Washington, DC (LifeNews.com) -- NFL football star Chris McAlister, a free agent pro-bowl player formerly with the Baltimore Ravens, stands accused of booting his wife from their home after she refused to get an abortion. Marlene McAlister filed court documents Wednesday in L.A. County Superior Court seeking a divorce.
Marlene, in the legal papers, according to a TMZ report, claims McAlister kicked her out of the couples home when she refused his request for an abortion...."-Click link for more.
Washington, DC (LifeNews.com) -- An 11-year-old Mexico girl has decided against having an abortion despite pressure from pro-abortion groups to have one after becoming the subject of international news following her sexual assault from her step father. The young girl says she won't because she knows she has a baby.
According to a Catholic News Agency report, the girl explained she understands, “a life is growing in her womb.”
CNA indicates the girl is receiving medical attention at a local clinic and has responded well to psychological tests saying she understands she has a unique human being she can give birth to or kill in an abortion...."- Click on link for more.
A Sarasota, Florida, doctor recently lost his medical license on the basis of an error he made in 2006 in an abortion procedure where he mistakenly took the life of the healthier fraternal twin of a boy diagnosed in utero with Down Syndrome.
In covering the story, most media outlets have noted that Dr. Matthew Kachinas aborted "the wrong baby."
Baptist theologian and radio program host Dr. Albert Mohler took the airwaves on his April 19 program to discuss both the case in question and the media's coverage thereof.
Here's what he said about the latter at the opening of Monday's program:
Last week I saw a news story that simply stopped me in my tracks, and I wrote about it at AlbertMohler.com, an article entitled, "Aborting the 'Wrong' Baby?" There's a question mark at the end of that question. It has to do with a news story that came out of Florida.
Dr. Matthew Kachinas had been stripped of his medical license last week by a Florida medical review board for -- and this is how the media discussed it -- for aborting the wrong baby.
It's one of those things that immediately catches your attention because, something huge is going on in this story. And a part of the story is not just what happened but how the media, and the culture-at-large, is understanding what happened.
[...]
Well, this medical doctor lost his license because, according to the media -- and evidently according to medical authorities in Florida -- he bore responsibility for aborting the wrong baby, and by the wrong baby, they meant, evidently, it was rightful in their view to abort the baby that had Down Syndrome, but it was "wrong" to abort the "wrong" baby.
Instead of performing the abortion on the baby with Down Syndrome, it was the other baby that was aborted, the one that is defined in the media stories as the healthy twin.
Sadly, and tragically, this situation was made all the more horrifying by the fact that the baby with Down Syndrome was later aborted as well."- Click link for more.
This is indeed an invaluable resource for those doing research into the political issues of the day. One can watch the debates and discussions that go on on the House and Senate floor every single day with ease and spending very little time. Each and every day there are votes and debates and statements made by our congressmen and women on the floor. But you may not want to sit through every discussion or statement on every single issue out there. CSPAN has made it easy to navigate the floor speeches.
Each day you can go in to the day before's session and you will see that each speaker is listed that spoke and it gives the amount of time they spoke and upon what subject they spoke and whether or not they are Republican, Democrat or Independent. If the title interests you then simple click on the speaker with that title and see what he or she has to say about it. You can notice when there is a debate on a single issue between Republicans, Democrats and Independents as you will find many speakers speaking on that same subject which will give you a flavor of the debate from the different sides of the issue.
And there is so much more. Get started by clicking here.
Now that's transparency. Just wish we could get CSPAN behind those closed doors. Check out this quick video I embedded promoting the CSPAN Video Library at AvoidtheBias.com. If you choose to embed video from CSPAN this is what it will look like.
After Obamacare was signed into law last month several US corporations reported that the democrat’s health care bill would cost their company millions of dollars.
On top of AT&T’s $1 billion, the writedown wave so far includes Deere & Co., $150 million; Caterpillar, $100 million; AK Steel, $31 million; 3M, $90 million; and Valero Energy, up to $20 million. Verizon has also warned its employees about its new higher health-care costs, and there will be many more in the coming days and weeks.
