Why?

This simple question I have heard asked by many people about Catholic's and Christian's drive to to see their views of how people should live imposed on all Americans -- one can even say, as made clear by ex-President Bush's war in Iraq and war-like rhetoric of "evil countries," imposed on the world.

Ex-Vice President Dan Quayle put it this way to a teen interviewing him and asked the quite adult question about allowing abortion in the case of incest: "I am afraid you will have to carry that child to term."^* This, in the era of the constitutional right to a woman's privacy with regard to her own body, from a "Christian," grossly shows us their view: "You must live by our rules."

But why?

I mean, in view of the doctrines of freedom and individual rights upon which this country was founded, and the absolute condemnation of tyranny against which a revolution was fought, "in order to form a more perfect union," which includes to "establish justice," "insure domestic tranquility," "promote the general welfare," and, most importantly for this case, to "secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity." It was with these ideals in mind that our country founded.

And just who can forget that "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof?"

But there is a fight going on to decide just what all of those words and phrases mean.

Just where does organized religion come in? What role do they play? We shall see here several of those organization's own words.

The first key to what they do is, of course, their belief that their Bible is "the word of God," and that their particular Bible provides us with a way to create a more perfect union, to establish justice, etc. Note that I choose my words carefully and will say this again to make sure that there is no mistake in understanding: their particular Bible provides us with a way to live, their Bible does not just provide them with a way to live. The reason why I make this emphasis is to point out that almost all religious organizations differ in how to interpret their particular Bible, but they all have the view that it is not just "they" that should live their way but it is "everybody" that should live by their way. Each religious organization, although based upon similar sources of scripture, has their own interpretation of their Bible and of how we should live accordingly.

But, although these groups all have different views of they why and the how of their religion, there is a way to unite them -- as is being done. By decrying an explosive issue that they all share as being "attacked," forces, people of a political mind, can provide the wick that reaches into all their bottles of oil. We have before us today a few basic rallying points that ignite them all: gay marriage, abortion, and evolution (anti-science, actually).

Conservatives overwhelmingly talk of the constitution, marriage, abortion, and science.

All other differences between religious doctrines disappear when the few shared "values" are emphasised as being attacked, being "removed from our children." This is the morality card, which in its current form is about sex and science. In the past it was slavery (pro and con), or alcohol, or war, or education. And there were others, of course. But today, it is the "sanctity of marriage," or "sacredness of life," or "validity of science" that has become paramount as rallying calls that unites the various religious organizations.

Whereas religious organizations manipulate the public, political forces manipulate the religious organizations, with the vast array of radio, television and newspaper "pundits" as dupes, taken in by their own propaganda that they spew, taken from other's propaganda, that of their "higher ups."

Answer the question: Where do George Will, William Kristol^*, Rush Limbaugh, and the list goes on and on, get their views? To whom do they look to for their data? Certainly it is not "the liberal press." Certainly it is not science journals. Certainly it is not from history, or biology, or geology, etc. textbooks. Certainly it is not from NPR or PBS or even ABC, CBS or NBC.

What's left? Fellow conservatives who share their views? Sure, and there is a feedback loop as they share their views in support of each other. But ultimately, conservatives get their views, their morals, from religious sources, from their churches.

So, what do the churches believe? Well, let them tell us. Here is the Creation Truth Foundation which says that they are a "Leader of Biblical world view development beginning in Genesis." A message that is typical and found repeated again and again by Christian ministries:

... this secular world view and life style provided the public platform that made it easy for the secular humanist to separate God from all public life and practice—chief of which was the so-called unconstitutionality of prayer and Bible reading in the public schools of America. This quickly produced unprecedented moral and educational decline throughout our beloved country.

America’s only hope, it was determined, was for the Bible believing public of our land to awaken to the reality of a true Biblical faith. Basic to this renewal is a return to all of realities of Biblical Creation.

That is, if the God of sacred Scripture is our Creator, then He is our owner and because He is—only He can set the rules and we, His children, must obediently follow them, asking no questions.

