloween and Mardi Gras are prime examples," the Habitot spokeswoman said, as reported on CustosFidei.blogspot.com on March 14, 2007.

But according to Robert Flynn, a novelist and 1954 Baylor University graduate, that's a lot of blarney.

"I don't see what is so wrong about having a saint's name in the holiday. It has no real religious connotation anymore, especially in this country, where it's entirely a secular celebration," Flynn said. "I mean, what will these people do with Rosh Hashana or some other Jewish holiday? Call it Mitzvah Day?"

Flynn, a retired Trinity University professor who lives in San Antonio, said he likes to claim all religions and their holidays as his own.

"It gives you more days off," he said. "Definitely, all Irish need to take the day off Tuesday."


---------------------------------------------------------------
http://wacotrib.qwapi.com/site?sid=wacotrib&pid=Article.detail&targetUrl=http://www.wacotrib.com/services/content/news/stories/2009/03/16/03162009wacshamrockday.html

---------------------------------------------------------------

My Thoughts

Geez! They have too much time on their hands, if they're worried about St. Patrick. Why must the overly sensitive few offend the majority to save themselves from a minor discomfort? What about the majority's sensitivities and discomfort brought about by taking away our traditions, holidays, and culture?

Many Children's Textbooks Misrepresent Religions

Authors Warn That Many Textbooks Distort Religion
Saturday, March 07, 2009 By Lauren Green
Jesus was a Palestinian? That's what one public school textbook says.

Although Jesus lived in a region known in his time as Palestine, the use of the term "Palestinian," with its modern connotations, is among the hundreds of textbook flaws cited in a recent five-year study of educational anti-Semitism detailed in the book "The Trouble with Textbooks: Distorting History and Religion."

Authors Gary Tobin and Dennis Ybarra of the Institute for Jewish and Community Research found some 500 imperfections and distortions concerning religion in 28 of the most widely used social studies and history textbooks in the United States.

Ybarra, a research associate at the institute, called the above example "shocking."

A "true or false" question on the origins of Christianity asserted that "Christianity was started by a young Palestinian named Jesus." The teacher's edition says this is "true."

But even though Jesus is the founder of Christianity, the question ignores the fact that he was Jewish. And Ybarra said, "The Christian scriptures say that he preached in Judea and Galilee, not Palestine," a term that was used at the time as a less specific description of the broader region between the Mediterranean Sea and the Jordan River.

Ybarra says part of the problem is that publishers employ or contract with writers who are not experts in the subject, or they may use out-of-date information. Or they may bow to special interest groups.

"They're under pressure from all kinds of minority groups, religious groups, and they try to satisfy everyone and that results in content that is dumbed down to the lowest common denominator," he said. "And so, in that process, things can be missed. Errors can survive."

Ybarra also claims that the textbooks tend not to treat Christianity, Judaism and Islam equally.

"Islam has a privileged position," he said. "It's not critiqued or criticized or qualified, whereas Judaism and Christianity are."

One example is in the glossary of "World History: Continuity and Change." It calls the Ten Commandments "moral laws Moses claimed to have received from the Hebrew God," while the entry for the Koran contains no such qualifier in saying it is the "Holy Book of Islam containing revelations received by Muhammad from God."

But First Amendment scholar Dr. Charles Haynes, who has written extensively on the subject of public schools and religion, says he thinks sometimes the criticisms go a little too far.

"There's no conspiracy in the textbook industry to favor one religion over another. ... I think the group that bangs the pot the loudest gets the most attention," he said.

"Having said all that, I think the textbooks are working at trying to treat everybody the same way," he added. "They made mistakes. They've got to work on it."

Experts agree, though, that part of the problem rests in the fact that there are so few textbook publishers.

Seventy-five percent of public school books are published by just three companies: Houghton Mifflin, McGraw-Hill and Pearson Education. None responded to requests for comment for this story.

"It's a big problem right now that we have so few choices in our textbooks," Haynes said. "This is an industry. ... It's a marketplace. They're trying to sell their textbooks."

But Ybarra said it goes deeper than pure economics. He thinks the school books are being used as tools for propaganda, particularly to perpetuate negative attitudes towards Christianity, Israel and pro-Palestinian views concerning the Middle East.

"We fear that this is creating a generation of biased school children," he said. "Some of our projects in the higher education realm with some of these same subject matters, we find that students do show up at universities with these prejudices."

Ybarra maintains that, ultimately, parents and communities need to get involved and demand accountability from school boards, publishers and scholars on what goes into the materials being used to teach fresh, young minds.

-----------------------------------------------------------
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,506773,00.html
-----------------------------------------------------------

My Thoughts


This is just another move by the secular, liberal establishment to minimize religion in tomorrow's generation.