Canadian journalists ridicule Preston Manning and the Reform Party because they are afraid of the U.S. religious right, says the president of the Evangelical Fellowship of Canada.

“An NDP member could use a Bible verse, but if a Reform member did it he would be castigated,” Brian Stiller said yesterday.

“The Prime Minister could say ‘God bless you,’ but if Preston Manning did it, they (the media) would see it as imposing his faith,” Mr. Stiller said.

That’s because Reform’s leader, Mr. Manning, is an an evangelical Protestant, as are many Reform MPs. The media view them “through their fear of the American religious right,” Mr. Stiller said.

But the religious right couldn’t impose its views in Canada, even if it wanted to, he said. Evangelicals make up a much smaller proportion of the population in Canada than in the U.S. (10 per cent versus 30 per cent), and Canadians never did share the common American idea that God had chosen their nation to carry out His will in the world.

In a recent book, Like Father Like Son, about Mr. Manning and his father, former Alberta premier Ernest Manning, author Lloyd Mackey says the younger Manning has always wanted to do politics “Christianly.”

But although Mr. Manning is personally opposed to such things as abortion, Mr. Mackey writes that Mr. Manning has made it clear that the Reform party is committed to allowing Canadians to make up their own minds on moral issues.

Mr. Stiller, 55, said the Canadian media have been alienated from evangelicals, not only by the U.S. religious right, but by the abusive and intemperate comments of some evangelicals.

“Our reaction to things we don’t like has been emotional and abusive. It’s embarrassing. There’s no doubt journalists are afraid of us and don’t want to talk to us.”

But, he said, it’s a tragedy that so many Canadians have adopted the idea that religious principles should no longer be mentioned in debate over political issues.

Faith not only provides a vision for life, but a motivation to care for others, he said.

He said there are few countries in the world in which Christianity has exerted a greater influence on the social and cultural life than it has in Canada.

In his own new book, From the Tower of Babel to Parliament Hill, Mr. Stiller urges Christians to face the fact they cannot turn back the clock and impose their values on others.

A truly Christian approach, he says, is to advocate what he calls “cultural pluralism,” a way for people of different beliefs to live together in harmony without abandoning the right to speak openly about their beliefs on such issues as abortion or euthanasia.

He says the RCMP’s 1990 decision to allow Sikhs to wear turbans on duty was a victory not only for Sikhs but also for this approach to pluralism.

Mr. Stiller says he supports the Sikhs in their fight for the right to wear turbans and other insignia of their faith, because they are saying “I can’t be in public service without my faith being part of it. They affirmed my right to be different, too.”

Mr. Stiller said the Sikhs helped open the door for conservative Christians and other believers to be more open on the job about the influence of faith on their lives.

======================================

Joe Versus a Legal Volcano: NOW v. Scheidler goes to the Supremes (021204)

Oral arguments are being heard Wednesday in the U.S. Supreme Court in a case whose outcome could put nonviolent civil disobedience in a deep freeze. If the High Court upholds lower-court rulings, peaceful political protest in this country could be treated as a form of organized crime — with protesters denied even the protections of a criminal trial.

National Organization for Women v. Scheidler, which has been in litigation for 16 years, is a federal case brought by the national feminist lobby against Chicago pro-life activist Joe Scheidler and others, which eventually sought damages from them under the civil provisions of the federal Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations (RICO) Act. NOW’s argument is that by organizing to block abortion clinic entrances and engage in other forms of civil disobedience, pro-lifers were extorting from the clinics their right to business proceeds, and the right of women to engage in commerce (i.e., procuring abortions).

In 1991, a U.S. District Judge ruled that the RICO law wasn’t applicable to this case, and ordered it dismissed, a ruling upheld on appeal. NOW appealed to the Supremes, who were told in an oral presentation by law professor Robert Blakely, RICO’s author, that there is no basis to impute extortion to the pro-lifers because they did not financially gain from their protests. But in January 1994, the Supremes unanimously ruled that the RICO law was unclear about the role monetary gain plays in applying the statute, thereby green-lighting NOW’s lawsuit.

In April of 1998, a civil jury found Scheidler and his codefendants, including the Pro-Life Action League and Operation Rescue, liable under RICO. Even though it was not demonstrated that the defendants engaged in violent acts, NOW convinced the jury that Scheidler and his codefendants conspired to drive the abortion clinics out of business through “force, violence and fear” (incidentally, a recent investigation by World magazine cast serious doubt on the truth of NOW’s witness testimony). The defendants appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court, claiming that peaceful protest cannot be considered extortion.

If the justices uphold the lower courts’ expansive definition of “extortion,” nonviolent civil disobedience will become a much riskier form of protest. A single jury finding of racketeering and extortion could cost an activist everything he owns.

That’s why a large and diverse number of activist groups and individual civil libertarians have signed “friend of the court” briefs on behalf of the pro-life defendants. One of them is the People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals, which has been involved on the pro-life side of the debate for almost ten years.

“Confrontation about social issues is sometimes frightening to people and industries trying to protect their vested interests, but aggressive social debate is not a RICO offense. RICO was designed to fight organized crime, not constitutionally protected protest,” said PETA general counsel Jeffrey S. Kerr, in a statement provided to NRO.

Katie Short, legal director of the Life Legal Defense Fund, says this case hinges on how far the courts will be allowed to go in stretching language to fit ends it finds socially desirable. This explains why noted civil libertarian Nat Hentoff called Scheidler’s RICO judgment “the most serious threat [to civil liberties] in years [because] the law is so broad and vague, it becomes simply a prosecutor’s tool.” Tellingly, Solicitor General Ted Olsen will offer court argument on behalf of NOW’s expansive definition of extortion, supposedly because the U.S. government wants to keep RICO as broad as possible to give itself maintain maximum latitude to prosecute under the statute.

“No one ever dreamed that ‘extortion’ would mean a peaceful sit-in at an abortion clinic,” Short tells NRO. “You no longer have the rule of law when words mean whatever a judge arbitrarily says they mean.”

NOW v. Scheidler is groundbreaking in that it marks the first time RICO has been employed against a social- or political- protest movement. Short warns that a victory for the feminists in the Supreme Court would hand opponents of any protest group a powerful weapon to quash demonstrations.

“They can sue you and push you immediately into danger of liability for treble damages and attorneys’ fees, with none of the due-process protections open to you in a criminal trial,” she says. “It can ruin an organization. It can ruin an individual. It makes people not even want to get involved in protest.”

NOW argues that it does not intend to stop peaceful protest, and that civil RICO can only apply to those who have used force or committed violent acts in the course of demonstrating. But “violent acts,” in NOW’s view, includes sitting down to block the door to an abortion clinic — a common form of protest since the 1960s, and utilized against government, college administrators, corporations, and others.

It is a form of protest we won’t see much of anymore if NOW and its allies sway the Supremes. If that were to happen, we would all have to count ourselves fortunate that the civil-rights movement desegregated lunch counters down south before RICO and its feminist friends came along. Jim Crow cafeteria owners could have owned the NAACP, the SCLC, and SNCC, and put Martin Luther King and his family in the poorhouse.

==============================

“Field Guide” Bye-Bye: Abercrombie and Fitch stops selling porn (NRO, 031201)

In matters of foreign policy, Teddy Roosevelt advised, one should speak softly and carry a big stick. Last month tens of thousands of Americans applied that advice to a vexing domestic matter. Their “big stick” was the threat of a nationwide boycott of one of Roosevelt’s favorite stores, Abercrombie and Fitch.

The threat worked. Four days before the official start of the Christmas shopping season — Abercrombie, known for overpriced clothes and underdressed models — ordered its 651 stores to stop selling “The Christmas Field Guide,” the latest edition of the company’s pornographic quarterly magazine. It’s evidently the start of a permanent ban on selling the quarterly in stores, and it’s evidence that when enough people get mad — and take action — even the most libertine companies will sometimes back down.

Abercrombie’s quarterly has long angered parents and others concerned about cultural decay. The 2003 Christmas issue features dozens of naked young men and women in various sexual poses, including group sex. The pictures are accompanied by a column from a “sexpert” who, among other lewd advice, suggests readers engage in oral sex in movie theaters “so long as you do not disturb those around you.”

Earlier editions featured pictures of Santa in sadomasochistic poses with his elves, drinking tips, advice on seducing everyone from teachers to nuns, and a recommendation that students “negotiate a special group rate at a local motel, which your entire quad can take advantage of.” A&F recently outraged parents by marketing, to seven-year-old girls, thong-style panties featuring slogans like “Eye Candy” and “Wink Wink.”

I visited an A&F store at the Montgomery Mall in Bethesda, Maryland last Wednesday. I was planning to write a story about the quarterly, and wanted to see a copy for myself. But when I got to the counter, the sales associate told me they were no longer selling the Christmas issue. This was confirmed by store manager Matt Willard, who said all A&F stores were ordered to stop selling the quarterly last Tuesday. Store managers were given no explanation for the decision, he said.

I called Abercrombie’s national headquarters in New Albany, Ohio to confirm this. CEO Mike Jeffries and his staff were not available, but an employee who gave his name as “Brennan” said the company had been, over the last two weeks, received 300 calls per hour from people announcing they were boycotting A&F stores until the clothier stopped selling the quarterly. The decision to yank the Christmas issue from stores was made at the beginning of Thanksgiving week, he added.

Who was behind the boycotts?

“Ever hear of Dr. Dobson?” Brennan asked.

James Dobson of Focus on the Family recently spent a radio program and an appearance on MSNBC’s Scarborough Country urging listeners to boycott Abercrombie until it stopped publishing the quarterly.

Dobson was joined in his efforts by former Redskins coach Joe Gibbs, Chuck Colson, the American Decency Association (ADA), the National Coalition for the Protection of Children and Families, and others.

Pressure on A&F may also have come from another source: Corporations that own other stores. Bill Johnson, says that his group had come up with a unique new strategy for getting a Grand Rapids, Michigan A&F to not only stop selling its raunchy quarterly, but also to get rid of the huge photographs of naked models that decorate the walls of every A&F store.

Discussions with Abercrombie and the manager of the Rivertown Crossings Mall in Grand Rapids had gone nowhere. So Johnson sent a letter to the managers of all 120 mall stores expressing concerns about what children visiting the mall were being exposed to. He enclosed several photos from A&F’s quarterly. Police yourselves, he warned, or we’ll urge people to boycott the entire mall — right at the start of the Christmas shopping season.

Johnson immediately heard from two stores, including the manager of one of the mall’s largest department stores. In the last two weeks there have been, Johnson says, “significant discussions” between the corporation that owns the department store and Abercrombie, leading the ADA to agree to agree to delay the boycott.

The mainstreaming of porn is nothing new. What outrages many parents is that Abercrombie is deliberately aiming its porn and damaging lifestyle advice, not at dirty old men, but at kids.

The best news is the lasting Christmas gift Abercrombie is giving to America. When I tried to order a “Field Guide” by telephone, an A&F employee told me the company’s decision to keep the quarterly out of stores is permanent. She, too, blamed the boycotts. The only people who will have access to the quarterly in future, she added, are those who already have a subscription. It’s a huge step forward.

A&F’s CEO Mike Jeffries has for years sneered at those who complained about his quarterly’s filth. Asking him softly to clean up his act didn’t work, but big stick evidently did.

— Anne Morse is a freelance writer in Virginia.

==============================

Falwell Launches ‘Faith and Values Coalition’ to Maintain Post-election ‘Evangelical Revolution’ (Christian Post, 041110)

Dr. Jerry Falwell, founder of Liberty University, launches a national organization designed to resurrect the Moral Majority.

Hoping to use the momentum of the November 2 elections in which “values voters” re-elected President Bush, Dr. Jerry Falwell announced the formation of The Faith and Values Coalition, a national organization designed to keep up the “evangelical revolution of voters who will continue to go to the polls and ‘vote Christian.’”

With 71-year-old Falwell serving as the national chairman for the next four years, the group plans to seek to confirm pro-life judicial nominees, pass a constitutional Federal Marriage Amendment, and elect another conservative president in the 2008 elections.

“Essentially, TFVC is a 21st century resurrection of the Moral Majority,” Falwell said in a press release.

Alongside Falwell, Mathew Staver, founder, president and general counsel of the Orlando, Florida-based Liberty Counsel, will serve as vice-chairman and Falwell’s son, Jonathan Falwell, will serve as executive director. Renowned author and theologian Dr. Tim LaHaye will serve as the Coalition’s board chairman.

“One of our primary commitments is to help make President Bush”s second term the most successful in American history,” said Falwell. “He will certainly need the consistent prayer and support of the evangelical community as he continues to spearhead the international war on terror and the effort to safeguard America.”

According to Falwell, the organization will have three platforms:

1. The confirmation of pro-life, strict constructionist U.S. Supreme Court justices and other federal judges

2. The passage of a constitutional Federal Marriage Amendment

3. The election of another socially- fiscally- and politically-conservative president in 2008, along with other state and national candidates.

He said his new leadership role in TFVC reminded him of a similar commitment he made when he found and began leading an organization called Moral Majority in April 1979.

“At that time, God burdened my heart to mobilize religious conservatives around a pro-life, pro-family, strong national defense and pro-Israel platform, designed to return America to her Judeo-Christian heritage,” Falwell recalled.

Falwell noted that during Moral Majority”s heyday, “we registered millions of new voters and re-activated millions more. More than 100,000 pastors, priests and rabbis and nearly seven million families joined hands and hearts to reclaim America for God. Many historians believe the result was the election of Ronald Reagan in 1980 and the genesis of what the media calls the ‘Religious Right.’”

After ten years of leadership, Falwell disbanded the organization to focus on the expansion of Liberty University.

But he said he distinctively feels that burden again.

“Our nation simply cannot continue as we know it if we allow out-of-control lawmakers and radical judges — working at the whims of society — to alter the moral foundations of America,” said Falwell.

He pointed to what he saw as indisputable election results which were “a mandate on marriage and morality.”

“President Bush was reelected. Eleven family initiatives passed overwhelmingly in favor of traditional marriage, and opposing same-sex marriage. Unprecedented victories in the Senate and the House strengthened the President’s hand for future congressional action,” said Falwell.

He continued, “Tom Daschle, the Senate Minority Leader who had consistently obstructed President Bush’s efforts to appoint constructionist judges, was defeated. His defeat should serve as a powerful indicator that we have the power to effectively take on politicians who are under the spell of the potent abortion-rights organizations across this nation.”

Adding that he “shed tears of joy” when he saw the return of his work, he stated, “Nearly 116 million Americans voted. More than 30 million were evangelical Christians who, according to the pollsters, voted their moral convictions. I proudly say... they voted Christian!”

Falwell attributes election victory to several evangelical leaders, including Dr. James Dobson, founder of Focus on the Family, Dr. Donald Wildmon of the American Family Association, Dr. D. James Kennedy of Coral Ridge Ministries, Dr. John Hagee of Cornerstone Church in San Antonio, and the many national leaders of the Arlington Group, the upstart alternative Internet news sites and more than 225,000 evangelical pastors.

Falwell said he is now “lending my influence to help send out at least 40 million evangelical voters in 2008” and to finish what he started a quarter of a century ago.

Said Falwell, “With more than seven decades now in the rear view mirror, I can honestly say that I feel the leading of the Holy Spirit to answer that call and to once again mobilize people of faith to reclaim this great country as ‘one nation under God.’”

Although he said is fulfilling his “light of the world” calling by continuing to serve as pastor of Thomas Road Baptist Church and chancellor of Liberty University, he is “praying for the strength and wisdom to also successfully complete my ‘salt of the earth’ ministry.”

“America is worth saving. Our children and children”s children will hold us accountable if we fail.”

He said the TFVC will task of bringing this nation back to the moral values of faith and family on which it was founded be organizing in all 50 states and “enlisting and training millions of Americans to become partners in this exciting.”

Falwell said his National Liberty Journal newspaper will serve as a springboard for the TFVC effort.

He concluded, “I urge my friends around the country to immediately get involved and join me in this four-year commitment, which is really an investment in America, in our children and in our children’s children.”

==============================

Falwell Invigorated by 2004 Election (Foxnews, 041213)

WASHINGTON — Invigorated by what he calls the “greatest victory” in the history of the religious right, Rev. Jerry Falwell says he is going to resurrect the Moral Majority — the movement he started in the 1970s that some say led to the march of Christian soldiers to Washington.

“We just experienced the greatest conservative victory in American history — we have never had a victory like Nov. 2 — and it’s the most dangerous time for our movement ever,” the evangelical activist and pastor told FOXNews.com.

Falwell said the movement must now fight complacency in the face of looming battles over gay marriage and possible vacancies on the Supreme Court.

“We therefore will be pounding, pounding doors through the media and the pulpits of our churches for the next 48 months to make sure we don’t get into trouble,” he said.

But one Democratic insider says Falwell’s often controversial and divisive presence on the Republican landscape may not be welcome.

“If he becomes the voice of the evangelicals, they’ve got big problems,” said Democratic strategist Tom King, who called Falwell a lightning rod who wants to cash in on the acclaim given to “moral values voters” credited, in part, with re-electing President Bush.

“I think he wants to be part of the action, and in resurrecting himself, he is trying to do that,” King said.

Conservatives who spoke with FOXNews.com disagreed, saying the more people who join in the movement, the more effective it will be.

“I’m more than happy that the Rev. Falwell reconstituted the Moral Majority coalition,” said Richard Land, president of the Southern Baptist Convention’s Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission. “I think anything that can be done to keep up the resurgence of moral values voters is good for the country.”

Falwell, 71, has a long religious, educational and political career that includes being the host of the longest running evangelical radio show, the Old-Time Gospel Hour, and the establishment of Falwell Ministries, the conservative Liberty University and the Thomas Road Baptist Church.

He began the Moral Majority in 1979 in order to energize Christians, particularly conservative evangelicals, who had previously shunned the political process.

“[In the 1970s] good Christians did not participate in politics,” said long-time conservative activist, Richard Viguerie, who was there at the start of the organization, often meeting with religious leaders and activists in his home.

“But sometime in the mid-’70s, Dr. Falwell and other Protestant leaders stepped up and said ‘No, no, the government is going to take away freedom of religious worship and continue to move the country in a direction that we don’t approve of, unless we step up and involve ourselves politically,’” Viguerie added.

Emboldened by what conservatives said was moral decay caused by counter-culture hubris and newly legalized abortion, Falwell’s Moral Majority struck a nerve and sent conservatives flocking to the polls in 1980 to elect Ronald Reagan.

“It became a sea change in how Protestants saw how to solve the problems of the world,” Viguerie said.

Falwell said today’s Christian evangelicals are more politically involved than ever. “Today, it’s hard to find a pastor who is not politically savvy or involved,” he said.

The Moral Majority, which had built an impressive ideological organ of grassroots activism and direct-mail fundraising, disbanded in 1989, after religious conservatives saw Reagan’s successor, George H.W. Bush, as lukewarm on their issues.

The “religious right” did not die down, however, and a new group of leaders, headed in part by the Christian Coalition, helped bring about the Republican Revolution of 1994, achieving GOP majorities in the House and Senate for the first time in decades.

In 2004, President George W. Bush’s re-election team was able to tap into growing concerns about gay marriage, abortion and religious freedom, and Christian conservatives responded accordingly, Falwell said.

The Lynchburg, Va., native nevertheless remains a serious target for people who do not share his brand of social conservatism. He has been called a bigot and homophobic, and he was harshly criticized last year when he called Islam’s prophet Mohammed “a terrorist.”

He was also forced to explain comments he made following the Sept. 11, 2001, terror attacks, in which he blamed liberal “secularists,” including gays, lesbians and the American Civil Liberties Union, for making the United States a target for foreign terrorists. He said later that he didn’t intend to place blame on anyone but the Sept. 11 hijackers.

“Jerry Falwell’s negatives are higher than those of a car salesman,” King said.

Richard Semiatin, professor of government for American University, said Falwell has “marginalized himself politically” during the years by his brand of over-the-top evangelical politics.

“He will be more of a hindrance than a help – that’s the key,” he said.

Comments like that don’t bother Falwell. He said evangelical networks were widely responsible for helping place constitutional amendments barring gay marriage on 11 states’ ballots. All of them passed, and some say were responsible for driving conservatives to the polls.

It’s a strategy Falwell expects to employ again.

“Between now and ‘08, we are going to be putting on state ballots family initiatives and controversial initiatives to awaken our people out to the polls,” he said, underscoring another main goal of the new Moral Majority – to elect a social conservative to succeed Bush in 2008.

“I want to see that red map on my wall get even redder,” he said, referring to the color denoting Republican territory.

Falwell said he wants 1 million members on board by January, and while he insists the new Moral Majority does not need to fund-raise, the Web sites, www.faithandvalues.us and www.Falwell.com, are accepting donations.

Roberta Combs, president of the Christian Coalition, said Falwell’s new endeavor is welcome, but it’s not the only game in town.

“All Jerry Falwell is doing is starting another organization – it’s not like the movement is monolithic,” Combs said. “I think it’s great, there’s lots of room for a lot of organizations. There is a lot of work to do, but that doesn’t mean there aren’t already groups out there doing their job.”

==============================

Evangelicals say Greater, Broader Civic Engagement Needed (Christian Post, 050316)

Evangelicals from across the nation convened in Washington D.C. for an informal discussion on a document designed to encourage greater civic participation among evangelicals, on Thursday, March 10, 2005.

Sponsored by the National Association of Evangelicals (NAE), the participants discussed the paper, “For the Health of the Nation: An Evangelical Call to Civic Responsibility,” and assessed the future direction of the evangelical movement.

The paper essentially encourages evangelicals to cover broader topics of Christian concern — such as religious liberty, poverty, peace, racial injustice, nd the environment/creation — rather than fixating on the fight against abortion and same-sex marriage.

While the paper, which was unanimously adopted by the NAE Board of Directors on October 2004, was generally accepted and supported by the evangelical leaders, others expressed concern that the new broad platform may “dilute the focus of the evangelical movement by taking issues,” according to New York Times.

“The issues of marriage, the issues of pro-life are the issues that define us to this day,” said Tom Minnery, vice president of Focus on the Family, at the luncheon. “Do not make this about global warming.”

However, the speakers at the event and most of the participants generally agreed that the document was necessary in order to portray the true mix of evangelicals – liberal, moderate and conservative - and their beliefs.

“Evangelicals have sometimes been accused of having a one- or two-item political agenda,” said the Rev. Ronald J. Sider, one of the drafters of the document and president of Evangelicals for Social Action. “This document makes it very clear that a vast body of evangelicals today reject a one-issue approach.”

The “Evangelical Call to Civic Responsibility,” calls on Christians to work for the transformation of “both individuals and institutions” but does not address any specific legislation.

The statement notes that evangelicals must be supporters of the gospel – not a set of political beliefs.

“While we may frequently settle for ‘half-a-loaf,’ we must never compromise principle by engaging in unethical behavior or endorsing or fostering sin,” the statement reads. “As we rightly engage in supporting legislation, candidates and political parties, we must be clear that biblical faith is vastly larger and richer than every limited, inevitably imperfect political agenda and that commitment to the Lordship of Christ and his one body far transcends all political commitments.”

Barbara Williams-Skinner, president of the Skinner Leadership Institute, a Christian training center in Tracy’s Landing, Md., reiterated the statement’s call for evangelicals to engage themselves in issues beyond gay marriage and abortion.

“The litmus test is the Gospel, the whole of it,” said Ms. Williams-Skinner, an African-American who told the group that she is a Democrat who opposes abortion, according to NY Times.

According to Baptist Press, nearly 90 evangelical leaders have signed on to the document, including: Richard Land, president of the Southern Baptist Ethics & Religious Liberty Commission; Dobson, founder of Focus on the Family; Colson, founder of Prison Fellowship; and Warren, pastor of Saddleback Church in Southern California and author of “The Purpose-Driven Life.”

Other signers included Barrett Duke, the ERLC’s vice president for public policy; NAE President Ted Haggard; Jack Hayford, president of the International Church of the Foursquare Gospel; Walter Kaiser, president of Gordon Conwell Theological Seminary; Diane Knippers, president of the Institute on Religion and Democracy; David Neff, editor of Christianity Today; John Perkins, founder of Voice of Calvary Ministries; Ron Sider, president of Evangelicals for Social Action; and author and apologist Ravi Zacharias.

The NAE represents 30 million people in 45,000 churches and has 51 member denominations.

==============================

Dobson: Boycott Procter & Gamble (WorldNetDaily, 040916)

‘Tacit support’ of same-sex marriage ‘affront to its customers’

Cincinnati-based Procter & Gamble should be boycotted for its efforts to overturn a local law barring special rights to homosexuals, says Focus on the Family founder and chairman James Dobson.

Dobson will urge listeners of his daily radio program today to stop buying two of the company’s best-known products, Tide laundry detergent and Crest toothpaste.

His half-hour program reaches about 9 million listeners a week in North America.

The American Family Association already has launched a boycott against those products for the company’s financial support of a campaign to repeal a Cincinnati city-charter amendment approved in 1993 with 62% of the vote. The group has set up an online petition.

Dobson argues that in addition to giving $10,000 to the campaign to overturn the amendment in November, Procter & Gamble has said it “will not tolerate discrimination in any form, against anyone, for any reason.”

The family advocate says while the company does not explicitly endorse same-sex marriage, its statements and policies communicate the notion that restricting marriage to one man and one woman is discriminatory.

“For Procter & Gamble to align itself with radical groups committed to redefining marriage in our country is an affront to its customers,” Dobson said. “An overwhelming majority of Americans — the men and women who buy this company’s products — oppose same-sex marriage. To give no thought to their views while selling out to a very small special-interest group is not only bad business, it’s bad for the country.”

A Procter & Gamble media contact gave WND the company’s standard response to the boycott.

“Statements and assertions made by these organizations are wrong. P&G has not supported gay marriage. The definition of marriage is a subject that will be debated and decided by voters.”

Spokesman Doug Shelton was not immediately available for further comment.

Dobson said he has been disturbed by the company’s sponsorship of “sexualized television programing,” but “what its doing now threatens the cornerstone of our society: the family.”

He acknowledges the difficulty of carrying out an effective boycott.

“It’s tough to make a dent, financially, in a corporate giant like Procter & Gamble,” Dobson said. “But we can send a very strong message to the men and women in the corporate offices: ‘Not only have you lost your moral compass, but you have lost our business. And you’re not going to get it back until you stop insulting us and disregarding our values.’”

‘Bigoted’ attitude

Phil Burris, president of the citizens group trying to maintain the Cincinnati amendment, told AgapePress in February he was stunned the company would go against the majority of city residents who oppose giving special rights to homosexuals.

He contends the company fosters an environment hostile toward people who hold traditional values.

“Many people have left Procter and Gamble because of the hateful, bigoted attitude that it has toward people of faith,” said Burris of the Equal Rights Not Special Rights committee. “And if you do not endorse and accept homosexuality, they will drum you out of the company.”

In 2002, Procter & Gamble began offering “domestic-partner benefits” to its employees. The company did not issue a press release, but an internal memo acquired by Concerned Women for America’s Culture and Family Institute said the move was in line with P&G’s “commitment to valuing diversity” and “promotes equal opportunity related to marital status or sexual orientation.”

In 2000, the Gay & Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation praised Procter & Gamble for its decision to drop an advertising buy on a television show planned by Dr. Laura Schlessinger because of “controversy surrounding Dr. Laura on a number of topics.”

In its announcement of the decision, P&G did not specify the topics, but GLAAD, hailing the company’s move, said, “Criticism of Schlessinger’s anti-gay commentaries has intensified in the last year, with the Canadian Broadcast Standards Council ruling last week that her broadcasts were ‘abusively discriminatory’ toward lesbians and gay men.”

Other major companies that distanced themselves from Schlessinger included Xerox, AT&T, United Airlines, Toys ‘R’ Us and American Express.

Within days of the Dr. Laura announcement, the company was criticized for declaring support for Cincinnati’s Gay Pride Parade. But P&G insisted it was supporting its employees, not the parade itself.

In the past, rumors spread that Procter & Gamble was tied to Satanism, prompting calls for boycotts. But prominent Christian leaders denounced the charges as baseless.

In the 1980s, the claim was based on an interpretation of the company’s man-in-the-moon logo. In the 1990s, e-mails falsely claimed the president of the company appeared on the “Phil Donahue Show” and announced a large portion of the company’s profits supports the church of Satan.

==============================

Procter & Gamble boycott builds momentum (WorldNetDaily, 041009)

Family advocates protest company’s support of homosexual rights

Nearly a quarter-of-a-million people have signed a pledge to boycott Procter & Gamble products because of the company’s policy on homosexual rights. As WorldNetDaily reported, the American Family Association and James Dobson’s Focus on the Family are promoting the boycott of the Cincinnati-based company for its efforts to overturn a local law barring special rights to homosexuals.

Dobson has urged listeners of his daily radio program to stop buying two of the company’s best-known products, Tide laundry detergent and Crest toothpaste.

He argues that in addition to giving $10,000 to the campaign to overturn the amendment in November, Procter & Gamble has said it “will not tolerate discrimination in any form, against anyone, for any reason.”

A Procter & Gamble media contact gave WND the company’s standard response to the boycott.

“Statements and assertions made by these organizations are wrong. P&G has not supported gay marriage. The definition of marriage is a subject that will be debated and decided by voters.”

Donald E. Wildmon, founder and chairman of AFA, said P&G is aggressively leading the fight to repeal the law.

Citizens to Restore Fairness, the group advocating special rights for homosexuals, is chaired by Gary Wright, an employee of P&G on a leave of absence to lead the campaign. Wright also heads P&G’s corporate homosexual group GABLE/P&G.

Wildmon says P&G has written its employees, encouraging support for the company’s efforts.

He stated that while P&G supports laws favoring homosexuals, it refuses to back the Ohio Marriage Protection Amendment which defines marriage as being between one man and one woman.

P&G has been promoting the homosexual political agenda for years, Wildmon says, including advertising in homosexual-themed publications and television programs.

==============================

Pro-family groups claim boycott success (WorldNetDaily, 050419)

Aimed at Procter & Gamble’s support of homosexual agenda

Claiming success, pro-family groups called off a boycott on Procter & Gamble that was prompted by the Cincinnati-based corporation’s “support for the homosexual agenda.”

The American Family Association, with backing from Focus on the Family and others, garnered nearly 400,000 signatures on a pledge to stop buying some of the corporation’s signature products, including Crest toothpaste.

“Judging by all we found in our research, it appears that our concerns have been addressed,” said Donald Wildmon, AFA’s chairman.

Based on AFA’s monitoring, Wildmon said P&G has stopped sponsoring homosexual Internet sites and TV programs such as “Will and Grace.”

According to AFA, P&G was the leading sponsor of “programming that normalized homosexuality,” paying more than $8.2 million in only six months to shows such as “Will and Grace” and $2 million to “Queer Eye for the Straight Guy.”

P&G spokeswoman Vicky Mayer told WorldNetDaily the company is “pleased to learn the AFA has suspended their actions.”

“P&G has always been focused on serving our consumers and that’s where our focus remains,” she said.

Did the boycott affect P&G?

“Well, I really, the only thing I can say is our advertising guidelines remain unchanged,” Mayer said. “We have one of the most conservative guidelines in the industry. We stick with our guidelines. So that remains unchanged.”

Mayer insisted there has been no change in policy.

“In reality, the absence of P&G advertising on the ‘Will and Grace’ show is due to either the episode did not meet our content guidelines or we decided not to buy ads” for a certain time, she said. “... We stand by our guidelines as we continue to adjust media purchases and ad copy to reflect our consumer preferences.”

So, was there an adjustment made within the context of “consumer preferences”?

Mayer said she couldn’t answer that, but offered, “We are always reviewing our consumer viewing patterns and preferences — what it is our consumers prefer and what they’re viewing.”

AFA also complained the company had sponsored “gay pride” parades and workshops advocating acceptance of the homosexual lifestyle, which they required their employees to attend. In addition, the company gave $10,000 to a campaign last fall to overturn a Cincinnati law barring special rights to homosexuals.

Mayer defended P&G’s support of the campaign, pointing out the company was one of many sponsors.

“P&G is a good corporate citizen, and P&G, along with major corporations in the city, decided it was dileterious to our recruiting,” she said.

Mayer said the city policy is offensive to young people.

“Not that all of them were gay, it’s just that young professionals are really turned off by that type of narrow thinking — disregarding rights, everyone’s rights really.”

The AFA’s Tim Wildmon told WND he has evidence from an unnamed source inside Procter & Gamble that the boycott was taken seriously at the highest levels of management.

Responding to Wildmon’s claim, Mayer said: “Of course, we take seriously any group of consumers that want to boycott our products. We are reasonable people, and we would like to know what our consumers are concerned about.”

Tim Wildmon believes the boycott might have had a small impact on sales, but, moreover, “Anything like this is not good for their image.”

Also, he said, the company might have been motivated by the potential for the boycott growing, noting AFA has more than 2 million names on its mailing list.

As WorldNetDaily reported, last fall, Focus on the Family founder James Dobson urged listeners of his daily radio program to stop buying two of the company’s best-known products, Tide laundry detergent and Crest toothpaste.

The family advocate said that while the company did not explicitly endorse same-sex marriage, its statements and policies communicated the notion that restricting marriage to one man and one woman is discriminatory.

At the time, Procter & Gamble insisted it “has not supported gay marriage. The definition of marriage is a subject that will be debated and decided by voters.”

But AFA pointed out Citizens to Restore Fairness, the group advocating special rights for homosexuals, was chaired by Gary Wright, an employee of P&G on a leave of absence to lead the campaign. Wright also headed P&G’s corporate homosexual group GABLE/P&G.

AFA said P&G wrote to employees, encouraging support for the company’s efforts.

==============================

Demography and the Culture War—A Rightward Shift? (Christian Post, 050418)

Those who think demographic statistics should be of interest only to social scientists and policy wonks should pay close attention to Stanley Kurtz’s recent article, “Demographics and the Culture War,” published in the current edition of Policy Review. A Research Fellow at the Hoover Institution of Stanford University, Kurtz is one of the most thoughtful observers of social trends on today’s scene.

Kurtz begins his article with a warning that the process of modernization that has marked Western societies for the last 200 years could be stopped in its tracks, or even forced into retreat. “We moderns have gotten used to the slow, seemingly inexorable dissolution of traditional social forms, the family prominent among them. Yet the ever-decreasing size of the family may soon expose a fundamental contradiction in modernity itself. Fertility rates have been falling throughout the industrialized world for more than 30 years, with implications that are only just now coming into view. Growing population has driven the economy, sustained the welfare state, and shaped Western culture. A declining population could conceivably put the dynamic of modernization into doubt.”

That powerful paragraph is packed with insight. Each of the social trends he identifies is well established in the data, but few observers have been sufficiently brave to offer the candid analysis Kurtz here provides.

The publication of several seminal volumes on the reality and significance of declining birth rates caught Kurtz’s attention. Books by figures such as Phillip Longman, Ben Wattenberg, Peter G. Peterson, and the team of Laurence J. Kotlikoff and Scott Burns offer a similar assessment, pointing to declining birth rates as a major issue of social concern. For some, the particular focus is on the economic consequences of a shrinking labor force and consumer market. Others are more interested in the consequences of aging and a future marked by an imbalance between the young and the old. In any event, these authors are agreed on one main point—demography is destiny.

Looking at the demographic data, Kurtz argues that the “essential facts of demographic decline” should not be doubted. “Global fertility rates have fallen by half since 1972,” Kurtz notes. “For a modern nation to replace its population, experts explain, the average woman needs to have 2.1 children over the course of her lifetime. Not a single industrialized nation today has a fertility rate of 2.1, and most are well below replacement level.”

A look backwards sometimes helps to put the data into context. When Ben Franklin was alive, America averaged eight births per woman. Kurtz notes that current American birth rates are the highest in the industrialized world, but still below the replacement level of 2.1. Beyond this, he documents the fact that the American birth rate is as high as it is only because of a substantial population of immigrants, who tend to reproduce at higher levels. “Fertility rates among native born American women are now far below what they were even in the 1930s, when the Great Depression forced a sharp reduction in family size,” Kurtz asserts.