In response, Congressional democrats announced that they would hold show trials to humiliate these US companies for the bad publicity.
After several more corporations announced their losses from Obamacare the democrats decided to cancel their Congressional dog and pony show.
Today, Congressional democrats finally admitted the corporations were correct and that Obamacare would end up costing US companies billions of dollars.
When major companies declared that a provision of the new health care law would hurt earnings, Democrats were skeptical. But after investigating, House Democrats have concluded that the companies were right to tell investors and the government about the expected adverse effects of the law on their financial results…
In a memorandum summarizing its investigation, the Democratic staff of the committee said, “The companies acted properly and in accordance with accounting standards in submitting filings to the S.E.C. in March and April.”
Notice the pure hypocrisy of the phone callers and Big Media for not reporting on this much like the hypocrisy in the media when you compare how they covered the Tea Party protests and the Arizona immigration law protests at Tale of two protests and how Big Media covered them reveals pure liberal media bias. Talk about real hate and threats. Watch video below.
If you are wondering why there is so much bias and slander of the Tea Party movement from those on the left in the media you may want to give this a thought.
Guess even the White House is believing the reports from the left in the media. Watch this recent Tea Party that the Obama administration was so concerned about that they brought in the SWAT team and snipers. For more on this see further pictures of the threat at Obama Sniper Teams Ordered to Rooftops To Quash Radical Tea Party Protest (Video)"
On Saturday's Good Morning America, reporter Mike Von Fremd downplayed the violence of protesters against Arizona's new immigration law. He spun, "Riot police were called in to try and control demonstrators protesting outside the capital. Most were peaceful. A handful threw bottles at police and were arrested." Yet, ABC derided March's Tea Party rallies as "very ugly," despite the fact that there were no arrests.
In contrast, on March 20, World News host David Muir scolded, "Protesters against the [health care] plan gathered on the streets of the capital where late today we learned words shouted turned very ugly, reports of racial and homophobic slurs, one protester actually spitting on a Congressman." Continuing to fret over those opposed the bill, he complained, "Late word from Washington tonight about just how ugly the crowds gathered outside the Longworth office building have become."
If Tea Party protesters had thrown bottles at members of Congress or police officers -- or anyone else, for that matter -- it seems unlikely that ABC would have described them as "mostly peaceful."
Over on NBC's Today show on Saturday, Telemundo's Jose Diaz Balart reported from the scene: "Tensions were high outside the Capitol. Four protesters were arrested." On CBS's Early Show, co-host Chris Wragge made only a quick reference to the protests: "On Friday, there were protests against the bill outside the state capitol in Phoenix."
—Scott Whitlock is a news analyst for the Media Research Center. Click here to follow him on Twitter.
Like this story? Then sign up to receive free e-mail alerts from the MRC
So when I heard of this I thought this was interesting. In this area you must proceed with caution as noted in article titled Evangelists claim Noah's Ark found but this is the first one that I am aware of that has many interesting pictures and video footage of the wood and structure. One of my favorite sources concerning Creation and the Scriptures is Answers in Genesis who did an initial report on this new finding which I will copy below video.
Every few years we hear of claims that Noah’s Ark (or what may remain of it) has been found on the mountains of Ararat in Turkey. Over the weekend, a press conference was held in Hong Kong where it was announced that explorers were almost certain they had found the remains of the Ark. Answers in Genesis has seen many photos that were released, but without corroboration by the leading creationist organizations and not knowing all the research methods that were employed, we will withhold judgment until further study. Over the decades, we have learned to be cautious about such Ark claims.
We have no doubt, however, that there once was a massive Ark that served as a vessel of salvation during a global Flood and landed on the mountains of Ararat, as recorded in the book of Genesis.
We may have more to report on this claim in our regular News to Note feature this weekend."
Answers in Genesis has done a good job with the Noah's Ark findings and I am looking forward to their report this weekend. I would recommend all to check it out this weekend. I believe they will do a good assessment of what they find.
Here are two more photos and here is the link to group behind the excavation that are now asking UNESCO World Heritage status so the site can be protected while a major archaeological dig is conducted.