They tell us that "America's only hope... is the God of sacred scripture... and we must obediently follow" His rules and ask no questions.

No single human being can call him or herself a human being if they resign themselves to obediently follow their leaders without question. It is hard for me to restrain myself with regard to this.

The church leaders do not beseech people to "follow us," but "follow the rules of God." This is the ultimate con -- and I know that the use of that word will cause those who believe to now throw up their hands and declare that this is yet another attack on their beliefs and to stop reading, and that in their minds this will simply become yet another example of the liberal media, as all criticism of church doctrine. But that is the point. They leave no room for discussion. They start with: "This is real and you must believe and not ask questions." Their leaders are telling them that all other thoughts and ideas are wrong, and that to merely question what they say is wrong. They tell their follower that they simply present the truth: "Do not believe me, believe these words!" They remove the "me," the "I" from their presentation. They say that they are just men presenting "the word of God." The con is that, once you are hooked, you actually do not believe the word of their God but their interpretation of the word of their God.

Where do these religious organizations, their leaders, get the idea that their Bible is the word of God? From their Bible, of course. As they frequently reference their Bible for their views, they reference it in telling us that it is the word of their God.

This is The Christian Reformed Church in North America:

The Bible is our only reliable guide to what we believe and how we conduct our lives (2 Timothy 3:14-17)

The fact that there are many versions of what is called the Bible is lost upon the believers. The fact that there are many translations of what is called the Bible is lost upon the believers. The fact that there are more original documents that are left out of what is called the Bible is lost upon the believers.

It is the ultimate con. One that politicians and bankers and auto executives and real estate agents alike love: "Do not believe me, believe these words." And those words are are their documents, their advertising. They, the men, are removed from the equation. They just represent the word of God, their advertisements.

But, and this is a huge but, what are the rules of their God and how do those rules fit in with the rules of men?

Let me now, deferring answering my own question, quote another founding document.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.--That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed,--That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.

There is, in my mind, no more important an aspect of the founding or our country than that "Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed." Yet, continually, we get the message from those who insist that their Bible is the word of God that, in essence, the rules are not instituted among Men (the populous) but are instituted among religious leaders. They will, of course use the ultimate con technique: "governments are not instituted among Men, but are instituted by the word of God."

As the famous Pastor John Hagee's Cornerstone Church tells us:

We believe in the scripture as the inspired Word of God and that it is the complete revelation of God's will for mankind. We believe in the absolute authority of the scripture to govern the affairs of men.

Those men calling themselves religious are, of course (according to themselves, of course), "Men of God." They are the anointed, they were chosen by their God to bring the words of their God to us, as John Hagee Ministries tells us:

We believe in the ministry of the Holy Spirit to the Church body through the anointing of oil by the elders of the church.

And Mormonism is a little extreme, to say the least:

As part of His plan, God has followed a simple pattern from the beginning of the world. He chooses a prophet (like Noah or Moses) to teach the gospel and lead the people. Sadly, most of God’s children have disregarded, disobeyed, and rejected His prophets.

In 1829, Joseph Smith received the restored priesthood authority to organize Christ’s Church. John the Baptist appeared and conferred upon Joseph Smith and his associate Oliver Cowdery the Aaronic Priesthood, which includes the authority to perform the ordinance of baptism. Later, Peter, James, and John (three of Christ’s original Apostles) appeared and conferred the Melchizedek Priesthood upon Joseph Smith and Oliver Cowdery, restoring the same authority given to Christ’s Apostles anciently. In 1830, with this priesthood authority, the same Church of Jesus Christ that existed centuries ago was organized and restored to the earth by Joseph Smith.

And so, we have an absolute, unquestionable word of their God, presented and interpreted by a vaguely supernaturally anointed priesthood, whose underlying message is "just believe." The ultimate con. ("He that believeth in Me hath everlasting life.")