All this flies in the face of the now-discredited prophets of the population “explosion” that was supposed to bring devastation in both economic and ecological terms. At this point in world history, the global situation is more endangered by too few births than too many.

The conventional wisdom has been that, though birth rates have been falling in the industrialized world, reproduction rates in the Third World more than compensated for this decline. This is clearly no longer the case. Fertility rates in the Third World have been falling precipitously. As Kurtz explains, “From East Asia to the Middle East to Mexico, countries once fabled for their high fertility rates are now falling swiftly toward or below replacement levels.”

In the developing world, a typical woman in 1970 bore six children. Today, the average woman bears only 2.7 children. Kurtz describes this fall in fertility rates as “historically unprecedented.” Already, fertility rates in many developing countries have fallen below replacement levels. Even the United Nations now admits that the population in the world is headed down, not up.

Moreover, declining birth rates lead to the inevitable aging of the population. Increasing life expectancy adds years to the lives of individuals, fueling the demographic trend. Kurtz notes that the typical life expectancy for an American born in 1900 was 47 years. In 2005, it is 76 years. Kurtz puts these statistics into context: “By 2050, one out of five Americans will be over age 65, making the U.S. population as a whole markedly older than Florida’s population today. Striking as that demographic graying may be, it pales before projections for countries like Italy and Japan. The United Nations estimates that by 2050, 42% of all people in Italy and Japan will be age 60 or older.”

No one knows if societies that have aged to this degree can sustain themselves. Older solutions may not work. “With fertility falling swiftly in the developing nations, immigration will not be able to ameliorate certain implications of the rapidly aging West,” Kurtz predicts. “Even in the short or medium term, the aging imbalance cannot be rectified except through a level of immigration far above what Western countries will find politically acceptable.”

What does all this mean? Kurtz suggests that Western nations are even now beginning to experience the impact of these demographic changes. Beyond this, he insists that these changes will bring “substantial cultural consequences.”

A balance between younger and older citizens has been an important factor contributing to social stability. All this is now endangered by the unprecedented aging of populations in the West. “Historically, the aged made up only a small portion of society,” Kurtz suggests, “and the rearing of children has been the chief concern. Now children will become a small minority, and society’s central problem will be caring for the elderly. Yet even this assumes that societies consisting of elderly citizens at levels of 20, 30, even 40 or more percent can sustain themselves at all. That is not obvious.”

Can these trends be reversed? Not quickly. Kurtz explains that demographic trends toward decline are “set to ramify geometrically.” Not only are women bearing fewer children, but the smaller number of young women produced by these birth rates would be hard pressed to reverse the trend, even if they chose to do so. As a result, children will become more and more expensive to raise, competing with older citizens for limited resources, cultural attention, and priority.

The economics of childbearing have changed remarkably in recent decades. In an agrarian society, children meant additional hands to work in the fields. Today’s economy, in contrast, often forces would-be parents to choose between the cost of childbearing and the enticements of a consumer society.

As Kurtz understands, in the current economic context, “children represent a tremendous expense, and one increasingly unlikely to be returned to parents in the form of wealth or care. With the growth of a consumer economy, potential parents are increasingly presented with a zero-sum choice between children and more consumer goods and services for themselves.”

Modern economies have been premised upon the assumption of continued population growth. The free market and the welfare state, Kurtz reminds, “assume continual population growth” and require future generations to pay the social costs of the aging generations before them. Phillip Longman, one of the authors Kurtz cites in his article, argues that there has never been economic growth in a context of population decline.

America’s consumer economy assumes an ever-expanding pool of consumers. Population growth becomes necessary in order for the economy to expand and thrive. A shrinking pool of potential customers can spell disaster for the economic system. Furthermore, “America’s massive unfounded entitlement programs have the potential to spark a serious social and economic crisis in the not too distant future,” Kurtz warns, adding that the welfare state in other developed nations “is on even shakier economic ground.”

A weird form of generational warfare may already be apparent in voting trends. The mobilization of elderly voters—a group soon to expand in huge numbers as the baby boomers age—means that politicians will be required to give increasing attention and priority to this group’s concerns. After all, the aged vote in large numbers, while infants do not.

Many observers paying close attention to these trends seem most concerned about the economic consequences. Some warn of an economic “hard landing” that will come when a shrinking labor force is unable to pay unfounded social entitlements. Others warn of a potential “spiraling financial crisis” that could lead to something like a global economic depression.

Kurtz, however, sees something of even greater significance on the horizon. He understands that the Culture War will be affected by these long term demographic trends, and he understands that the lifestyle assumptions of late modernity are incompatible with any solution to the problem of population decline.

There are others who see the future in similar terms. Phillip Longman believes the pattern of population decline may be reversed only if society accepts a fundamental cultural change. The prevailing worldview assumptions of late modernity, including such cherished notions as personal autonomy, human liberation, self-actualization, and self-absorption will be called into question as the birth rate crisis becomes more visible.

Longman appears to fear that any fundamental cultural change sufficiently significant to address this problem may be couched in theological terms. The lifestyle movements of the 1960s, ranging from feminism and the sexual revolution to pop psychology and moral relativism, set the stage for an acceptance of falling birth rates. Would a return to a pro-natal philosophy require an abandonment of those cherished ideological artifacts of the 1960s?

Kurtz insists that “we needn’t resort to disaster scenarios to see that our current demographic dilemma portends fundamental cultural change.” As he expands: “Let us say that in the wake of the coming economic and demographic stresses, a serious secular, pronatalist program . . . were to take hold and succeed. The result might not be ‘fundamentalism,’ yet it would almost certainly involve greater cultural conservatism. Married parents tend to be more conservative, politically and culturally. Predictions of future dominance for the Democratic Party are based on the increasing demographic prominence of single women. Delayed marriage lowers fertility rates and moves the culture leftward. Reverse that trend by stimulating married parenthood, and the country grows more conservative—whether in a religious mode or not.”

As usual, Stanley Kurtz has written an informative article that demands attention, combining keen social analysis with an understanding of deeper ideological issues. No one can predict with certainty how future demographic trends will transform society. Nevertheless, we can already see where these trends are pointing, and we must think seriously about the long range consequences of these unprecedented demographic patterns. As Kurtz’s analysis should remind us, these demographic trends point to deeper personal, cultural, ideological, and spiritual issues. Inevitably, the Culture War will be played out on the battlefields of these data projections. Beyond this, these demographic trends may point to a fundamental shift in the way the Culture War is both fought and understood. After all, to a great extent, demography is destiny.

_______________________________________________

R. Albert Mohler, Jr. is president of The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary in Louisville, Kentucky.

==============================

Microsoft Thinks Hard (Christian Post, 050503)

In this age of technology, when someone at Microsoft speaks, most people listen. Due to the scope and profitability of the company, leaders at Microsoft wield enviable influence far beyond matters of computers and software. So when Microsoft removed their support for a bill designed to add sexual orientation to anti-discrimination law in Washington state, the bill’s supporters were outraged. Failing by one vote in the Senate, the bill’s demise has been blamed on Microsoft’s official neutrality.

Gay rights supporters were livid. Columnist Wayne Besen reacted by suggesting gay activists “…dust off your boxing gloves and prepare to fight for your rights or, you can stay silent and redecorate your closet…” Equal Rights of Washington state is asking for Microsoft to return a diversity award presented to the company in 1991. Despite the passage of civil unions in Connecticut, activists believe the Microsoft reversal signals a turnaround in progress for gay political progress. Concerning gay rights, Besen moaned: “this is the first time I believe we are going backwards and actually losing the battle.”

However, I see the events surrounding Microsoft as possibly signaling another trend that would ultimately benefit everybody. Steve Ballmer, CEO of Microsoft issued a memo to his employees that may foretell a shift among publicly held companies toward corporate neutrality on issues of conscience that are unrelated to the business bottom line.

An excerpt from Mr. Ballmer’s memo follows. As quoted in the Seattle Times, he wrote:

“We are thinking hard about what is the right balance to strike — when should a public company take a position on a broader social issue, and when should it not? What message does the company taking a position send to its employees who have strongly-held beliefs on the opposite side of the issue?”

What message indeed? When large public corporations support causes that are unrelated to the bottom line, employees who disagree with the stance can feel helpless. These employees may feel disenfranchised and conflicted that their labors are supporting an issue they would never support in their private lives. Ballmer is aware of this tension and suggests that a real respect for diversity requires a company to take no position when an issue sharply divides co-workers. He goes on to make exactly this point:

“The bottom line is that I am adamant that Microsoft will always be a place that values diversity, that has the strongest possible internal policies for non-discrimination and fairness, and provides the best policies and benefits to all of our employees.

I am also adamant that I want Microsoft to be a place where every employee feels respected, and where every employee feels like they belong. I don’t want the company to be in the position of appearing to dismiss the deeply-held beliefs of any employee, by picking sides on social policy issues.”

Mr. Ballmer wants every employee, conservative, liberal and in-between to feel respected. After years of disregarding the views of employees with traditional social views, Microsoft via the Ballmer memo, seems to understand that tolerance often requires respecting all views by favoring none.

Unfortunately, due to the vitriolic response from the left, Ballmer’s common sense approach may yet be reversed. Reportedly surprised by the backlash, Bill Gates, board chairman indicated to the press that Microsoft may yet support the bill next year. However, for those grieving over the loss of support for the anti-discrimination bill, it may be helpful to consider how they would feel if Microsoft had gone from being against the bill to being neutral.

Media reports suggest that a local pastor may have threatened a boycott of Microsoft products. Whether the boycott story is true or not, something caused Microsoft leadership to reflect about matters of fairness and mutual respect. I doubt it was a threatened boycott, but perhaps the visit by the local pastor was a purpose-driven moment that caused the leaders at the software giant to think hard about how it might feel to be on the other side of the ideological fence.

_________________________________________________

Warren Throckmorton, PhD is Associate Professor of Psychology and Director of Counseling Services at Grove City College (PA).

==============================

Democrats, Christians and social issues (townhall.com, 050510)

David Limbaugh

At the risk of further provoking the brilliant George Will, I must say that the national Democratic Party’s approach to Christians is analogous to an abusive husband in complete denial, seeking reconciliation when it suits his purposes, but otherwise engaged in a pattern of abuse.

Just like certain abusive spouses, the party can’t live with Christians but can’t live without them (politically). No matter how distasteful some may find our chronicling of it to be, the systematic abuse is demonstrable, as I documented in my book.

Nevertheless, significant confusion persists over these issues, among many on the Left and the Right, so permit me to take a stab at clarifying a few points.

The popular culture does routinely mock and demean Christians, who are the only group not protected by the selective “tolerance” of political correctness, but mere derision is not our primary grievance. We cite it mainly to demonstrate the antipathy of the secularist culture toward people of faith.

More troubling are the discrimination against Christians at the hands of the government — mainly the courts — and the consequent suppression of their religious liberty, and the scrubbing of Christianity from the public square, as if it were a contagious airborne disease.

Those of us who have complained about these patterns are not, as some have asserted, equating the disparagement of Christians with the suppression of their liberties. Though they arise from the same mindset, they are two different things, one involving the infringement of constitutional liberties and the other contributing to a climate conducive to such infringement.

I don’t highlight these abuses for the sake of whining, to evoke sympathy, to incite counter-abuse against the perpetrators or to portray Christians as helpless victims. My purpose is to wake up the dormant, naive, oblivious and apathetic among us. As Christians we will only lose our religious liberties and be defeated in the Culture War, if we permit it to happen.

While many secularists seem to believe otherwise, Christians want neither a Christian theocracy, nor the suppression of religious liberties of any other group. Christianity stands for freedom, and we will vigorously defend the religious liberty of anyone, regardless of his faith or lack thereof. But we must demand an equal seat at the table of religious liberties.

Some Christians insist we should stay out of politics and stick to the task of winning souls for Christ. But the two activities are hardly mutually exclusive; indeed, they’re complementary. It’s not enough for Christians to fight for their values only at the level of the culture, because by doing so, they ignore the profound impact of politics and government on the culture.

Granted, the Supreme Court probably couldn’t have “legalized” abortion or outlawed voluntary nonsectarian payer in public schools in a cultural vacuum — unless there were a degree of receptiveness to those decisions in the culture. On the other hand, the Court’s decisions in such cases greatly accelerated the coarsening of the culture. For Christians to fully and effectively engage in the Culture War (among many other reasons) — they must participate in politics and government.

So I disagree with George Will’s implication that certain Christians are invoking a “religious test” of sorts when they confess, for example, that Rudy Giuliani is not their first choice for president. Rudy’s religion — whatever it may be — has little to do with it. It’s his position on social issues that makes him less than the optimal candidate, despite his other admirable qualities and qualifications.

Most Christian conservatives care as much about social issues as the economy and national security. Unless candidates share their values, they will not resonate with Christian conservatives on all bases.

That’s why it’s almost humorous to read of a conference of secular liberals at the City College of New York called “Examining the Real Agenda of the Religious Far Right,” or an analysis of the liberal think tank, the Progressive Policy Institute, arguing that Democrats are suffering from a severe “parent gap.” Do they really need conferences and issue papers telling them what is patently obvious: that parents are concerned about “morally corrosive forces in our culture”?

The way to reach Christians — or values voters, if you prefer — is the same as reaching any other group. You must stand for — not just pay patronizing lip service to — the things they believe in.

Most Christian conservatives are not single issue — or even single category of issues — people. But they do care deeply about social issues and believe in electing executives who will appoint constitutionalist judges and legislators who will confirm them — and who share and will promote, within the law, their values.

For liberals to woo Christian conservatives, they must stop the pattern of abuse and get on the right side of the Culture War. Pretending to do so just won’t be enough.

==============================

Why Are Christians Losing America? How the U.S. is becoming anti-Christian despite an 80% majority of believers (WorldNetDaily, 050502)

Despite decades of relentless attacks on its moral and spiritual foundations, America is still overwhelmingly a Christian nation. Or is it?

With 80% of Americans describing themselves as Christians, 45% of the population attending church on any given weekend, tens of millions buying Rick Warren’s “The Purpose-Driven Life” and believers making Mel Gibson’s “The Passion of the Christ” one of the top-grossing movies of all time, America appears to be bursting its seams with vibrant Christianity.

There’s just one problem.

Although Christians comprise the vast majority of the nation’s citizens and voters, America is becoming increasingly un-Christian and even anti-Christian with every passing year – from its culture, to its laws, its public education system, its news media and most other major institutions. Whether the battlefield is abortion or “gay rights,” public prayer or euthanasia, most of the fights are being won by the bad guys. Why?

Now, a groundbreaking new edition of WND’s acclaimed monthly Whistleblower magazine – titled “WHY ARE CHRISTIANS LOSING AMERICA?” – reveals exactly what has gone wrong within Christianity, and why believers have been on the losing side of virtually every cultural and public policy battle for the past 40 years.

An outgrowth of Managing Editor David Kupelian’s widely read column of the same name, “WHY ARE CHRISTIANS LOSING AMERICA?” visits the key battlegrounds within Christianity that have made headlines over the past few years – from “mainline” Protestants’ ordination of homosexual clergy and condemnations of Israel to the National Council of Churches’ hardcore leftist activities to the Roman Catholic Church’s devastating clergy sex scandals.

But this issue also focuses a laser beam on the lesser known problems – the IRS’s gagging of churches in the realm of political speech, the proliferation of inane and dangerous fads like “gross-out games” among church youth groups, and the insidious dangers Francis Schaeffer described in his final book, “The Great Evangelical Disaster.”

This issue will take readers on a guided tour through modern Christianity – from the highs (selfless service, redeeming the lost, fighting courageously for America’s culture) to the lows (pedophile priests, communist infiltration, rampant moral compromise).

“Prepare to be shocked by this issue of Whistleblower,” said WND founder Joseph Farah. “But prepare also to be challenged by some rarely reported information and profound insight that could just help save the nation.”

Highlights of “WHY ARE CHRISTIANS LOSING AMERICA?” include:

* “Time for church leadership” by Joseph Farah.

* “How religion lost the culture war,” in which Farah reveals the church’s scandalous abdication of its former influential role in the creation of American entertainment. “Hollywood didn’t abandon the church,” says Farah. “The church abandoned Hollywood.”

* “Mainline churches marching leftward” by Art Moore, showing how some of America’s biggest Protestant denominations support a hardcore leftist agenda.

* “Mainline churches bash Bush budget” – how Presbyterians, Lutherans, Methodists and Episcopalians attacked the administration for not spending more on the poor.

* “A tale of 2 Christians” by Joseph Farah, revealing a radical contrast between the judge in the Terri Schiavo case and that judge’s pastor.

* “The marketing of false Christianity,” a comprehensive, disturbing and enlightening exploration of how the world’s greatest religion became the No. 1 target for subversion, by David Kupelian.

* “Poll: U.S. teens see God as ‘Divine Butler,’ ‘Cosmic Therapist’” – which shows that despite the interest American teenagers have in religion, in most cases their understanding of their faith is remarkably shallow.

* “Stupid church tricks” by Gene Edward Veith, a shocking expose of one of the most shameful trends in youth ministries today: “gross-out games.”

* “Restore the rights of clergy in America,” in which Patrick Buchanan reveals how Congress and the IRS have muzzled U.S. churches.

* “Poll: Christians think and behave ‘like everyone else,’” by Ron Strom. “It often seems that their faith makes very little difference in their life,” says Christian pollster George Barna.

* “Survey: Only 9% of Christians have biblical worldview” – another disturbing poll showing that most “believers” in today’s America think and act much the same as everyone else.

* “No fear: Overcoming Bible trauma” by Bob Just, who offers “Encouraging words to those who believe it’s God’s Word, but who rarely read it.”

“The religion that underpins Western Civilization is under merciless attack,” said Kupelian. “It’s about time we realized what is happening and why, and what we can do to reverse course. It’s definitely not too late. In fact, America may be ripe for a real national awakening.”

==============================

Zoo, Too (Tongue Tied, 050610)

Creationism supporters have succeeded in forcing a zoo in Tulsa to put up a display featuring details about the biblical account of creation after they said their faith was being discriminated against in favor of others, according to the AP.

The Tulsa Park and Recreation Board voted in favor of putting up the display despite the objections of zoo employees and others in town, many of whom wondered about the wisdom of forcing the facility into the contentious debate over theology.

Supports of the move, however, pointed to a statue of the Hindu god, Ganesh, outside the elephant exhibit and a marble globe inscribed with an American Indian saying, “The earth is our mother. The sky is our father” as evidence that the zoo was discriminating against Christians.

==============================

Moral agenda’s safest hands (Washington Times, 050622)

Former senator and U.N. Ambassador John Danforth has performed a valuable service between elections by writing about a Christian’s role in contemporary American society.

In an op-ed in the New York Times last Friday, Mr. Danforth, an ordained minister, observed: “Many conservative Christians approach politics with a certainty that they know God’s truth, and that they can advance the kingdom of God through governmental action.”

He writes the “only absolute standard of behavior is the commandment to love our neighbors as ourselves.” One can quibble over where Mr. Danforth’s “absolutist” position may lead politically (and I do, given the position of religious moderates and liberals when it comes to a host of other issues in which they are engaged — from antiwar activism and the environment, to civil rights and same-sex “marriage”), but his central thesis is correct: Christians are limited in what government can do for them and for an earthly agenda.

That does not mean government can’t do some things. It simply means it cannot advance a moral and spiritual agenda, because it the church, not the state, is commissioned to preach and observe God’s message.

That much of the country is preoccupied with materialism and pleasure further limits the state’s capabilities in this area. Conservative Christians, while seeking legislation that reflects their moral views, increasingly have found it difficult to impose their morality on themselves.

The pollster George Barna, who regularly checks the spiritual temperature of the Christian church, has chronicled important facts conservative Christians should consider before demanding government act to repair the “moral slide.”

Mr. Barna has noted as many conservative Christians are divorcing as are those of different religious persuasions, or of no religion. And as many of the children of conservative Christians are having sex as non-Christian children.

But the ordained and self-appointed conservative Christian leaders do not seem to preach as much to their own about these shortcomings (or, if they do, they are not heeded) as they do to the rest of the country about theirs.

Wouldn’t these conservative Christians have greater moral power if they put their own houses in order before trying to cure the disorder in other houses? Isn’t that the principle behind Jesus’ story about noticing a speck in the other fellow’s eye, while ignoring the beam in one’s own eye?

In a week when evangelist Billy Graham is visiting New York for what may be the last mass meeting of a long and noble ministry, Richard Ostling of the Associated Press asked him about social issues. Mr. Graham replied: “I don’t give advice. I’m going to stay off these hot-button issues.”

Mr. Graham hasn’t always shied away from those topics, but he learned where the greater power comes from, and it isn’t government. The 86-year-old Mr. Graham “now seeks to shun all public controversies — preferring a simple message of love and unity through Jesus,” writes Mr. Ostling.

John Danforth seems to flirt with universalism when he says he and his fellow religious moderates believe “religion should be inclusive.” Not exactly. Different religions make competing claims and the Christian faith separates “sheep from goats,” the saved from the lost, and heaven from hell.

Jesus said he came to bring a sword. A sword divides. The primary objective for the Christian should be to seek and to point others toward Jesus, not to political parties and agendas.

The social ills confronting us have not produced our collective indifference to a moral code. They reflect that indifference. Fixing social ills does not begin in the halls of Congress or Supreme Court, but in individual human hearts.

Government can’t go there. God can. But if God’s servants prefer government to God, or seek to attach God to political parties and earthly agendas, they are doomed to futility.

Mr. Danforth notes Jesus sat with “tax collectors and sinners” and sees these acts as part of Jesus’ “tolerance” and inclusiveness. But his purpose was not to justify their often corrupt tax-collecting practices and other sins. It was to lead them to repentance and faith in himself. He told the woman taken in adultery that while he did not condemn her, she was to “go and sin no more.” To a moderate, I guess that was intolerant.

These concerns were never raised when religious moderates and liberals had the public square to themselves. They’re upset because they have been marginalized. Still, Mr. Danforth is right about where true power to change people comes from, and it isn’t from the state.

Cal Thomas is a nationally syndicated columnist.

==============================

Allstate terminates manager over homosexuality column: On own time, man posted anti-’gay’ article insurance giant says didn’t reflect its values (WorldNetDaily, 050624)

A former manager with Allstate has sued the insurance giant, alleging the company, which financially supports homosexual advocacy groups, fired him solely because he wrote a column posted on several websites that was critical of same-sex marriage and espoused his Christian beliefs.

J. Matt Barber was a manager in Allstate’s Corporate Security Division, its investigative arm, at the Fortune 100 company’s headquarters in Northbrook, Ill. Besides working for the insurance provider, Barber was and is a professional heavyweight boxer, a jazz drummer and a Web commentator. His columns have appeared on TheConservativeVoice.com, MensNewsDaily.com and others.

Though the column in question was written and posted in December, it wasn’t until Jan. 31 that Barber was called into a meeting with two Human Resources officials, one of whom Barber says “slapped down” a printed copy of the column in front of him and asked if he had written it.

Recognizing the piece, Barber confirmed he had written it on his own time, at his home and on his own computer. Barber claims he was told, “Here at Allstate we have a very diverse community.”

Barber says the Human Resources assistant vice president told him the column didn’t reflect Allstate’s view and that he was suspended with pay. Barber was immediately ushered off company grounds – “which was humiliating,” the former employee said.

“I explained to Allstate that the article was a reflection of my personal Christian beliefs, and that I had every right to both write it and to have it published,” Barber told WND. “I further explained that I had written the article while at home on my own time, that I never mentioned Allstate’s name and that I neither directly nor indirectly suggested that Allstate shared my Christian beliefs or my views on same-sex marriage.”

Three days later, on Feb. 3, Barber, who had worked for Allstate for five years, says he got a call informing him he was fired “for writing the article,” he said. Now, with the help of the Christian Law Association and David Gibbs III, who represented Terri Schiavo’s family in the final weeks of her life, Barber is challenging Allstate in federal court.

According to an investigation by the state of Illinois’ Department of Employment Security related to Barber’s claim for unemployment benefits, an organization – likely a “gay”-rights group – complained to Allstate about the column. But how did the group connect Barber to the insurance company? It turns out one site that posted the column, MensNewsDaily.com, added to the bio line on the article the fact that Barber worked for Allstate.

Barber says he did not include that fact in the original column submission but that the site “disclosed that without my knowledge or consent.” According to Barber, he is somewhat well-known in the boxing field in Chicago, and Allstate would sometimes tout the fact that he worked for the company.

The columnist told WND even if he had included a reference to Allstate in his bio, “I wasn’t intimating that I was representing Allstate or that these were the views of Allstate.”

Barber stressed to the unemployment office that he did not intend for the affiliation to be included in the bio. Allstate argued to the agency that Barber should not be given unemployment, but upon investigation, the agency agreed with Barber’s contention and ruled he was entitled to the money.

Said the agency’s report: “The claimant was discharged from Allstate Insurance Company because an outside organization had complained about an article he had written while on his own time.”

The state agency also ruled Barber did not engage in misconduct, saying, “The term misconduct means the deliberate and willful violation of a reasonable rule or policy of the employer. … In this case, the claimant’s action which resulted in his discharge was not deliberate and willful.”

Homosexuality a violation of ‘natural law’

In the commentary piece, which Barber refers to as “the article that got me fired,” he makes several arguments against same-sex marriage.

Wrote Barber: “Marriage between one man and one woman, and the nuclear family have forever been cornerstones of civilized society. Regrettably, there are at present, many within the militant homosexual lobby who wish to take a sledge hammer to those cornerstones – many who hope to undermine both the historical and contemporary reality of marriage and family – many who, through judicial fiat, aim to circumvent the Constitution, the legislative process, and the overwhelming will of the people in an effort to redefine marriage. Accordingly, the unsolicited, oxymoronic and spurious expression ‘same-sex marriage’ has been forced into popular lexicon.”

Barber, who holds both a law degree and a masters in public policy, uses anatomy to argue against homosexual behavior.

“For one to believe that homosexual behavior, the act of sodomy in particular, follows the biological order of things,” wrote Barber, “one must ignore the fact that sodomy violates natural law – you know … wrong plumbing … square hole/round peg. The whole thing really is a testament to man’s creativity. Give us something good, and we’ll bend over backwards to twist it into something else.”

‘Diversity and inclusion’

Barber – known in the boxing world as Matt “Bam Bam” Barber – says Allstate has a decidedly “pro-homosexual” philosophy, requiring employees to undergo “diversity training” and offering domestic partnership benefits.

The training, Barber says, “is really indoctrination hostile toward thousands of employees’ Christian beliefs.”

The insurance company’s foundation has donated money to homosexual-advocacy organizations, including the Gay and Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation and the LAMBDA Legal Defense and Education Fund. A notice about the Allstate foundation says funds are given to “nonprofit organizations that are related to tolerance, diversity and inclusion.”

Barber says he hopes consumers who hold traditional values will stop patronizing Allstate.

Addressing those who do, Barber said, “You are helping to support an organization that brazenly and illegally discriminates against religious employees who do not blindly and silently toe the extremist, liberal line on official company policy – policy that is not just overtly pro-homosexual, but is demonstrably anti-family.”

Gibbs is the lead attorney on the case.

“To have Fortune 100 companies like Allstate firing people for expressing their sincerely held religious beliefs and even their personal viewpoints on their own time demonstrates just how out of kilter things have gotten,” Gibbs told WND.

“Allstate aggressively pushes and promotes the homosexual agenda in the name of tolerance, but the minute someone speaks up with what would be considered the traditional moral-values viewpoint, the tolerance disappears and it results in a termination.”

Gibbs rhetorically asked if Allstate would take the same action against someone who put forth a pro-homosexual viewpoint.

“The answer is absolutely not,” he said. “The tolerance is only running one way.”

Such discriminatory action violates Title VII of the Civil Rights Act, Gibbs contends.

Said Gibbs: “The law was intended to make sure people of faith didn’t have to leave their religion or viewpoints at the workplace stairs.”

Gibbs compared the situation to that of racial discrimination.

“Just like Allstate can’t go in and say, ‘We’ve discovered your ethnicity and we’re going to fire you,’ I don’t believe Allstate should be able to go in and say, ‘We’ve discovered your anti-homosexuality viewpoint and we’re going to fire you.’”

The complaint claims Barber was “terminated from his employment and discriminated against by Defendants, with respect to his compensation, terms, conditions or privileges of employment because he expressed during non-work hours his sincerely held religious beliefs.”

Whistleblower retaliation?

Part of the complaint filed in court discusses a 2003 business trip to Lisbon, Portugal, Barber took to attend the annual Chairman’s Conference with hundreds of other Allstate employees.

According to the suit, Barber witnessed on the trip his boss’ boss, Ben Tarver, assistant vice president for corporate security, “engaging in various public displays of affection with a young female physician who had been hired by Allstate to serve as the on-call physician for the conference team.”

Following Barber’s report of the assistant vice president’s alleged behavior to his immediate supervisor, the ex-employee says Tarver began harassing him and treating him in an “abusive manner.”

Barber eventually filed a sexual harassment/retaliation complaint against Tarver with the Human Resources Department at Allstate.

Barber pointed out the irony of the head of the agency that investigates company-policy violations and fraud allegedly breaking the rules of sexual conduct.

“He was a married man,” Barber explained. “It made me very uncomfortable, especially because we investigate sexual harassment.”

Barber believes the whistleblower action was a motive in his being fired and that officials were looking for a reason to terminate him. It was the very people to whom he had reported Tarver’s alleged misconduct who confronted him about the online article.

‘Allstate is very fair’

Marissa Quiles, media relations spokesperson for Allstate, told WND the company could not comment on a lawsuit its lawyers have not yet seen. According to Barber’s attorneys, the company was to be served with the suit today.

“Allstate is very fair and has a very good reputation for being inclusive,” Quiles said.

“It’s the company’s policy to maintain a working environment free of any type of discrimination and harassment that may affect an employee’s terms or conditions of employment.”

Continued Quiles: “We cannot disclose or discuss details related to the former employee’s termination, nor can we comment on a lawsuit we have not yet received.”

Barber says his termination from Allstate came at a stressful time in his life with his wife just having given birth after a problem pregnancy.

He recently described the situation in a narrative:

To add insult to injury, about two weeks before I was fired, my wife, Sarah, and I delivered our third child in four years following a highly stressful at-risk pregnancy. Allstate was fully aware of our new arrival and that Sarah was still recovering from her C-section surgery when they callously snatched away both our medical insurance and our means of providing for our young family.

All of this notwithstanding, my personal faith and optimism remain intact. I always knew that people were persecuted in the workplace for their religious beliefs, but I never imagined it would happen to my family and me. We’re losing our home, and we may be forced into bankruptcy; but I know that somehow, God will provide. I believe it’s crucial to take a stand for truth, even if that stand results in suffering in the short term.

The lawsuit, which was filed May 26, seeks compensatory and punitive damages, as well as attorneys’ fees.

An initial status hearing on the federal lawsuit is set for July 5 in the Illinois Northern District Court.

==============================

Engaging the City of Man: Christian Faith and Politics (Christian Post, 050713)

Over the last 20 years, evangelical Christians have been politically mobilized in an outpouring of moral concern and political engagement unprecedented since the crusade against slavery in the 19th century. Is this a good development? With at least one Supreme Court nomination now on the horizon, the issue of political involvement emerges anew with urgency.

To what extent should Christians be involved in the political process?

This question has troubled the Christian conscience for centuries. The emergence of the modern evangelical movement in the post World War II era brought a renewed concern for engagement with the culture and the political process. The late Carl F. H. Henry addressed evangelicals with a manifesto for Christian engagement in his landmark book The Uneasy Conscience of Modern Fundamentalism. As Dr. Henry eloquently argued, disengagement from the critical issues of the day is not an option.

An evangelical theology for political participation must be grounded in the larger context of cultural engagement. As the Christian worldview makes clear, our ultimate concern must be the glory of God. Building from that, we understand that when we are instructed by Scripture to love God and then to love our neighbor as ourselves, we are given a clear mandate for the right kind of cultural engagement.

We love our neighbor because we first love God. In His sovereignty, our Creator has put us within this cultural context in order that we may display His glory by preaching the gospel, confronting persons with God’s truth, and serving as agents of salt and light in a dark and fallen world. In other words, love of God leads us to love our neighbor—and love of neighbor requires our participation in the culture and in the political process.

Writing even as the Romans Empire fell, Augustine, the great bishop and theologian of the early church, made this case in his monumental work, The City of God. As Augustine explained, humanity is confronted by two cities—the City of God and the City of Man. The City of God is eternal, and takes as its sole concern the greater glory of God. In the City of God, all things are ruled by God’s Word, and the perfect rule of God is the passion of all its citizens.

In the City of Man, however, the reality is very different. This city is filled with mixed passions, mixed allegiances, and compromised principles. Though the City of God is marked by unconditional obedience to the command of God, citizens of the City of Man demonstrate deadly patterns of disobedience, even as they celebrate and claim their moral autonomy, and then revolt against the Creator.

Of course, we know that the City of God is eternal, even as the City of Man is passing. But this does not mean that the City of Man is ultimately unimportant, and it does not allow the church to forfeit its responsibility to love its citizens. Love of neighbor—grounded in our love for God—requires us to work for good in the City of Man, even as we set as our first priority the preaching of the gospel—the only means of bringing citizens of the City of Man into citizenship in the City of God.

Thus, Christians bear important responsibilities in both cities. Even as we know that our ultimate citizenship is in heaven, and even as we set our sights on the glory of the City of God, we must work for good, justice, and righteousness in the City of Man. We do so, not merely because we are commanded to love its citizens, but because we know that they are loved by the very God we serve.

From generation to generation, Christians often swing between two extremes, either ignoring the City of Man or considering it to be our main concern. A biblical balance establishes the fact that the City of Man is indeed passing, and chastens us from believing that the City of Man and its realities can ever be of ultimate importance. Yet, we also know that each of us is, by God’s own design, a citizen—though temporarily—of the City of Man. When Jesus instructed that we are to love our neighbor as ourselves, He pointed His followers to the City of Man and gave us a clear assignment. The only alternatives that remain are obedience and disobedience to this call.

Love of neighbor for the sake of loving God is a profound political philosophy that strikes a balance between the disobedience of political disengagement and the idolatry of politics as our main priority. As evangelical Christians, we must engage in political action, not because we believe the conceit that politics is ultimate, but because we must obey our Redeemer when He commanded that we must love our neighbor.

We are concerned for the culture not because we believe that the culture is ultimate, but because we know that our neighbors must hear the gospel, even as we hope and strive for their good, peace, security, and well-being.

The Kingdom of God is never up for a vote in any election, and there are no polling places in the City of God. Nevertheless, it is by God’s sovereignty that we are now confronted with these times, our current crucial issues of debate, and the decisions that are made in the political process.

This is no time for silence, and no time for shirking our responsibilities as Christian citizens. Ominous signs of moral collapse and cultural decay now appear on our contemporary horizon. A society ready to put the institution of marriage up for demolition and transformation is a society losing its most basic moral sense. A culture ready to treat human embryos as material for medical experimentation is a society turning its back on human dignity and the sacredness of human life.

Trouble in the City of Man is a call to action for citizens of the City of God, and that call to action must involve political involvement as well. Christians may well be the last citizens who know the difference between the eternal and the temporal, the ultimate and the urgent. God’s truth is eternal and Christian convictions must be commitments of permanence. Political alliances and arrangements are, by definition, temporary and conditional. This is no time for America’s Christians to confuse the City of Man with the City of God. At the same time, we can never be counted faithful in the City of God if we neglect our duty in the City of Man. That’s a good principle to remember as America gears up for a crucial political debate.

[Editor’s Note: This article was originally published on September 3, 2004.]

_____________________________________________

R. Albert Mohler, Jr. is president of The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary in Louisville, Kentucky.

==============================

Disney boycott suspended: Pro-family group cites positive changes (WorldNetDaily, 050525)

The American Family Association announced yesterday an end to a nine-year boycott of The Walt Disney Co. that also was supported by several other conservative organizations.

AFA said it sees some positive changes in the entertainment giant and wants “to focus on more current and flagrant issues that address the same concerns AFA initially had with Disney.”