Representative Smith of Texas reports on how Arizonan voters feel about the new law and below are McCain and Kyl's comments who are the Senators from Arizona to give a little local perspective to the debate. You can find a conservative and liberal debate this very issue at AvoidtheBias.com.
Kyl and McCain give some astonishing background to the context that led up to the passing of the law.
Interview with Sheriff explaining how the law would be enforced in Arizona explaining that he has many hispanic officers.
First give a good listen to Andrew Kalvan as you read Janine Turner's comments below. I found the example of Denzel Washington and the Book of Eli an interesting example that Andrew used as an example of the left's influence on films done by conservatives.
Maybe the left can learn a little from their own ENDA.
"At a press conference in Washington, D.C., to announce her new organization, Constituting America, CNSNews.com asked Turner if she would “elaborate a little bit more on the environment in Hollywood for conservative actors and actresses such as yourself.”
Turner said: “Well, I think it’s hard for conservatives in Hollywood because they’re afraid to step out. Because when they do, there could be repercussions where they don’t have work, and that can mean – I think there are a lot of conservatives in Hollywood, whether they’re actors or producers or directors or crew members – but there’s not sort of en masse stepping out, and so everyone, no one is really willing to take the first step.”
“And I don’t blame them,” she said. “I mean, it’s affected my career too. And I think it’s hard, when you, when you step out as a conservative, it’s just such a – the environment is very left, very, very different to our type of environment.”
New York (AP) - Figures released Monday by the Audit Bureau of Circulations show average weekday circulation of U.S. newspapers fell 8.7 percent in the six months that ended March 31, compared with the same period a year earlier.
Sunday circulation fell 6.5 percent.
Neither decline was as steep as the comparable one documented in the last reporting period. From April through September of last year, average weekday circulation dropped 10.6 percent and Sunday circulation fell 7.5 percent.
Even so, the top 25 newspapers in the country showed some huge losses.
The San Diego Union-Tribune's weekday circulation dropped nearly 23 percent from the year before to 241,330.
At The Washington Post, average circulation fell 13.1 percent during the week to 578,482 and 8.2 percent to 797,679 on Sunday.
USA Today lost 13.6 percent of its circulation and averaged 1.83 million. That extended a slump that began with a slowdown in travel during the recession, which trimmed sales where USA Today is especially popular, such as hotels and airports.
USA Today's decline last year allowed The Wall Street Journal to surpass it as the newspaper with the biggest U.S. circulation.
In Monday's report, the Journal once again posted the only gain in circulation among the top 25 newspapers that had comparable figures from a year ago. It grew its circulation 0.5 percent to 2.09 million. The Journal can count online readers because it charges them to read its website, while most newspapers can only count print subscriptions and newsstand sales.
The Journal is also looking to put itself further ahead of the No. 3 newspaper, The New York Times, which saw an 8.5 percent decline in weekday circulation during the most recent period and a 5.2 percent drop on Sundays. The Times' average circulation was 951,063 on weekdays and 1.38 million on Sundays.
The new figures came as the Journal launched a metro edition in the New York City region to compete more aggressively with the Times for local readers and advertisers. The first metro section ran 16 pages Monday with articles detailing a rat infestation on Manhattan's Upper East Side and the New York state budget crisis alongside advertising from Bloomingdale's and Macy's.
There are many reasons for the declines in newspaper circulation, including the rise of free news on the Web. Publishers also have sought to offset losses in advertising revenue by raising newsstand and subscription prices. And some newspapers have reduced delivery to unprofitable areas.
In a statement, Newspaper Association of America President John Sturm said that declining circulation does not offer a full picture of the industry's health.
He pointed to recent studies by Scarborough Research and Nielsen Online showing nearly 100 million adults still read a printed newspaper every day and that newspaper Web sites averaged more than 74 million unique visitors a month during the first quarter.