And to top it all off the priesthood believes that all people everywhere must converted. This is called "witnessing" or evangelizing. It is what drives Jehovah's Witnesses to go to people's homes, and the christian ministries in general to lobby for legislation that references their God. It is the root of their attempts to control government, education and "Hollywood."

The United Methodists tell us this directly:

As United Methodists, we have an obligation to bear a faithful Christian witness to Jesus Christ, the living reality at the center of the Church’s life and witness. To fulfill this obligation, we reflect critically on our biblical and theological inheritance, striving to express faithfully the witness we make in our own time.

Youth for Christ USA's motto is "Every young person. One at a time." Campus Crusade for Christ, International says "win the campus today and change the world tomorrow."

As the Cornerstone Church tells it, their followers have an obligation to evangelise:

We believe that evangelism is the obligation of every follower of Jesus Christ. The Lord commands us to go out and make disciples in all of the Earth. We believe that each person is first responsible to evangelism in their own family as the Holy Spirit leads them and gives them the ability.

The John Hagee Ministries also makes this quite prominent on their website:

The mission of John Hagee Ministries is to aggressively fulfill the commission that Jesus Christ gave to his followers to go into the world and make disciples of all people. Our purpose is to bring the lost to Jesus Christ and to build up and encourage those who are already believers. We pledge to our viewers & supporters to take The Gospel to all the World and to all Generations.

And the Christ in Youth organization, specializing in connecting young people with their interpretation of Jesus Christ, sums it all up for us nicely:

We believe that the Bible is the fully inspired Word of God. Faith in Jesus and obedience to His teachings are essential for salvation. Jesus is fully God, was born of a virgin, lived a sinless life, died a death of atonement on a cross, was bodily resurrected, and is coming again in judgment of all men. Heaven and Hell are literal, as taught in the Bible. CIY is committed to these truths as well as to restoration of New Testament teaching, principles, and practices.

This is why Christians want to control your and your children's behaviour. Brought together by their common Bibles, church differences are lost with the hue and cry over marriage, abortion and science. The priesthood has conned their followers into a narrow belief system, usually from a young age, which makes it hard to acknowledge contrary scientific data, nor even to discuss the legitimacy of basic science principles, when the priesthood tells them that anything contrary to their absolute position constitutes an attack on their values.

They refuse to believe that there is any room for other value systems. For them, their values are absolute and all must adhere to them. For them, the ends justifies the means. And for them the means is accomplished by refusing to discuss different opinions, by the suppression of evidence and by out right lies and the promoting of misconceptions.

That is no way to live in a free society.

<sup>* As I saw this on television and have to link to a transcript.
* William Kristol even told Jon Stewart of The Daily Show that people should not read The New York Times -- a newspaper he fucking wrote for at the time.</sup>

Is this your view of Jesus?

How about this?

Or this?

If those do not fit with your wish what Jesus looks like here are 200 more images. Or perhaps you can pick from these 300 just 4 you!

Are you quite satisfied you your pick? Sure you are, for they are all satisfyingly nice white boys that you would love to bring home to mother (or sister).

Those are all iconic, Westernized and modernized just for you. And a fraud.

In your heart, you may say, my image of Jesus does not matter. But truth does. Or do you just want to believe? Do you want to believe want you want to believe? Or do you just believe what you have been told to believe?

Or should we find truths to believe in?

This image is on the ceiling of the Church of the Holy Sepulcher in Jerusalem:

Not a very detailed image of Jesus himself but of his fellow Jews known as his apostles.

This image is of the 12th station of the Via Dolorosa in Jerusalem:

This is from a wall painting in the Dormition Abbey on Mount Zion, Jerusalem:

Take your Jesus the nice white boy image and stuff it.

It is not hard to search the news for bad news regarding the Catholic Church; seems that bad news just crops up regularly.

Bishops were warned of abusive priests

As early as the mid-1950s, decades before the clergy sexual-abuse crisis broke publicly across the U.S. Catholic landscape, the founder of a religious order that dealt regularly with priest sex abusers was so convinced of their inability to change that he searched for an island to purchase with the intent of using it as a place to isolate such offenders...