“We feel we have made our point,” AFA President Tim Wildmon said. “Boycotts have been a last resort for us at AFA, and the Disney boycott was started to address issues of concern to us – especially the promotion of the homosexual agenda in the culture and media.”

Wildmon said Disney has become “one of the less egregious perpetrators of the homosexual agenda,” and pointed to recent events “lending hope for a more family-friendly Disney approach to entertainment.”

“We are pleased to see Disney CEO Michael Eisner stepping down in September, a year earlier than planned, and the breakup of Disney and Miramax, which produced most of the movies associated with Disney that Christians found highly offensive,” Wildmon said.

Those included the 1994 homosexual-themed release “Priest,” the teen sex drama “Kids” in 1995 and the 1999 irreverent religious comedy “Dogma.”

The initial boycott of Disney was organized by the Catholic League in protest of “Priest.” The AFA initiated its boycott in 1996, followed by the Southern Baptist Convention, two Jewish groups, a Muslim group and many independent Christian organizations.

Wildmon said, “We hope that the end of the partnership between Disney and Miramax will mean the end of films that were extremely offensive to Christians.”

Disney is co-producing a big budget film based on the Christian classic “The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe,” by C.S. Lewis, and has hired two Christian marketing companies to reach out to the religious community prior to its release Dec. 9.

“In the past, Disney’s corporate policy has kept them from targeting a religious audience, and their efforts to connect with Christians through ‘The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe’ is encouraging,” Wildmon said. “Though we are glad to see some positive changes, we will continue to carefully monitor Disney as we have done in the past.”

==============================

Lawsuit Filed Over Removal of Christian Posters in Classroom (Christian Post, 050812)

A civil liberties and human rights group said on Friday that it filed a First Amendment lawsuit in a Virginia Federal court on behalf of a teacher whose Christian-themed posters were removed while he was out sick.

The Rutherford Institute, a civil liberties and human rights group, alleges that school officials deprived teacher William Lee of his freedom of speech when York County School Division officials kept him from putting the materials back up, according to a press statement.

“Academic freedom is a core First Amendment value,” stated John W. Whitehead, president of The Rutherford Institute. “The real question is whether William Lee has the same free speech rights as other teachers.”

The event occurred at the beginning of the 2004-2005 school year in October after the teacher had been absent for several days. William Lee is a full-time Spanish teacher and faculty sponsor for First Priority, an approved Christian students’ extracurricular club at Tabb High School.

When he returned, various materials relating to Christian religious expression had been removed from classroom walls. He had posted several materials in his classroom as is the practice among instructors, said the Institute.

County Attorney James E. Barret sent a letter to the the Institute following the incdent, stating that the various posters were removed because the “overtly religious nature of the displays and their narrow focus on only a religious point of view, conveyed to the School Division an unmistakable endorsement of, and attempt to advance, Christianity,” according to the Associated Press.

Lee’s lawyer, Steve C. Taylor, said that his client was being targeted in “an apparently indiscriminate way, according to AP.

“When we’re not provided with any guidelines, it permits a man to be singled out in violation of his constitutional rights,” Taylor said. “I don’t understand how these things were overtly religious.”

He added that the posters came down after a “parent advocate” had complained on behalf of a student. Lee did not have an opportunity to discuss the matter with any parents or students, his lawyer said.

The posters taken down had Christian religious themes, while the items that remained included religious items that were not Christian. The Institute stated that Lee used the materials to teach students about the Spanish language, its culture and the religious traditions of nearly all Hispanic countries, in addition to illustrating the activities of First Priority.

Those removed included a poster publicizing the National Day of Prayer and depicting George Washington praying at Valley Forge, an article from a newspaper pertaining to the religious faith of President Bush with a picture showing Bush praying, and a news article about former Attorney General John Ashcroft and his prayer meetings with staff members.

Others that remained were pictures and articles relating to the Peruvian Inca sun god festival, a magazine article discussing the religious motives of pre-Inca civilizations, another article discussing the “priceless gift” of 14 “religious cows” as a religious expression of grief to the United States by the Masai people of Africa, a National Geographic article discussing the religious understanding of souls of Inca mummies in the afterlife, and posters with emblems representing the pantheon of Mayan creature gods.

The Institute said that only those materials relating to Christianity were removed while those relating to other religious beliefs or with a secular viewpoint were not taken away. The lawsuit is being made to ask the court to allow Lee to repost the materials removed.

The Institute says the suit was filed in defense of Lee’s rights first and fourteenth amendment rights.

==============================

Canada: Christians seek voice in politics: Evangelicals ‘mocked’ (National Post, 051112)

BURLINGTON, Ont. - With its neatly arrayed chairs and Christmas decorations, the atrium of the Crossroads Centre looks more ready to host a nativity play than a political workshop.

But 150 evangelical Christians from across the Golden Horseshoe region of southern Ontario will gather here today, outside the studio where the evangelical TV show 100 Huntley Club is filmed, for a lesson in political activism.

“In order to see anything different in Ottawa, we need to see a change in our culture,” said Tristan Emmanuel, a conference organizer and executive director of the Equipping Christians for the Public-square Centre. “People need to change. The church needs to change.”

In the United States, the Christian community has emerged as an influential force behind the current Republican administration and the impetus toward faith-based initiatives.

Mr. Emmanuel believes that a similar move is necessary in Canada, but it is up to evangelical voters — not political leaders — to drive the agenda.

So Mr. Emmanuel is planning a televised town hall meeting in January, coinciding with a possible election call, when Christian Canadians could discuss their beliefs and priorities in an open forum.

By organizing events around political involvement rather than partisan stripes, he hopes party leaders will recognize the electoral advantage of acknowledging the Christian community in their campaigns.

“They’re politicians and a politician won’t take a step unless it’s politically advantageous,” he said.

Three million evangelical Christians live in Canada, a voting bloc whose political voice should not be dismissed or underestimated, Mr. Emmanuel said.

Christians have long been vilified by the Liberal party, he said, a trend crystallized by the public derision heaped on the creationist beliefs of former Canadian Alliance leader Stockwell Day.

“People like myself have been mocked over that issue,” said Mr. Emmanuel, who is studying at the McMaster Divinity College in Hamilton, Ont. “You would never do that with anyone else’s religious views.”

During Mr. Day’s unsuccessful campaign to unseat the Liberals, Mr. Emmanuel said many evangelical Christians watched as religion was used to undermine Mr. Day’s credibility as a leader, in spite of the fact that both former prime minister Jean Chretien and his replacement Paul Martin are avowed Roman Catholics.

But Mr. Emmanuel said he reached his breaking point during the 2004 federal election, when the Liberal government threatened the electorate with the Conservative party’s “hidden agenda,” which he believes was a thinly veiled attack on Christian beliefs.

“They used a strategy to vilify a natural constituency of the Conservative party,” he said. “Normally you go after your opponent, not a specific community who might support him.”

That was the moment he decided evangelicals had to demonstrate their political influence, not by throwing their weight behind a specific candidate but by making their voices heard at all levels of politics.

“Ideally, what we want to be is an organization that defends and advocates for Christians who want to be involved in the public square,” Mr. Emmanuel said.

To that end, the conference has not invited MPs or would-be candidates to speak today, but rather Christian activists who believe their beliefs have been misrepresented or maligned.

“I basically looked at the last 10 years of political marginalization of the Christian view,” he said of the invited speakers. “I think what people will take away is that this is happening, this mistreatment of our standpoint is not theoretical.”

One of the speakers who will address attendees today is Chris Kempling, a B.C. teacher who was suspended from his job as a guidance counsellor after writing a series of letters to his local paper that criticized same-sex relationships.

The conference will also hear from Stephen Bennett, a U.S. radio personality, musician and public speaker who has flown to Canada to discuss his personal rejection of homosexuality. A self-professed “former homosexual,” Mr. Bennett is now married to a woman and has dedicated himself to reaching out to “homosexuals who want to escape the lifestyle.”

Mr. Emmanuel said the evangelical community is not necessarily going to fall in line behind Mr. Harper’s Conservatives.

“I want to be careful not to be too critical, but I think Stephen Harper could do a better job defending our community,” he said. “To be honest, I was shocked at his inability to fight for his beliefs and to keep the [sponsorship scandal] in the forefront of the debate.”

Contrary to popular belief, he said evangelical voters are not politically monolithic.

Christians interested in social outreach and other “compassionate endeavours” might have a natural proclivity toward Liberal or NDP candidates, he said. But he said it is the public disavowals of religion that push the evangelical constituency toward the Conservatives.

“If you constantly marginalize us, that’s when we could galvanized into one voting bloc,” he said. “But really we’re all over the map. We’re pretty open-minded people.”

==============================

Ford to Halt Gay Ads after End of Christian-Led Boycott (Christian Post, 051208)

Following the end of a boycott by a Christian pro-family group, the Ford Motor Company said it would no longer advertise its Jaguar and Land Rover brands in gay publications, but denied it came under pressure to do so.

The American Family Association began their boycott in May, criticizing the company for supporting gay groups. At the time it said it still had differences with Ford’s policies.

“We are ending the boycott of Ford,” association Chairman Donald Wildmon said in a Nov. 30 statement on the group’s Web site. “While we still have a few differences with Ford, we feel that our concerns are being addressed in good faith and will continue to be addressed in the future.”

A spokesman for Ford, Mike Moran, told the Associated Press that a division of the Ford Company decided to cut back on advertising because of market difficulties. The Premier Automotive Group had reported a pretax loss of $10 million in the third quarter.

“They feel pressure on their marketing budgets, so they decided to streamline marketing across the board,” Moran said. “They’re not supporting as many publications and events as before in 2006.”

Moran did not indicate how much money had been spent on gay publications.

According to AP, the boycott began on May 31 with the AFA disagreeing with the Ford Company’s decision to give thousands of dollars to homosexual groups, its offer of benefits to same-sex couples, and its active recruitment of gay employees, according to AP.

Pro-homosexual groups such as GLAAD demanded Ford to assure them that the company had not made a deal with the AFA regarding the incident.

Moran denied such a deal.

==============================

Advocate Notes Wins, Setbacks for Pro-Life Movement in 2005 (Christian Post, 051228)

Sometimes the best wins barely get noticed, said Wendy Wright, the Executive Vice President of Concerned Women for America, as she recounted some of the victories and setbacks in the 2005 pro-life movement.

Wright specializes in pro-life and international issues at the conservative pro-family public policy group, lobbying the U.S. Congress and United Nations while also acting as a spokeswoman for her organization on many of the same topics. She has appeared on numerous television news programs while her editorials, articles and letters have also appeared in major news publications.

In a phone interview earlier this month with The Christian Post, Wright issued her list of pro-life victories in 2005 that included the U.N.’s declaration against human cloning, which she said received scant media attention. Other pro-life victories she said were the approval of cord blood stem cell legislation, the FDA’s rejection of easy access to the “morning-after” pill, and a growing sense of unease among more and more politicians regarding pro-abortion legislation.

For the setbacks, she noted that the death of Terry Schiavo by court order was one of the setbacks for the movement, along with a stalled bill in the Senate that would prevent anyone other than parents to take a child across state lines to receive an abortion.

Looking ahead to next year, she said that the outcome of the Ayotte v. Planned Parenthood of New England parental notification for abortion case in the Supreme Court would be significant.

U.N. Declaration Has Implications for Embryonic Stem Cell Research

The U.N declaration against human cloning passed decisively after a three-yearlong struggle with 84 nations voting for it, 34 against and 37 abstentions. The resolution, however, is not legally binding on the U.N. member states.

The matter addressed by the human cloning statement has a clear application for discouraging the reproduction of babies, which most nations are against. However the vote also has more controversial implications for human embryonic stem cell research, which involves the destruction of an embryo to harvest stem cells. Pro-life groups consider such research to be the equivalent of abortion.

Scientists in favor of the research, say future medical breakthroughs may provide answers for incurable ailments such as Alzheimer’s, Parkinson’s, and even to help paralyzed patients one day regain the ability to walk by repairing spinal cord injuries. Still, after several years of research, potential cures have yet to be found.

Pro-life groups say the research to find cures should not involve the destruction of human lives.

Terry Schiavo Case Grips Nation

The Terry Schiavo case galvanized the nation as nearly 15 years of medical and legal efforts by Schiavo’s parents to keep her alive, concluded with a flurry of court cases and unsuccessful government attempts to intervene.

Schiavo’s parents continued to plead for the life of their daughter – who could not move or speak on her own – in court even after a Florida judge ordered that Schiavo’s water and feeding tube be permanently removed. She died 12 days later on Mar. 31.

Schiavo’s husband, Michael Schiavo, had opposed efforts to keep her alive, asking a judge on two previous occasions in 1994 and again in 1998 to have her feeding tube removed. He believed that there was no hope of recovery and added that his wife would have wanted her own life to end if she had been able to express it.

Schiavo’s parents maintained that as a Roman Catholic, Terry would not have wanted to violate her church’s teachings on euthanasia

Pro-life groups maintained that the result was tragic and an affront to the lives of those who are defenseless.

Wright said that the case wrongly reinforced the “concept that certain people don’t have the right to live and that not all disabled people have the right to live.”

Politicians Express Uneasiness over Abortion Legislation

Overall, however, Wright noted that from a legislative view, 2005 proved to be a year where the pro-life movement gained greater deference from politicians. In a significant spillover effect from the November 2004 elections, she said that politicians began to take note of the significant “values voters” voting block.

She says that such recognition has forced some politicians to distance themselves from embracing “abortion-on-demand” policies, which are being viewed in an increasingly negative light.

Proposed legislation such as the Freedom of Choice Act which may have been viewed more positively 12 years ago is not so today, she said. The Freedom of Choice Act, if passed, would codify abortions. Currently abortion is legal based on the Roe v. Wade Supreme Court decision in 1973, which held that under the Constitution, women have a right to privacy and choice when making the decision to abort or not.

Ayotte Supreme Court Case Has Pro-Life Implications

Looking ahead, Wright said that the decision by the Supreme Court in the Ayotte v. Planned Parenthood of New England case could change the landscape for future legislation on abortion. The decision in the case, due next year may affect how judges rule for or against new abortion laws.

She said that courts have been relying on a low standard for ruling that abortion laws are unconstitutional, making it easy to reject laws based on hypothetical situations that do not reflect reality.

The Ayotte case, which was heard by the Supreme Court on Nov. 30, 2005, pitted proponents and detractors of a New Hampshire law that requires physicians to give parents 48 hours of notice when their minor daughter requests to have an abortion. The law would not require the parent’s consent.

However, the notification aspect of the law was not the main point of contention in the case argued before the court. Instead, the questioning by the Supreme Court Justices was more specific, centered around the statute’s “judicial bypass” mechanism. In the proposed law, a minor is allowed to have an abortion without a parent being informed only if a judge allows it.

The judges questioned lawyers from both sides about how that judicial bypass would work in emergency situations, since there wasn’t a specific standard or medical exceptions that a physician could refer to in the proposed law.

Ever since the Roe v. Wade Supreme Court ruling in 1973 legalized abortion nationwide, part of the standard that the courts have used to see if an abortion law is constitutional is if it contains a health exception or not.

Pro-life groups have argued that the current definition of health – which includes physical, mental and emotional considerations – is so broad that women and girls today are able to obtain abortions for almost any reason.

If the court decides in the Ayotte case that the standard no longer requires an exemption, it could become much more difficult to obtain an abortion, since legislation would become more restrictive.

==============================

Pro-life groups see brighter days (Washington Times, 060123)

As tens of thousands of abortion foes prepare for today’s 33rd annual March for Life, they are buoyed by developments they see as promising for their cause, both at the state and federal levels.

“The pro-life movement is in the best position it has ever been in,” said Wendy Wright, executive vice president of Concerned Women for America (CWA).

Pro-life advocates are excited about broad abortion bans proposed by lawmakers in two states, Ohio and Indiana.

It’s their hope that these bills become law and that the statutes are eventually considered and upheld by a more conservative U.S. Supreme Court in a challenge to the Jan. 22, 1973, ruling in Roe v. Wade that abortion was a constitutional right.

“We’re seeing, after many years of education and work, that people are beginning to understand the pro-life movement. The culture is shifting to a more pro-life perspective,” said Tony Perkins, president of the Family Research Council, which opposes abortion.

Miss Wright of CWA agrees. “The American public better understands what abortion has done to women and our country” by destroying innocent lives, she said.

The March for Life, sponsored by the March for Life Education and Defense Fund, is held annually in Washington, on or near the anniversary of the Roe v. Wade ruling. March leaders have estimated the number of protest marchers each of the past two years at 100,000.

As usual, this year’s event begins with a noon rally. But unlike the past, it will not be held on the Ellipse near the White House. The staging area “will be on the Mall at Seventh Street,” march organizer Nellie Gray said. After the rally, the crowd will march along Constitution Avenue, passing Congress and ending at the Supreme Court on First Street Northeast.

Pro-life advocates make it clear they are optimistic the Supreme Court will be more favorable to abortion restrictions, with the addition of Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. and this week’s expected confirmation of Judge Samuel A. Alito Jr.

Judge Alito said he would have “an open mind” about any challenge to Roe v. Wade, while previous nominees such as Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Stephen G. Breyer have declared Roe fundamental law.

Vicki Saporta, president of the National Abortion Federation, said that Judge Alito “has not been confirmed yet” and that advocates for abortion rights are “still trying to defeat his nomination.” She said she isn’t afraid of the abortion bans some states are eyeing. “I think any such law would be declared unconstitutional,” she said.

Pro-life and pro-choice advocates alike saw victory in a unanimous opinion the Supreme Court rendered Wednesday, when it said lower courts erred by ruling a New Hampshire law requiring parental notification for minors seeking abortions was unconstitutional.

“The justices respected the law of the state and the right of parents to know if their minor daughter will have an abortion,” said Carrie Gordon Earll, senior analyst for bioethics with Focus on the Family, a pro-life group based in Colorado Springs.

On the other side, Ms. Saporta said she is encouraged that the Supreme Court asked lower courts to examine the potential for parental notification waivers in cases where a girl’s health is at risk in an emergency. At this time, waivers are permitted if a pregnant teenager’s life is at risk but not for health emergencies that are not life-threatening.

It’s still uncertain whether the Ohio and Indiana bills to ban abortions in those states will advance. Jon A. Husted, Ohio’s Republican House Speaker, said Wednesday he plans no more hearings on the measure.

Indiana Gov. Mitch Daniels, a Republican who opposes abortion, told the Associated Press on Wednesday he thinks the proposed abortion ban in that state has a “very limited prospect of ultimate success” until Americans become less divided on abortion.

In a report last week, the group NARAL Pro-Choice America gave 19 states a failing grade in reproductive rights. [KH: meaning these are prolife states] Ohio, Indiana and South Dakota made the list, as did Virginia, Alabama, Arkansas, Idaho, Kentucky, Louisiana, Michigan, Mississippi, Missouri, Nebraska, North Dakota, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, Texas, Utah and Wisconsin.

==============================

Nationwide Pro-Life Marches Mark ‘Roe’ Anniversary (Christian Post, 060123)

Pro-life advocates marched throughout the country in protest of the Roe v. Wade U.S. Supreme Court decision that nationalized the practice of abortion 33 years ago.

Among the largest protests were those in St. Paul, Minn., where thousands marched peacefully at the state Capitol, and in San Francisco, where some 15,000 came together for the city’s second annual pro-life march.

The largest protest, the March for Life, is expected to take place today in Washington D.C. although rain may play a factor in reducing the turnout.

“We have a dream today that someday soon this will not be an anniversary of sadness, but an anniversary of justice restored,” said Minn. Gov. Tim Pawlenty, who has signed three laws favored by pro-life activists, according to the Associated Press.

Meanwhile, in Los Angeles, reportedly 1,000 protestors showed up for a pro-life march originating in a downtown cathedral there; a police officer, however, reported that there were only about 150 protestors, according to the Associated Press. The event was organized by Hispanics for Life and endorsed by Los Angeles archdiocese head Cardinal Roger Manhony. Protesters held up signs which read, “Pray to End Abortion,” “Lord Forgive Us and Our Nation,” “Save Babies, Don’t Kill Them.”

In Little Rock Arkansas, hundreds joined in at the State Capitol on Sunday despite cold and wet weather. The protest there has been held every year since the Roe decision. Participants included State Governor Mike Huckabee and Suzanne Vitadamo, sister of Terri Schiavo whose death through starvation and dehydration by court order was the subject of much controversy last year.

Counter protesters were also active this weekend. In San Francisco, over 1,000 abortion rights supporters lined the sidewalks as police kept pro-life and pro-choice demonstrators apart. Before the Walk for Life, organizers told the pro-lifers not to respond to taunts or hecklers and avoid gruesome depictions of abortions. However there were a small number of such displays among the crowd.

Off the streets, and in the corridors of the nation’s legislative offices and courts, the abortion debate is also raging.

Supreme Court nominee Samuel Alito, who is expected to be confirmed by a narrow margin in the Senate this week, said he would respect precedent in abortion legislation but would not commit to either deciding for or against it when if a case on the issue comes to him. He has previously written that the constitution does not support abortion rights.

Today’s “March for Life” in Washington will start at the National Mall and proceed along a closed off Constitution Avenue, taking the marchers to the Supreme Court and the Capitol Building.

==============================

Why they march (Washington Times, 060123)

Why do we care when our Mothers and Fathers enter the darkness of Alzheimer’s disease, lose their minds and become physically decrepit and unalterably old? Why do we oppose capital punishment, the so called “death penalty”?

Why do some reach out to orphans and lost children and other “people without voices”? Why did Abraham Lincoln and the United States turn away from slavery and make the Emancipation Proclamation the law of the land?

Why do charities and half-way houses, drug clinics, orphanages, refugee help organizations and other social services exist for people who are too old, too poor, too broken, too enslaved or too lost to help themselves?

These are pertinent questions all thinking persons might ponder. Or should. And we ponder them especially today during the annual “March for Life” anti-abortion day, coinciding with the anniversary of Roe vs. Wade.

The root answers to all these questions, and the answer to the question of why so many object to abortion, is simple: Enlightened men and women believe in the special dignity and sanctity of their fellow man. Simply stated: Each man and woman is so unique, so capable, so intrinsically close to God that doing violence to a fellow man, killing and even aborting, can never be acceptable.

The first drives of a cognizant human being all include staying alive: eating, fleeing when threatened or in fear, striving to stay healthy. Animals have some of these same drives.

But we humans have other natural drives: We are repelled by irresponsible violence visited by one human being on another. We cringe at the sight.

The key thought is: “so intrinsically close to God.” Man is God-like. This is a truth so obvious, simple and fundamental that the belief is a “core value” of the Judeo-Christian tradition.

The Bible’s first book, Genesis, (1:27) teaches “So God created man in His own image; in the image of God He created him; male and female; He created them.” Scholars note being created in the image of God (imago Dei) means more than having certain abilities and attributes. It means humans are the images of God, regardless of what they can or cannot produce for the economy, what they look like, how they act. Bearing the image of the Creator is a privilege extended uniquely to humans. No animals or other “creation” can make this claim.

America is deeply rooted in accepting this special place, this sanctity, of human life. The Declaration of Independence states: “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal.” And the sentence immediately before in the Declaration is also illustrative of God’s special place in man; or man’s special sanctity: “When, in the course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the Political Bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the Powers of the Earth, the separate and equal Station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God entitle them, a decent Respect to the Opinions of Mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the Separation.”

So, we in America have a conundrum. Defined as “a paradoxical, insoluble, or difficult problem; a dilemma,” a conundrum is a “Catch-22” many find impossible to square with their real beliefs. We, many of us at least, shudder at the thought of covering Mother’s face with a pillow and killing her even though she is certain to die soon anyway.

We, at least many of us, are reviled by the killing of our fellow man, even if he or she has committed some heinous crime. Even if he or she has murdered another. And we, at least some of us, are moved by hunger, troubled by war, tearful at the sight of helpless and hopeless peoples.

And we, at least some of us, decry abortion: an act of violence and death against another human being. In America, where “all men are created equal” by law, where “Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God entitle them,” we are troubled by a law that clearly seems in disconnect, in violence to God’s law.

Emma Lazarus wrote the words on the Statue of Liberty, greeting newcomers to America: “Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to breathe free, The wretched refuse of your teeming shore, Send these, the homeless, tempest-tossed, to me: I lift my lamp beside the golden door.”

America has been the welcoming nation for the “homeless, tempest-tossed” for generations, for two centuries and more. America remains the beacon of hope, and freedom and dignity for many “people without voices” in the world today. Why then do we turn our backs on the unborn, the most helpless manifestation of God’s gift to mankind?

John Carey is a Falls Church free-lance writer specializing in American history.

==============================

Fundraising Foolishness: Fanning the Flames of Fear (townhall.com, 060124)

by Chuck Colson ( bio | archive )

This week, more than two months after President Bush nominated him, the Senate will finally vote on Judge Samuel Alito’s elevation to the Supreme Court. In a final, all-too-typical move, the vote was put off a week at the behest of Alito’s opponents.

Why? Nobody seriously expects another week to make a difference. With a few exceptions, senators probably knew how they were going to vote before the hearings. So, why put off the vote?

The most likely answer has nothing to do with Judge Alito or even the Supreme Court. Instead, it’s about what the former Speaker of the California Assembly, Jesse Unruh, famously called the “Mother’s Milk of Politics”: money.

The extra week gives interest groups another week to stay in close contact with their respective supporters and ask for urgent support. It’s another week to remind supporters that, regardless of the outcome, the “struggle” goes on—with the asking group, of course, leading the way.

In other words, the postponement is good for fundraising. And, if the past is any guide, the fundraising appeals can be expected to frighten their constituents with visions of a monster guaranteed to tear their wallets open: Christians.

Mind you, not real Christians, not the type you see in church. The Christians of appeal letters are straight out of Margaret Atwood’s The Handmaid’s Tale: would-be theocrats who, given the chance, would establish an apple pie Inquisition. And, needless to say, confirming Judge Alito represents just such a “chance.”

If you think I’m exaggerating, consider what the head of the Anti-Defamation League recently told his membership. Speaking at the same time, ironically, that Muslim youths were setting French communities on fire, he warned his members about the threat posed by, of all things, “the Christian worldview.” He expressed his “alarm” over how well “financed,” “sophisticated, coordinated, unified, energized, and organized” Christians have become in their efforts to reverse court-imposed secularism.

You could just about hear the checkbooks opening as he said that Christians’ goal is to “Christianize all aspects of American life, from the halls of government to the libraries . . . from the military to SpongeBob SquarePants.”

If this sounds overwrought to you, you are not alone: Writing in the journal First Things, David Klinghoffer called these accusations “ludicrous.” Christians seek to move the culture in a “spiritually healthful direction” by “inspiration and example.” That is something, Klinghoffer says, writing as a Jew himself, “[that] we Jews likewise have traditionally regarded as healthy and positive.”

So why the vilification? Well, Klinghoffer says, “a crusading nonprofit organization needs a bad guy to give a sense of urgency to its fundraising campaigns . . . “ Unfortunately, the easiest way to raise money is by pandering to people’s fears.

Thus, delaying the final vote gives “crusading nonprofits” another week to raise money by scaring people about what Justice Alito and his supporters might do. Money-wise, it makes no difference if any of these “predictions” come true, since the fears being appealed to are not based on facts, anyway.

But it does matter to the common good if, in pursuit of its “mother’s milk,” our policies are rendered completely sour.

==============================

Wanted: Pro-Life Democrats: Enough of this “big tent” Catholicism from the party with little room for pro-lifers. (National Review Online, 060314)

Late last month, 55 Catholic Democrats from the House of Representatives released what they termed a “historic” Catholic Statement of Principles. In substance the statement seeks to reconcile the support for abortion embraced by the Democratic Party with Catholic social teaching and a “consistent moral framework for life.”

This statement has been salt in an already festering wound for Catholic Democrats estranged from their party by its ever more entrenched pro-abortion platform. It is a position that has caused Catholics, especially practicing Catholics, to trickle away from the Democratic Party. Over the past years, pro-life Democrats have systematically been culled out of positions of importance in the party, and the official platform has come to mirror the mission statements of NARAL and Planned Parenthood. The idea of pro-life Democrats has now become something of an oxymoron, except in rare cases, like that of Pennsylvania, where the party begrudgingly trots out a pro-life candidate as the only possible way to defeat a strong pro-life Republican. This is especially disingenuous, given that the candidate’s own father, Robert Casey Sr., was denied permission to speak at the 1992 Democratic National Convention because of his pro-life stance.

All the typical rhetoric is in the “Statement”: talk of a “safety net” for those who are “most in need,” a commitment to advance “respect for life” and the “dignity of every human being,” and of course, protection for “the most vulnerable among us.” Unfortunately it is precisely the most vulnerable among us — voiceless unborn children — whom the Catholics of the party have sacrificed on the altar of Moloch. If the party would only take its own rhetoric seriously, then the most important social-justice issue of our day would command center stage. There is no indication of that happening any time soon. As a result, Catholics who would otherwise be sympathetic to the Democratic Party reluctantly find themselves obliged to abandon it.

More “progressive” Catholics have often had recourse to the image of “big tent” Catholicism, appealing for a broader acceptance of heterodox opinions within the Church. The image is apt, in that Catholicism does embrace a rich and varied array of opinions, emphases, schools of thought, theologies, spiritualities, and apostolates. At the same time, even the most enormous of tents has its boundaries, beyond which it is possible to stray. The statement makes a feeble attempt at defending the claim that the “big tent” of Catholicism can cover abortion.

That is a tough case to make. Just as you don’t have the polytheistic wing of Islam or the seal-clubbing wing of Greenpeace, you don’t have the pro-abortion wing of the Catholic Church. Certain non-negotiable moral standards define Catholicism just as surely as doctrinal beliefs do. We all advocate a big tent, but it can stretch only so far until it rips asunder.

Moral teaching is just as essential to Christianity as its doctrinal beliefs are. The earliest Christian writings, such as the Didache and the Letter of Barnabas speak of the “two ways,” one of which leads to life and the other to death. Both texts (and this is in the first and second centuries of the Christian era) speak explicitly of abortion as an element of the second way — that of death — and as directly opposed to the Christian spirit. Since its beginnings, Christianity has viewed abortion as an abhorrent crime against God and man.

To justify their position, the authors of the statement appeal to the so-called “primacy of conscience.” Yet conscience is not a pass to excuse wrongdoing. Would it make any difference if a serial killer claimed he was following his conscience when he murdered his victims? Even if the politicians are following their conscience, Catholic morality makes an important distinction between good conscience and bad conscience, and a conscience that sees nothing wrong with killing the innocent falls decidedly in the second category. Our first duty concerning conscience is to form it according to the moral law, and especially for a Catholic, no doubt can exist regarding the objective evil of abortion.

True, the statement acknowledges the “undesirability” of abortion, and the signers hasten to assure their constituencies that they do not “celebrate its practice.” That they do not “celebrate” the greatest social ill of our time may prove cold comfort to those who spend much of their free time actively campaigning for its abolition. And as regards its “undesirability,” this poorly chosen term will likely provoke only indignation. Hangnails are undesirable; under-seasoned salads are undesirable; lines at the cash register are undesirable. Abortion is repugnant and evil. Can you imagine a politician stepping forward and (with much hand-wringing) asserting that he finds rape “undesirable” and that he does not “celebrate” its practice, but that he will not stop defending legislation that permits it? Such a politician would rightly be ridden out of town on a rail.

I would like to make a counterproposal. Rather than asking Catholicism to embrace its antithesis, why not forge a true “big tent” Democratic party where all are welcome, even those who are pro-life? Better yet, why not return to that noble strain of politics that prided itself on its defence of the most vulnerable members of society? Why not forego the precious support of abortion power-brokers and rediscover the roots of the Democratic party? No number of “historic” statements could match the impact of a lived commitment to true social justice.

— Father Thomas D. Williams, LC, is dean of the theology school at Rome’s Regina Apostolorum University where he teaches Catholic Social Doctrine, and is a Vatican Analyst for NBC News and MSNBC.

==============================

Over 25,000 Bay Area Youth Engage Pop Culture War (Christian Post, 060327)

Battlecry leader ron luce called it a “spiritual battle” and more largely, a “cultural war” that the young generation is facing.

“we’re in the middle of a spiritual battle but also in the middle of a cultural war,” he said, according to the san francisco chronicle. “your generation is being pounded with sexual messages ... It’s literally destroying your generation.”

The mega-event drew young believers and christian rock fans who ultimately made the battle cry countering the trend of sex that has become all too casual among peers and frequent on the television and movie screens. Youth in their early and late teens revealed a new generation of rock ‘n roll. Rather than forming the rock ‘n roll hand sign, their hands were raised openly toward the sky in worship.

Informed of the alarming statistics of youth engaging in sex and contracting an std, thousands from the stadium committed themselves to take the message and culture of christ to fellow peers. In response to luce’s mission call, some 2,500 teens decided to dedicate their summers to spread christianity through mission works.

The stadium event followed a reverse rebellion rally that kicked off the major battlecry movement. Teens rallied in front of san francisco’s city hall in the rain friday to shout against secularism and reclaim the traditional values of america.

Linking teens and youth workers across the country, a new web platform was launched - www.battlecry.com - to help today’s generation have their own battle cry action plan. Students and churches are encouraged to join the battlecry coalition to track progress and receive updates from luce. Teen mania aims to involve 100,000 churches in the battlecry.

The battlecry stadium events will be hitting detroit apr. 7-8 and philadelphia may 12-13.

==============================

Hardball (Christian Post, 060318)

When i was growing up, i loved to play sports in our urban neighborhood. To compensate for the crowded conditions, cars, and by-passers, we often used rubber or waffle balls. The minute we played with a regulation baseball, everything had to change—our location, our clothes, and, most of all, our attitudes. The game became serious. Hardball was exciting and explosive. It was an adult game, played for fame and fortune. Skill could really count.

As i have thought about the church today, i realize that we must make some clear choices. Sports, cinema, music, education, business, the arts, and politics are all fields with the potential to explosively impact the culture. The church can choose to play hardball in each one of these arenas. If we make the choice to step up to the plate, are we ready to make the big play?

For some reason, the political realm seems to be the most elusive area for true christian authority. Perhaps our problem is that we only desire to support the “good guys.” In the quagmire of real-world political struggles there often are no good guys. Instead of siding with the championship team which is morally superior, the church is forced to deal with the lesser of two evils.

In these situations, we may wait for one side to do the right thing or keep a promise that they have no real intention of keeping. The church may need to take the lead, declare what it wants, and enforce its will in a world filled with conmen and imposters.

Let’s reflect on the last two years. Many of us voted our consciences and values in the 2004 elections. With unprecedented unity, the sleeping giant (the u.s. Church) rallied to protect traditional marriage and limit abortion-on-demand. Black and white, rich and poor, catholic and protestant together staved off an all-out attack on our nation’s most deeply held traditions. Just after the election, we applauded ourselves because of our unified heroic effort. Naively though, we have been lulled back to sleep. We’ve been waiting for someone else to step up and take the lead.

In my mind, president bush was supposed to lead the republican congress to reverse the damage done by the massachusetts supreme court. Instead, he began to champion social security reform and issues which had nothing to do with the moral mandate he received from the christian community. Was i disappointed?

As an african american, i have been called “uncle tom” and other racial slurs by many in my own community because of my support for george bush. My allegiance was not simply to president bush. My allegiance is ultimately to jesus christ and a biblical standard of morality.

I feel betrayed by one party and disrespected by the other. I must honestly confess that i have had to resist the temptation to be angry with presidential handlers such as karl rove. They received our votes and support without delivering on their promise of moral reform. I have concluded that no one else can do the church’s job of calling our society back to moral accountability. Not withstanding the important strides made by confirming conservative judges, protecting traditional marriage may only be possible in the next three to five years.

The question of the hour is, “are we only playing waffle ball while thinking we are competing in the major leagues”? The words of jesus in luke 16:8 ring in my head. “… the people of this world are more shrewd in dealing with their own kind than are the people of the light.” These words suggest that believers are often unaware of how lame and ineffective they are until it is too late. Fortunately, there’s no spiritual law against asking for wisdom and taking prudent action.