Below is an email I sent to my sister concerning vaccines being cultured in aborted fetal tissue. I thought I would post it here for documentation sake at Values Voter News. My wife and I are having our 5th baby and my sister just had her baby and so the issue of vaccines has surfaced. I never was anti-vaccine except I have a natural inclination to not want to inject anything into my children but vaccines I thought were justified for the protection of the diseases that they successfully protect children and society from. But then I heard of the issue that some vaccines were cultured in aborted fetal tissue then I started keeping an ear out and here is what I have found so far in an email to my sister:
"Since your baby and now that Vena and I are going to have to make choices on this issue in the near future with Teague and our new baby I thought I would bring this up to you and ask you what you think about it.
I never cared before about the Autism issue and still do not believe our child will get autism via a vaccination as none of our other children have nor do I believe your child will. But as I did some research another concern came up over the issue of cancer and brain development. I heard from pro-life news sources last year about vaccines being cultured in aborted fetal tissue. Now we as pro-lifers find that not very inviting to say the least. However, an institute called Sound Choice Pharmaceutical Institute (SPCI) whose President has some fair credentials. She has a PHD from Stanford University in Molecular and Cellular Physiology, has 23 patents but probably the most interesting and notable one is her being the first to discover adult heart stem cells. She has worked for biotech companies in the field and has 17 years experience. For some more on her click here.
She is very concerned with the vaccines being cultured with aborted fetal tissue. Not only because she is pro-life but because of all the scientific unknowns. Dr Oz on the Oprah Winfrey show said that he believes Adult Stem Cell research will cure many diseases in 10 years over Embryonic Stem Cell Research because stem cells from one's own body actually is less likely to form tumors than introducing embryo stem cells from another embryo cause from what I can gather from the interview is 1) they are much harder to control what they become and 2) they are not from one's own genes maybe one of the reasons why they are hard to control what they do become. You can watch his explanation here.
Now I was reading SPCI's April newsletter which you can read here. What really struck me as concerning as I was reading was what the newsletter claimed the FDA authors in 2008 wrote: “Whether this residual cell-substrate DNA can induce tumors in vaccine recipients and thus represent a risk factor has been debated for over 50 years without resolution.” (Biologicals 2008 vol 36 pages 184-197)." So there apparently is residual DNA from the aborted fetal tissue that remains in the vaccine after it is cultured from what I am gathering here and we are injecting that into our kids.
Now I listened to an interview of this lady on some program here and she said that vaccines cultured in animal tissue and residual from that tissue is not a problem because our body will recognize it as a foreign agent of some sort and fight it off however she is concerned that residual DNA from aborted fetal tissue the body may not fight off and wants to study the issue more.
So in the newsletter she explains that the FDA has begun to look at the dangers of residual human DNA in vaccines triggering cancer but SPCI is conducting the first studies to look at the impact of residual human fetal DNA in vaccines on brain development and autism disorder in our children. So it appears there are greater concerns than just autism which is now what is concerning me that being future formations of tumors and possibly cancerous tumors or tumors in dangerous areas and then brain development.
Here are my concerns: The most obvious is 1) the aborted life that was used to culture the vaccines. 2) Do I really want a vaccine that has residual human DNA from another human being's DNA in my child without any resolution on the science of such an effect? 3) Scripturally speaking and this may be stretching a little but it speaks of not touching a dead body, bone of a man nor grave and if one does they are considered unclean until evening or something and then here we are injecting ourselves with tissue from another dead human being. Now the stretch is that this life is a life that died in early development as opposed to a life that is well along the way in development but none the less a bit concerning either way considering this is the actual DNA though residual of another human life being injected into our children.
Now God will take care of us either way but I never knew about the aborted fetal tissue before on my previous children and now that I know I am not sure if I am willing to get these types of vaccines. The neat thing is that Vena did some research and there are alternative vaccines that were not cultured in aborted fetal tissue for most of the vaccines though not all.
I guess my question to you is have you in your research of autism and vaccines and other issues come across the culturing process and the issues above that may be a possible rebuttal? I also wanted to give you this information for you and your child just in case there is some validity in the concerns this scientist has brought about and you find some weight to them. I myself do not condemn or judge another on this issue since there are so many questions not answered about it but when I learned of the aborted fetal tissue I automatically became concerned and I think many others would if they knew. It seems most people I speak to doesn't even know about this as I didn't know until just last year and this has been going for decades. Actually, the SPCI has been trying to get our government to pass law requiring manufacturers and distributors to inform the public of this on their labels or whatever. See actual language of law proposed here.