You know what the latest revelation of priestly abuse tells us? That priests are human. There is no indication that priests (or bishops, or reverends, etc.) are any more "Godly" than anyone else. Over and over again we hear of sexual misconduct by "men of God." They are human and not nearer to God than anyone else.

If fact, the priesthood is a prime breeding ground for sexual misconduct and a magnet for pedophiles. Priests are held in esteem and looked up to. They are sources of authority. They are un-questioned. They are assumed to be "Godly men." They can take people aside, close the door, and...

You finish the sentence.

The infallible Pope is at it again. What? Is it his job to create controversy?

Pope, on plane, says church can help Africa address its problems

By John Thavis
Catholic News Service

Making his first trip to Africa, Pope Benedict XVI said the Catholic Church can help bring answers to the continent's chronic problems, including poverty, AIDS and tribalism.

Speaking to reporters aboard his Alitalia chartered jet March 17, the pope strongly defended the church's efforts to fight AIDS and said condom distribution only made the problem worse.

"One cannot overcome the problem with the distribution of condoms. On the contrary, they increase the problem," the pope said.

Nor can the AIDS pandemic be confronted only with aid programs, he said.

What the church teaches, he said, is "humanization of sexuality" and sexual responsibility on the one hand, and a willingness to be present with those who are suffering, on the other hand.

He pointed to the many church programs currently helping AIDS victims and said the church's contribution had led to real and visible progress.

...

Here are what just a few people who actually do know what they are talking about have to say about the Pope's "help."

"While it is not up to us to pass judgment on the doctrine of the Church, we consider that these statements endanger public health policies and the imperative to protect human life."
  -- Eric Chevallier, French Foreign Ministry

"Along with information, education and testing, the condom is a fundamental element of actions to prevent transmission of the AIDS virus."
  -- Eric Chevallier, French Foreign Ministry

"[The Pope] proffered a monstrous scientific untruth."
  -- Roselyne Bachelot, French Health Minister

"Condoms save lives, in Europe as well as on other continents. Modern assistance to the developing world today must make access to family planning available to the poorest of the poor—especially the use of condoms. Anything else would be irresponsible."
  -- German Health Minister Ulla Schmidt and Development Minister Heidemarie Wieczorek-Zeul

"I think Africa, which is hit so hard (by AIDS), did not need this message. Negationist statements are terribly harmful."
  -- Michel Kazatchkine, Global Fund

"It's a denial of the epidemic. And to make these remarks on a continent that unfortunately is a continent where 70% of the people who have AIDS die, it's absolutely unbelievable."
  -- Michel Kazatchkine, Global Fund

"His remarks could destroy years of prevention and awareness, and endanger many human lives."
  -- Belgium Health Ministry

"Is the pope living in the 21st century?"
  -- Alain Fogue, MOCPAT

"To claim that condoms 'aggravate' the problem of AIDS goes totally against all the efforts made by the Cameroonian government and other actors implicated in the struggle against AIDS in Cameroon."
  -- Alain Fogue, MOCPAT

"The pope's comments are not very helpful. It's sending a confusing message to Africa, in those countries where the Catholic church is very important."
  -- Judith Melby, Christian Aid

"Our policy is that abstinence is an important part of the package, but abstinence is not the only thing that is going to prevent HIV transmision."
  -- Judith Melby, Christian Aid

"The access to condoms is absolutely essential to combat HIV."
  -- Mohga Kamal-Yanni, Oxfam

"If we want to stop new infections which is happening among young people, we do need to use of condoms, we need to expand the use of condoms, not to decrease it."
  -- Mohga Kamal-Yanni, Oxfam

"A disease like HIV/AIDS that has no cure has to be prevented and condom usage is being advocated in this context. Condom use is critical in prevention."
  -- Akhila Sivadas, Centre for Advocacy and Research

"It is not being promoted as a lifestyle product. You need a pragmatic approach, you need to set aside all your queasiness and deal with it as a public health issue."
  -- Akhila Sivadas, Centre for Advocacy and Research

I think this, though, sums it up nicely:

"He's shut up in his study," one [Vatican] cardinal said off the record. "He's a theologian, not an executive. A great theologian may not necessarily have his finger on the pulse of reality."