If the church is to play political hardball, she must set a clear agenda and demand both parties to comply. The nation is poised to believe that the republican party is a party of faith. Nothing could be farther from the truth. The abrahamoff scandal and other recent disclosures suggest that the church must be its own voice. The christian community cannot rely upon a fraudulent and deceptive system to represent the social agenda of the king of kings. On the other hand, we have to work within the real systems of the day. Essentially we must not let any party take us for granted. We must hold parties and candidates accountable to follow through on our agenda.

To do this, we must get involved in the nitty-gritty level of the political world. Voter registration, campaign contributions, campaign volunteer efforts, voting in both primaries and general elections are just a start. Let’s roll up our sleeves and engage our culture with a good old fashioned game of hardball!

_________________________________________________

Bishop Harry Jackson Is The Senior Pastor Of Hope Christian Church In College Park, Maryland

==============================

Ministry funds worthy pro-family projects: Offering grants to ventures helping rescue victims of ‘gay lifestyle’ (WorldNetDaily, 060322)

Pro-abortion, anti-war, “gay-rights” and other liberal-left groups seem to have no problem obtaining funding from everyone from George Soros and MoveOn.org to hundreds of nonprofits, PACs and trusts. But where do you turn if you’re a pro-family organization?

Enter the Pro-Family Charitable Trust, part of the California-based Abiding Truth Ministries.

The organization is seeking worthy ventures to consider for grants. Specifically, PFCT is currently focused on projects that:

1. Help individuals recover from homosexuality,

2. Oppose the recruitment of young people into the “gay” lifestyle or its defense, or

3. Counter the effect of pro-”gay” propaganda in media and culture.

“If you know of a pro-family project that deserves our consideration,” says attorney Scott Lively, president of Abiding Truth Ministries, “send us a short description of the project and the name and contact information of its organizers.”

The organization can be reached via its website or by mailing: The Pro-Family Charitable Trust of Abiding Truth Ministries, P.O. Box 891023, Temecula, CA 92509.

Some recent grantees include:

* Hillcrest Mission: Ex-”gay” activist James Hartline’s Hillcrest Mission seeks to establish a permanent Christian presence in the “gay”- and porn-dominated Hillcrest District of San Diego. The grant goes to help sponsor a “Shake the Nation” Christian activist conference there in May.

* HIS Ministry: This homosexual-recovery group near Sacramento, Calif., is based at Sunrise Community Church. The grant is to help with scholarships for group members to the 2006 conference of Exodus International, the nation’s premiere “ex-gay” group.

* Alliance Defense Fund: ADF’s “Day of Truth” campaign is a direct counter-protest to the homosexual “Day of Silence.”

* Campus Republicans of Cal State San Bernardino: This grant will help pay for a challenge to the school’s refusal to charter a Christian Club on campus unless it adopts an anti-discrimination policy on sexual orientation.

* PFOX: This grant goes to Parents and Friends of Ex-Gays and Gays to help with their project to distribute their new teen-oriented brochures on “gay” recovery to public school students. The project will be coordinated with High School Conservative Clubs of America.

==============================

Homeowners ban Bible study: Association leaders claim right to cut off religious gathering (WorldNetDaily, 060421)

Two residents of a Southern California senior mobile home park are suing the homeowner’s association for barring prayer and Bible study meetings in common areas.

For 17 years, residents met weekly in the Warner Springs Estates clubhouse for a prayer and Bible study meeting, most recently led by local pastor Andy Graham. But in August 2004, after new leadership took over the homeowner’s association, Graham was told in a threatening letter posted at the clubhouse to stop the Wednesday night meetings, according to the United States Justice Foundation, or USJF, which represents residents Susan Eva-Marie Heraver and Catherine Lovejoy.

Colette Wilson, the lead attorney in the case, told WND the letter essentially said, “Anybody who tries to defy us, we’re going to sue your pants off.”

Just prior to that, when the Bible study group gathered for its regular meeting, tenants and mobile home park staff were allowed to harass, threaten and interfere with the meetings, Wilson said.

During other events scheduled during the week, such as Bingo on Tuesdays, it’s understood that others in the room should be respectful and not in interruptive, but during the Bible study, the hostile residents acted in a “threatening manner,” with antics such as blasting the volume on the TV and talking loudly, according to Wilson.

One woman threatened meeting participants with a pool cue, and when she was videotaped, grabbed the camera, called police and claimed she was attacked, Wilson said.

After the threatening letter, the attorney noted, the Bible study group gave up and began meeting in each other’s homes. But Wilson said it limited them, because they couldn’t accommodate the up-to-40 people who met in the clubhouse, where there also was adequate parking and handicapped access.

Wilson said the meetings were nondenominational and included people of many different backgrounds, including Catholics, Jews and Protestants.

Responding to an attempt by USJF to resolve the dispute without litigation, the defendants argued the residents have no right to have prayer services. The homeowners association, they insist, can determine who will use the common areas and under what conditions.

Wilson contends this is contrary to the constitutions of the U.S. and California and the Unruh Act. She argued “numerous case precedents bar discrimination against people wishing to use commons areas in mobile home parks, in condominium complexes, and in other areas from holding Bible meetings or prayer meetings.”

“The attempt by the homeowners association to discriminate against those who wish to hold such prayer or Bible meetings, and the support of the homeowners association of the attempts to intimidate tenants out of having such meetings, is not only inexcusable, but illegal,” Wilson said. The homeowners association passed resolution against religious meetings then revoked it, she explained, but in practice, the ban remains in effect.

At the association’s monthly meeting, residents ask about whether they can have a religious group and the head of board always says no, Wilson explained.

She plans to file a new preliminary injunction in court asking that the meetings immediately be allowed to resume.

==============================

Starbucks to Put ‘Purpose Driven’ Quotes From Rick Warren (Christian Post, 051026)

Starbucks will begin to ink a “purpose driven” quote from Southern California megachurch pastor Rick Warren, onto its cups, according to a recent report by USA Today.

The quote from the Saddleback Church pastor contains the only direct mention of God in Starbuck’s new quote campaign, “The Way I See It,” which gathered 63 quotes from writers, scientists, musicians, athletes, politicians and cultural critics. Warren’s quote states the purpose of life can only be found in God.

“You are not an accident,” Warren writes. “Your parents may not have planned you, but God did. He wanted you alive and created you for a purpose. Focusing on yourself will never reveal your real purpose. You were made by God and for God, and until you understand that, life will never make sense. Only in God do we discover our origin, our identity, our meaning, our purpose, our significance and our destiny.”

The quote is part of Starbucks’ effort to carry on the coffeehouse tradition of conversation and debate beginning Spring 2006. A disclaimer on the cups state that they do not necessarily reflect the company’s beliefs.

As secular companies become more open with displays of others’ faith, Christian companies are less intimidated by secular norms. Large corporations with Christian foundations, the Curves fitness chain, Chick-fil-A, and Servicemaster have faith stamped all over their packaging.

In-N-Out Burger, the California-based fast-food chain, has included notations for Bible verses in some of its burger and drink packaging since 1987.

Don Chang, the “deeply religious” founder of popular clothing chains Forever 21 and XXI, stamps John 3:16 on the bottom of his shopping bags: “For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.”

Meanwhile, a new breed of small-owner entrepreneurs is advertising its faith loud and clear, according to a recent feature in TIME magazine. There are Christian banks, car dealerships, gyms, plumbers, financial planners, mortgage lenders, moving companies, building contractors and Internet-service providers.

Cindy Griffin, salon owner of Classic Body Image Salon & Day Spa, says her most popular service is prayer. Her stylists stop mid-session for prayer.

As her clientele solidified and evangelicals gained prominence, she had Scripture stenciled on the walls and named the café after the Garden of Eden. The salon plays Christian rock, displays Christian magazines and forbids cursing or gossip. There are now over 1,000 clients a month, and the store grosses $540,000 a year.

Michael Zigarelli, dean of the School of Business at Regent University, estimated that there are 500,000 to 600,000 “Christian owned and operated” businesses in the United States today—approximately 10% of all corporations.

And TIME observed that these businesses are “meshing prayer with profits—marketing to the like-minded, proselytizing to the unbelieving.”

==============================

Purpose Driven Cafe Launches Ahead of Rick Warren Starbucks Cup (Christian Post, 060421)

As preparations are underway for the release of the Starbucks Coffee cup featuring a quote from “Purpose Driven” author Rick Warren in late April, the Purpose Driven Ministries has launched a new online “coffeehouse” community – the Purpose Driven Café.

The special Starbuck cups are part of the company’s “The Way I See it” campaign featuring quotes from writers, scientists, musicians, athletes, politicians, and cultural critics.

After the beginning of the series in 2005, Starbucks solicited customer contributions for 2006. When Warren saw a quote on the theory of evolution, he decided to submit one of his own. Warren’s quote, taken from his book, The Purpose Driven Life, states: “You are not an accident. Your parents may not have planned you, but God did. He wanted you alive and created you for a purpose. Focusing on yourself will never reveal your real purpose. You were made by God and for God, and until you understand that, life will never make sense. Only in God do we discover our origin, our identity, our meaning, our purpose, our significance, and our destiny.”

The online Purpose Driven Café was launched to provide more information to someone who sees the quote and is interested in finding out more about Rick Warren and the Purpose Driven Life book. It is housed on the Purpose Driven Life Web site at www.purposedriven.com and also offers features oriented toward common questions about Christianity.

“We’re trying to connect with people’s real life and be honest and straightforward about things,” said Fischer. “We want it to be a place where seekers can come and feel comfortable.”

The site will offer answers to “burning questions” submitted by readers, book reviews, suggested resources, and a daily “On Purpose” column by Fischer that is geared toward people who aren’t yet followers of Jesus.

Additionally, the community will encourage visitors to get involved in “Life Groups” – groups that meet in coffee shops, homes, or other locations to talk about life’s most difficult questions – and offer discussion guides for such groups.

The first discussion guide will be called The Balanced Life.

“It’s a four-week discussion guide focused on slowing down and getting a sense of what your priorities are in life,” said Fischer.

In addition to reaching Starbucks customers and others curious about how Christian faith relates to everyday life, the Purpose Driven Café also will serve readers of The Purpose Driven Life..

“We want to have a conversation with the 35 million people who bought The Purpose Driven Life – those who are unchurched, seeking, or not Christians,” Fischer said.

==============================

Starbucks Is In Love With Brokeback Mountain: Company Continues To Be Leading Financier of Gay Agenda! (www.jameshartline.com, 060409)

A James Hartline Report Action Alert - April 9, 2006

www.jameshartline.com

Take Action Now! Boycott Their Brew!

(JHRonlineActionAlert) Without question, one of the largest corporate promoters of the anti-family, radical homosexual agenda, continues to be coffee giant Starbucks. The time has now come for Christians everywhere, who seek to save America from being redesigned by the morally bankrupt and socialistic minds of pro-gay corporations like Ford (www.afa.net/Petitions/IssueDetail.asp?id=194) and Starbucks, to take decisive action. Christians must finally come to terms with the severity of the moral decline in America. Either, we believe the Bible and its historical importance to America, or we, like the anti-christian secularists, will throw it on the ash heap of wasted paper, and continue to support the anti-family, homosexual agenda of the Starbucks Corporation.

-The Facts-

1. Starbucks was a financial supporter and sponsor of the 2005 San Diego Gay Pride parade and festival, that was involved in a major pedophile scandal (http://sdpride.org/2005_sponsor_logos.htm).

2. Starbucks is a current sponsor of the vehemenently anti-christian homosexual media group GLAAD (The Gay and Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation) (www.glaad.org). The goals of GLAAD are to promote homosexual, lesbian and transsexual character acceptance as positive role models in the media. GLAAD was a major player in promoting the acceptance of Brokeback Mountain, homosexual television program Will & Grace, the lesbian coming out of Ellen on the Ellen DeGeneres program, a lesbian kiss during family viewing hours on the Roseanne television show, and in 2004, launched the “I Do” contest to create a commercial promoting acceptance of gay marriage (www.glaad.org/about/accompphp). GLAAD has had an extensive history of aggressively attacking pro-family groups and individuals who believe that homosexuality is wrong, groups and individuals like Dr. Laura, Senator Trent Lott, and the Southern Baptist Convention. Starbucks’ involvement with GLAAD is a clear statement that they are in agreement with the anti-christian, pro-homosexual agenda of the radical, socialist movement in America (www.glaad.org/events/mediaawards/17th_annual/sponsors.php).

3. In 2005, Starbucks placed a frightening homosexual statement on its coffee cups, so that young teenagers would be indoctrinated into accepting the company’s dark version of sexuality (www.bpnews.net/bpnews.asp?ID=21387).

On that cup, Starbucks printed:

“My only regret about being gay is that I repressed it for so long. I surrendered my youth to the people I feared when I could have been out there loving someone. Don’t make that mistake yourself. Life’s too short.” Armistead Maupin - Author of homosexual books.

4. Exposed by Concerned Women for America as a major supporter of the radical homosexual agenda (www.cwfa.org/articles/8693/CWA/misc/index.htm).

5. In 2005, Starbucks not only promoted the Seattle Gay Pride Parade (www.costumegoddess.com/political/gaypride.htm), but also had approximately 75 of its employees marching with a Starbucks’ company van trailing them in the degrading, anti-family event(http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/business/230034_gaypridebusiness25.html).

6. While Starbucks continued to be the beneficiary of countless millions of dollars in sales from Christians in 2004, there is no apparent evidence that it spent any of its $1.94 million in Starbucks Foundation corporate donations on traditional Biblical values, Bible promotion or Bible reading among children. According to its 2003-2004 IRS tax filings posted on www.guidestar.com, the Starbucks Foundation donated $1.94 million to a wide variety of secular and oftentimes, socialistic children’s programs, secular reading programs, abortion rights and homosexual causes.

That year, the Starbucks Foundation did give $7,500 for the promotion of homosexual values to young children attending a junior high school. The organization’s IRS statement identified the $7,500 recepient as the Robert C Murphy Junior High School Gay-Straight Alliance Club at 351 Oxhead Rd. Stony Brook, NY. The Gay-Straight Alliances are devoted to promoting acceptance of homosexuality, lesbianism and transsexualism among young children and teenagers in public schools, oftentimes without parental knowledge.

The Starbucks Foundation also gave in 2004, $1,500 to the radical pro-abortion feminist organization The Global Fund for Women, located at 1375 Sutter St. in San Francisco. While Starbucks Corp. was supporting a multitude of homosexual groups who are on the move to dismantle Christian influence in America, its foundation donated $5,000 in 2004 to the Earth & Spirit Council, a Portland, Oregon-based group devoted to the promotion of the spiritual traditions of indigenous Indian tribes. It also gave $15,000 to the National Conference for Community & Justice (NCCJ), a radical group that holds homosexual camps for young children and teenagers each year called Camp Anytown and Camp Minitown. Youth that attend these camps end up so indoctrinated into the homosexual lifestyle, that they often return to school to start gay-straight alliance clubs to spread the agenda throughout their schools.

Take Action Now!

While Starbucks wants the money from Christian customers, its corporation despises your Christian values. In other words, bring in your money, but leave your Christianity outside! Until Starbucks stops funding radical homosexual groups that seek to dismantle traditional Christian values, will you please take a simple pledge to boycott Starbucks’ brew?

To contact your nearest Starbucks to express your displeasure at the corporate giant’s promotion of homosexuality and abortion go to: www.starbucks.com/retail/locator/default.aspx

Remember: While many Christian parents are raising their teenagers to believe in Biblical values, once they become employees of Starbucks, they are exposed to the anti-christian, pro-homosexual corporate polices of the coffee conglomerate. Will you sacrifice a daily $3.00 cup of coffee that you normally give to Starbucks to stand up for the future of our kids? You can certainly buy coffee somewhere else, or give your money to your local church ministries.

This information has been provided by The James Hartline Report.

Now Read By Over 5,000 Concerned Citizens Everyday!

I Am Making My Stand! Are You?

James Hartline, Publisher

The James Hartline Report

Educating The Church

Fighting For Our Generation

619-255-9378

==============================

Macy’s Removes Gay Pride Display (Christian Post, 060607)

BOSTON (AP) - Macy’s department store has removed a window display marking Boston’s gay pride week after a group that opposes gay marriage complained it was offensive.

The display at the downtown Boston store featured two male mannequins, with one wearing a gay pride rainbow flag around his waist, next to a list of several planned Boston Pride Week events.

MassResistance, formerly the Article 8 Alliance, which has campaigned against gay marriage and gay-themed textbooks in public schools, objected to the display and said the mannequin wearing the flag had a “skirt” on, the Boston Herald reported.

The group posted pictures on its Web site and scores of its supporters complained to Macy’s by phone and e-mail.

Elina Kazan, a Macy’s spokeswoman, said the store decided to remove the mannequins but leave the list of events in order to strike a balance. Displays in previous years did not use mannequins.

“We believe in diversity, and our customers are very important to us,” Kazan said. “But (the display) did offend a few of our customers, and we had to re-examine it.

ACLU of Massachusetts spokeswoman Sarah Wunsch criticized Macy’s for “succumbing to the bigotry” of what she said was a fringe anti-gay group.

==============================

Disney lay-offs mean R-rated films out: Moviemaker bedeviled for years by boycotts over family-unfriendly fare (WorldNetDaily, 060721)

Famed family-film maker Disney is headed back to its roots, with confirmation yesterday of cuts of 650 employees that will include a phase-out of its R-rated movies.

Oren Aviv, newly appointed president of production at Walt Disney Pictures, told the Hollywood Reporter that the company’s coming productions will be along the lines of “Pirates of the Caribbean,” “Chronicles of Narnia,” “National Treasure” and “Miracle.”

“If it’s a great idea and it’s done with quality and care, then it qualifies to be a Disney movie,” he told the newspaper.

The studio, which founded its greatness on the classics for families and children, had branched out in the 1990s to grasp R-rated projects with its Touchstone and Miramax labels. Touchstone was created to deal with more mature themes, and is expected to remain but be significantly smaller, generating only two or three films a year. Miramax handles independent and art-house films and now operates separately from Disney.

Those actions, along with Disney’s endorsement of “Gay Days” at its theme parks, had prompted a series of conservative and Christian groups to announce boycotts of the company, as WorldNetDaily has reported.

The American Family Association launched its boycott of Disney in 1996 and relinquished it only after the resignation of former CEO Michael Eisner, under whose leadership Disney made many of those moves.

AFA founder Donald Wildmon said it was successful in bringing attention to those issues at that time, but lately the AFA has focused its campaigns against activist liberals on the judicial bench and attempts to codify same-sex marriages.

The Southern Baptist Convention, the nation’s largest Protestant denomination, also conducted an eight-year boycott against the Mouse over Disney’s support of homosexual-themed events and movie subjects.

After it was concluded, Rev. Richard Land, of the convention’s Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission, said while it may have done little financially to Disney, the boycott did show conservative and Christian parents Disney no longer deserved unbridled trust.

Disney never indicated that those boycotts had any impact on its bottom line.

The Ontario Consultants on Religious Tolerance also listed boycotts of Disney by The Catholic League and the Assemblies of God. The Southern Baptists also had been joined in their effort by several other Christian denominations and groups as well as several Muslim and Jewish groups.

Now, Aviv told the Reporter, he will see to it that what the company brings to its audience is something the whole family can enjoy.

“That to us has always defined a Disney movie, and that definitely hasn’t changed,” he said.

Aviv’s predecessor, Nina Jacobson, recently had suggested the company move into the horror film genre, but Aviv said he would take some convincing.

The return-to-family-fare move comes as “Pirates” turned in a weekend sales total of $135.6 million and the computer-animated “Cars,” released by the Pixar unit, has been declared a hit.

The announcement also came the same day as Christian researcher George Barna and others announced plans for a new kind of multimedia organization, called Good News Holdings. Barna told the American Family Association’s AgapePress he sees it influencing young people through movies, books, television, magazines, cellular and other services – all with positive moral values.

He said his plans are for Good News to compete with secular media because of the superior quality of its products. Its first plans are to release “Christ the Lord: Out of Egypt,” based on an Anne Rice novel.

==============================

Focus on the Family Counters Gay Mooing Pup Campaign (Christian Post, 060721)

COLORADO SPRINGS (AP) - Two pooches are the unlikely mascots for competing ideas in Colorado Springs over what makes a person gay.

First there was Norman, the puppy who says “moo” because he was born different, according to an ad campaign that started early last month. Organizers of the Born Different campaign say Norman is a metaphor for gay people, who they argue were born different and deserve acceptance.

Tuesday, a dog named Sherman launched a counter-campaign with a sharp “woof,” a sound he makes because, his creators say, “that’s what dogs do.” A campaign featuring Sherman called “No Moo Lies” began Wednesday with an advertisement in The Gazette.

The Colorado Springs-based Christian ministry Focus on the Family developed the No Moo Lies campaign to rebut the Born Different effort, which is funded by the Denver-based Gill Foundation.

“Dogs aren’t born mooing, and people aren’t born gay,” Focus said in materials distributed to reporters at a news conference.

In the materials, Sherman is pictured as a real dog. At the Tuesday event, he also was a person in a dog costume.

While organizers of the Born Different campaign said they want only to spark discussion, Focus on the Family said Born Different is really an effort to champion legal status for same-sex marriages.

Colorado voters will decide in the November election whether to change state law to grant the benefits of marriage to same-sex couples in domestic partnerships. Organizers are gathering petition signatures for three other ballot measures to change the Colorado Constitution, including one to ban any new legal status similar to marriage, one to define marriage as only the union of one man and one woman, and a third establishing domestic partnerships for same-sex couples.

The last measure is similar to the one already on the ballot, except that it would change the constitution rather than merely state law. The ballot initiative supporters have until Aug. 7 to submit the 67,829 petition signatures needed to qualify for the ballot.

Focus on the Family officials said the Born Different campaign is a veiled attempt to boost the measures recognizing same-sex unions.

“What we’re talking about here is a radical redefinition of the human family,” said Bill Maier, a Focus vice president and psychologist. “Same-sex marriage intentionally creates motherless or fatherless families.”

Bobby Rauzon, a spokesman for the Born Different campaign, denied that it’s tied to the ballot measures. He said he welcomes the Focus dog, Sherman, to the discussion.

“This is about two dogs, Norman and Sherman,” Rauzon said. “It’s about inviting the people of the Springs to really engage in a conversation about whether gay people are born gay. Colorado will face some political decisions, and voters will really need to sit down and weigh those issues. This is separate.”

Focus on the Family said it’s exploring various venues for its Sherman campaign, but on Tuesday had developed only a newspaper ad and a Web site. Both were modeled on the Born Different campaign’s graphic designs.

The Born Different campaign has appeared on television, in movie theaters, radio spots, yard signs, paper napkins and other media. Focus spokesman Gary Schneeberger didn’t reveal how much the ministry will spend on its campaign, but indicated it will be much less than the $900,000 grant the Gill Foundation gave for Born Different.

The Born Different campaign has focused only on Colorado Springs because of the city’s reputation as a battleground over gay-rights issues, organizers said. The No Moo Lies campaign initially will focus only on Colorado Springs as well, but Focus officials said they might consider expanding it elsewhere.

The No Moo Lies campaign disputes Born Different on several points, including an assertion on the Born Different Web site that a person cannot change his or her sexual orientation. Melissa Fryrear, a gender issues analyst for Focus, said she is proof that’s wrong.

“I used to be someone who was lesbian-identified,” Fryrear said. “I know firsthand that people are not born gay, and homosexuality can be overcome.”

==============================

New Study Refutes Stereotypes about Churches and Politics (Christian Post, 060907)

New research revealed how largely Protestant clergy and laity differ about religion and politics. For the most part, however, both groups say their church is not heavily involved in local and national political issues.

Phoenix-based Ellison Research conducted two studies for Facts & Trends magazine on Protestant church ministers and adults who attend Protestant churches at least once a month who were asked about their personal political views and how appropriate it is for churches to be politically involved.

Measured on their involvement in local politics, 6% of ministers said their church was very involved, 36% of said it was somewhat involved and 46% said it’s not very involved. On national political issues, 7% of clergy said their church is very involved, 41% somewhat involved and 40% not very involved. And 12% said they try to avoid these issues. Results were similar among the surveyed laity.

Pentecostal and Southern Baptist congregations were most likely to be involved politically, but only to the level of “somewhat involved.” Lutheran clergy were least likely to say their church is politically involved. On national issues, evangelical and/or politically conservative pastors were slightly more likely than others to report some political involvement.

The studies found a wider gap between clergy and laity on the appropriateness for local churches to be politically involved in a number of ways.

The majority of both pastors (88%) and laity (65%) deemed encouraging the congregation to vote as appropriate. On the matter of discussing controversial issues from the pulpit, 62% of clergy rated it as appropriate whereas 47% of laity agreed. Half or nearly half of the clergy said it is appropriate for the church to serve as a polling place during an election, hold voter registration drives, publish information on what politicians stand for and work with politicians on local issues while only about one third of laity said the same.

Additionally, more laity (20%) deemed it appropriate to invite a political candidate to speak in church than clergy (14%).

Evangelical ministers were more likely than mainline clergy to say it is extremely appropriate to encourage the congregation to vote (74% to 62%), to discuss controversial issues from the pulpit (43% to 27%), and to encourage people how to vote on certain issues (24% to 12%).

People who attend evangelical churches showed the same differences from their mainline counterparts, and they had a greater willingness for the church to encourage people to protest or get involved in controversial issues.

The research report noted that only a minority of pastors and laity saw most of these areas of political involvement as highly appropriate for a local church.

Personal Political Views

The study also measured how laity and pastors classified themselves politically. Among Protestant clergy, 62% described themselves as politically conservative, 23% as moderate and 15 as liberal. Broken down by denominations, conservatives were most represented among Southern Baptist ministers, ministers from other Baptist groups and Pentecostal ministers, in order.

Presbyterian clergy were more evenly divided with 38% conservatives, 27% moderates and 35% liberals, and Methodist clergy as well (27% conservatives, 38% moderates, and 35% liberals).

The people in the pews were more likely to consider themselves politically moderate. Findings showed 45% of laity classified themselves as moderates, 38% as conservative and 17% as liberal. Among Southern Baptist laity, 47% considered themselves as conservative – a large gap between them and the clergy. Among Methodist laity, 12% were found to be politically liberal as opposed to the 35% for the clergy. Presbyterians were the only major denominational group in which the positions of clergy and laity were much the same, according to the report.

A majority of clergy, however, believed their political views were about the same as the views of their congregation with 64% saying they see themselves as politically on the same page as the congregation. Among laity, 59% said they felt their own political views were similar to those of their church.

“There are a lot of stereotypes about churches and politics: mainline churches are liberal, evangelicals represent a politically active Religious Right, conservative churches are raising Cain politically. It’s just not true,” said Ron Sellers, president of Ellison Research, who said clergy and laity are “all over the board” on their views of political involvement.

“Mainline ministers are almost equally divided among political conservatives, moderates, and liberals,” he continued. “Fewer than half of all evangelical pastors or conservative pastors believe it’s appropriate to encourage people how to vote on specific issues, and even fewer feel it’s appropriate to encourage their congregation to get involved with controversial issues. It’s really time to look beyond the stereotypes of churches and politics, and start dealing with the reality of the situation.”

The studies were conducted on 797 Protestant church ministers nationwide and 1,184 adults who attend Protestant churches at least once a month.

==============================

‘Creation Care’ Concerns Increase Among Evangelicals (Christian Post, 060908)

Tending to your soul at the Vineyard Christian Fellowship in Boise, Idaho, involves recycling old cell phones and printer cartridges in the church lobby, pulling noxious weeds in the backcountry and fixing worn-out hiking trails in the mountains. This is part of the ministry of Tri Robinson, a former biology teacher whose rereading of the Bible led him to the belief that Christians focused on Scripture need to combat global warming and save the Earth.

magnifier Enlarge this Image

“All of a sudden Boise Vineyard is one of the most important driving forces in our community for the environment,” Robinson said. “People say, ‘Why are you doing that?’ Because God wants it.”

Many evangelicals have dismissed environmentalists as liberals unconcerned about the economic impact of their policies to fight global warming. Long-standing distrust between the two camps over issues such as abortion and same-sex marriage has discouraged evangelicals from joining liberals on the environment.

But shared concerns over global warming and protecting the Earth are bringing together the two groups in ways that could make the Republican Party more eco-friendly and lead some evangelicals to vote Democratic.

In signs of change, Robinson had a Sierra Club representative at his environmental conference recently, and the Sierra Club invited Calvin DeWitt, a University of Wisconsin biology professor and a founder of the Evangelical Environmental Network, to its summit last year where it declared global warming the top issue for the coming decade.

“More and more evangelicals are coming to believe creation care is an integral part of their calling as Christians. It is becoming part of their faith,” said Melanie Griffin, director of partnerships for the Sierra Club and an evangelical.

Dewitt said evangelicals will not call themselves environmentalists.

“They are going to call themselves pro-life,” he said. “But pro-life means life in the Arctic, the life of the atmosphere, the life of all the people under the influence of climate change.”

The last time the environment was a major political issue was the 1970s, when rivers were catching fire, acid rain was killing lakes and Earth Day was created. President Nixon, a Republican, signed landmark legislation to combat air and water pollution, protect endangered species and create the Environmental Protection Agency.

Since then, League of Conservation Voters scorecards show Democrats getting greener and Republicans browner. President Bush earned the organization’s first “F” for a president.

Hoping to sway Bush, 86 evangelical pastors, college presidents and theologians signed a letter in February calling on Christians and the government to combat global warming.

One of the signers was Bert Waggoner, national director of The Vineyard USA, a network of more than 600 churches with 200,000 members.

“If you believe, as I do, that the ultimate end is not the destruction of the Earth but the healing of the Earth, you will be inclined toward wanting to work with God to see it restored,” he said.

Much of the old guard remains unmoved.

The Southern Baptist Convention, the largest Protestant denomination in the country, adopted a resolution in June denouncing environmental activism and warning that it was “threatening to become a wedge issue to divide the evangelical community.”

Focus on the Family leader James Dobson admonished evangelicals to remain focused on stopping abortion and gay marriage.

The Interfaith Stewardship Alliance, which includes Christian leaders with close ties to the Bush administration, argues that if humans are responsible for global warming, the costs of preventing it outweigh the harm it causes, said spokesman Calvin Beisner.

“This is not a split,” DeWitt said. “It is a transformation. What you find in the evangelical world in contrast to mainline denominations is that they are very suspect of authority.”

A Pew Research Center for the People survey this year found that 66% of white evangelicals said there was solid evidence the Earth was getting warmer, with 32% blaming human activity, 22% natural patterns and the rest undecided.

John Green, professor of political science at the University of Akron and a senior fellow of the Pew Forum on Religion and Public Life, sees evangelicals, particularly the young and educated, increasingly interested in issues that could take some of them out of the Republican Party.

“Climate change is not only a part of this but perhaps the most public part,” Green said.

Robinson said he voted for Bush in 2004 because of his opposition to abortion, but it was a tough decision, making him feel he was voting against the environment.

“If the conservatives want the Christian vote, they are going to have to address this,” he said.

The pastor feels like Noah cutting his first tree to build the Ark.

“God blesses small beginnings,” he said. “That’s why we’re trying to get people to recycle — do the little things. I believe God will meet us.”

==============================

A Matter of Conscience (townhall.com, 060913)

By Jay Sekulow

As in any movement, the pro-life community has seen changes over the last decade. In the 1980s and 90s, it was picketing and protests in front of abortion clinics that led the effort to eradicate the rampant abortions taking place in the United States. These picketing and protests included acts of civil disobedience, pitting protestors against governmental authorities. These protestors later faced arrests and, in some cases, allegations of Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations (RICO) violations. It took 20 years to have those RICO charged lifted off the back of the pro-life movement. In order to obtain victory, we actually had to take the RICO cases to the Supreme Court of the United States on three separate occasions. Most recently, we won a unanimous decision, once and for all removing this cloud that had hung over the pro-life movement for two decades.

Now the front line fight for life includes doctors and medical professionals who refuse to participate in abortion procedures. We have received calls across the country from medical professionals who were being compelled by their places of employment to participate in abortion procedures. Nurses, doctors and pharmacists have all contacted us seeking help. We’ve gone to federal court in several of these cases and, in fact, have obtained a jury verdict, including punitive damages on behalf of nurses in California who were forced to dispense the morning after pill. That victory sent shock waves through the pro-abortion industry.

Our latest victory in federal court is doing exactly that once again: A federal court has dismissed an attempt by Illinois Governor Blagojevich to dismiss a lawsuit against him filed by seven pharmacists whom we represent. These seven pharmacists object to an Executive Order the Governor issued forcing all state pharmacists to dispense the morning after pill. We have alleged in our complaint that the order violated the First Amendment right to religious freedom and freedom of conscience. The U.S. District Court in Springfield, Illinois, denied the Governor’s motion to dismiss the suit, which was filed challenging the State’s year-old morning after pill mandate. This is a significant victory for the right of conscience for those pharmacists who object to dispensing this particular pill. Five of the seven pharmacists have actually lost their jobs for failing to comply with the Governor’s mandate. In a 28-page order and opinion, Judge Jeanne Scott held that the pharmacists’ allegations taken as true “may establish that the object of the Rule [morning-after-pill mandate] is to target pharmacists, such as the Plaintiffs, who have religious objections to Emergency Contraceptives, for the purpose of forcing them either to compromise their religious beliefs or leave the practice of pharmacy.” The judge went on to hold that such an object is not “religiously neutral.” Rules and regulations that show hostility toward religious faith and practices are deemed unconstitutional by the courts. The ruling is an important recognition of the right of conscience. Frank Manion, who is leading these cases for us around the country, noted that, “The Court has recognized that the State may not target religious objectors for disparate treatment.” Frank went on to state that “[o]ur clients have never sought to prevent anyone from gaining access to these drugs. They simply want the State to respect their right to refrain from participating in activity that violates their sincerely held beliefs.”

Judge Scott, in her order, encouraged the State to amend its existing rule “to clarify its object and application in a manner that would be consistent with individual constitutional rights.” We hope that the State of Illinois heeds the wisdom of Judge Scott. If they do not, these cases will continue to be litigated as will others around the country. As in the case of the jury trial for the nurses in California two years ago, this case is sending the same shock waves to the pro-abortion industry that is not used to having to have their position challenged so aggressively in federal court. It’s about time!

==============================

Pro-life group gets abortionist’s license revoked: ‘The truth is finally coming out about the seedy and dangerous nature’ of industry (WorldNetDaily, 060915)

A pro-life group’s complaints prompted Pennsylvania to revoke the medical license of an abortion provider accused of “unprofessional conduct.”

Harvey Brookman also was fined $50,000 for operating without medical malpractice insurance, practicing medicine beyond the scope of his license, and “unprofessional conduct due to actions that departed from the quality standards of the profession.”

Centre County Citizens Concerned for Human Life filed the complaints with the state Bureau of Professional and Occupational Affairs and the state Department of Health.

Brookman’s unprofessional conduct included a botched abortion in which he perforated the uterus and bowel of a woman who later was forced to undergo emergency surgery at a hospital in Philadelphia, according to Operation Rescue.

Brookman already had a record of disciplinary action taken against him. His medical license was revoked in New York in 1996 and he surrendered his license in New Jersey to avoid revocation.

“We think Brookman is finally out of medical licenses and out of the abortion industry,” said Operation Rescue President Troy Newman.

Newman emphasized, however, he believes Brookman’s conduct is “more the rule than the exception when it comes the abortion industry.”

“We don’t know of any abortionist that doesn’t have major problems,” he said. “Those still left in the abortion industry are not exactly the cream of the crop.”

The successful complaint lodged by Centre County Citizens Concerned for Human Life is another example of how “savvy pro-lifers are using the system to stop abortion,” he said.

Over the past year, 12 abortion clinics have closed, many because of efforts of pro-life groups, Newman points out. Brookman is the fifth abortion provider during that time to have his license suspended or revoked, or to quit the abortion industry.

“The truth is finally coming out about the seedy and dangerous nature of America’s abortion industry that has existed all along,” Newman said.

As WND reported Tuesday, Ohio state regulators have uncovered more than a dozen health code violations, including a serious situation that endangered the life of a patient, and an East Side Cleveland clinic that performed second-trimester abortions is closing down.