Here is a recent blog post that got me interested in the issue titled Vaccines made with fetal cells causing autism? as of late. And here are the conclusions that both the blogger and the scientist made that leaves some haunting questions.
Blogger said: "virus-laden DNA of aborted babies could be wreaking havoc on the DNA of healthy children is completely plausible."
And SPCI: "Shouldn't we determine whether injecting residual human fetal DNA into our children is safe, or not?"
Lastly, you can call me wacky on this but just follow my reasoning.
1) God says in the scriptures to not touch another dead human body, bone or grave or else you are unclean till evening or something like that and (again the stretch) that we are injecting our children with dead residual human DNA in vaccines.
Then I was naturally concerned about vaccines cultured in animal tissue and whether or not that is an issue. The scientist answered in part one of my concerns that our body will fight off foreign residual DNA. So great but then I remembered there were certain animals that God in the scriptures said to not touch there dead carcass so maybe there should be a concern there. So if we are reasoning with assumption 1) and the stretch then is there a problem with other animal tissue that the Bible considers unclean. The Bible talks specifically about certain animals to not touch their dead carcasses and one being the pig.
And then I found out that just 3 weeks ago a vaccine cultured in pig tissue was suspended because of a virus found in it in which the FDA as of 04/07/2010 has concluded: "does not know how DNA from PCV1 came to be present in Rotarix” or whether “this means that intact virus is present. Additional studies are being conducted.”-Click here for more on that.
I found this video that is from the above link and am inserting it here as you read the rest of the post.
So maybe we need to stop culturing our vaccines in animal tissue that God says in the scriptures to not touch or else you are unclean for so many days.
Now I am no scientist and my biblically inspired theory would need to be tested cause it may not be what God really intended cause there is "the stretch" that I am making and there may be other stretches and this may not be God's intention at all. But it reminded me of different scientific discoveries that proved the scriptures correct in sanitary areas like the scientist in France discovering washing his hands over running water rather than still water and the scriptures talk about just that. Anyways, these are just some interesting findings that I wanted to pass on to you and see what you think. I know you have plenty to do so if you don't respond at all that is ok but these are issues Vena and I are struggling with and have come to some resolve but are still investigating and waiting for further scientific discoveries.
Once again the major issues for the week will be on the Senate side with possible consideration of a financial regulation overhaul bill and the possible introduction of a climate change bill by Senators Kerry, Graham, and Lieberman. The House will be taking up three smaller measures this week focusing on misspent federal funds, defense acquisition, and Puerto Rico. Though the defense acquisition bill received complete bi-partisan support out of the House Armed Services Committee and is lauded as a bill that would save taxpayers billions of dollars it is more likely to increase bureaucracy, add more regulation, create a slower and less efficient acquisition system, and continue a risk adverse mentality at the Pentagon.
Major Floor Action
HR 3393 — Improper Payments Elimination and Recovery Act of 2009
HR 5013 — Implementing Management for Performance and Related Reforms to Obtain Value in Every Acquisition Act of 2010
The House Armed Services Committee will hold a number of hearings during the week, most notably a full committee hearing on the “Security and Stability in Pakistan” and a subcommittee hearing on the budget for the Army Reserve, National Guard, and Air National Guard.
The House Ways and Means Subcommittee on Trade will hold its first hearing with new subcommittee Chairman John Tanner (D-TN) to discuss U.S.-Cuba policy.
The House Energy and Commerce Subcommittee on Energy and Environment will hold hearing on reducing dependence on oil.
Senate Cloakroom: April 26-30
It’s all about financial regulation in the Senate. Rumors persist that Senators Dodd (D-CT) and Shelby (R-AL) are closing in on a deal, but Senate Majority Leader Reid (D-NV) is promising to move ahead with a vote on Monday even if a deal does not exist. Senator Dodd’s bill is fatally flawed and conservatives believe a complete re-write is necessary—a watered down compromise remains unacceptable. Global warming will make a come back on Monday, as Senators Kerry (D-MA), Graham (R-SC) and Lieberman (I-CT) unveil their plan to tax American energy.