Dominionism is a tendency among Protestant Christian evangelicals and fundamentalists that encourages them to not only be active political participants in civic society, but also seek to dominate the political process as part of a mandate from God.[1]

Usage: The Religious Right's combination of apocalyptic and dominionist statements really creep me out.

And God blessed them, and God said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it: and have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over every living thing that moveth upon the earth.
-- Genesis 1:28

[1] From Talk to Action.

Leader: Joseph Kony
Church/Group: The Lord's Resistance Army (LRA)
Location: Uganda and Sudan
Mission: The establishment of a government based on the biblical Ten Commandments.
Followers: thousands

Claims to fame:

Kidnapping children and forcing them to become rebel fighters or concubines. The LRA continued to kill, torture, maim, rape, and abduct large numbers of civilians, virtually enslaving numerous children.[1]

[1] GlobalSecurity.org - http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/para/lra.htm

Live Pure or Die

Brought to us by those pure people of The National Coalition For Purity, "a non-denominational Christian ministry that strengthens Christians, churches, and organizations in their stand for sexual purity."

Just look at this "logo," at the imagery it portrays. First, consider that they consider themselves advocates of "purity." Then look at the words: "Live Pure or Die." Gee, how nice! How could that not be interpreted as: "Live by our standards or die?" And what do they mean, exactly, since these people are undoubably biblical literalists, by "or die?" That those who are not pure will die or that those who are not pure should die?

But the question of will/should is answered by the image of the dog tags. Dog tags are unequivocally for soldiers; men (and women) who take up arms and kill for the state (in defense, but offensively as well).

The imagery is clear: Killing over sex.

You open Your hand, and satisfy the desire of every living thing.
-- Psalms 145:16

The Administrator of this site is on Holiday for a few months.

I leave you with these questions:

What does a TREE have to do with Christianity?
What do GREETING CARDS have to do with Christianity?
What does SANTA CLAUS have to do with Christianity?
What do FLYING REINDEER have to do with Christianity?
What does SHOPPING have to do with Christianity?
What do CAROLS have to do with Christianity?

Christmas is a secular holiday.

Truthdig - Cartoons - Kill the Media

Related: VIDEO: The McCain-Palin mob in Strongsville, Ohio. Now, this really is scary -- these people are going to be voting.

I am not a conventionally religious man, or even a very superstitious one, but I do wish George Bush would stop asking God to bless America. Every time he does, we seem to be visited with another plague, suggesting divine wrath over our president’s evil ways. How else to explain the persistent calamity that has marked this administration: a pointless but very costly war over nonexistent Iraqi weapons of mass destruction, the devastating New Orleans flood, the betrayal of the nation by the money-changers—from Enron to Goldman Sachs—that Bush welcomed into the temple of the White House?

What’s next? Pestilence, frogs, locusts or incurable boils?

Truthdig's Robert Scheer: A Plague Upon the White House.

From BBC NEWS, The rival to the Bible:

For those who believe the Bible is the inerrant, unaltered word of God, there will be some very uncomfortable questions to answer. It shows there have been thousands of alterations to today's bible.

The Codex, probably the oldest Bible we have, also has books which are missing from the Authorised Version that most Christians are familiar with today - and it does not have crucial verses relating to the Resurrection.

More on the Codex Sinaiticus:

Wikipedia: Codex_Sinaiticus
The Codex Sinaiticus Project
CATHOLIC ENCYCLOPEDIA: Codex Sinaiticus

Jaun Cole writes in Palin: Raped Women must bear Child:

The irrationality of the American religious right is demonstrated by their attempt, in Louisiana, to make rape a capital crime. So let me get this straight. Respect for "life" means a raped woman can't have an abortion and must bear her attacker's child for nine months of her life and then risk being responsible for it for a lifetime.