==============================

NBC: Special Won’t Show Madonna on Cross (Christian Post, 061020)

NEW YORK (AP) - Backing away from a confrontation with religious groups, NBC said Thursday it has decided not to show pictures of Madonna mounting a Crucifix when it airs a concert special with the pop star next month.

The concert, which lists Madonna as an executive producer, is scheduled to air Nov. 22.

During the provocative passage in her concert, Madonna is shown on a mirrored cross wearing a crown of thorns. She has explained that it was meant to illustrate a theme of confession.

But this angered some religious leaders, who called it a bad-taste publicity stunt. Several religious groups in the United States told NBC they would organize a boycott of one of the concert’s commercial sponsors if the cross scene appeared, and were meeting next week to decide which company to target.

NBC didn’t explain its decision, with a spokeswoman saying the network doesn’t discuss how its editorial decisions are made. NBC Entertainment President Kevin Reilly ducked out of an industry function in Los Angeles Thursday before reporters could reach him.

“NBC did the right thing, but the fact that it did not say why the offensive part of Madonna’s concert was cut shows cowardice,” said Bill Donohue, president of the Catholic League. “What NBC should have done is to admit that since it refused to air the Danish cartoons that Muslims objected to earlier in the year, it felt obliged not to treat Christians in a discriminatory manner.”

NBC will still show a performance of “Live to Tell,” but use different camera angles so that Madonna isn’t seen until she gets off the cross, the network said.

The pop star, whose video for “Like a Prayer” likewise left some religious leaders cold two decades ago, explained earlier that she wasn’t mocking the church and considered the scene no different than a person who wears a cross.

Asked about it an interview late this summer, Reilly told TVGuide.com that the crucifixion scene would probably be in the special. He said Madonna “felt strongly about it.”

“We viewed it and, although Madonna is known for being provocative, we didn’t see it as being ultimately inappropriate,” Reilly said then, according to the Web site.

==============================

Calif. City to Pay Christian Group Banned from Holiday Fest (Christian Post, 061023)

CHULA VISTA, Calif. (AP) - The city has agreed to pay $31,000 to settle a lawsuit filed by a pre-teen Christian dance troupe kicked out of the Holiday Festival last December because of their religious message.

Chula Vista also agreed to provide to police officers and city officials annual First Amendment training “with emphasis on the rights of religious persons to express their faith in the public square.”

A hearing to approve the settlement is scheduled for Tuesday in U.S. District Court in San Diego, though officials say the judge’s approval is a formality.

Lita Ramirez, instructor for the Jesus Christ Dancers, said yesterday the outcome of the case sends a message that religious expression must be protected.

“We did this not just for us we did this for everybody,” Ramirez said.

==============================

Fed-up Wal-Mart worker quits over pro-’gay’ agenda: Urges Christians to take stand because most people ‘unaware’ (WorldNetDaily, 061101)

Sam Walton’s original stores wouldn’t even sell recorded music if it contained profanity and Janet Baird was happy working hard to make the company money, setting up and managing wedding fairs and other promotions, and won awards for her efforts.

She and her husband even married at one of the store’s events.

But no more. The Ohio woman, after hearing the shocking confirmation directly from the mega-corporation’s international headquarters that the company is, in fact, contributing to the financial and moral agenda of the nation’s “gay” chamber of commerce, she quit. And she’s not a bit worried.

“I got God backing me. That’s where I stand on it,” she told WND in an interview.

Baird had worked for the corporation, in various branches including Sam’s Club and Wal-Mart, since 1992. It was a recent tip she received from her brother that was the beginning of the end, because he told her “my company had joined the National Gay and Lesbian Chamber of Commerce.”

It was during an interview with WND in August that Wal-Mart spokesman Bob McAdam said, “It is correct that we have a dialogue with the (gay chamber). This is just what businesses do.”

“Sam Walton was such a moral man, he wouldn’t even allow music to be sold in his stores if it had bad language,” Baird said. “When it comes to moral values, first of all they started selling smutty magazines, then they brought in nasty music and videos, even ones others refused to sell, like ‘Brokeback Mountain.’”

Now this comes along. “I sent an e-mail (to the company) asking, ‘What have you done to Sam Walton’s store?” Baird said.

McAdam had told WND the move was just another business outreach, much as the company’s affiliations with other chambers of commerce, such as the Hispanic organization.

But to Baird, it wasn’t the same. She called the corporate office for its response. “The lady said, ‘Yes.’ When I asked if the money I spent shopping at Wal-Mart would go to support same-sex marriage, she simply responded, ‘Sales are sales.’”

“I let her know how long I had worked at Wal-Mart and told her that I would no longer work for this company and never spend another dime there. She replied, ‘I hope you don’t mean that.’ I did mean it. The next day I went to the store and quit. The manager that signed my exit papers had no idea about what had been going on in the leadership of Wal-Mart.”

Now she’s staging protests in front of that store, and others nearby, to let people know of the company’s affiliations and commitments.

She said a large part of her years-long commitment to the company was because of the original core values the company exemplified.

“I began working with Sam’s Club in 1992. Mr. Sam Walton, the founder of Wal-Mart Stores, had recently passed away. The more I learned about this man the more I wanted to do what I could to make this an ever better place to work.

“I worked in marketing and put together the first wedding expo. This was a fund-raiser that allowed vendors to set up for a weekend and all the proceeds went to the Children’s Miracle Network. It was a huge success,” she said.

“This became a yearly event. I was so proud to work for this company. I was privileged to be the event coordinator for a number of Wal-Mart sponsored events and raised a lot of money in the community,” she said.

One beneficiary was a young man named Luke Clemons. He was 18 and needed a liver transplant. “We managed to raise enough money for (the) transplant and start a Luke Clemons Foundation,” Baird said. He survived four more years.

For that work, she was given a Member Service Award.

“This was not a job to me, it was a ministry given to me by God Himself to help His people in need and get paid for it at the same time,” Baird said.

But things changed. “Today Wal-Mart is not the same company Mr. Sam started. I think he would rather see it go under than to see what it has become. Mr. Sam loved God – the store he began does not!” she said.

Her boycott is getting its start in front of the store where she used to work, on the Lexington Springmill Road in Ontario, and then at the nearby store in Mansfield, Ohio, and then will continue to other stores.

“As Christians we have to take a stand and get the word out because most people are not aware of what is happening,” she said.

Her big boycott launch will be the Friday after Thanksgiving, November 24, she said, because that traditionally is the biggest single shopping day of the year.

“We will be joining all of you on the day after Thanksgiving … to bring the Gospel of Christ to the very gates of hell,” she said.

She’s replaced only part of the income she gave up by leaving Wal-Mart, by accepting a position in a physician’s office.

When Wal-Mart initially confirmed the agreement to support the “gay” chamber, Tony Perkins, of the Family Research Council in Washington, D.C., immediately launched a citizens protest of the move.

It also was at that point that an advertising industry site, AdAge, confirmed Wal-Mart not only had joined the NGLCC but also has hired a “gay-marketing” shop and started discussions about extending domestic-partner benefits to employees.

In the AdAge report, Justin Nelson of the NGLCC described the company as “pragmatic.”

“They have been viewed with some degree of skepticism by the lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgendered community, and it’s important for them in terms of gaining market share to change that,” he told AdAge.

Perkins told supporters that the “heat” from the “radical left” apparently influenced the company’s corporate decisions, and he wants constituents to let Wal-Mart know of their displeasure.

“While the NGLCC professes to promote the ‘interests of the LGBT business community,’ this is not all they have done,” Perkins said. “Recently, they described efforts to defend traditional marriage as an attempt to ‘write discrimination into the Constitution …’ The NGLCC also advocated attaching a pro-homosexual ‘hate crimes’ amendment to legislation intended to protect children from violent sex offenders.”

“It is unfortunate,” Perkins said, “that Wal-Mart has joined forces with an organization whose mission opposes many of the values shared by rural and small-town America. It is precisely the interests of average Americans that Wal-Mart has prided itself in promoting.

“Now, by surrendering to the radical homosexual lobby, Wal-Mart has entered the political arena with no economic benefit to their company or their customers,” he said.

==============================

‘Gay’ Wal-Mart prompts another employee to quit: ‘God hit me’ through WND report, says Florida woman who’s leaving (WorldNetDaily, 061107)

A second worker upset over Wal-Mart’s newly-contrived “gay” agenda is quitting the retail chain to take a stand for Christianity, and is citing a report from WND about another woman who also decided she’d had enough.

Karin Laginess, of Auberndale, Fla., told WND yesterday that it was as if “God hit me” when she saw the earlier WND report about Janet Baird.

Baird, of Ohio, heard the shocking new plans that WND had reported several weeks ago directly from the mega-corporation’s international headquarters: that the company is, in fact, contributing to the financial and moral agenda of the National Gay and Lesbian Chamber of Commerce.

She quit, and now Laginess has joined her.

“I just got home from shopping at Winn-Dixie,” Laginess told WND yesterday. “I am not going to buy anything else from Wal-Mart again.”

She promised her supervisor she would give two weeks’ notice, and she only has a few days left on that.

“The minute my husband made me aware of this, I started to just cry,” she said. “It broke my heart to see them choose to side themselves with what I call such an immoral organization. I just sat and cried.”

She had been discussing moral decline in America with her husband just a few days earlier, and had concluded that’s just what the world is coming to these days.

Then when she discovered the chain at which she’s shopped since it opened also had chosen that very direction to move, and she realized she could make a choice – let it go and conclude that’s just the way of the world, or make a stand.

It was as if God told her: “Hey there, even you are beginning to be that way, letting other people tear down God’s word.”

“I felt I was beginning to become numb to some things,” she said, so decided to make her stand.

“Within a couple hours, I had written out my resignation letter,” she said, and although her supervisor asked her to reconsider, she hasn’t felt the need.

“I stated exactly why I was leaving, because the company had gone into partnership with this league,” she said.

Her husband sent an e-mail to Wal-Mart, “but of course we have not heard back from them.”

“Jesus would love people, but he wants them not to be sinning,” she said. “I feel like I can do more for the Lord’s work by quitting, and boycotting if I can do that, and telling others about it.”

Baird had told WND just about a week earlier of her decision. She had worked for the chain for years, rising through the ranks and even running wedding fairs and other promotions.

But she said she felt strongly that she needed to not be in that environment any longer.

“I got God backing me. That’s where I stand on it,” she told WND in an interview.

It was during an interview with WND in August Wal-Mart spokesman Bob McAdam said, “It is correct that we have a dialogue with the (gay chamber). This is just what businesses do.”

Baird said Wal-Mart founder Sam Walton was such a moral man, “he wouldn’t even allow music to be sold in his stores if it had bad language.”

Baird now has announced plans to launch a series of protests in front of Wal-Marts to let others know of the corporation’s agenda.

“As Christians we have to take a stand and get the word out because most people are not aware of what is happening,” she said.

Tony Perkins, of the Family Research Council in Washington, D.C., said while the NGLCC “professes to promote the ‘interests of the LGBT business community,’ this is not all they have done.”

He said the group recently described efforts to defend traditional marriage as an attempt to “write discrimination into the Constitution …” and it has advocated attaching a pro-homosexual “hate crimes” amendment to legislation intended to protect children from violent sex offenders.

==============================

The Grinch, the ‘gays’ and Wal-Mart (WorldNetDaily, 061118)

by Pat Boone

I played tennis with Sam Walton.

Yes, the man who conceived, founded and built the mighty Wal-Mart. What a man he was! Everything he did, he gave his all to. That, I found out, included tennis. I’m remembering a match on his home court in Bentonville, Ark., when my pro partner, John Newcomb, and I faced Mr. Sam and his partner, Rod Laver. Mr. Sam had to be in his late 60s by then, but he ran for everything, and if he got his racket on the ball, he was likely to put it away. The other three of us will never forget what a competitor, what a happy scrapper he was.

I played in the annual golf and tennis tournament actually hosted by John Phillips and his grocery store chain, but Sam Walton took a very active part, as he did in anything that involved his beloved Bentonville. He and I shared a private early breakfast at a diner he frequented, and we talked about marketing, especially gospel music. He always wanted his vast and growing empire to be family friendly, offering every good product at the lowest possible prices, and we constructed a plan to feature gospel music more prominently.

Already at more than 4,000 stores, his music department offered most everything, and he was personally concerned that some of it was anything but family friendly. Increasingly, he would be informed by customers that a number of albums contained profanity, strong and explicit sexual material, angry and violent imagery, all kinds of stuff he didn’t want to sell anybody – but he didn’t know what to do about it, since neither he nor his employees had time to listen to all the records the national distributors would place in his racks.

So I told him about, and subsequently introduced him and his top buyers to, the PMRC. That’s the Parents Music Resource Committee, created by Washington wives, including Dee Jepson and Tipper Gore, wife of Albert. These ladies, mothers all, made it their business to check the lyric contents of all the records being marketed relentlessly to their kids and other mothers’ kids. They lobbied successfully to force the record business to either print the lyrics on the outside of the records, or more often, put advisory labels or stickers on the covers – so that kids and their parents were warned about what their children would be hearing – before any purchase was made.

For several years, they advised Wal-Mart and helped keep it “family friendly.”

Sensible, right? Responsible, sure. And Sam Walton loved it. The record companies grumbled, complained and used the dreaded “censorship” word. The late Frank Zappa, he of the Mothers of Invention, actually testified before some congressional committee, invoking (like “Hustler” magazine’s Larry Flynt later) the First Amendment as if somehow letting people, especially young people, know what they were buying was encroaching on their “rights.”

But Sam’s folks, prompted somewhat by me, reminded the committee that food companies had to put their ingredients on soup cans and cereal boxes. It wasn’t “censorship”; it was truth in advertising. It was responsible; it was family friendly. It was right – simply the right thing to do.

I loved Sam Walton for that.

So, years later, when other people began to complain about the size and prices and almost unbeatable competition Wal-Mart displayed, and stories kept popping up in publications charging the juggernaut with “unfair competition,” non-union employees, of not treating employees right – all kinds of bad publicity, whether well-founded or not – I called the top brass at Wal-Mart and offered my services, my name and reputation, if they could use them, to help counteract these negatives. And they took me up on it, adding me to a sizable group of volunteer citizens who confer from time to time, sharing ideas about how to keep Wal-Mart’s family friendly image strong and true. I still love the Sam Walton I knew, and I feel protective toward him, since he’s not here to personally direct his own business.

This year, instead of bowing and kowtowing to militant atheist and super liberal “political correctness,” so-called, I’m thrilled to see that Wal-Mart has banished “the Grinch” that threatened to steal Christmas, and will be advertising Christmas sales and playing Christmas music – and not conforming to the total “Holiday” imagery and advertising of other milk-toast wimp marketers. Again, the family friendly vision of Sam Walton lives on! I believe he’s smiling somewhere, possibly in the presence of the One whose birth Christmas celebrates.

So imagine my surprise, my shock really, when I read yesterday that this venerable company, the international outgrowth of Mr. Sam’s personal vision, has agreed to automatically donate 5% of online sales directly to the Washington, D.C., community center for gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender people! The cash donation will come from online purchases made at Wal-Mart through the homosexual group’s website. Every purchase made online for books, music, videos, clothing and accessories, children’s clothing and toys, and electronics will automatically send 5% of the sales to the CCBLBT organization.

The American Family Association Action Alert, a widely read Internet news source, says this latest move follows Wal-Mart’s joining the National Gay and Lesbian “Chamber of Commerce,” and agreeing to give generous financial help to that organization also. The AFA, and I predict many other family organizations, are calling for a post-Thanksgiving boycott of Wal-Mart. In fact, they’re lining up 1,000,000 families who will pledge not to shop at Wal-Mart or Sam’s Club on the Friday or Saturday following Thanksgiving.

If the boycott succeeds, it won’t bankrupt Wal-Mart; but it may send them a message, loud and clear.

And I suspect Mr. Sam is not smiling about the sudden flak, or the actions that caused it. The man I knew was a conscientious deacon at the Methodist church, and his own family are wonderful people, still honoring their mom, Helen. He was a rock ribbed “traditional values” guy, and while he loved everybody and loved serving them, his own staff has told me of situations in which he took a stern, fatherly, moral stance with employees who weren’t representing his American Christian values. He considered them his “family” and tried to lead them accordingly.

There’s a distinct line between allowing people to live their own lives as they choose, and underwriting and endorsing, even promoting, choices and actions with which you fundamentally disagree. Mr. Sam was determined that his stores would always be “family friendly”; and suddenly, the millions of families he always catered to are seriously pondering the mixed messages coming out of Bentonville. I think he would have remained benignly neutral and non-condemning toward homosexual groups – but would never have donated to their causes.

How ironic, if Wal-Mart banishes the Grinch – but has its Christmas sales stolen by the gays!

==============================

Wal-Mart blacklisted for Black Friday: Shoppers urged to boycott No. 1 retailer due to pro-homosexual commitments (WorldNetDaily, 061121)

Group wants to save Wal-Mart from pro-homosexual activists

The Friday after Thanksgiving typically is the biggest single shopping day of the year, and has been known to make or break a holiday season for many a retailer. This year, for Wal-Mart Friday will be even bigger than that.

The American Family Association, as WND reported earlier, already asked its several million supporters to boycott the stores that day.

And now another organization is launching an “information explosion” that is intended to tell the tens of millions at Wal-Mart Friday that some of their dollars will be going to support a group that works to discriminate against Christians with “hate crimes” legislation and wants marriage expanded to involve same-sex couples.

“We’re out to help an old friend. Wal-Mart has been a friend of ours for a long, long time,” said Flip Benham, the director of Operation Save America who is working to help coordinate the new efforts by the www.SaveWalMart.com outreach.

The AFA effort to trying to wake Wal-Mart up.

“Wal-Mart should remember that the majority of people in this country do not support things like same-sex marriage, and don’t want the company giving money to groups that do support it,” American Family Association Chairman Donald E. Wildmon said. “Shopping at retailers other than Wal-Mart might remind the company of that fact.”

The SaveWalMart.com plan is different. It wants to approach customers directly, to let them know about the company’s moral agenda, and to bring people together in a series of events that will convince the company to return to the values of founder Sam Walton.

Those were described in a recent WND column by Pat Boone, who knew Walton personally.

In his commentary, Boone told how he met with Walton, and at Walton’s request offered ideas on how to feature gospel music in his stores.

“Already at more than 4,000 stores, his music department offered most everything, and he was personally concerned that some of it was anything but family friendly. Increasingly, he would be informed by customers that a number of albums contained profanity, strong and explicit sexual material, angry and violent imagery, all kinds of stuff he didn’t want to sell anybody – but he didn’t know what to do about it, since neither he nor his employees had time to listen to all the records the national distributors would place in his racks,” Boone wrote.

He than told Walton about the Parents Music Resource Committee, which checked lyric contents and lobbied to have recording companies print the lyrics on the outside of the records or put advisories on the packaging.

Walton loved it, Boone reported. “It was responsible; it was family friendly. It was right – simply the right thing to do.”

“We are not protesting. We are proclaiming the gospel of Jesus Christ,” says the SaveWalMart organization website about Friday’s plans.

The plans are to have people choose the Wal-Mart nearest either their home or church on Friday, and be there all day to hand out information about the developments involving the company.

“If you have a portable sound system, let the preacher boys proclaim the Gospel of Jesus Christ on it! We are a Gospel people! As always, we are going out because we love Wal-Mart and want to see the corporation turn back to the Christian ethic of its founder, Sam Walton,” the website instructs

Benham said so far there are plans to demonstrate against the “satan-inspired” agenda at “hundreds” of the stores across the nation. He said it is “foolish” for a company even such as Wal-Mart to drive away an entire classification of customers.

However, he said it’s a situation almost like blackmail or extortion. He called it “demonic” for its reach well beyond what logic could allow.

In one city, for example, Benham’s workers offered a regional newspaper nearly $17,000 for an ad about its campaign, nearly double the routine $8,500 for such an ad, he said. The newspaper turned down the ad, which included statements such as, “God blessed Wal-Mart because founder Sam Walton chose to honor Jesus Christ and run his business according to biblical principles!”

The ad, which also has been prepared as a handout for people to give away on Friday, also said customers should “ask your local Wal-Mart Store Manager” about the changing moral values, and either call Wal-Mart or e-mail the company about the concerns.

“Wal-Mart is changing! It is departing from the rock from which it was hewn. The faith and love for Jesus Christ and His Word by Sam Walton, the founder of Wal-Mart, is being trashed before our very eyes,” the ad says.

The facts it cites are basic. Wal-Mart recently joined the National Gay & Lesbian Chamber of Commerce, contributing at least $25,000 to the cause with promises to sponsor various homosexual events.

“It’s a beginning,” Benham told WND about the information plans. “Most of the people that we talk to, they have no idea (of the company’s moral changes).

“Our hope is that thousands and thousands and thousands of people will be put on notice as to what is happening in Wal-Mart,” he said.

Boone noted that he was shocked when the company agreed to donate a percentage of its online sales directly to a Washington, D.C., community for homosexuals.

“The man I knew was a conscientious deacon at the Methodist church, and his own family are wonderful people, still honoring their mom, Helen,” Boone wrote. “He was a rock ribbed ‘traditional values’ guy…”

The AFA also is asking people to sign an online petition promising they will participate in a boycott, and the goal is a million families.

“The devil is forcing our schools, businesses, government, and churches to honor those things which are an abomination to God. Christians must take a stand! It’s time for our theology to become biography in the streets! It’s time for us to come out of the closet!” the information campaign website says.

“We are not a protest. We are a proclamation that Jesus Christ is Lord! Wal-Mart can be saved and so can America. It begins with God’s Church!” the website said.

Wal-Mart, after confirming to WND that it did establish a relationship with the homosexual business group, has been focusing on “diversity” in responses to people concerned about the company’s moral drift.

To Pastor Rick Barnard’s note that he couldn’t support such a company, Wal-Mart said, “Working with the NGLCC, as we do with other minority enterprise leaders, is our way to help educate corporate America and the public as to the economic benefits of a diverse workplace and the power of creating mutually beneficial relationships with the LGBT and the LGBT-friendly business community.”

Florida customer Lawrence Reves said he supported Wal-Mart “when the Democrats targeted you, but THIS is something I can not consciously continue to do.”

“Wal-Mart Stores, Inc.’s commitment to nondiscrimination underscores our understanding of and appreciation for diversity, as well as the growth and influence of emerging consumer markets in the United States, including the lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) community,”‘ the company responded.

“American businesses … are being blackmailed by the devil himself. They are being forced by the ‘politically correct’ dogma (abortion, homosexuality, etc) of our day to accept his terms. If one chooses to defy this dogma, he will be forever branded as a right-wing, bigoted fascist, bent on forcing his own religion (Christianity) down everyone else’s throat. If the Church or any business will not accept these terms, or truly honors God, there will be hell to pay!” said the SaveWalMart site. “Now Satan has Wal-Mart in his line of fire!”

“After being lambasted for years by the anti-family, pro-abortion, pro-homosexual, radical environmental left, Wal-Mart has finally succumbed to this constant harassment and blackmail. She has now chosen a policy of appeasement to assuage all of the false accusations leveled against her in hopes that the devil will somehow stop being so mean,” according to information campaign organizers.

“And I suspect Mr. Sam is not smiling about the sudden flak, or the actions that caused it,” Boone wrote. “There’s a distinct line between allowing people to live their own lives as they choose, and underwriting and endorsing, even promoting, choices and actions with which you fundamentally disagree. Mr. Sam was determined that his stores would always be ‘family friendly’; and suddenly, the millions of families he always catered to are seriously pondering the mixed messages coming out of Bentonville. I think he would have remained benignly neutral and non-condemning toward homosexual groups – but would never have donated to their causes.”

The company also recently offered for sale online a book promoting lesbian sex to girls still young enough to be playing with Barbies, and as WND reported, pulled it when the offering was publicized.

The company also has had several workers quit their jobs and plan protests because of the support for the “gay causes.”

Tony Perkins, of the Family Research Council in Washington, D.C., said the problem is that the homosexual business group isn’t just that. While the NGLCC “professes to promote the ‘interests of the LGBT business community,’ this is not all they have done,” he said.

AFA boycotts in the past have proven effective, even though the organization doesn’t take credit for all of the impacts. An example is the Ford Motor Company which more than a year ago embraced the “gay” community in its advertising and programs.

The AFA and dozens of other Christian groups joined in a boycott, and since then Ford has lost hundreds of millions of dollars, laid off tens of thousands of workers and is trying to regroup and stabilize.

==============================

Wal-Mart relents, boycott called off: Family advocates claim victory as retailer says it won’t give to controversial issues like ‘gays’ (WorldNetDaily, 061121)

The American Family Association is dropping its planned boycott of Wal-Mart for Friday, the biggest shopping day of the year, after the corporation said it would clean up its corporate relationships.

“Respect for the individual is one of the core values that have made us into the company we are today. We take pride in the fact that we treat every customer, every supplier and every member of our individual communities fairly and equally,” the company said in a statement on its Wal-Mart Facts website late today.

“Wal-Mart will not make corporate contributions to support or oppose highly controversial issues unless they directly relate to our ability to serve our customers,” the company said.

The AFA immediately suggested to its constituents, who had been asked to boycott the retailer on what often is the single-most important day for retailers in their fiscal year, that they send the company a ‘Thank you.’

“You have made a difference!” the AFA said. “(We) are pleased with this announcement.”

==============================

Family Group Drops Plans to Protest Wal-Mart (Christian Post, 061122)

NEW YORK (AP) - A conservative group that had called on supporters to boycott Wal-Mart’s post-Thanksgiving Day sales to protest the retailer’s support of gay-rights groups withdrew its objections Tuesday.

The American Family Association, which had been asking supporters to stay away from Wal-Mart on Friday and Saturday — two of the busiest shopping days of the year — said it was pleased that Wal-Mart had pledged in a statement to stay away from controversial causes.

Wal-Mart said it would make changes in the way it contributed to such groups, earmarking funds only for specific causes it supported, such as workplace equality, rather than giving unrestricted gifts.

However, another [KH: liberal] group critical of Wal-Mart was skeptical.

Wal-Mart’s statement “is a confusing contortion of words that make it completely unclear whether Wal-Mart still supports equal rights for the [gay and lesbian] community or not, and worse, raises real questions as to whether they caved to the pressure from the religious right,” said Chris Kofinis of WakeUpWalMart.com.

While stressing its support for diversity and nondiscrimination, Wal-Mart said in its statement that it “will not make corporate contributions to support or oppose highly controversial issues unless they directly relate to our ability to serve our customers.”

Wal-Mart spokeswoman Mona Williams said the company would continue working with the National Gay and Lesbian Chamber of Commerce and other gay-rights groups on specific issues such as workplace equality. She indicated, however, that the company would henceforth avoid unrestricted donations that might be used for causes Wal-Mart did not endorse.

“Going forward, we would partner with them on specific initiatives. ... as to opposed to just giving blanket support to their general operating budget,” she said.

The company’s statement, she said, resulted primarily from concerns expressed by customers and employees, not from the boycott threat.

There was no immediate word from a second conservative group, Operation Save America, on whether it was reconsidering its plans for prayer-and-preaching rallies outside many Wal-Mart stores on Friday.

The corporate actions that had triggered the protest plans were little different from those taken by scores of major companies in recent years — Wal-Mart paid $25,000 this summer to become a member of the Gay and Lesbian Chamber of Commerce and donated $60,000 to Out and Equal, which promotes gay rights advances in the workplace.

However, some conservative activists depicted Wal-Mart’s engagement as endorsement of same-sex marriage and a pledge to give gay-owned businesses preferential treatment — assertions Wal-Mart denied in its statement Tuesday.

Conservative leaders had viewed Wal-Mart’s actions as a betrayal of its own traditions, which have included efforts to weed out magazines with racy covers and CDs with explicit lyrics.

“This has been Christian families’ favorite store — and now they’re giving in, sliding down the slippery slope so many other corporations have gone down,” said the Rev. Flip Benham of Operation Save America. “They’re all being extorted by the radical homosexual agenda.”

Wal-Mart ranks in the middle among companies rated by the Human Rights Campaign, a major gay-rights group, for workplace policies toward gays. Scores of companies now have a perfect 100 rating, while Wal-Mart’s rating has risen from 14 in 2002 to 65 this year as it added sexual orientation to its nondiscrimination code and offered some domestic-partner benefits.

Tim Wildmon, the American Family Association’s president, said Wal-Mart had been responsive to conservative pressure on a different issue, approving use of the word “Christmas” in advertising and employee greetings this season after shifting to a “happy holidays” phrasing last year.

That campaign was one of the first times Wal-Mart came under sustained criticism from the right. Far more often, it has been a target of left-of-center groups, including WakeUpWalMart.com, complaining that the company pays low wages, skimps on employee benefits and outsources too many jobs.

The company has responded by adding low-cost health care plans, launching environmental programs and increasing diversity among employees and suppliers.

==============================

America’s pro-homosexual giants: 2006: List of companies scoring perfect 100% from ‘gay’-rights group (WorldNetDaily, 060920)

Below is the list of companies scoring a perfect 100% on the Human Rights Campaign’s 2006 Corporate Equality Index, with policies beneficial toward homosexuals:

1. Adobe Systems

2. Aetna

3. Agere Systems

4. Agilent Technologies

5. Allianz Life Insurance

6. Alston & Bird

7. American Express

8. AMR Corp. (American Airlines)

9. Anheuser-Busch

10. Apple Computer

11. Arnold & Porter

12. AT&T

13. Avaya

14. Bain & Company

15. Bank of America

16. Bausch & Lomb

17. Bell South

18. Best Buy

19. Boeing

20. BP America

21. Bright Horizons Family Solutions

22. Bristol-Myers Squibb

23. California State Automobile Association

24. Capital One Financial

25. Cargill

26. Carlson Companies

27. Charles Schwab

28. Chevron

29. ChoicePoint

30. Chubb

31. CIGNA

32. Cisco Systems

33. Citigroup

34. Clear Channel Communications

35. Clorox

36. CMP Media

37. CNA Insurance

38. Coca-Cola Company

39. Consolidated Edison

40. Coors Brewing

41. Corning

42. Credit Suisse First Boston

43. Cummins

44. Daimler Chrysler

45. Dell

46. Deloitte & Touche USA

47. Deutsche Bank

48. Dorsey & Whitney

49. Dow Chemical

50. DuPont

51. Eastman Kodak

52. Eli Lilly & Co.

53. Ernst & Young

54. Estee Lauder Companies

55. Faegre & Benson

56. Fannie Mae

57. Ford Motor Co.

58. Freescale Semiconductor

59. Gap Inc.

60. General Mills

61. General Motors

62. GlaxoSmithKline

63. Global Hyatt

64. Goldman Sachs Group

65. Google

66. Harvard Pilgrim Health Care

67. Heller Ehrman

68. Hewitt Associates

69. Hewlett-Packard

70. Honeywell International

71. Hospira

72. ING North America Insurance

73. Intel

74. IBM

75. Intuit

76. J.P. Morgan Chase & Co.

77. Jenner & Block

78. Johnson & Johnson

79. Kaiser Permanente

80. Keyspan

81. Kimpton Hotel & Restaurant Group

82. KPMG

83. Kraft Foods

84. Lehman Brothers Holdings

85. Levi Strauss & Co.

86. Lexmark International

87. Liz Claiborne

88. Lucent Technologies

89. McDermott Will & Emery

90. McKinsey & Co.

91. Mellon Financial

92. Merck & Co.

93. Merrill Lynch

94. MetLife

95. Microsoft

96. Mitchell Gold and Bob Williams

97. Morgan Stanley

98. Morrison & Foerster

99. Motorola

100. Nationwide

101. NCR Corp.

102. New York Times Co.

103. Nike

104. Nixon Peabody

105. Nordstrom

106. Northrop Grumman

107. Orrick Herrington & Sutcliffe

108. Owens Corning

109. Pepsico

110. Pfizer

111. PG&E

112. Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman

113. Powell Goldstein

114. PriceWaterhouseCoopers

115. Prudential Financial

116. Raytheon

117. Replacements

118. SC Johnson & Son

119. Schering-Plough

120. Sears Holdings Corporation

121. Sempra Energy

122. Sprint Nextel

123. Starcom MediaVest

124. Starwood Hotels & Resorts Worldwide

125. State Street

126. Sun Microsystems

127. SunTrust Banks

128. Tech Data Corp.

129. The Olivia Companies

130. US Airways

131. Viacom

132. Visa International

133. Volkswagen of America

134. Wachovia

135. Walgreens

136. Wells Fargo

137. Whirlpool

138. Xerox

==============================

Why is Obama’s Evil in Rick Warren’s Pulpit? (townhall.com, 061119)

By Kevin McCullough

Rick Warren, the best selling author of The Purpose Driven Life and senior teaching pastor at Saddleback Church in California, has invited Barack Obama to speak to the congregation of the faithful on December 1, 2006. In doing so he has joined himself with one of the smoothest politicians of our times, and also one whose wickedness in worldview contradicts nearly every tenant of the Christian faith that Warren professes.

So the question is, “why?”

Why would Warren marry the moral equivalency of his pulpit - a sacred place of honor in evangelical tradition - to the inhumane, sick, and sinister evil that Obama has worked for as a legislator?

According to press reports, it is because of a mutual respect that each feels towards the other over the AIDS/HIV pandemic on the African continent. That rationale however is not only dishonest, but not even logical given the two distinct positions that the men come to on the matter. Because of this supposed shared concern, Warren is ready to turn over the spiritual mantle to a man who represents the views of Satan at worst or progressive anti-God liberals at best in most of his public positions on the greatest moral tests of our time.

Warren’s stand on the matter in this instance is what is in doubt. Not Obama’s!

Barack Obama has a long history of defying the intended morality of scripture. As a state legislator he actively worked to preserve availability of abortion in all nine months of pregnancy. He opposed parental notification. He opposed any and all bans on partial birth abortion (an act that includes delivery of the baby up to the head, the crushing of the baby’s brain, the suctioning of the brain matter, and then completed delivery of the child’s deflated cranium.) In his run for the U.S. Senate Obama even asked his wife to pen a letter to Illinois voters that reassured them of his commitment to fighting for the right to butcher children in the womb.

Barack Obama has long supported the advance of the radical homosexual activist lobby in their pursuit to destroy traditional marriage. He supported the creation of “special rights” for people who engage in homosexuality for the sole purpose of putting them at the front of the line on issues of employment, housing, and litigation. He has also solidly backed the advancement of all “hate crimes” legislation, which ultimately may be used to silence clergy who believe according to their own convictions that homosexual behavior is wrong and preach so from biblical texts. Barack Obama has a perfect voting record against the defense of marriage.

Barack Obama advocates continued funding for Planned Parenthood clinics in our nation’s inner cities which are performing genocide against the populations of African Americans living there.

And most damnable of all, when a brave nurse named Jill Stanek brought about national awareness to a practice at a local hospital in suburban Chicago that allowed the starvation and neglect of newly born children who had survived abortion procedures - Obama opposed her. He opposed the right of those children to be given the chance to live and he advocated against a ban on such procedures - then known as “born alive abortions.”

Even if they share a professed concern over the AIDS pandemic what difference would Warren and Obama’s union actually make?

Barack Obama does not share a view with evangelicals in a belief of moral absolutes. Right and wrong are terms of humor to Obama. All issues are shades of gray.

So how does Rick Warren believe their efforts can legitimately be joined? And what does he have to give up to do so?

By scriptural standards Rick Warren is to be bound by the biblical text and its teaching on morality. Obama would pursue and has pursued mass distribution of condoms.

If you say to a society, as Uganda has, that the only way to be sure of not getting AIDS is through “abstinence until marriage” then they will be likely to believe you. (It’s scientifically provable. And it explains Uganda’s unique improvement on the African continent in numbers of people contracting the virus.) On the other hand if you say to a culture, as has happened in more than one African nation, “try abstinence - but if you can’t remain abstinent then use a condom” what do you think the likely outcome will be?

Rick Warren’s reasoning might be similar to other leaders of doctrinally weak seeker churches like Willow Creek Community Church in Illinois. Senior Pastor Bill Hybels first invited an unrepentant then President Bill Clinton to attend his pastor’s conference, and proceeded to pitch him one softball after the next in an interview before the gathered masses. Hybels’ idea was to allow Clinton to “teach pastors” ideas about what “true leadership” was all about? (At what? Adultery? Lying under oath? Oral Sex?) Clinton was at least smart enough to be able to play the game a bit and profess certain vagaries about a “life of belief in God.” Obama doesn’t let such non-sense get in his way.