Major Floor Action
On Monday at 5:00pm, the Senate will vote on the motion to proceed to Senator Dodd’s financial regulation bill (S.3217). If cloture is invoked, the Senate will debate and amend the bill for the remainder of the week.
April 21, 2010 (LifeSiteNews.com) – Researchers at Fordham University in New York have published a study in the March edition of the Journal of Men's Studies, showing that positive results can be gained by homosexual men seeking to change their “orientation” by developing healthy non-sexual relationships with other men.
According to the National Association for Research and Therapy of Homoseuxality (NARTH), the study rovides “valuable empirical evidence” from the mainstream of psychological research supporting environmental factors as the cause of homosexuality.
The study, by Dr. Elan Y. Karten and Dr. Jay C. Wade, examined the “social and psychological characteristics” of men who experience unwanted homosexual attractions and who seek “sexual orientation change efforts” (SOCE).
Investigating these characteristics in cases of “self-reported change,” Karten and Wade found that clients reported that they experienced “a decrease in homosexual feelings and behavior, an increase in heterosexual feelings and behavior, and a positive change in psychological functioning” with SOCE.
The researchers discovered that the most significant factors correlating to successful orientation change were “reduced conflict in expressing nonsexual affection with other men, being married, and feeling disconnected with men prior to treatment.”
NARTH commented that the factors like “reduced conflict in expressing nonsexual affection with men,” provide “valuable empirical evidence” that homosexual thoughts and feelings are greatly influenced by social and psychological factors,” instead of being biologically pre-determined.
NARTH also noted that the study demonstrated that there is a growing body of mainstream literature that is “beginning to give voice” to the value of SOCE.
“Although such research may not be considered politically correct, Karten and Wade should be praised for their courage to investigate such issues, and Fordham University should be lauded for sponsoring it,” NARTH’s Benjamin Erwin wrote.
“The Journal of Men's Studies should be commended for their integrity in publishing honest research regardless of popular political sentiment. Perhaps other journals and scholarly publications will follow suit,” Erwin added.
Efforts to help those who suffer from unwanted same-sex attraction are widely denigrated in the media and especially by homosexualist activist groups who claim that they are nothing more than religious bigotry, or “homophobia.” But some have pointed out the internal inconsistencies in the popularly held theory that homosexuals are “born that way” and that homosexuality is merely one variation of normal human sexuality.
U.S. conservative columnist and controversialist Ann Coulter, writing on the media’s reaction to the latest manifestation of the Catholic Church’s sex abuse scandals, said that the accusation that it is the discipline of clerical celibacy that “causes” priests to sexually abuse young men and boys, contradicts the deterministic theory of homosexuality.
To hold water, Coulter said, those who attack the Catholic Church’s discipline of celibacy would have to believe that a commitment to celibacy creates such a psychological trauma that it changes a man’s sexual orientation, a possibility ruled out by the “born that way” homosexualist doctrine.
She wrote, “If celibacy is to blame, this is a show-stopping, Nobel Prize-winning discovery overturning years of liberal claptrap.
“In all other circumstances, it is punishable by death to suggest that sexual behavior is not determined at birth or that gays can be ‘cured’. Now liberals are hawking the idea that gay priests could have been cured by marriage!”
NASHVILLE, Tennessee, April 21, 2010 (LifeSiteNews.com) - Less than one month after Congress passed its sweeping health care bill, Tennessee's Legislature has become the nation's first to make clear that abortion will not be a funded benefit in its health exchange programs.
Bipartisan majorities in both the state House (70-23) and the state Senate (27-3) easily approved language which states, "No health care plan required to be established in this state through an exchange pursuant to federal health care reform legislation enacted by the 111th Congress shall offer coverage for abortion services."
"At the end of the day this is very simple," said House sponsor, Rep. Matthew Hill (R-Jonesborough), before House passage on April 12. "Do your constituents want their tax money going to kill unborn babies? It's as simple as that."
Senate sponsor Diane Black (R-Hendersonville) stated, "We must take every action possible to protect Tennessee from being a part of a plan that allows for funding abortions."