Barack Obama is likely to run for president in 2008 and speaking from the pulpit of one of America’s most well known evangelical churches is likely to be footage that could be used over and over in trying to dissuade Christians from thinking about moral issues that real Christians truly feel concern for.

It should also be noted that Rick Warren knows better. Both he and his wife Kay have appeared on my broadcast in days gone by. Through some of our combined efforts with World Vision, my radio listeners have raised literally millions of dollars towards the AIDS crisis in Africa. And the truth be told, evangelicals in North America contribute more monies towards the very issue Warren professes worry over than the whole of Barack Obama’s liberal friends combined.

There is definitely something for Barack Obama to gain by appearing in Rick Warren’s pulpit - the implied endorsement and blessing for the 2008 presidential race. There is definitely something for Rick Warren to gain in promoting Barack Obama and giving him time behind the altar of God’s word - power and access to a future heavyweight contender for the highest office in the land.

There is also something definitively risky for me in drawing attention to the matter, but because I am compelled to do what is right — and not what is expedient — I can not refrain from asking the question.

My listeners feel the same way. They feel even more so that way when they are hung up on when dialing Warren’s church at 949.609.8000 to express their concerns. (That was 949.609.8000.)

Whatever the forthcoming explanation is from Rick Warren, it will be impossible to counter-balance the rock solid truths about Obama and what he stands for.

And for the scripturally literate among us, Ephesians 5:11 says, “Have no fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness, but rather expose them.”

It may be too late to alter a stubborn heart or mind at Saddleback Church, but the effort should at least be made. So I am encouraging you to do what my listeners have done for the past several days call Rick Warren and ask him why Barack Obama’s evil worldview will be given the high honor of addressing the faithful. (949.609.8000 or info@saddleback.com)

Then gently remind him - that it would be sin to let him do so!

==============================

Calling Rick Warren! (WorldNetDaily, 061122)

by Joseph Farah, editor, WorldNetDaily

Rick Warren just toured Syria last week where he announced that terrorist haven, that police state, that bastion of hate, anti-Christian persecution and anti-Semitism is really not so bad.

In fact, he said in a videotape released by his own church, then subsequently withdrawn from YouTube, that Syria does not countenance “extremism” and is worthy of praise for its protection of Christians and Jews.

I know I have dealt with all of these issues in recent days already. But, today, in light of what transpired in Lebanon yesterday, I am calling on Rick Warren to repent for what he said and to condemn Syria now.

In case you missed it, prominent anti-Syrian Christian politician Pierre Gemayel was assassinated in a suburb of Beirut yesterday.

Gemayel, the minister of industry and son of former President Amin Gemayel, was a supporter of the anti-Syrian parliamentary majority, which is locked in a power struggle with pro-Syrian factions led by Hezbollah. He was named for his grandfather, who founded the Phalange Party in 1936 to exert Christian power in Lebanon. It dominated Christian politics for decades after Lebanon’s independence from France in 1943.

Neither Gemayel nor his family nor the party he represented are perfect. There is no political perfection in a fallen, sinful world. But it is imperative that Christians – and especially Christian leaders – have discernment about evil in our world. And true, unadulterated evil is what you have running Syria today. The government led by Bashar Assad, who met with Rick Warren last week, is anti-American, anti-freedom, anti-Christian, ant-Jewish and pro-terrorist.

Rick Warren should know this. Yet, he has placed himself in a position of apologizing and excusing the government in Damascus, one of the most evil on the face of the earth.

It is not an exaggeration to say that government got cover last week as a result of Warren’s shameful public relations on its behalf. I won’t go so far to say there was a direct cause-and-effect relationship between Warren’s embrace of Assad and the assassination of Gemayel yesterday, but it is both a coincidence of striking proportions as well as an illustration of the true character of Damascus’ totalitarian police-state regime.

Before any more blood is shed, before any more damage is done, before any more Christians are run out of the Middle East, before any more momentum is gained by the Syrian regime, it’s time for Rick Warren to admit he was mistaken in suggesting Damascus is hospitable to Christians and Jews.

I cannot even imagine the horror Christians and Jews trapped in the Middle East must feel, surrounded as they are by the jihadists and the tentacles of fascist dictators like Assad, when they hear co-called Christian leaders like Rick Warren explaining that things really aren’t that bad in hellholes like Syria.

I’m persuaded by the Holy Spirit in me that this is sin. And Rick Warren needs to repent for further victimizing the voiceless and powerless martyrs in the Middle East.

Is Syria the worst place in the world for Christians? No. But, according to organizations like Voice of the Martyrs that work full-time on persecution issues, it is a place where Christians fear to evangelize. It is a place, much like other Middle East dictatorships, Christians are fleeing when they can. It is a place serving as a hub for the worldwide spread of jihadism. It is a place, as we saw once again yesterday, that spreads death to Christians in foreign countries in hopes of spreading Syrian hegemony over less-powerful neighbors.

Influential people are susceptible to mistakes like all of us. But they must own up to them as all of us are expected to do. They need to be held accountable for their actions, just as every individual will be held accountable by God.

I’m calling on Rick Warren to condemn Syria for its role in the assassination of Pierre Gemayel, the earlier assassination of Lebanese Prime Minister Rafik Hariri, its spread of anti-Semitic bigotry, it’s control of the Christian church inside Syria, its support for terrorism around the world and its unceasing threats and hostility to the very existence of the Jewish state.

That would be a good start in undoing the damage that has already been done by Rick Warren to the Christian community held hostage in the Middle East.

==============================

Ford Posts Record Loss of $12.7 Billion in 2006 (Foxnews, 070125)

DEARBORN, Mich. — Ford Motor Co. (F) lost $5.8 billion in the fourth quarter amid slumping sales and huge restructuring costs, pushing the fabled automaker’s deficit for the year to $12.7 billion, the largest in its 103-year history.

The annual loss reported Thursday surpassed its previous record for a year of $7.39 billion set in 1992. The 2006 loss amounted to of $6.79 per share versus a profit of $1.44 billion, or 77 cents a share, in 2005.

The Dearborn-based company expects more losses for this year. It expects to burn up $10 billion in cash on automotive operations through 2009 and spend another $7 billion to invest in new products.

The fourth-quarter loss was the worst final-quarter loss in Ford’s history and its second-worst quarterly performance. Ford lost $6.7 billion in the first quarter of 1992, due mainly to accounting rule changes on health care liabilities.

“We began aggressive actions in 2006 to restructure our automotive business so we can operate profitably at lower volumes with a product mix that better reflects consumer demand for smaller, more fuel-efficient vehicles,” Alan Mulally, president and chief executive officer, said in a statement. “We fully recognize our business reality and are dealing with it. We have a plan and are on track to deliver.”

Excluding special items, Ford lost $1.50 per share in all of 2006, worse than Wall Street predicted. Fourteen analysts polled by Thomson Financial expected a loss of $1.35 per share for the year, excluding special items.

Its shares rose 4 cents to $8.24 in premarket trading.

Ford, faced with increasing competition from overseas rivals such as Toyota Motor Corp. (TM), is banking on a restructuring plan to pull it through this rough stretch. Mulally, hired from aerospace giant Boeing Co., is leading the drastic efforts to turn around the company.

Ford mortgaged its assets to borrow up to $23.4 billion to pay for the restructuring and to cover losses expected until 2009. About 38,000 hourly workers have signed up for buyout or early retirement offers from the company, and Ford plans to cut its white-collar work force by 14,000 with buyouts and early retirements.

Ford, which relied on truck and sport utility vehicle sales for much of its profits, was hurt last year as $3 per gallon gasoline sent consumers fleeing to smaller, more fuel-efficient vehicles. Ford has seen its market share deteriorate in recent years. At the same time, Toyota has seen its U.S. sales rise, beating Ford out for the No. 2 sales spot in July and November.

The company has rolled out or will introduce several new or updated products during 2007, including the Edge crossover, new F-series Super Duty pickups, a redesigned Focus small car and an updated Five Hundred larger sedan.

But many analysts are skeptical that the products are strong enough to turn the company around.

Mulally said earlier this month that Ford’s restructuring plan remained “absolutely the right thing to do.”

Ford said that special items associated with restructuring costs totaled $9.9 billion for the year as the company continues efforts to shrink itself to match reduced demand for its cars and trucks.

Sales for the fourth-quarter fell to $40.3 billion from $46.3 billion a year ago, while annual sales dropped to $160.1 billion from $176.9 billion in 2005.

==============================

Morals Week Spreads to 20 College Campuses (townhall.com, 070208)

By Mike S. Adams

Complaining about the leftist domination on college campuses isn’t a worthwhile activity unless one is also willing to take risks in order to do something about it. Thanks to some great students at UNCG (University of North Carolina at Greensboro), this column provides some good news for those who are sick and tired of hearing about problems on college campuses without hearing about solutions.

Many readers recall the cold February night – it will be exactly three years ago this week (2004) – when I drove to UNCG to give a speech on how college administrators try to suppress free speech in the name of “tolerance” and “diversity.” When I got there I learned that the Office of Student Life refused not only an honorarium for my speech but also money for a hotel room.

Before I prepared to give a speech and then drive back in the middle of the night, I sat down for a serious discussion with the College Republicans who invited me. When I asked the students why OSL refused the funding, they said – among other things – that the university had quoted a policy of refusing to fund “political” groups. (And, wouldn’t you know that the CR chapter was the only “political” group on campus at the time).

The problem with this policy was that the U.S. Supreme Court had stated four years previously that such categorical funding disqualifications were unconstitutional at a public university collecting mandatory fees from students. I learned that those same fees were used to fund a speech by a porn star just 24 hours before my arrival. (Note that they also said I was “too controversial,” despite my reluctance to talk about anal sex).

And the university – the one that dislikes “controversy” - was also using public funds to sponsor a “Gay Pride Week” with drag queen shows and events geared towards the promotion of the university’s official religion of moral relativism. Unsurprisingly, the university refused to let the CR chapter sponsor a “Morals Week” because, once again, that would give funding to a “political group.”

When the word got out about UNCG refusing to sponsor a conservative speaker’s talk the night after they sponsored a porn star’s talk – devoted almost solely to the topic of “safe sodomy” - the public was outraged. Some of the highlights of the fun that followed were:

• My appearance on MSNBC to debate the porn star.

• A federal investigation by the Department of Education over funding abuses in the UNC system, which was launched by a U.S. Congressman after learning of the incident.

• An admission by the university that they did, in fact, spend public funds on pornography. At first they lied and said they did not. That was before employees were caught storing mother-and-son incest films on the UNCG website.

But the most important outcome was that the students got angry and got pro bono assistance from attorneys who helped them demand public records on UNCG diversity expenditures. When the university realized they were on the verge of a lawsuit they relented.

And so “Morals Week” was initiated at UNCG in 2004. The first keynote speaker was Dr. Mike S. Adams who demanded that the university match the porn star’s fee of $3000. I had plenty enough money to buy a 30.06 (gun) and give two-thirds of the money (after taxes) back to the CR chapter to start a conservative paper.

Many of my readers already know that the first issue of the conservative paper focused on an OSL employee who was a convicted pedophile – readers remember the OSL as the office that likes to avoid controversy – helping to schedule student speakers and events. He was fired about 48 hours after the story about his criminal record was published.

When Morals Week 2005 rolled around I gave another speech – and, needless to say, bought another gun – to an audience that included a true First Amendment heroine named Allison Jaynes. As a libertarian, she was listening carefully to my speech about government control of free speech and how to fight it. Her target, later that year, would be UNCG’s now defunct “speech zone” policy.

In December of 2005, Allison and her UNCG Libertarian friends bravely and deliberately violated the policy that allowed free speech on just 1% of the Greensboro campus. Holding signs that said “UNCG Hates Free Speech” they stepped outside the zone and were ticketed by university authorities. In other words, the university responded by saying “You aren’t allowed to say we hate free speech!”

When the backlash against their reprimand became too much to bear in the court of public opinion, UNCG got rid of the policy. Like true revolutionaries the Libertarians asked “What can we do to piss them off next?” (I’m not kidding. They actually asked that).

In February of 2006, I would find the answer to that question when I was approached after a speech at Wake Forest University. The UNCG CR President was holding a letter, which was co-signed by the UNCG Libertarian President. They were threatening the university with a lawsuit unless they got rid of a policy, which prevented them from kicking people out of their group for not adhering to certain beliefs.

This idea that a group can discriminate on the basis of beliefs – yes, even when using public funds – was inspired by the NAACP practice of removing members of the KKK who, of course, believed in segregation. Apparently, the administration needed a threat of litigation to help them relinquish the KKK perspective on freedom of association.

Shortly after this third major policy victory, Morals Week 2006 was held. But there won’t be just one Morals Week in 2007. The College Republicans will be promoting Morals Week on twenty campuses this year. And it is due to nothing more than the sheer persistence and courage of a bunch of kids who refuse to be bullied by academic leftists – even those who have power over their academic future.

Put simply, Morals Week is spreading across North Carolina with greater speed and permanence than an outbreak of genital herpes. And the liberals are getting nervous because they can’t seem to find a cure.

Mike Adams is a criminology professor at the University of North Carolina Wilmington.

==============================

Silent ‘Holy War’ Being Waged Among Christians, Says Commentator (Christian Post, 070409)

CHICAGO – An advocate of expanding the Christian agenda to encompass social issues described the current dispute between Christians over the top issues in society as a silent “holy war.”

“Many people believe we are engaged in a holy war. And we are,” contended Roland Martin, a talk-show host on Chicago’s WVON-AM, in a recent CNN commentary. “But it’s not with Muslims. The real war – the silent war – is being engaged among Christians, and that’s what we must set our sights on.”

Debate is quickly escalating among Christians over whether abortion and homosexuality should really be the top concerns of believers or if they are overemphasized and drawing too much attention away from poverty and other social and economic justice issues.

“When did it come to the point that being a Christian meant caring about only two issues, abortion and homosexuality?” questioned Martin.

“Ask the nonreligious what being a Christian today means, and based on what we see and read, it’s a good bet they will say that followers of Jesus Christ are preoccupied with those two points.”

More recently, however, a new generation of evangelical believers has been trying to broaden the movement’s focus from the familiar wars about sex to include social issues such as global warming, immigration reform, and HIV/AIDS.

While such developments have been welcomed by more liberal Christians, whose concerns tend to center on social issues, more conservative believers have protested the shifted focus from what they feel are the most urgent issues.

Last month, a group of prominent and influential conservative evangelical leaders criticized a high official of the National Association of Evangelicals for his outspoken stance on global warming.

The leaders – which included James C. Dobson, founder and chairman of Focus on the Family; Gary L. Bauer, president of Coalitions for America; and Tony Perkins, president of the Family Research Council – were opposed to the Rev. Richard Cizik, NAE vice president of governmental affairs, diverting attention away from more important moral issues such as abortion and homosexuality with his promotion of global warming.

However, the NAE board defended Cizik and affirmed “creation care” as an important moral issue. It also adopted a statement against torture during its board meeting last month.

The Southern Baptist Convention – one of the most conservative Christian denominations in America – also recently surprised some people when it joined with evangelical Hispanic leaders to garner support for a new comprehensive immigration reform bill.

In the past, issues relating to immigration reforms that would allow illegal immigrants legal status were predominantly taken up by Christian groups deemed more liberal.

In his commentary last Friday, WVON-AM’s Martin made note of the little attention given to other issues – aside from homosexuality and abortion – that require the commitment of Christians such as poverty, homelessness, and divorce.

“The divorce rate of Christians mirrors the national average,” he pointed out.

The CNN contributor concluded by stating: “If abortion and gay marriage are part of the Christian agenda, I have no issue with that. Those are moral issues that should be of importance to people of the faith, but the agenda should be much, much broader.”

He said he looked forward to the day when “Jerry Falwell, Pat Robertson, Joyce Meyer, James Dobson, Tony Perkins, James Kennedy, Rod Parsley, ‘Patriot Pastors’ and Rick Warren will sit at the same table as Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton, Cynthia Hale, Eddie L. Long, James Meek, Fred Price, Emmanuel Cleaver and Floyd Flake to establish a call to arms on racism, AIDS, police brutality, a national health care policy, [and] our sorry education system.”

==============================

Dobson’s Influence Continues to ‘Outshine’ as Ministry Marks 30 Years (Christian Post, 070406)

Focus on the Family, one of the most influential Christian family organizations in the nation, recently celebrated 30 years of ministry. The celebration also recognized the passionate work of its founder, considered by some as the most powerful evangelical in the Christian right.

“He’s like this giant snowplow and he’s paving the way for those of us who are the little sidewalk snow blowers,” best-selling author Gary Smalley commented about founder Dr. James Dobson.

Thirty years ago, Dobson was serving as associate clinical professor of pediatrics at the USC School of Medicine. He felt fulfilled with what he was doing, Dobson said at an anniversary event in Colorado Springs, Colo., on March 30. But he saw families starting to fall apart and what he sees as the beginning of a movement that we see today which has devastated families.

Today, Dobson leads an organization that broadcasts faith and family values on approximately 6,000 stations worldwide and receives millions of calls each year. During the early years, however, Dobson had no clue that Focus on the Family would become a ministry which would not only help families but also win people to Christ.

“I am astonished that so little became so significant,” said Dobson, who says he is proud of the ministry today.

Although his ministry mainly helps hurting families, struggling marriages and parents trying to raise their troubled teens among other family issues, Dobson’s influence is significant in the political sphere.

“His influence among evangelicals outshines that of any previous Christian Right standard-bearer because he is not seen as the Christian Right’s standard-bearer,” wrote Dan Gilgoff in The Jesus Machine, which released last month.

Dobson told Gilgoff in an interview that he has no political ambitions. Rather, he prefers the role of a behind-the-scenes political fixer, wrote Gilgoff, alluding to Dobson’s role in the evangelical successes of the passage of gay “marriage” bans, the reelection of George W. Bush, and the Terri Schiavo congressional intervention.

While Jerry Falwell and Pat Robertson are more widely known and considered some of the most influential figures in the Christian Right, Dobson is a more powerful political force than Robertson or Falwell ever were, even though he’s less well known among non-evangelicals, said Gilgoff, who believes the story of Dobson and his organization has gone almost entirely untold.

Although Dobson and Focus On the Family constantly receive verbal attacks and hate calls, the hate is evidence of the fact that they have spoken the truth at a time and in a culture that refuses to believe that truth even exists, said Gary Bauer, president of American Values, at the anniversary celebration.

“Someday soon because of you, because of this ministry, because of Jim (Dobson) and Shirley (his wife) and his incredible team, you’re going to wake up and go down to the end of your driveway and pick up your morning newspaper and the headline is going to say ‘Court Overturns Roe, Finds Right to Life,’” Bauer told Focus on the Family staff.

“Jim Dobson and Focus have never sought power in Washington, D.C., and that’s a good thing because power is fleeting,” said Bauer, indicating that the organization represents permanent values – family, faith and freedom.

After 30 years, Dobson continues to lead the popular radio broadcasts and actively serves as founder and chairman but has largely stepped back from the operations of the organization, which is currently under the leadership of Jim Daly.

Dobson admitted he has one concern – that the ministry will lose its heart.

It’s not enough for the ministry to be effective and to operate successfully from a business perspective, the ministry founder said. Passion is required.

“You can’t afford to lose heart.”

As America falls further from faith and moral values, Dobson urged the ministry to press on with passion.

“The end is not yet. Let’s press on.”

==============================

Lawsuit: Promotion Denied Because of Professor’s Christian Views (Christian Post, 070412)

WILMINGTON, N.C. (AP) - A federal lawsuit claims the board of trustees at UNC Wilmington harassed and denied promotion to an associate professor of criminology because of his conservative Christian views.

The lawsuit was filed Monday by the Alliance Defense Fund Center for Academic Freedom in U.S. District Court in Wilmington.

It claims Mike Adams, who has taught at the university since 1993 and been an associate professor since 1998, was denied his civil rights and promotion to full professor in 2004 and 2006, despite being qualified.

“It is indefensible for a university to refuse promotion ... because they disagree with his religious and political views,” David French, director of the center, said in a statement.

UNC Wilmington issued a statement denying the allegations, saying the decision not to promote Adams was an academic one.

The lawsuit seeks immediate status for Adams as a tenured full professor, monetary damages and legal fees.

==============================

Onward, Christian Soldiers! Part One (townhall.com, 070312)

By Mary Grabar

For too long Christians have been in retreat. Lately, several men with very little knowledge of theology or cultural history have foisted tracts on to a public that has been denied exposure to the rich tradition of Christianity upon which our rights, our values, and highest forms of art are based. A handful of smug “scientists” (Richard Dawkins and Sam Harris, among them) have come along displaying their ignorance in pedestrian prose.

Like the big Liar, they look for and exploit weaknesses. The flock has been demoralized both by the weasels (called humanities professors) nipping at them when they were young and vulnerable, and by the leaders of churches who have either sacrificed some lambs (hoping to appease these atheist hyenas) or have simply retreated from the world.

In the public universities today, professors wax on about the wonders of Islam or Native American scalp dances, but stutter apologetically about “oppression,” “hegemony,” and “imperialism” when they present the great works of our Western tradition. Smart-alecky graduate teaching assistants express their desire to disabuse undergraduates of the Christian beliefs and values they enter college with. Craven tenured professors give in to feminists strutting in high heels and mini skirts or in Dickies pants; they meekly follow the order of the feminist department heads to place on their syllabi the learning objective, “an understanding of gender, cultural, and ethnic diversity.” At faculty meetings they nod and express agreement about the need for “diversity,” as the great literary works like Paradise Lost are replaced by such vile things as the lyrics of Tupac Shakur (true story).

But we need to be reminded that Christians started almost all of the major universities in this country. If it weren’t for Christians, the atheists would be chanting into the fire and clubbing each other over the head for food and women. But contrary to the historical evidence, the atheists claim to have the moral high ground, to be the most civilized, while cashing in royalty checks. Christians’ own recent timidity is partly to blame.

The Catholic Church abandoned its rich traditions and emphasis on scholasticism while priests went protesting and parishioners wore jeans to mass. The Church adopted the ways of the world (and a pretty bad world at that in the 1960s), and rather than allowing the Gospel to work through souls, caved in to political demands. The Catholic Church has sacrificed lambs on the altar of political correctness.

Evangelicals have retreated, refusing to read or listen to anything that engages the world or involves serious thought. They read their own literalist tracts and live circumscribed lives. Christian bookstores carry only their own pious tomes that hardly qualify as great literature. Christian art refuses to engage with the world and has thereby become largely irrelevant, except to those seeking to affirm their own beliefs in a pious, non-challenging way.

It isn’t much better for the small group of serious Christian literary writers. Indeed, at the Association of Writers and Writing Programs conference in Atlanta last week, out of over 300 panels (with some on such topics as “Deviant Fictions by Women,” “Queer Poetry/Queer Myth,” and “Native American Literature in the Classroom,”) two panels were dedicated to Christian literature, and one only by way of Flannery O’Connor. The panel, “Fact and Mystery: The Legacy of Flannery O’Connor,” was made up of a publisher of a literary journal of arts and religion and three of its writers. What I learned from this panel was that the Christian writer “writes out of moments of his own doubt.”

So, the literary writer who is Christian is to express “doubt.” Gee, thanks for letting us do that. We wouldn’t want to offend non-Christians. We wouldn’t dare take a stand on the big questions.

The published literature reflects this axiom. Literary Christian writing today portrays the tedium of small domestic dramas. The writers and publishers of these journals are as quivering as the tenured professors who dutifully put “race, class, and gender” on their syllabi, and are afraid to mention the Trinity in class discussions.

Do the atheists express doubt? No, they have all kinds of faith in themselves—from the smug authors of atheistic apologetics to the narcissistic authors who see into “nothing,” from Sartre to Jonathan Franzen.

The leftist literary writer has no qualms about promoting his politics through his fiction and poetry, as well as in his commentary. About a quarter of the contributors to the Huffington Post are creative writers—novelists, screen writers, poets, etc. In fact, they get directly involved in politics and use their cachet as writers through “Litpac,” a political action committee of writers who made phone calls to voters during the 2006 elections. A luminary is Stephen Elliott, author of autobiographical sadomasochistic fiction, teacher at creative writing workshops, and a featured performer in the “Sex Workers Tour” that visited campuses across the country this year. While the non-Christian writer is rewarded for promoting sadomasochism, and blazes forward in the political arena, the Christian writer congratulates himself for expressing doubt.

Did Dante express doubt? Did Flannery O’Connor? The artist who expresses doubt is at one and the same time a coward and a tyrant. He is a coward, obviously, because he is afraid to express his faith, to go out on a limb, to be vulnerable to being wrong or attacked for his views. The doubter, the equivocator, is above criticism, and above engagement.

Writers who are Christian should not be afraid to present their ideas to a mainstream audience. The staying power of Flannery O’Connor even among nonbelievers is a testament. As they say in dancing: Lead strong even if you lead wrong. There can be no dance without a lead. There can be no memorable art from a position of doubt or neutrality.

The Christian writers of mystery plays during the Middle Ages displayed great ribald humor, of themselves and of Biblical characters. There is the great tradition of satire in the vein of Evelyn Waugh. And none of the nice pastel pious literature of today presents the horrors of hell the way Dante and Milton do. Or humor that cuts the way Flannery O’Connor’s or Walker Percy’s did.

What works of atheists, Buddhists, Muslims or Wiccans parallel the greatness of the literature that expands on the themes of the Bible?

It’s time to engage and fight the enemy.

This is not a call for forceful conversion but an assertion that we have the right to express facts about the great Christian heritage of our art and values and the imperative to continue in that tradition as artists and writers. The alternative is an atheistic world that is scientifically sophisticated, but ugly and loveless. The works produced lately—the piles of garbage that pass as “installation art,” the literature that glorifies pain and promiscuity—testify to the world atheism is ushering in.

Let’s take up Milton’s call in Areopagitica. We demand our rights to free speech in our intellectual centers, especially those we founded. We make up 80% of the population in this country, but in the classroom we’re presented as responsible for the ills of the world and ordered to present only other religious traditions in a respectful way.

We need Christian writers who will engage with the world and write for the world.

Yes, one of the reasons for my attending this conference was to find a publisher for my novel manuscript, “Dancing with Derrida,” that tackles the atheistic world that has brought us abortion, feminism, pornography, political correctness, and objectifying sex. But I am told that no “Christian” publisher will touch it. And most mainstream publishers seem to want novels that promote politically correct themes, nihilistic views of dysfunctionalism, chick lit fluff, or timid little tomes that present “doubt.”

Even many conservatives have written off the arts. They believe that English departments are not very influential or important. They have turned their attention to political science departments. The conservative publishers have done the same, churning out political books every month, but no works of fiction or poetry. We need to support and promote our art. Art’s effect ripples out. It promotes and sustains our culture.

Flannery O’Connor, one of the most respected writers of the twentieth century, by Christians and non-Christians alike, expressed her Christian convictions through parables. She was not afraid to say through the words of an escaped convict called the Misfit, “If [Christ] did what He said, then it’s nothing for you to do but throw away everything and follow Him, and if He didn’t, then it’s nothing for you to do but enjoy the few minutes you got left the best way you can—by killing somebody or burning down his house or doing some other meanness to him.” Yes, these are the two choices available, as the believer sees it. The atheist escaped convict says this right before he murders an old woman. We know what choice he made.

Sadly, O’Connor, with her dark, violent, and funny parables, would have a hard time getting published today. As a culture we are all the poorer for not promoting Christian writers who challenge our pieties.

When I was teaching at an open admissions college, many of my students were returning students. I had one middle-aged woman, a skeptic, who told me after we had discussed The Inferno that she was going to give a copy to her brother who had been thrown in jail that weekend. Dante’s work, describing certain sinners spending eternity submerged in excrement (though not expressed in such polite terms by Dante), had an effect on at least one person and it was going to the jailhouse where it and other Christian works are badly needed.

==============================

Silent ‘Holy War’ Being Waged Among Christians, Says Commentator (Christian Post, 070409)

CHICAGO – An advocate of expanding the Christian agenda to encompass social issues described the current dispute between Christians over the top issues in society as a silent “holy war.”

“When did it come to the point that being a Christian meant caring about only two issues, abortion and homosexuality?” questioned Martin.

“Ask the nonreligious what being a Christian today means, and based on what we see and read, it’s a good bet they will say that followers of Jesus Christ are preoccupied with those two points.”

Last month, a group of prominent and influential conservative evangelical leaders criticized a high official of the National Association of Evangelicals for his outspoken stance on global warming.

However, the NAE board defended Cizik and affirmed “creation care” as an important moral issue. It also adopted a statement against torture during its board meeting last month.

In the past, issues relating to immigration reforms that would allow illegal immigrants legal status were predominantly taken up by Christian groups deemed more liberal.

“The divorce rate of Christians mirrors the national average,” he pointed out.

==============================

Procter & Gamble Awarded $19.25 Million in Satanism Lawsuit (Foxnews, 070320)

CINCINNATI — Procter & Gamble Co. (PG) has won a jury award of $19.25 million in a civil lawsuit filed against four former Amway distributors accused of spreading false rumors linking the company to Satanism to advance their own business.

The U.S. District Court jury in Salt Lake City on Friday found in favor of the Cincinnati-based consumer products company in a lawsuit filed by P&G in 1995. It was one of several the company brought over rumors alleging a link with the company’s logo and Satanism.

Rumors had begun circulating as early as 1981 that the company’s logo — a bearded, crescent man-in-moon looking over a field of 13 stars — was a symbol of Satanism.

The company alleged that Amway Corp. distributors revived those rumors in 1995, using a voice mail system to tell thousands of customers that part of Procter & Gamble profits went to satanic cults.

The company’s claim was based on the Lanham Act, which prohibits unfair competition and false advertising.

“This is about protecting our reputation,” Jim Johnson, P&G’s chief legal officer, said in a statement Monday. “We will take appropriate legal measures when competitors unfairly undermine the reputation of our brands or our company.”

The former Amway distributors thought they’d be exonerated and were shocked by the jury’s verdict late Friday, said Randy L. Haugen, one of the defendants.

“It’s hard to imagine they’d pursue it this long, especially after all the retractions we put out,” said Haugen, a 53-year-old Ogden, Utah, businessman who maintained P&G was never able to show how it was harmed by the rumors. “We are stunned. All of us.”

Haugen said he forwarded another person’s account of the Satanic rumor to other Amway salesmen on a common phone-message system, then circulated the retraction. The original message, however, found its way to Procter & Gamble.

Amway has said it acted quickly to quash the rumor and the company was dismissed from the case, leaving the four ex-distributors, who are protected by liability insurance against the judgment, Haugen said.

P&G spokesman Terry Loftus said Monday that the corporation brought a handful of cases against various individuals — not just Amway distributors — through the 1980s, with the last one prior to this case filed in 1990.

Loftus said he did not have immediate information on the outcome of those cases.

Joseph Joyce, one of the attorneys representing the Amway distributors, didn’t return several messages left by The Associated Press on Monday at his Salt Lake City office.

A federal judge had dismissed the lawsuit involving Amway, and a three-judge panel of the U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Denver agreed in 2003, saying the rumors were not defamatory and that P&G had not made a case for specific damages. P&G, however, got the case reinstated on a further appeal, Haugen said.

Amway has successfully defended itself in this and other lawsuits and can provide its research materials to the former distributors if they appeal, said Kate Makled, spokeswoman for Alticor Inc., Amway’s parent company based in Ada, Mich.

“Despite the public apology, P&G has spent 12 years destroying their lives,” Makled said. “P&G is a $68 billion company. What they got out of this case was what they could earn in about 2 1/2 hours. We think that’s shameful.”

Amway is involved in direct selling through independent business owners in over 80 countries and territories around the world.

P&G is the world’s largest consumer products company. Its products include Pampers diapers, Tide detergent, Pringles chips and Folgers coffee.

==============================

Anti-God Starbucks cup has customer steaming (WorldNetDaily, 070507)

Woman says: ‘I don’t think there needs to be religious dialogue on it. I just want coffee’

An Ohio woman is steaming after reading an anti-God message published on the side of a Starbucks coffee cup.

The message that got Michelle Incanno’s blood boiling reads:

“Why in moments of crisis do we ask God for strength and help? As cognitive beings, why would we ask something that may well be a figment of our imaginations for guidance? Why not search inside ourselves for the power to overcome? After all, we are strong enough to cause most of the catastrophes we need to endure.”

Michelle Incanno of Springboro, Ohio, holds a cup part of Starbucks’ ‘The Way I See It’ campaign (Dayton Daily News)

The quote was written by Bill Schell, a Starbucks customer from London, Ontario, Canada, and was included as part of an effort by the Seattle-based coffee giant to collect different viewpoints and spur discussion.

“As someone who loves God, I was so offended by that,” Michelle Incanno, a married mother of three who is Catholic, told the Dayton Daily News. “I don’t think there needs to be religious dialogue on it. I just want coffee.”

Incanno of Springboro, Ohio, admits she had been a huge fan of Starbucks before discovering the message, always ordering a large, house-brewed coffee with nonfat milk and two Splenda.

“I wouldn’t feel right going back,” she said.

The paper says Incanno wasn’t satisfied with a company disclaimer saying the quote is the author’s opinion, not necessarily that of Starbucks, which invites customers to respond on its website.

Starbucks spokeswoman Sanja Gould said the collection of thoughts and opinions is a “way to promote open, respectful conversation among a wide variety of individuals. “

This is not the first time a message on a Starbucks cup has caused controversy.

As WND reported in September 2005, officials at Baylor University told the Starbucks store on its Waco, Texas, campus to remove a cup said to promote homosexuality.

The offending cup featured the words of homosexual novelist Armistead Maupin.

It read:

Baylor University, the world’s largest Baptist school, refused to comment on the issue, said KCEN-TV in central Texas. Employees at the campus Starbucks said none of their customers had complained about the cup, but they removed it nonetheless.

==============================

Chicago Board of Ed Sued for Teacher Allegedly Showing ‘Brokeback Mountain’ in Class (Foxnews, 070513)

CHICAGO — A girl and her grandparents have sued the Chicago Board of Education, alleging that a substitute teacher showed the R-rated film “Brokeback Mountain” in class.

The lawsuit claims that Jessica Turner, 12, suffered psychological distress after viewing the movie in her 8th grade class at Ashburn Community Elementary School last year.

The film, which won three Oscars, depicts two cowboys who conceal their homosexual affair.

Turner and her grandparents, Kenneth and LaVerne Richardson, are seeking around $500,000 in damages.

“It is very important to me that my children not be exposed to this,” said Kenneth Richardson, Turner’s guardian. “The teacher knew she was not supposed to do this.”

According to the lawsuit filed Friday in Cook County Circuit Court, the video was shown without permission from the students’ parents and guardians.

The lawsuit also names Ashburn Principal Jewel Diaz and a substitute teacher, referred to as “Ms. Buford.”

The substitute asked a student to shut the classroom door at the West Side school, saying: “What happens in Ms. Buford’s class stays in Ms. Buford’s class,” according to the lawsuit.

Richardson said his granddaughter was traumatized by the movie and had to undergo psychological treatment and counseling.

In 2005, Richardson complained to school administrators about reading material that he said included curse words.

“This was the last straw,” he said. “I feel the lawsuit was necessary because of the warning I had already given them on the literature they were giving out to children to read. I told them it was against our faith.”

Messages left over the weekend with CPS officials were not immediately returned.

==============================

Focus on the Family ‘Kind of Hurt’ Over AIDS Shock (Christian Post, 070810)

The conservative Christian ministry Focus on the Family said it is a little hurt over the shock that came in response to its sponsorship and participation in a local bike race this weekend to raise funds for AIDS relief in Colorado.

“There seems to be the perception that [because] AIDS is seen as typically associated with the gay community, that Focus on the Family wouldn’t care for these people,” said Devin Knuckles, a spokesman for the ministry, according to the Denver Post.

“It’s kind of hurtful,” Knuckles said. “It’s our mission to help people who need help.”

The Christian ministry paid the $1,000 sponsorship fee, reserved a booth and registered two riders for the 100-mile Pikes Peak Classic race this Sunday.

Many locals expressed shock at FOTF’s willingness to be involved in the AIDS fundraiser because of the ministry’s long and outspoken battle against same-sex “marriage” and “the homosexuality agenda.”

FOTF holds “Love Won Out” conferences throughout the country where former homosexuals and ministry leaders equip the church to respond biblically and in a Christ-like way to the issue of homosexuality. Speakers also share how those who struggle against unwanted same-sex attractions can overcome their desires with the Gospel.

However, not all are happy with FOTF’s participation.

“We have had some complaints,” said Linda Boedeker, executive director of the AIDS project where the money raised will go to, according to the Denver Post. “There are a lot of people [who] think that Focus on the Family must have an agenda … [but] I think they are trying to do what’s right in their community.”

The Southern Colorado AIDS project provides food, clothing, housing help, medical attention and counseling to those who are HIV-positive or have AIDS. The group’s main focus in education includes safe sex with condoms, which makes FOTF a little uncomfortable.

“That does cause a little bit of concern that they don’t teach abstinence,” Knuckles said. “That (abstinence)’s certainly what we believe is the answer.”

FOTF’s involvement stemmed from an AIDS project volunteer who is a Christian heterosexual who has AIDS. He approached FOTF for help in the race and to try to get the two groups to move beyond stereotypes about the disease.

Many churches and denominations have also recently tried to move beyond the stereotype and focus on the people who need help.

Megachurches such as Rick Warren’s Saddleback Church in California and Bill Hybels’ Willowcreek Church in Illinois have spearheaded efforts for the church to move past the stigma associated with the disease and reach out to those who are in need. However, amid their humanitarian efforts, both leaders continue to maintain that homosexuality is a sin.

==============================

Pro-Family Group Accuses Holiday Inn of Anti-Christian Discrimination (Christian Post, 070830)

A Christian non-profit devoted solely to confronting the homosexual activist agenda is alleging anti-Christian discrimination against a Holiday Inn Select in Naperville, Ill.

Weeks after Americans for Truth (AFT) reserved space at the hotel and provided a security deposit to hold their first annual banquet on Oct. 6, the local Holiday Inn dropped the reservation over the possibility that gay rights activists would protest the upcoming gathering.

The dinner banquet, themed “Celebrating Truth and the Freedom to Be Moral,” will feature former lesbian activist Charlene Cothran and parents’ rights crusader David Parker. Pro-family leaders will celebrate “God’s power to transform men and women struggling with homosexuality and expose the attack on children’s innocence, parental rights and religious freedom by a gay/transgender lobby,” according to AFT.

When AFT’s executive director Pete LaBarbera mentioned there might be a small protest considering they are a Christian group addressing the issue of homosexuality, Holiday Inn’s general manager Dennis Igoe cancelled AFT’s reservation citing safety issues for the hotel guests and “potential negative publicity to the hotel.” The venue was advertised only on invitations sent to those participating in the event.

Holiday Inn’s corporate offices backed Igoe’s decision despite the argument by Christian legal group Liberty Counsel that the cancellation is a violation of the Illinois Human Rights Act which prohibits discrimination in places of public accommodation on the basis of religion.

“I think this is a first,” said LaBarbera about the cancelled reservation on the basis of a “theoretical protest of a homosexual group.”

“I think we have to let corporations know that if they’re going to be victimizing Christians [by] engaging in anti-Christian anti-pro-family or anti-conservative discrimination, there’s a price to pay,” said LaBarbera in an interview with Concerned Women for America.

LaBarbera doesn’t plan to book any more stays at the Holiday Inn, noting that another Inn in the state kicked out Christian group Minuteman Project for the same reason.

“I can’t picture them doing this to a gay group,” he further mentioned.

AFT rescheduled the banquet for Oct. 5 at an undisclosed location outside Chicago.

In the meantime, AFT calls pro-family advocates to complain about Holiday Inn Select’s “discriminatory treatment against people of faith and conservatives.”

==============================

Evangelicals to Kick Off Pro-Family Summit (Christian Post, 070920)

Some of the nation’s top evangelical leaders will kick off a major three day pro-family summit Thursday evening to inform to empower Christian citizens to uphold conservative values.

Through the Family Impact Summit, conservative leaders hope to inform Christians about issues that will affect their ability to live out their values; ignite their passion to get involved by explaining the consequences if they don’t; and train them on how to make an impact when they go home to their communities.

“Has there ever been a more critical time for Christian citizens to be informed and involved?” asked Terry Kemple, president of Community Issues Council, in a welcome video.

“The list of threats to our children, our families, even to our religious liberty has never been greater,” he declared.

The Sept. 20-22 summit is presented by Community Issues Council, Family Research Council, Florida Family Policy Council and Salem Communications Tampa.

According to organizers, the most “critical issues facing our families today” include online predators, stem cell research, hate crimes, sex businesses, and homosexuality.

Pro-family speakers such as Tony Perkins, president of Family Research Council; Gary Bauer, founder of American Values; Dr. Richard Land, president of The Ethics & Religious Liberty Commission; Bishop Harry Jackson, founder and chairman of the High Impact Leadership Coalition; and Tom Minnery, senior vice president of government and public policy at Focus on the Family are among the more than 30 speakers participating in the event in Tampa Bay, Fla.

The summit features seven plenary sessions, nine unique panel presentations, debates featuring pro-con positions on critical contemporary issues faced by Christians today, practical grassroots workshops, and special praise and worship music.

Kemple describes the event as a “dynamic” weekend that can help concerned citizens make a “tremendous” impact on their communities.

“Together we can put Christian citizenship in action,” he said.

Overall summit topics include religious freedom, life issues, racial reconciliation, Christian citizenship, education, community decency, homosexual agenda, and homosexuality and ministry.

==============================

Mrs. Fields’ on-again-off-again Christmas ban: Adds cookies to website in response to activist pressure (WorldNetDaily, 071015)

Mrs. Fields has added Christmas cookie gifts to the holiday section of its website in response to heat it received for initially avoiding any mention of “Christmas” products for fear of offending people.

Last Thursday, the American Family Association flew into action when alerted to the omission by a resident of Michigan who called Mrs. Fields’ customer service number to complain about the absence of any Christmas products or even mention of the holiday by name.

She was reportedly told by the customer service representative the company did not offer products mentioning Christmas because it did not want to offend anyone.

AFA sent out an “action alert” to hundreds of thousands of its members nationwide accusing Mrs. Fields of becoming the first company to ban Christmas from products and promotions this year.

“Mrs. Fields wants the business of Christians who celebrate Christmas, but they don’t mind if they offend Christians,” the AFA said over the signature of Don Wildmon, founder and chairman of the organization.

But, by the following day, Mrs. Fields website was offering at least three gift products mentioning “Christmas” by name.

Randy Sharp, director of special products for AFA, said the group is still not entirely pleased with the capitulation.

“Mrs. Fields is still being politically correct as a company,” he said.

He said in give-and-take conversations and e-mails with the company, officials suggested substituting “winter” in place of “holiday” in its promotions.

An official statement on the matter from Mrs. Fields says:

“This year, Mrs. Fields is celebrating our 30th anniversary and as always, looks forward to families celebrating the Christmas season with our delicious and fresh baked cookies and treats. Our plan is to kick off the 2007 holiday season beginning November 1, 2007 with seasonal gifts available both in-store, in-catalog and online. We have a complete line of holiday specific themed gifts including Christmas items that we have been perfecting for the past eight months, and are eager to share them with Mrs. Fields’ customers. From the Mrs. Fields’ kitchen to yours, we hope to help make your 2007 Christmas and holiday warmer, brighter and tastier.”

Last year, giant retailer Wal-Mart was the target of a boycott threat by AFA for dumping the word “Christmas” from all of its store promotions. Wal-Mart later avoided the clash by relenting to use the name of the holiday.

==============================

Court Overturns Ban on Prayer in Jesus’ Name, Skirts Constitution Question (Christian Post, 071103)

An appeals court has overturned a ban on prayers mentioning Jesus’ name in the Indiana House chamber but gave no opinion on the constitutionality of sectarian prayers.

The 7th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals on Tuesday reversed a lower court’s decision court banning prayers given in the name of Jesus in the Indiana legislature but centered the decision on a technicality instead of answering whether sectarian prayers on the floor of the House violated the constitutional separation of church and state — an issue of main concern for many following the case.

The court ruled against the plaintiffs because they failed to establish how their tax dollars directly tied to the prayers and thereby had no legal standing to sue.

“They have not shown that the Legislature has extracted from them tax dollars for the establishment and implementation of a program that violates the establishment clause,” Judge Kenneth Ripple wrote in the majority opinion.

Nonetheless, the 2-1 decision was applauded by House leaders and conservative groups.

House Minority Leader Brian Bosma (R-Indianapolis), who formerly led the prayers, called the ruling a victory for free speech.

“I am honestly elated that the 7th Circuit has protected the rights of individuals to speak openly and freely in every way before the crucible of free speech, the state legislature,” Bosma said in a report by The Indianapolis Star.

“Mere offense at the mention of God does not give the right to file a lawsuit,” stated Mathew D. Staver, founder of the religious liberty organization Liberty Counsel, which filed a friend-of-the-court brief defending the prayer practice.

“Prayers offered at legislative sessions are permissible acknowledgements of God and do not establish a religion,” he added in a statement.

Glen Lavy, an attorney with the Alliance Defense Fund, which also filed a friend-of-the-court brief, also praised the ruling.

“Those who oppose Christian invocations are essentially saying that the Founders were violating the Constitution as they were writing it,” Lavy said in a statement.

“People of all religions have always had an equal opportunity to offer prayer before Indiana legislative sessions, and this ruling ensures that those who offer prayers in the name of Jesus will not lose that opportunity either.”

The lawsuit, filed by the American Civil Liberties Union of Indiana on behalf of four taxpayers, came after a minister led the House in singing “Just a Little Talk With Jesus.

The suit was brought against then Majority Leader Bosma. The new Majority Leader B. Patrick Bauer (D-South Bend) decided to continue with the appeal of the lower court’s ruling.

Bauer, who has been reading non-sectarian prayers in order to abide by the 2005 ruling, said he was pleased with the ruling but would meet with the Indiana attorney general’s office and House staff to discuss ramifications of the ruling, reported the Associated Press.

It is still unclear whether the House will begin with a prayer in Jesus’ name when they meet for the next scheduled organization day on Nov. 20.

Ken Falk, an attorney of the ACLJ of Indiana, said he is recommending his clients to ask for Tuesday’s decision to be heard by the appeals court’s full panel of 11 judges.

The attorney warned that the battle may not be over if the legislature should resume its practice of sectarian prayers.

Falk said his organization would not hesitate to take up a case from people in a position to sue, according to The Indianapolis Star.

Bosma, meanwhile, said he was confident the ruling would stand and dismissed the threat of another suit.

“I’m sure the Civil Liberties Union won’t rest until all prayer is erased from every aspect of public life,” he said.

Bosma along with leaders of conservative groups have urged Bauer to continue the long-standing tradition of open prayer and not succumb to challenges.

In a statement released by the Foundation for Moral Law, former Alabama Chief Justice Roy Moore acknowledged that the appeals court’s decision left prayers at the Indiana House “vulnerable to future attack” but encouraged the legislature to “remain firm in the fight against the prayer censors.”

“This victory reminds us and our legislators that we should never surrender one of our most valuable rights to a false belief that ‘they always win,’” said Moore.

==============================

Politics in the pulpit (World Magazine, 080322)

Charity: The law allows churches to do more than they may realize

Rusty Leonard and Warren Cole Smith

A century ago, Theodore Roosevelt famously called the presidency a “bully pulpit.” Today, Americans United for the Separation of Church and State argues that intermingling politics and religion produces pulpit bullies.

“Project Fair Play,” an Americans United initiative, sent out letters to thousands of evangelical pastors in an attempt to “stop illegal church electioneering.” But according to Jere Royall of the North Carolina Policy Council, the intimidating letters fail to let pastors know that most are doing less, not more, than the law allows.

“God told us to ‘love your neighbor as yourself,’” Royall said. “Public policy affects the lives of countless numbers of our neighbors. I don’t see how a Christian can be fully obedient to that command without getting involved.”

Royall says pastors have much more freedom than they generally assume. “Churches can’t endorse specific candidates, but pastors, as private citizens, can,” he said. Also, churches can’t spend “a substantial amount of time” lobbying or working for the passage of specific legislation, but Royall said 5% to 15% of a church staff’s time is the standard that’s allowable: “If a church has two or three full-time staff members, and a number of volunteers, 5% of their total work time amounts to quite a lot.”

Kenyn Cureton, vice president of church ministries for the Family Research Council, said the most significant action a church can take is simply to register its members to vote. “There’s absolutely nothing wrong with holding a nonpartisan voter-registration drive in your church,” he said. Churches also can make their buildings available for candidate speeches, as long as they don’t specifically endorse a candidate.

And, of course, none of these rules matter if the church doesn’t care about losing its tax-exempt status. A number of churches—so-called “free churches”—have done just that. Peter Kershaw of Heal Our Land Ministries calls tax-exempt status “hush money. . . . For the sake of a tax deduction, pastors are putting a muzzle on themselves and their churches.”

The “free church” movement, though growing, still represents no more than 5% of the 350,000 churches in America. Besides, as Royall says, the problem is not that the government is muzzling the church: “The problem is that we have muzzled ourselves. We have tremendous freedom. We just need to exercise it.”

Of course, a church that has good teaching and worship will be influential even if it does not do voter registration or anything else explicitly political, because its members will bring spiritual depth to their duties as citizens.

Political Do’s and Don’t’s for Churches

The following activities are allowed:

* Discuss positions of political candidates on issues

* Hold nonpartisan voter-registration drives on-premises

* Invite candidates to speak at church meeting or service

* Lobby for specific legislation (up to 5% to 15% of total staff and volunteer time)

* Rent church facility to candidate (provided the rate is the same as for other groups)

The following activities are NOT allowed by churches, but ARE allowed by pastors:

* Endorse candidates

* Make financial contributions to candidates

* Distribute campaign literature

* Establish a political action committee (PAC) or make contributions to PACs

—Sources: Alliance Defense Fund, James Madison Center for Free Speech, the Family Research Council, Focus on the Family, Concerned Women For America —

==============================

Student Wins Right to Use Scripture Reference in Art Piece (Christian Post, 080521)

A student who was assigned a “zero” and penalized with disciplinary action after he wrote a scripture reference on a piece of artwork won a settlement Tuesday in what was a celebration of freedom for Christians everywhere.

“Christian students shouldn’t be penalized for expressing their beliefs, so we’re pleased that this settlement will make sure that no longer happens,” cheered David Cortman of the Christian Alliance Defend Fund, which represented the student, in a statement.

The Tomah High School student of Madison, Wis., was told by school officials in March to remove or cover up his scripture reference on a piece of artwork to stay in line with the school policy that bans depictions of “blood, violence, sexual connotations, [or] religious beliefs.” The artwork depicted an image of a cross alongside the words “John 3:16.”

Depictions of demon-like creatures by other students, however, were not censored – an indication of what the ADF said was a double standard.

“Allowing demonic depictions by some students while prohibiting Christian religious expression in artwork by others is a blatant violation of the Constitution,” Cortman said.

In the settlement reached by ADF after the group indicated to the school that it would pursue a lawsuit, the Tomah Area School District agreed to end its ban on religious expression, clean the student’s disciplinary record and fairly grade the contested piece of artwork.

“It was clearly unconstitutional for the school to enforce a policy in such a way as to bar religious expression by a Christian student while allowing other types of religious expression by other students,” Cortman said approvingly.

“No school policy can require a student to surrender his First Amendment rights,” he added.

==============================

Ford Cuts North American Production, Cuts Profit Goal (Foxnews, 080522)

DETROIT — Ford Motor Co. says it is cutting North American production for the rest of the year as high gas prices and the weak economy depress its sales.

The Dearborn-based company said Thursday it also expects to break even in 2009, scaling back its goal of returning to profitability by that time.

Ford says it will cut production by 15% in the second quarter, 15 to 20% in the third quarter and 2 to 8% in the fourth quarter.

The cuts primarily will affect pickups and sport utility vehicles, which have seen sales plummet in recent months. Ford plans to increase its production of cars and crossovers.

==============================

McDonald’s hears: ‘I’m NOT lovin’ it!’ In front of local restaurants, fed-up Christians protest company’s support of same-sex marriage (WorldNetDaily, 080722)

The corporate headquarters for McDonald’s is hearing from store managers in California that customers are upset over the company’s pro-homosexual advocacy and they aren’t going to take it any longer.

Yuriy Popko, one of several Christians who staged a sign-waving protest at the Golden Arches in Citrus Heights today, said the protest at that location was suspended when store officials agreed to convey protesters’ objections to the corporate office.

“They came out and talked with us. Basically we had two requests: a notice to the public and that they e-mail our concerns to the corporate office,” Popko told WND.

He said McDonald’s officials confirmed they already had notified both regional and international headquarters about the concerns. But the company has a prohibition on local posted notices, so Popko said the Christians agreed to write a letter that McDonald’s would forward also.

“Tomorrow we’re going to be at a different location,” he said.

WND report earlier on the call for the boycott by the American Family Association, and later when the boycott was joined by several other organizations.

It was because of a decision by the restaurant chain known for Happy Meals and its Golden Arches to deliberately advocate for homosexuality. The company has given $20,000 to the National Gay and Lesbian Chamber of Commerce and placed one of its executives on that group’s board. The NGLCC, among other things, lobbies for same-sex “marriage” provisions.

“If McDonald’s restaurants and franchises … follow the small business advice of the company’s new homosexual partner – the National Gay and Lesbian Chamber of Commerce (NGLCC), which received a $20,000 grant from McDonald’s – there would be chaos,” said Peter LaBarbera, chief of Americans for Truth.

LaBarbera’s was one of several groups, also including the Culture Campaign, Liberty Counsel, the American Family Association of Pennsylvania and the Illinois Family Institute, that have joined the boycott call.

Popko said there are Christians from several organizations in the area working on the McDonald’s boycott.

“From customers, we’ve actually gotten a pretty good response. They see the signs and come up to us. When they ask, we just explain about the $20,000 donated to the NGLCC.”

According to Beth Braun, a member of the group SaveBiblicalMarriage, which is arranging the protests, hundreds of homeschooling families and groups, churches and others have been contacted “to encourage them to join the boycott, if not in person, to send e-mails, call, and write the local, regional and national divisions expressing their disgust.”

“I know a lot of homeschool families,” she told WND. “When they hear, they’re just going ‘yuck.’”

“McDonalds should focus on food quality and safety issues instead of attacking the values held by the majority of people worldwide. Marriage between a man and a woman is the norm throughout the world. McDonalds’ personal attack against those who support the traditional definition of marriage, while siding with a narrow group that promotes a radical redefinition, shows that company executives are out to lunch. McDonalds might as well change their signs to read ‘billions and billions insulted,’” said Mathew Staver, chief of Liberty Counsel.

“It’s a shame that McDonald’s would tarnish their family-friendly image,” said AFA Chairman Don Wildmon. “But the company has ramped up its support of the gay agenda and it leaves us no option but to call for a boycott.”

Wildmon had written the company with a plea for McDonald’s to remain neutral in the culture war by removing McDonald’s name and logo from the National Gay and Lesbian Chamber of Commerce (NGLCC) Web site (where McDonald’s is cited as a partner and ally) and withdraw McDonald’s VP of Communications Richard Ellis’ endorsement from the website. McDonald’s ignored both requests.

“To put it politely, the company thumbed its nose at the Christian community,” Wildmon said.

“This boycott isn’t about hiring homosexuals, or homosexuals eating at McDonald’s or how homosexual employees are treated. It is about McDonald’s, as a corporation, refusing to remain neutral in the culture war. The company has chosen not to remain neutral but to give the full weight of their corporation to promoting the homosexual agenda, including homosexual marriage,” the AFA said.

The pro-family groups are encouraging families to do two things: sign, print and distribute a Boycott McDonald’s petition at www.boycottmcdonalds.com; and call the local McDonald’s to politely tell the manager they are boycotting the chain until it stops promoting the “gay” agenda.

McDonald’s officials declined to return a WND call seeking comment on the placement of its executive on the “gay” advocacy organization. But the corporation sent a subsequent e-mail confirming its support for the agenda of the homosexual business lobby.

“McDonald’s is indeed a Corporate Partner and Organizational Ally of NGLCC. Our vice president of U.S. communications, Richard Ellis, was recently elected to its board of directors,” said the brief statement to WND from Heidi M. Barker, senior director of media relations.

A spokeswoman for NGLCC refused to speak with WND except on “background” when asked about McDonald’s financial contribution to the group. But she did confirm the organization would not release information on its sponsors.

But Christians were further angered when a McDonald’s executive said the company would continue its campaign against such “hate.”

==============================

‘Gay’ McDonald’s prompts boycott: AFA urges millions to shun fast-food giant over its promotion of same-sex marriage (WorldNetDaily, 080703)

Following a link from the National Gay and Lesbian Chamber of Commerce’s website leads to a promotional for children’s Happy Meals at the McDonalds website

The American Family Association, whose earlier boycott of Ford Motor Co. over its promotion of homosexuality was dropped after company sales fell 8% per month for two years, now is asking consumers to stop buying Big Macs and Happy Meals at McDonald’s.

In a brief announcement today, AFA, whose constituents number in the millions, said it is “asking its supporters to boycott the restaurant chain.”

“This boycott is not about hiring homosexuals, or homosexuals eating at McDonald’s or how homosexual employees are treated. It is about McDonald’s, as a corporation, choosing to put the full weight of their organization behind promoting the homosexual agenda, including homosexual marriage,” said AFA chairman Donald E. Wildmon.

AFA pointed out McDonald’s donated $20,000 to the National Gay and Lesbian Chamber of Commerce in exchange for membership in the NGLCC and a seat on the group’s board of directors. The NGLCC lobbies Congress on a wide range of issues, including the promotion of same-sex marriage.

AFA had asked the corporation to remove its name and logo from the NGLCC website, where it is listed as a “corporate partner and organization ally.” AFA also requested that McDonald’s remove the endorsement of NGLCC by Richard Ellis, vice president of communications for McDonald’s USA, from the website.

“McDonald’s refused both requests,” the AFA announcement said. In fact, Pat Harris, global chief diversity officer and vice president of “inclusions & diversity,” told AFA the burger-and-fries conglomerate would “reaffirm our position on diversity.”

The McDonald’s logo is featured on the website of the National Gay and Lesbian Chamber of Commerce, among other well-known companies

“Ellis, who is openly homosexual, was given a seat on the NGLCC board of directors. … He was quoted as saying, ‘I’m thrilled to join the National Gay & Lesbian Chamber of Commerce and ready to go to work. I share the NGLCC’s passion for business growth and development within the LGBT community, and I look forward to playing a role I moving these important initiatives forward,’” AFA said.

The AFA initiative followed an exchange of words between the pro-family organization and the corporation. WND reported then that McDonald’s was running an e-mail campaign responding to concerns expressed by AFA to constituents.

The restaurant corporation had told consumers expressing opposition to its pro-homosexual stance that the company treats “all our employees and customers with dignity and respect regardless of their ethnicity, religious beliefs, sexual orientation or any other differentiating factor.”

“We are not telling McDonald’s who they can hire to work for the company, nor are we demanding that they stop serving Big Macs to homosexual customers,” AFA said then. “This issue is about the world’s largest fast food chain allying itself and partnering with an organization that lobbies Congress to enact laws that we feel can be used to repress religious freedom or undermine the sanctity of marriage.”

McDonald’s noted, “While one McDonald’s employee is affiliated with the National Gay & Lesbian Chamber of Commerce (NGLCC), McDonald’s is in no way ‘aggressively promoting the homosexual agenda’ as suggested in the newsletter.”

But AFA said, “To refer to Richard Ellis, who is the vice president of communications for McDonald’s, as ‘one McDonald’s employee,’ as if he is a teenager flipping hamburgers, is disingenuous at best. While ‘aggressively’ is admittedly a subjective term, AFA believes that giving money to and partnering with a homosexual lobby organization is certainly an enthusiastic promotion of the homosexual agenda.”

AFA asked the corporation for honesty in its communications and called its verbal maneuvers “disingenuous.”

“As a Christian organization, the American Family Association always seeks to be honest, accurate and completely forthright in the information we pass along to our supporters,” AFA said. “We expect corporations in this country, especially those that position themselves as ‘family friendly’ businesses, to do the same.”

As WND reported, after joining the NGLCC, Wal-Mart’s income later started declining as Christian organizations reacted to the news.

CNN reported Wal-Mart officials later decided to pursue a lower level of homosexual promotions.

“We are not currently planning corporate-level contributions to LGBT groups,” Mona Williams, the company’s senior vice president of corporate communications, told CNN only months after the issue arose.

WND also reported AFA’s suspension of its two-year boycott of Ford after the auto giant met the conditions of an original agreement with the pro-family group.

Wildmon said the original agreement between AFA and Ford contained four items:

* Ford would not renew current promotions or create future incentives that give cash donations to homosexual organizations based on the purchase of a vehicle.

* Ford would not make corporate donations to homosexual organizations that, as part of their activities, engage in political or social campaigns to promote civil unions or same-sex marriage.

* Ford would stop giving cash and vehicle donations or endorsements to homosexual social activities such as ‘gay’-pride parades.

* Ford would cease all advertising on homosexual websites and through homosexual media outlets (magazines, television, radio) in the U.S. with the exception of $100,000 to be used by Volvo. The Volvo ads would be the same ads used in the general media and not aimed at the homosexual community specifically.

According to AFA, during the 24 months the boycott was in effect, Ford sales dropped an average of 8% per month. The organization said its boycott was not entirely responsible for the drop in sales but played a very significant role. A total of 780,365 individuals had signed AFA’s Boycott Ford petition.

==============================

James Dobson: We Have Not Raised the White Flag (Christian Post, 090416)

Conservative evangelical giant James Dobson of Focus on the Family made a rare interview appearance on Fox News Tuesday to articulate that neither he nor the pro-family movement have raised the white flag.

“We’re not going anywhere,” Dobson stressed to Fox’s Sean Hannity.

Dobson, who recently stepped down as chairman of the Focus on the Family board, went on the news talk show to set the record straight about media reports indicating that he conceded defeat in the culture wars.

London’s Telegraph reported last week on Dobson’s “farewell” speech to his staff in February.

“We tried to defend the unborn child, the dignity of the family, but it was a holding action,” Dobson said, as reported by the Telegraph. “We are awash in evil and the battle is still to be waged. We are right now in the most discouraging period of that long conflict. Humanly speaking, we can say we have lost all those battles.”

Several news outlets picked up on Dobson’s speech and also interpreted it as the religious right admitting defeat in moral battles.

But Dobson said on Fox’s “Hannity” that the media had only reported half of his statement and intentionally left out the rest.

What the evangelical leader said that day to his staff was: “Humanly speaking, we can say that we have lost all those battles, but God is in control and we are not going to give up now, right?”

“The left wing media is itching for members of the pro-family movement to put up a white flag and declare the culture war over and to just hand the country to them,” Dobson commented. “So they will take a statement like that, which was made to my staff; it wasn’t a press release.”

Dobson explained that the statement to his staff was in reference to the election.

“It would not be accurate not to admit we lost the White House, and we lost the House, we lost the Senate and we probably will lose the courts, and we lost almost every department of government with this election,” he said on Fox News. “But the war’s not over. Pendulums swing and we’ll come back. We’re going to hang in there.

“It’s not going to be a surrender.”

Dobson noted the “terrible things” that have been happening under the Obama administration, including the reversal of the Mexico City Policy, which prohibited funding for overseas abortion providers, and overturning a Bush policy that banned federal funding for embryonic stem cell research. Obama is set to also rescind a conscience rule that protects healthcare workers who refuse to participate in abortions and has indicated that he would sign the Freedom of Choice Act, which would prohibit any state from denying a woman the right to an abortion.

“Admittedly, Obama won the election and he has the right to set the policy. But in setting that policy he has changed or destroyed many of the principles that we worked so hard for,” Dobson said on Tuesday. “The Freedom of Choice Act is hanging out there someplace that would roll back every single piece of legislation ever passed in any of the states to limit abortion and maybe even partial birth abortion will come back.”

“Those things are very, very troubling,” he continued. “But we believe they’re temporary.”

Dobson doesn’t believe the American people have shifted in their moral standing on abortion and marriage and although the pro-life and pro-family movement has lost many battles, he stressed that the war was not lost.

“[S]peaking ... as a Christian, we’re not called to be successful. We’re called to be faithful and that’s what we plan to do,” he told Hannity. “We will have our day, I want to say to everybody out there who’s concerned about the unborn child, about the meaning of marriage, about the conscience clause.”

“This is a discouraging time but in tough times good people hang in there and wait for things to change and we pray a lot.”

Dobson, who founded Focus on the Family, resigned as chairman in February as he continued relinquishing leadership roles. He stepped down as president and CEO in 2003.

He made clear on Tuesday that he did not retire or leave the family ministry but said “it was time to pass [the leadership] along and let a younger generation take over.”

Currently, he continues to host the Focus on the Family radio broadcast which is heard on 1,500 radio stations and has 220 million listeners in 150 countries.

“I’m working as hard as I ever have and that has not changed,” he said.

==============================

Pro-Lifers Keep Up Protests Against Notre Dame’s Obama Invite (Christian Post, 090501)

Pro-lifers are pressing on relentlessly in their efforts to prevent President Obama from giving the commencement address at the University of Notre Dame.

On Friday, five pro-life activists pushed strollers carrying bloodied baby dolls with Obama bumper stickers during a Board of Trustees and Board of Fellows meeting at the South Bend, Ind., campus, according to a report by stopobamanotredame.com.

“If a man said he was going to kill your child, or pay to have it killed, would you politely ask him not to? These are real human beings that are aborted every day. Our strollers are intended to yell, ‘PLEASE STOP,’” said notorious anti-abortion <http://christianpost.com/topics/Abortion> activist Randall Terry.

The University of Notre Dame drew fire when it announced the invitation of Obama to speak at the school’s May 17 commencement. More than 40 Catholic bishops and pro-life leaders have sent letters to the Roman Catholic university’s president, the Rev. John Jenkins, urging him to rescind the invitation, and more than 300,000 names have been added to the online petition notredamescandal.com.

Jenkins, however, has repeatedly defended the invite and made clear that it should not be taken as condoning or endorsing Obama’s positions on issues related to human life.

Recent pro-abortion actions by Obama include lifting a ban on federal funding of embryonic stem cell research and overturning a policy that banned U.S. taxpayer money from going to international groups that perform or promote abortions.

Pro-lifers opposing the invitation as well as the university’s decision to award Obama an honorary doctor of laws degree have been holding rallies, signing petitions and leading demonstrations over the past several weeks and plan to continue protesting in the weeks leading up to the commencement.

On May 4, two billboards criticizing the school are scheduled to be erected near the campus. The billboards, by the Pro-Life Action League, will read: “NOTRE DAME: Obama is pro abortion choice. How dare you honor him.”

Eric Scheidler, the League’s communications director, sees an opportunity in the controversy.

“As scandalous as the Obama invitation is, it presents us with a welcome opportunity to highlight Barack Obama’s pro-abortion record - something which was largely concealed by the Obama campaign and the media during last year’s campaign,” Scheidler said in a statement. “Obama’s extreme pro-abortion agenda is out of step with the majority of Americans, and that news is finally getting out, thanks to this controversy.”

The president’s views, however, do not appear to be out of step with Catholics, a recent poll indicates.

A poll by The Pew Forum on Religion and Public Life found that half of U.S. Catholics said it was right to invite Obama to speak at Notre Dame. Only 28% opposed the invitation. The study, however, found that Catholics who attend church weekly were more likely to say Notre Dame was wrong to have invited Obama (45%) compared to those who attend less often (23%).

According to other findings, 47% of Catholics believe abortion should be legal in all or most cases while 42% said it should be illegal. White evangelical Protestants were the only surveyed Christian group more likely to oppose abortion than support it.

In recent decisions, the University of Notre Dame will not be awarding its highest honor at commencement this year. Mary Ann Glendon, a Harvard University law professor and anti-abortion scholar, was intended to receive the Laetare Medal but she turned down the award in opposition to the school honoring Obama.

==============================

Pro-Life Notre Dame Seniors to Hold Alternate Commencement (Christian Post, 090312)

Days away from the highly publicized and debated commencement at the University of Notre Dame, a coalition of student groups opposing the invitation of President Obama will hold its own gathering on graduation day.

Notre Dame Response announced on Tuesday that it has received “official permission” by the university to hold a two-day rally that includes a “meditation” and prayer vigil. The protesting seniors want to affirm the university’s Catholic identity and pro-life position.

“It’s not a political issue; this is an issue of human dignity, and it’s a Catholic issue,” said Greer Hannan, a Notre Dame graduating senior, in a video by ND Response. “As a Catholic university, we need to stand up for it.”

Thousands of graduating seniors, alumni, clergy and Catholics outside the university are outraged that Obama, who is pro-choice, was not only invited to give the commencement address on May 17 but also to receive an honorary law degree.

Awarding a Notre Dame law degree to Obama who has used the law to deny equality to the unborn would diminish the value of the degree itself, ND Response has said.

The Rev. Frank Pavone, national director of Priests for Life, will be leading members of the senior class who have decided not to attend their graduation in a separate meditation on Sunday.

“In standing with these students, I am standing with the true spirit of Notre Dame: a pro-life spirit, in harmony with human reason and Catholic Faith,” Pavone said in a statement Monday. “The scandal that has been generated does not represent what Notre Dame is all about; it represents a radical betrayal of what Notre Dame is all about. I am encouraged by the pro-life activities of so many student groups on this campus - activities that are carried out all year round.”

Pavone is encouraging students not to show up at the university’s commencement ceremony and instead attend the alternative “Vigil for Life.”

“The seniors who do this are manifesting the real meaning of commencement: they are carrying out the witness to truth and service that their hard-earned degrees have prepared them to give in the world,” he stated.

For nearly two months, thousands have protested, petitioned and advertised their opposition to Obama’s invitation and have called on university president the Rev. John Jenkins to rescind the invitation.

Former Notre Dame president the Rev. Theodore M. Hesburgh, however, has not been swayed by the protests, according to seattlepi.com.

“No speaker who has ever come to Notre Dame has changed the university. We are who we are,” Hesburgh recently told a group of students and alumni, according to seattlepi. “But, quite often, the very fact of being here has changed the speaker.”

Former commencement speakers at the university include former presidents Jimmy Carter, Ronald Reagan, John F. Kennedy, and George W. Bush.

==============================

‘Religious Right’ Critics Skeptical About Ralph Reed’s New Group (Christian Post, 090715)

An Atheist public policy group expressed skepticism Tuesday over a new group formed by former Christian Coalition leader Ralph Reed.

“This new organization seems to be just the latest effort in promoting religious-right candidates, and demolishing the ‘wall of separation’ between church and state in America,” said Ed Buckner, president of American Atheists, after hearing about the low-key activities of the Faith and Freedom Coalition.

“Despite his questionable record on being forthright and a squeaky-clean crusader, Reed is a savvy political hit man with big ambitions,” he added.

Reed, however, says his new organization “is not your daddy’s Christian Coalition.”

“It’s got to be more brown, more black, more female, and younger,” he told USA Today’s Dan Gilgoff last month, weeks after the organization quietly launched.

Reed, who raised the Christian Coalition into a potent political force in the 1990s, says the nation is at a crossroads and is need of people to stand up for time-honored values, stronger families and individual freedom.

And he believes that many of those people are within the rising generation of young believers, who may not approach the issues in the way that older conservatives do but still stand for them.

“The Obama administration and the dominant media are leading us in the direction of bigger government, higher taxes, extreme social policy, liberal judges, and exploding debt,” he tells potential supporters on the Faith and Freedom website, ffcoalition.com. “We are standing in the gap to oppose these policies.”

Though the movement is small now and launched without the fanfare that some might expect from a man who – at the pinnacle of his power – was dubbed “The Right Hand of God” by Time magazine, Reed says the humble beginning is intentional.