"We have worked for years to ensure that taxpayer money is not used for abortion services in Tennessee," added Black, "and we must fight back against this overreach of federal power."
Tennessee Right to Life commended both sponsors and their pro-life colleagues. "Tennessee is a strongly pro-life state, and with principled pro-life leadership in both chambers, we are finally able to restore some common sense balance to this state's policies," said Brian Harris, president of the state's oldest and largest pro-life organization.
"Until the voters are able to undo some of the damage brought by activist judges, there are few statutes that we can pass and enforce," Harris said, referencing the 2000 ruling by the Tennessee Supreme Court in Planned Parenthood v. Sundquist, which identified a fundamental right to abortion in the Tennessee Constitution.
"We're hopeful, however, that the protection of Tennessee's taxpayers to not be forced to fund elective abortions is one that will clearly meet muster," said Harris.
The vote to remove abortion funding from government-backed health exchanges follows other abortion votes this session in which pro-life legislative majorities moved decisively, including passage of bills to defund Planned Parenthood, to require abortion providers to post the state's non-coercion policy and to bring a public vote on SJR 127 in 2014 allowing voters to decide whether or not the Tennessee Constitution protects a right to abortion.
"Having legislative leaders who actually represent the views and voices of their pro-life constituents has made all the difference," said Harris. "It also highlights the critical importance of next fall's elections here in Tennessee."
Americans United for Life, which drafted legislation for any state interested in opting out of the abortion mandate of President Obama's new health care law, has said that numerous states have expressed interest so far.
TUCSON, Ariz., April 21, 2010—In a victory for freedom of association, the University of Arizona has reversed course and granted its Students for Life (SFL) group official recognition. The decision gives the group equal access to university resources. SFL's application was initially denied by UA's student government because the group's proposed constitution required that members share beliefs about the sanctity of human life. After the student government denied recognition to his group, SFL founder Jeremiah Lange came to the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education (FIRE) for help.
"FIRE is pleased that the University of Arizona has recognized its obligation to uphold the First Amendment right to freedom of association guaranteed to its students," FIRE Vice President Robert Shibley said. "When students form groups around shared beliefs, they exercise a core constitutional right. A diversity of belief-based groups enhances the marketplace of ideas on campus."
FIRE asked the U.S. Supreme Court to acknowledge this right of student groups to freely associate in a friend-of-the-court brief in Christian Legal Society v. Martinez, which was argued before the Justices on Monday.
UA's application procedure for new student groups requires submission of a proposed constitution and a nondiscrimination statement. Lange submitted an application for SFL that satisfied the written guidelines of the Associated Students of the University of Arizona (ASUA), the student government. SFL also included a requirement that "member[s] must agree to stand by the princip[le]s that life is sacred and that the intentional killing of human beings through abortion, euthanasia, and murder, and all forms of eugenics are morally reprehensible." The application was denied in a February 25, 2010, e-mail to Lange in which ASUA Club and Organization Standards Board Director Jarrett Benkendorfer informed Lange that "organizations cannot require participants to fulfill or abide by specific principles." Benkendorfer informed Lange that the belief-based requirement was "unnecessary" because "students holding shared views with your club will be attracted to your organization."
In a March 15 letter to UA President Robert N. Shelton, FIRE pointed out that no ASUA regulations specified that student groups were prohibited from requiring voting members to share the group's organizing beliefs, contrary to what Benkendorfer had alleged. Further, FIRE informed Shelton that preventing Lange and SFL from making belief-based membership choices was a denial of the group's First Amendment right to freedom of association. As the Supreme Court made clear in Roberts v. United States Jaycees (1984), "freedom of association plainly presupposes a freedom not to associate." FIRE expressed doubt that recognized student groups including the College Republicans, Students for Justice in Palestine, Students Organized for Animal Rights, Voices of Opposition, Liberty in North Korea, Young Democrats, and Movimiento Estudiantil Chicano de Aztlán were aware that they were unable to require members to share their central beliefs.