More than publicity, what Reed is focused on is cultivating and training the rising generation of young leaders in the faith community who will ultimately be the movers and shakers of the movement.

Reed, himself, was tapped to run the Christian Coalition at age 28.

Despite the claims of the now-48-year-old conservative that the new group will be “younger, hipper, less strident and more inclusive,” there are groups like American Atheists that believe Reed’s new organization will indeed become “your daddy’s Christian Coalition,” if it’s not already.

“I usually prefer to give people the benefit of the doubt, but Mr. Reed’s history speaks for itself,” said Dave Silverman, communications director for American Atheists, alluding to string of troubles Reed has faced since resigning as executive director of the Christian Coalition in 1997.

“We’ll be watching this very, very closely,” promised Silverman.

==============================

Fla. Churches Boycott Pepsi Products Over ‘Anti-Family’ Efforts (Christian Post, 090910)

A number of churches in Florida are boycotting Pepsi products to send a message to companies involved in “anti-family” activities.

The Community Issues Council, which meets with about 50 churches each month to discuss issues that conflict with traditional Christian values, had asked the soft drink company to curb its support of groups, events and legal issues that “oppose traditional family values,” according to council president Terry Kemple.

“This year, they pumped millions of dollars into organizations that opposed California’s same-sex marriage ban, Proposition 8,” he told The Tampa Bay Tribune.

Pepsi also forces its employees to attend sexual orientation and gender identity diversity training, where they are taught to accept homosexuality, noted Kemple’s church – Bell Shoals Baptist in Brandon, Fla., which is leading the boycott – in a report earlier this year.

“There are a lot of corporations that have diversity programs, but Pepsi goes far beyond,” Kemple added.

After months of discussion turned up fruitless, Bell Shoals Baptist decided to boycott Pepsi and this week replaced the last of their ten Pepsi vending machines with Coke machines.

The megachurch, which draws several thousand worshippers each Sunday, has been joined by other churches including Kings Avenue Baptist Church and Plant City Church of God.

It was not immediately clear whether the boycott is for only Pepsi products or if it also includes all brands under Pepsi’s mother company, PepsiCo.

PepsiCo, one of the largest corporations in the country, boasts subsidiaries including Gatorade, Tropicana, Frito-Lay and Quaker.

==============================

Currents Affecting the Church (Christian Post, 100225)

By Chuck Colson

Perhaps you’ve witnessed it in your own congregation. The past 10 to 15 years have brought dramatic change. Maybe you get regular email updates from a missionary you support. Perhaps the church missions committee uses an internet phone service like Skype to talk face-to-face with a sister church in a remote part of Africa. Or maybe you attend a church where a foreign missionary from overseas has come to help spread the Gospel here in the U.S.

And because of immigration, perhaps your church looks a little more like that picture painted in Revelation, with worshippers from every tribe, tongue, and nation.

We may take changes like this for granted, but they are rippling through the global Church, creating challenges and opportunities like never before.

One of BreakPoint’s Centurions, Fritz Kling, has seen these changes up close. He shares his insights about what they mean in a new book: The Meeting of the Waters: 7 Global Currents that Will Propel the Future Church.

This book is based on Kling’s years as a foundation executive, which took him to over 40 developing countries. He also conducted a year-long survey of 158 indigenous leaders, finding out how their faith communities are being affected by changes in the world.

He asked questions like: How have relationships between foreign missionaries and local Christians changed in the past 10 years? Are there ministry approaches that are no longer as effective as they used to be because of changing times?

From those surveys, 7 “Global Currents” emerged, which Kling unpacks through stories of mentors and friends from around the world. The 7 Currents are Mercy, Mutuality, Migration, Monoculture, Machines, Mediation, and Memory.

Let’s take a look at just one of these currents and see how it is affecting the larger church.

Kling uses the term monoculture to describe how the cultures of diverse countries are growing more similar. This is because of the spread of worldwide images, ideals, celebrities, and ad campaigns.

In Singapore, for example, the population woke up one morning to a Nike ad campaign with graffiti-like posters plastered across streets and subways with the face of an American basketball star, LeBron James. Suddenly, young people across Singapore were saving for a pair of Air Zoom LeBron II Nike basketball shoes.

The growth of this monoculture presents challenges and opportunities. Suddenly, faith communities across the globe are struggling with rising consumerism, materialism, and the burgeoning celebrity culture. And ironically, the importation sometimes of unwanted images in places which, like Singapore, ban all graffiti.

But at the same time, the spread of the English language means that we have shared cultural icons. We have a common cultural currency, in fact, that makes, for the most part, better cross-cultural exchanges.

Effective outreach begins with understanding. And today, that means understanding the forces that are shaping the church here at home and around the globe.

==============================

Glenn Beck’s Advice on ‘Social Justice’ Churches Sparks Outrage (Christian Post, 100310)

Anti-poverty Christian groups are up in arms after popular political commentator Glenn Beck urged Christians to leave their church if it talks about social justice.

Beck, a Mormon, said the word “social justice” is code for communism and Nazism.

“Beck says Christians should leave their social justice churches,” wrote the Rev. Jim Wallis, CEO of the social justice ministry Sojourners [KH: liberal], in response to Beck’s comments.

“[S]o I say Christians should leave Glenn Beck,” he added in a commentary posted Wednesday on The Huffington Post.

Wallis said the Bible from beginning to the end is clear that social justice is an “integral part of God’s plan for humanity.”

In his radio and television show last week on Fox News, Beck urged Christian viewers to talk to their pastor or priest about the word social justice if their church uses the term. If the church leader refuses to change the church’s commitment to social justice, then they should leave, Beck continued.

“I beg you, look for the words ‘social justice’ or ‘economic justice’ on your church website,” the TV and radio personality said. “If you find it, run as fast as you can. Social justice and economic justice, they are code words.

“Now, am I advising people to leave their church? Yes!” he exclaimed.

Later in the show, Beck held up cards with a hammer and sickle on one and a swastika on the other. He said communism and Nazis both have the same philosophy and in America “social justice” is the code word for both.

“They talked about economic justice, rights of the workers, redistribution of wealth, and surprisingly, democracy,” he said.

Wallis, in response, refuted the controversial claim and highlighted how the Catholic Church, Black churches, Mainline Protestant churches, and an increasing number of evangelical and Pentecostal churches believe that social justice is central to biblical faith.

“I don’t know if Beck is just strange, just trying to be controversial, or just trying to make money,” the long-time anti-poverty activist wrote. “But in any case, what he has said attacks the very heart of our Christian faith, and Christians should no longer watch his show. His show should now be in the same-category as Howard Stern.”

Meanwhile, anti-hunger ministry Bread for the World said it does not usually feel compelled to respond to Beck’s outrageous statements. But it said his recent comments had “gone too far.”

“[W]e say Jesus called us to care for ‘the least of these,’” wrote Jim McDonald, managing director of Bread for the World, in an e-mail to The Christian Post. “No matter where you fall on the political spectrum, it is impossible for biblically-literate people to deny the thousands of verses in the Bible about hunger and poverty.”

Sojourners and Bread for the World are calling on Christians to send Glenn Beck a message to protest his comparison of church-based social justice and communism.

Notably, Beck’s religious group, the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints, or the Mormon church, is widely regarded by Christians as either a heretical Christian sect, a cult, or another Abrahamic religion.

Among the Mormon beliefs that are contrary to core Christian doctrines is the rejection of the validity and veracity of the Bible. Mormons believe that the proper translation of what God wants believers to know is found in another source – the Book of Mormon.

Mormons also reject the Apostles Creed and Nicene Creed – which are based on the Bible and were agreed upon by the ancient Christian churches as statements that true believers should affirm.

==============================

Church Fights Back After Arizona Town Bans Home Bible Study (Foxnews, 100315)

GILBERT, Ariz. — The national Alliance Defense Fund says a town code that bars religious assemblies in private homes in the Arizona community of Gilbert is unconstitutional.

The Oasis of Truth church began meeting at Pastor Joe Sutherland’s house in November and rotated homes several times a week for Bible study and fellowship.

A Gilbert code compliance officer hit the church with a violation notice after seeing a sign near a road advertising a Sunday service.

A zoning administrator told the church that Bible studies, church leadership meetings and fellowship activities are not permitted in private homes.

The Alliance Defense Fund’s Doug Napier says no neighbors complained.

The Scottsdale-based group has filed an appeal with the town of Gilbert, contending its code violates the U.S. Constitution.

==============================

Theologian: Glenn Beck Was Reckless, but Has a Point (Christian Post, 100316)

Amid the uproar over Glenn Beck’s recent comments about the church and social justice, a respected theologian has called for more “careful thinking” and “earnest struggle” with the issue.

Dr. R. Albert Mohler, Jr., president of The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary in Louisville, Ky., observed that most media jumped on the story taking the simple approach of pitting pro-social justice Christian leaders against the controversial Fox News broadcaster.

But the theologian, who daily tackles hot-button issues on his blog, called on “serious-minded” Christians to take a deeper look at what Beck was trying to say when he warned that the words “social justice” or “economic justice” are “code words” for Communism and Nazism.

During his March 2 radio broadcast, Beck had urged Christians to leave their church if it embraced social and economic justice.

“At first glance, Beck’s statements are hard to defend. How can justice, social or private, be anything other than a biblical mandate,” Mohler wrote on his blog Monday.

“But, there is more going on here,” he contended. “A closer look at his statements reveals a political context.”

Mohler pointed out that Beck had specifically mentioned the Rev. Jeremiah Wright, the former pastor of Trinity United Church of Christ, the church where President Obama had attended while living in Chicago.

The Baptist theologian then said many preachers trade “the Gospel for a platform of political and economic change, most often packaged as a call for social justice.”

He looked back on Christian history and highlighted the “immediate roots” of the so-called “social gospel” to Washington Gladden, a Columbus, Ohio, pastor, from the mid-nineteenth century, and, more famously, to Walter Rauschenbusch, a liberal Christian theologian and Baptist minister in the early twentieth century.

Both Gladden and Rauschenbusch promoted a liberal theological message that redirected the Christian emphasis of salvation through Jesus Christ to one that emphasized using politics to bring the Kingdom of God on earth.

“The urgency for any faithful Christian is this – flee any church that for any reason or in any form has abandoned the Gospel of Christ for any other gospel,” Mohler stated.

While Beck’s statements suggest that his primary concern is politics, Mohler said his concern is about the “primacy of the Gospel of Christ.”

“The church’s main message must be that Gospel,” he stated. “The New Testament is stunningly silent on any plan for governmental or social action. The apostles launched no social reform movement. Instead, they preached the Gospel of Christ and planted Gospel church.”

But in spite of the church not adopting a social reform agenda, Mohler believes that a church that is faithful to the Gospel will naturally reform society through the lives of its congregants.

“The Gospel is not a message of social salvation, but it does have social implications,” maintained Mohler.

Jerry Falwell, Jr., president of Liberty University and the son of the late Christian right leader the Rev. Jerry Falwell, also said Jesus taught that individuals, not governments, should help the poor.

“Jesus taught that we should give to the poor and support widows, but he never said that we should elect a government that would take money from our neighbor’s hand and give it to the poor,” Falwell said in response to the Beck controversy, according to CNN.

But Beck has faced a barrage of criticism from anti-poverty Christian leaders and organizations following his remarks.

The Rev. Jim Wallis, CEO of the social justice ministry Sojourners, called on Christians to stop listening and watching Beck’s shows. Wallis said the Bible is clear that social justice is an “integral part of God’s plan for humanity.”

So far some 30,000 Christians have sent a message to Beck in protest of his social justice comments, according to Wallis.

Mohler, though noting there is some truth to Beck’s statements, criticized the comments for lack of “nuance, fair consideration, and context.”

“It was reckless to use a national media platform to rail against social justice in such a manner,” the theologian said. Becks reckless statements has left him “with little defense against a tidal wave of biblical mandates.”

While the church must make preaching the Gospel central to its mission, Christians must strive to “be on the right side of justice,” Mohler concluded.

==============================

Ariz. Town Officials OK Home Bible Studies (Christian Post, 100323)

The Gilbert, Ariz., town council agreed on Monday to amend an ordinance that banned one small church from meeting in homes.

“I’m not willing to regulate what goes on in peoples’ homes,” Councilmember Jenn Daniels said, according to The Arizona Republic.

The council held a special meeting to discuss changes to the Land Development Code which currently prohibits the use of single family residential structures for religious assemblies.

It was convened after a relatively new church of seven members was ordered to stop holding Bible studies and worship services in the home of Pastor Joe Sutherland. The cease-and-desist order gained the national spotlight after attorneys with the Alliance Defense Fund filed an appeal last week on behalf of Oasis of Truth Church.

Council members, however, said they were not aware of the order against Oasis of Truth when it was issued by a zoning administrator. Once they found out, they decided to make changes to the zoning code.

Expressing commitment to religious freedom, Gilbert Mayor John Lewis said, “It is unfortunate that the Council did not know about information given to the Oasis of Truth Church. Gilbert is known as a family-oriented community and our faith groups are a vital part of our Town. We want to keep it that way.”

Lewis attended the Sunday worship services of Oasis of Truth Church earlier this month and listened to the church members’ suggestions regarding zoning changes. The church is currently renting space at a local school.

Some of the proposed changes presented Monday included changing the definition of religious assembly or regulating all gatherings in homes, such as Super Bowl parties.

Councilmember Steve Urie suggested “simply saying assemblies are permitted in single family residences provided there isn’t a problem with parking, traffic or other public safety issues,” as reported by KTVK 3TV.

ADF Senior Legal Counsel Douglas Napier told the local TV news station that they are simply seeking protection of religious freedoms.

As the town council moves forward on an amendment, which will likely not take effect until June, enforcement of the current code has been suspended.

Mayor Lewis assured Gilbert residents, “Our vibrancy is enhanced with our strong faith-based groups. Our partnership with our local ministers and pastors is excellent. Gilbert is considered a religious friendly area. Religious activities occur all over Town and most especially in our homes. The Town Council and our citizens will keep it that way.”

Oasis of Truth Church was launched in 2009 and consists of only seven adult members and four children. They were meeting in different houses on a rotating basis three times per week for fellowship, biblical and moral instruction and worship. No complaints had been made from neighbors about the church meetings.

==============================

Beck Vs. Wallis (townhall.com, 100331)

by Marvin Olasky

Two entertaining controversialists, Glenn Beck and Jim Wallis, blasted each other in mid-March over the meaning of “social justice.”

Their antagonism has a backstory. Wallis, a religious adviser to Barack Obama, took on Beck last September after the FOX News and radio commentator criticized Democratic healthcare proposals. Wallis asked his followers to “tell Glenn Beck that healthcare reform is pro-life,” but The New York Times and CNN did not publicize Wallis’ call, and Beck did not give Wallis more attention by firing back.

This past month Beck advised listeners to “look for the word ‘social justice’ or ‘economic justice’ on your church website. If you can find it, run as fast as you can.” Beck said those two terms are “code words” for giving government more power. Wallis again struck back: “Beck says Christians should leave their social justice churches, so I say Christians should leave Glenn Beck. Christians should no longer watch his show.”

This time the Times and CNN megaphoned Wallis’ attack. This time Beck responded with criticism of Wallis that gave Wallis an opportunity to shoot back on the show of Keith Olbermann (the anti-Beck). Beck said 19th-century Roman Catholics and 20th-century Communists and Nazis had talked about “social justice.” Meanwhile, Wallis said Beck’s show was “in the same category” as that of sex yakker Howard Stern.

Oh, what a tangled web we weave! Let’s review the history: Was “social justice” born as a Catholic term? Yes, Jesuit theologian Luigi Taparelli tried to stem a socialist surge in the 1840s by arguing that religious and civic groups could justly improve living conditions without relying on governmental force.

Did Communists and Nazis flip “social justice” into a promotion of government power? Yes. Communist Party USA leaders instructed me in 1972 and 1973 to use those words. I haven’t personally researched Nazi usage, but a leading Nazi sympathizer during the 1930s, radio priest Charles Coughlin, established a National Union for Social Justice and published a million-subscriber magazine, Social Justice. His radio audience of 16 million heard him attacking an “international conspiracy of Jewish bankers.”

Do those historical wrinkles mean that the term should not be used? No, but it should certainly be defined. We can study the 150 or so times that mishpat in Hebrew and kreesis in Greek—words commonly translated as “justice”—appear in the Bible. Biblically, justice—tied to righteousness—is what promotes faith in God, not faith in government. Prophets criticized not entrepreneurs but those who combined economic and political power to lord it over others, as today’s bureaucrats and corporate/government partnerships tend to do.

I can understand Glenn Beck’s frustration. As the Beck-Wallis tempest swirled on March 11, I spent 3½ hours in a long-arranged debate with Wallis at Cedarville University. He kept trying to position himself as a centrist rather than a big government proponent. Furthermore, modern usage by liberal preachers and journalists is thoroughly unbiblical: Many equate social justice with fighting a free enterprise system that purportedly keeps people poor but in reality is their best economic hope.

How to respond? I’d suggest four possible ways, one of which is a variant of Beck’s: Challenge those who speak of “social justice” in a conventionally leftist way. If your local church is committed to what won’t help the poor but will empower would-be dictators, pray and work for gospel-centered teaching. If necessary, find another church.

A second: Try to recapture the term by giving it a 19th- (and 21st?) century small-government twist. The Heritage Foundation and the American Enterprise Institute are trying to do this. I wish them success.

A third way: Accept the left’s focus on systemic problems but not its faulty analysis. Learn about the biggest institutional hindrance to economic advance for the poor: the government’s monopoly control of taxpayer funds committed to education and welfare. Work for school vouchers and tax credits that will help many poor children to grow both their talents and their knowledge of God.

Fourth and best: Tutor a child. Visit a prisoner. Help the sick. Follow Christ.

==============================

Is social justice just ice? It takes relational justice to melt frozen hearts (World Magazine, 090829)

Marvin Olasky

One of the favorite words of President Obama and his supporters is “justice,” often combined with the adjective “social.” We hear calls for government-imposed economic redistribution through taxes and various kinds of welfare, and advocates of same-sex marriage also talk about “social justice.”

Education for “social justice” is now very big in public schools. At least three recent books push for teaching “social justice” even in math classes, which means spending less time learning the multiplication table and more time learning about the uneven distribution of wealth in the United States. (But isn’t one of the greatest injustices leaving kids without enough math knowledge to get a decent job and begin redistributing some money to themselves through hard work?)

Do Christians have an alternative? We should begin by asking, “What is justice?”—and that question should drive us first neither to Aristotle nor to Bill Ayers, but to the Bible. One observation: Over 50 times God’s inspired writers link the Hebrew word mishpat, “justice,” with the Hebrew word tzedek, “righteous.” They regularly declare that a central purpose of justice is to increase righteousness, as Isaiah 26:9 states: “When your justice is present, the inhabitants of the world learn righteousness.”

The Bible also emphasizes justice between individuals. Psalm 112:5 praises the person who “deals generously and lends, who conducts his affairs with justice.” Jeremiah 22:13 pronounces: “Woe to him who builds his house by unrighteousness, and his upper rooms by injustice, who makes his neighbor serve him for nothing and does not give him his wages.” Justice isn’t charity—recipients pay back loans and work—but it is generally interpersonal rather than collective: We might call it “relational justice” rather than “social justice.”

Kings have an influence—they can walk in God’s way and tear down the high places of paganism—but righteousness still builds from the bottom up. Children who receive just treatment from their parents usually don’t grow up hating them. When husbands and wives act righteously toward each other, bitterness (of the sort that fueled the feminist movement) rarely takes root. Employers and employees who act righteously toward each other are less likely to feel the need to lobby or bribe officials to win by governmental force.

Deuteronomy 24:13 emphasizes person-to-person justice: A well-off person loaning money to a poor person is to “restore to him the pledge as the sun sets, that he may sleep in his cloak and bless you. And it shall be righteousness for you before the Lord your God.” We should rejoice over justice because it points to God, as in Proverbs 21:15, “When justice is done, it is a joy to the righteous but terror to evildoers.”

The justice-righteousness connection shows why entitlements that go equally to the reliable and to the profligate, whether rich or poor, are wrong. Isaiah 26:10 states, “If favor is shown to the wicked, he does not learn righteousness; in the land of uprightness he deals corruptly and does not see the majesty of the Lord.” Ezekiel 13:22 shows that injustice works against faith in God: “You have disheartened the righteous falsely, although I have not grieved him, and you have encouraged the wicked, that he should not turn from his evil way to save his life.”

I’ve also examined the New Testament linkage of justice and righteousness: It’s similar, and there’s a telling emphasis on relationship. “Religion” comes from the Old French religare, to bind (same root as ligament), and most religions emphasize binding to a set of rules, but Christianity emphasizes bonding into a relationship with Jesus. Most religions are exchange religions: “I do this for Shiva, he will give me a son.” The apostle Paul, though, emphasized love for Christ—”We make it our aim to please Him” (2 Corinthians 5:9)—that leads to loving our neighbors.

Many other aspects of justice need consideration, and I’ll deal another time with what role modern government should and should not play. I’ll leave you for now with C.S. Lewis’ advice: “Aim at heaven and you will get earth thrown in. Aim at earth and you get neither.” Today, “social justice” aims at earth and produces just ice. Relational justice aims at heaven, and the just acts that occur along the way can melt many frozen hearts.

==============================

Liberty U Taps Glenn Beck to Address Class of 2010 (Christian Post, 100426)

Liberty University has tapped radio host Glenn Beck to address its graduating class next month despite knowing that such a decision will be contested and criticized given the well-known conservative’s Mormon faith.

Liberty Chancellor Jerry Falwell, Jr., announced Beck as one of two commencement speakers on Friday, calling the radio host “one of the few courageous voices in the national media standing up for the principles upon which this nation was founded.”

“Liberty University is blessed to have two national conservative leaders speak at our 2010 Commencement ceremony,” Falwell said, referring to Beck and Dr. Paige Patterson, the current president of Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary.

“Both speakers continue Liberty’s long tradition of Commencement speakers who are making a positive impact on society in all walks of life,” he added, after calling Patterson “one of the patriarchs of Christian higher education.”

While Liberty notably introduced Beck as a “conservative leader” and not a Christian figure, the Evangelical school’s decision to have him speak immediately drew critical responses as the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints, or the Mormon church, is widely regarded by Christians as either a heretical Christian sect, a cult, or – at best – a newly developed Abrahamic religion.

Aside from rejecting the Trinity and their belief in many gods, Mormons believe their prophet, Joseph Smith, was “the only man that has ever been able to keep a whole church together since the days of Adam,” according to the Mormons’ History of the Church.

Mormons also reject the validity and veracity of the Bible, believing that the proper translation of what God wants believers to know is found in another source – the Book of Mormon.

“Alliances such as these are not glorifying to God, in that what association has God with false religions?” posed blogger John Ferguson, who runs the Voice of Truth blog.

“The tangential dangers when the evangelical community unites with the secular world for the sake of social or political agendas are numerous because it leads to a dilution of truths from the Word of God, opens the door to give credence to non-believers within evangelical circles and ultimately leads to the eternal destruction of lost people,” he wrote Saturday.

Similarly, Steve McConkey, president and founder of the organization that operates ChristianInvestigator.com, stressed Saturday the need for Jesus Christ to come first before politics and that need for biblical messages in today’s confusing times.

“We are not to put politics first and the Lord second,” he said in a statement. “If this country is to have another revival, we need to get back to the basics, just like an athlete who has to go back to the basics to learn proper skills. We join Glenn Beck in many of his viewpoints, however, we do not endorse his Mormon beliefs.”

With Liberty’s commencement about three weeks away, the school’s announcement Friday is expected to fuel many more debates on Mormonism and whether or not evangelicals should align with like-minded (though theologically different) Mormons in the social arena amid America’s moral decline.

It is not likely, however, that Liberty will rescind its invitation to Beck, whose Mormon faith has posed a problem before for evangelical organizations that had placed their spotlights on him.

In December 2008, conservative ministry Focus on the Family removed from its website an article about the latest book by Beck in response to complaints over his Mormon ties.

According to ministry spokesman Gary Schneeberger, Focus on the Family could not intimate to its evangelical base that the differences in Mormon faith and the historic evangelical faith are inconsequential.

“We can, and do, gladly cooperate with friends outside of the evangelical heritage on common causes; but in no case do we intend to alter our clear distinction as unwaveringly grounded in evangelical theology,” he explained.

Schneeberger also said at that time that the ministry did not condone the tone of communications put out from McConkey’s group, who was among the critics of Focus of the Family’s acceptance of Beck.

“And we can without reservation say that the group’s news release had nothing to do with our decision to pull the article from publication,” he added.

Once listed under “cults and sects” by the Southern Baptist Convention, Mormonism today is categorized among “newly developed religions” on the North American Mission Board apologetics page.

Liberty University, meanwhile, touts itself as the largest and fastest growing Christian Evangelical university in the world. Founded in 1971 by the late Dr. Jerry Falwell Sr., the school is also the largest private university in Virginia, offering more than 60 accredited programs of study.

Liberty University’s Commencement Ceremony for the Class of 2010 will be held on Saturday, May 15.

==============================

Liberty U Bestows Honorary Degree on Glenn Beck (Christian Post, 100517)

Conservative radio and TV host Glenn Beck received an honorary Doctorate of Humanities degree from Liberty University on Saturday just moments before he was to deliver a keynote address to the school’s graduating class.

The bestowing of the degree by Chancellor Jerry Falwell, Jr., “kinda wreck[ed]” the opening remarks of the surprised and notably moved Beck, who had gone to college for only one semester.

“I couldn’t afford more than that,” a tearful Beck told the graduating class as he tried to keep his composure. “I am humbly honored.”

Though Beck is a devout Mormon, Liberty leaders decided to tap the popular conservative to speak at Saturday’s commencement ceremony because of his “positive impact on society” – a move that Beck thanked the evangelical school and its chancellor for.

“I understand the courage that it took to invite me to speak for a myriad of reasons – my faith just being one of them,” Beck said. “And I want you to know that I understand that the invitation to speak today is not meant as an endorsement of my faith. But I also want you to understand that my agreeing to speak here today is an endorsement of your faith.”

Beck went on to speak for about 20 minutes, preaching on the story of Moses, urging graduates to “turn to God and live,” and sharing excerpts from his journal that he had intended to tell his daughter.

“As long as we have today, we can change the world,” shared Beck, who became emotional several times as he spoke.

“Marry for love, marry for laughs, but mostly importantly – as my wife Tania taught me – marry for God. Without God, life’s storms are too strong to withstand,” he added with tears.

Also speaking Saturday was Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary President Paige Patterson, who was the keynote speaker at Friday’s baccalaureate service.

According to Liberty University, about 4,400 students walked in Saturday’s ceremony – a significant jump from last year when 2,300 graduates were present.

In total, 8,650 students graduated this year from Liberty – the school’s largest-ever graduating class.

Founded in 1971 by the late Dr. Jerry Falwell Sr., Liberty University touts itself as the largest and fastest growing Christian Evangelical university in the world as well as the largest private university in Virginia.

This year, Liberty moved well past the enrollment mark of 50,000 that its late founder had envisioned nearly 25 years ago. The Lynchburg, Va.-based school presently has nearly 12,000 residential students and more than 45,000 online students.

==============================

Target Sues Gay Marriage Petitioners for Disruption (Christian Post, 110326)

Target Corporation is suing a gay marriage protest group for driving away customers from its San Diego, Calif., stores.

Superior Court Judge Jeffrey B. Barton heard initial arguments Friday morning between Target Corp. and Canvass for a Cause. The judge plans to issue a ruling next week.

The group, founded by “pissed off activists” according to the website, says it canvasses at shopping malls, college campus and stores like Target to collect signatures and donations in support of gay marriage.

However, Target headquarters says CFAC volunteers are disrupting customers. The Minnesota-based company filed a lawsuit against CFAC for its activity in front of San Diego County Target stores.

According to court documents, the activists typically stand within 10 feet of the store entrance and approach customers by asking them if they support gay marriage. If the individual says yes, the volunteers ask him or her to sign a petition and make a credit card donation. If the individual responds negatively to the initial question, court documents state that volunteers tend to become “angry and aggressive” and “challenge our customers on their morals.”

Target Corp. Executive Team Lead Daniel Brown testifies in the documents, “I have seen them tell our customers not to vote if they are unhappy with the customers’ views.”

Also, in a March 1 complaint, a man complained after a CFAC volunteer allegedly verbally berated his wife while she was with their four-month-old child. He alleged that the volunteer followed the wife to her car and refused to move until she gave a credit card donation.

The corporation also claims that at least eight Target stores in San Diego County have reported receiving an average of eight to 10 complaints reporting similar harassment and discomfort since CFAC volunteers started working outside their stores in October 2010.

CFAC Director Tres Watson told The Associated Press that it trains its volunteers to be professional and polite, and to educate the public about the rights of gays and lesbians. The group says the lawsuit is meant to shut down their right to free speech.

“It’s very David vs. Goliath. We understand they’re the Goliath in the room. They’ve got all money in world to get us to stop talking about gay marriage,” Watson said of the trial.

But Dale Larson, attorney for the company, argues that “Target is not a public forum.”

Target asserts in the lawsuit that CFAC volunteers have been violating its no-solicitation policy, which states: “In order to provide a distraction-free shopping environment for our guests, we do not allow solicitation or petitioning at our stores regardless of the cause being represented.”

Brown argues that the activists violated the policy by refusing to leave the store’s property when asked politely and shown the company’s policy prohibiting solicitation. Target Corp. says it has taken similar actions against a number of organizations representing a variety of causes.

The Salvation Army was banned in 2004 from deploying its iconic bell ringers for the annual Christmas campaign in front of Target stores.

This is not the first confrontation that Target has experienced over gay rights. Pop singer Lady Gaga backed out of a deal with the retailer to exclusively sell a special edition of her single “Born This Way.” Lady Gaga allegedly was dissuaded by the company’s donations to Minnesota Forward. Minnesota Forward then donated the funds to the campaign of pro-traditional marriage gubernatorial candidate Tom Emmer (R).

Target responded to the controversy stating, “Target remains committed to the LGBT community as demonstrated by our contributions to various LGBT organizations, our recently established Policy Committee to review our political giving and our respectful, inclusive workplace environment.”

Along with appearances at Target, Canvass for a Cause volunteers have also gone door to door, lobbying for gay rights and telling neighbors that they accept LGBT Americans “for who they really are.” The group’s goal is to get the listeners and passers-by to support their causes.

==============================

TOMS Founder Distances Company From Focus on the Family (Christian Post, 110711)

[KH: regrettable]

The founder of TOMS, the charity-business that gives away a pair of shoe for every one sold, apologized Saturday to upset gay rights and feminist advocates for speaking at Focus on the Family.

Blake Mycoskie wrote on his blog that had he “known the full extent of Focus on the Family’s belief,” he would have declined the invitation to speak at FOTF’s “Feet On The Ground” event on June 30. He described the acceptance to speak at the event as an “oversight” and “one we chose poorly.”

“[L]et me clearly state that both TOMS, and I as the founder, are passionate believers in equal human and civil rights for all,” wrote Mycoskie. “That belief is a core value of the company and of which we are most proud.”

Christianity Today first reported that Mycoskie and FOTF were seemingly developing a relationship where the Colorado-based pro-family group might help TOMS in its charity distribution in Africa. Word quickly spread about this TOMS-FOTF potential partnership and the rumor that FOTF is a TOMS giving partner, which Mycoskie denies in his blog response.

Lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) advocates took to Twitter, Facebook, blogs, and websites to call on Mycoskie to end TOMS partnership with FOTF, which they labeled as an anti-gay and a right-wing, fundamentalist Christian group.

Ms. Magazine began a petition on Change.org pressing for an end to TOMS’ relationship with FOTF, which gathered 566 signatures. Some clients and potential clients said they would not buy TOMS shoes because of its connection to FOTF.

“I was getting ready to order myself and my daughter our second pairs of TOMS shoes, but I cannot, in good conscience, do so given this information,” wrote a commenter, identified as Colleen Moore, on the Change.org petition webpage.

FOTF, under the former leadership of Dr. James Dobson, was closely tied to the Christian Right agenda. But the group has taken a milder tone on culture war issues under Jim Daly’s leadership, although FOTF is still firmly against abortion and gay marriage.

TOMS founder Blake Mycoskie is an evangelical Christian who attends popular Mosaic Church, led by Pastor Erwin McManus, in Los Angeles. Mycoskie is not shy about talking about his Christian faith and its influence on his business-charity model.

At the 2010 Global Leadership Summit at Willow Creek Community Church, Mycoskie shared, “I think that TOMS represents a lot of different biblical principles but the one that I kind of go back to again and again is in Proverbs, where it says ‘give your first fruits and your vats will be full.’”

The young entrepreneur says the Bible and C.S. Lewis’ Mere Christianity are among his favorite books. But Mycoskie, like a growing number of young evangelicals, has stayed away from culture war issues and focuses his efforts instead on battling humanitarian problems.

As of this article, Focus on the Family has not issued a response to Mycoskie’s blog post.

==============================

Serial abortion clinic protester, Linda Gibbons back in jail (National Post, 110809)

Linda Gibbons, who spent roughly nine of the past 17 years in jail for staging illegal protests in front of Toronto abortion clinics, is back behind bars.

Late last week, Ms. Gibbons was taken into custody in front of the city’s Morgentaler abortion clinic for breaking an injunction that prevents protesters from getting within 150 metres of the clinic’s doors.

Since 1994, when a civil court ordered a temporary injunction against picketing too close to the city’s abortion clinics, the 63-year-old activist has been arrested more than 20 times for picketing within the restricted zone.

Daniel Santoro, her lawyer, said Ms. Gibbons was at a bail hearing Monday morning but he does not expect to see her free anytime soon — even though she could walk out of jail by signing an agreement to cease her picketing.

“I don’t expect she’s going to do that,” said Mr. Santoro. “She never has before so I don’t see why she would do it this time and so she’ll remain in jail.”

In June, Ms. Gibbons ended a 28-month stint behind bars after an Ontario Court Justice allowed her to leave jail without signing a pledge to stop her civil disobedience. But the Crown warned Ms. Gibbons that if she continued her picketing she would be rearrested.

Interviewed at the time, Ms. Gibbons said she planned to visit her 89-year-old mother in British Columbia and then continue her anti-abortion protests once back in Toronto.

“For me to sign off is to say that I will compromise my commitment to the unborn when it comes to legal restrictions,” Ms. Gibbons, a devout Christian, said in June. “I’m not ready to toy with my commitment to pro-life. It would almost be like me telling the unborn, ‘Sorry, I can’t defend you this time.’ “

Last Tuesday, Ms. Gibbons called a reporter at LifeSiteNews, an online anti-abortion journal, to let him know that she would be in front of the Morgentaler clinic on Thursday.

In an online video taken by LifeSite, Ms. Gibbons can be seen holding a poster of a healthy infant with the words: “Why Mom? When I have so much love to give.” She remained silent while five police officers spoke to her about the court order. Ms. Gibbons was then handcuffed and taken into custody.

Jim Hughes, president of the anti-abortion group Campaign Life, said he admires Ms. Gibbons for her willingness to go to jail for the cause but does not see the injunction as a major issue for his group.

“The consensus was the injunction did not curtail the pro-life activity at all,” he said. “We could still protest outside the bubble and still try to talk to the women. Linda didn’t want to go along with that. I’ve to her, ‘Wouldn’t you be better off standing out there attempting to convince women not to go in?’ “

Over the past few years, Mr. Santoro has argued that Ms. Gibbons has been abused by the justice system on several fronts:

It was up to the civil court years ago to decide whether the 1994 temporary injunction should have been made permanent or quashed.

Mr. Santoro has also argued that the Crown should have not used the weight of the Criminal Code to enforce a civil injunction.

Earlier this year, the Supreme Court of Canada agreed to hear Mr. Santoro’s arguments on this later point and a hearing is expected this fall. If the court agrees with the argument, all of Ms. Gibbons’ convictions would become invalid, Mr. Santoro said.

At that point, he added, he would hope the civil court would finally deal with the temporary injunction.

==============================