If the Supreme Court rules against a similarly situated student group in Christian Legal Society v. Martinez, the ability of belief-based groups to exist and maintain their expressive identity on campuses around the country will be in jeopardy.
In a March 29 response, Arizona Student Unions Executive Director Bill Shiba avoided answering FIRE's constitutional concerns, but asked Lange to reapply. On April 1, FIRE again wrote President Shelton, noting the inadequacy of Shiba's reply and asking that Shelton "personally ensure that ASUA respects the constitutional right of UA students to assemble with others around shared beliefs." In a reply of April 14, Shiba informed FIRE that SFL's application had been accepted.
"Public universities like the University of Arizona cannot deny students their First Amendment right to meet with others of like mind to advance a message of their own choosing," said Will Creeley, FIRE's Director of Legal and Public Advocacy. "The university's initial denial of recognition to Students for Life is a troubling example of what will happen across the country if the Supreme Court permits public universities to render freedom of association an empty right on campus. Fortunately, the University of Arizona has done the right thing by recognizing that campus life benefits from hosting a multitude of groups expressing a multitude of viewpoints."
FIRE is a nonprofit educational foundation that unites civil rights and civil liberties leaders, scholars, journalists, and public intellectuals from across the political and ideological spectrum on behalf of individual rights, due process, freedom of expression, academic freedom, and rights of conscience at our nation's colleges and universities. FIRE's efforts to preserve liberty at the University of Arizona can be viewed at thefire.org.
CONTACT:
Will Creeley, Director of Legal and Public Advocacy, FIRE: 212-582-3191; will@thefire.org
Robert N. Shelton, President, University of Arizona: 520-621-5511; robert.shelton@arizona.edu
Santa Rosa County, FL – The ACLU has been hiding a critical secret in its continuing attempts to criminalize prayer in the schools of Santa Rosa County: It has been litigating to salvage an unconstitutional Consent Decree without clients that have a legal interest in its actions. The two anonymous plaintiffs, on whose behalf the ACLU brought the infamous lawsuit that resulted in two contempt trials for prayer, have long since graduated from the school district they sued. But the plaintiffs’ permanent loss of legal standing hasn’t stopped the ACLU and the school district from continuing to defend the Consent Decree that has become irreversibly moot. Having failed in its attempts to fine and jail school officials for praying, the ACLU, aided by the school district, has been opposing the efforts of Christian Educators Association International, represented by Liberty Counsel, to have the Consent Decree declared unconstitutional.
The problem? The Consent Decree at issue became legally moot on the day the ACLU’s clients graduated, less than four weeks after it was issued. Moreover, without clients that have a legal interest in the litigation, the ACLU was legally barred from continuing to litigate against the people of Santa Rosa County. The ACLU and the school district knew this but conspired to hide the fact that the two anonymous plaintiffs graduated. In the Consent Decree they jointly submitted to the court, they inserted provisions purporting to require the court to retain jurisdiction for at least five years, thereby inferring that their anonymous clients were much younger. They also asked the court to conceal the plaintiffs’ identity for another five years, so that no one would know they graduated.
The ACLU’s conspiracy is now unraveling. Liberty Counsel raised the issue of mootness last year and then again in the motion earlier this year. The federal court that entered the Consent Decree, which has literally forced teachers and staff to hide in closets to pray, has now demanded an explanation from the ACLU and the school district as to why it should continue to enforce that Consent Decree. The court noted that the ACLU and the school district “should have advised the court of factual matters affecting this court’s continuing jurisdiction,” which they obviously have failed to do.
Mathew D. Staver, Founder of Liberty Counsel and Dean of Liberty University School of Law, commented: “The errors in judgment by the ACLU and the school district are stunning. The school district agreed to enter into an unconstitutional Consent Decree that was legally effective for less than one month, then agreed to pay the ACLU a whopping $200,000, and then expended a great deal of additional resources to oppose Liberty Counsel’s intervention and defend the unconstitutional and moot Consent Decree. From the beginning, our position has been that this order should be set aside. We will not rest until that happens. If the school board does not come to its senses and seize the opportunity before it to make things right, the voters of Santa Rosa County will hold them accountable in the next election.”