But the religious right wants to kill the child's father (that is absolute respect for life?) and make sure that the child has no one who could be made to provide child support and ensure the child gets a proper education.

This is called logic, folks -- the American religious right is absolutely wrong with regard to "the right to life" issue.

Obama has Reverend Wright, McCain has Pastor Hagee, and Palin has Pastor Kalnins -- and we know some of the sermons that the Pastors have preached. But we should not apply any guilt by association. It was tried with Obama by the "Liberal Media" but it did not work. Those truly liberal outlets of the media are rightfully leaving well enough (and McCain's and Palin's Pastors) alone. (The liberal blogosphere takes them on at their peril -- perhaps only to further estrange themselves from the right though.)

For the Pastors (and their churches) record, here are the Wikipedia entries for Wright, Hagee and Kalnins.

(I have posted about Hagee before, not to associate his words with McCain's, but to point out the hypocrisy, at the time, of the "Liberal Media's" over-reporting on Reverend Wright.)

The point is, though, that it matters not what their church leaders say, but what the candidates say. Sarah Palin -- far beyond the other candidates -- has said enough for us to know that she believes in:

• Creationism in schools
• A wrathful, vengeful God
• That God has a plan for her
• End times

Now we know that the current "Christian" leader of "the free world" has through his own "God is on my side" actions is presiding over the most disastrous domestic and foreign policies of any previous Whitehouse Administration. We know that this same "War President" has caused the deaths of hundreds of thousands and the misery of millions of families in the Middle East -- disastrously making America and the world vastly less safe.

You may be religious as polls show that most Americans are. But do you believe in End Times? Do you believe that total war in the Middle East by making war on Iran will hasten the Coming of Jesus?

The Bush/Cheney administration will simply be the standard from which a McCain/Palin administration will bring further death and misery upon us all as both McCain and Palin have, many times, talked the same talk about Iran and Ahmadinejad as Bush and Cheney about Iraq and Hussein.

We now know that in recent years, 129 people in the United States who were found guilty of capital offenses in a trial and were facing a sentence of death were later found to be innocent. In some of these cases, witnesses lied; in others, police or prosecutors took constitutionally unlawful shortcuts; in some, the defense lawyer did not put on a defense.

-- Joseph D. Tydings

Read more at the Baltimore Sun, No Fatal Mistakes.

Now, just what kind of a person would say this?

It's so very possible that God, instead of responding by granting spiritual renewal and sustained prosperity could just as easily...it's conceivable that He could just as easily, for example, raise up a revived, prosperous and powerful Communist Russia with a web of alliances across the Middle East. And our gas pumps would go dry. The dollar would collapse. And the markets would crash. The kayak could go upside down. And it could happen in a matter of weeks. That could happen. It could happen by this fall.

Republican Vice Presidential nominee Sarah Palin's Pastor, Larry Kroon, of Wasilla Bible Church in Wasilla, Alaska.

Read more at The Nation: Palin's Pastor: God Will Damn America, by Max Blumenthal.

God damn fear mongering fucks!

From the AP, Palin: Iraq war 'a task that is from God':

"Our national leaders are sending them out [to Iraq] on a task that is from God," she [Palin] said. "That's what we have to make sure that we're praying for, that there is a plan and that plan is God's plan."

...

Palin told graduating students of the church's School of Ministry, "What I need to do is strike a deal with you guys." As they preached the love of Jesus throughout Alaska, she said, she'd work to implement God's will from the governor's office, including creating jobs by building a pipeline to bring North Slope natural gas to North American markets.

"God's will has to be done in unifying people and companies to get that gas line built, so pray for that," she said.

"I can do my job there in developing our natural resources and doing things like getting the roads paved and making sure our troopers have their cop cars and their uniforms and their guns, and making sure our public schools are funded," she added. "But really all of that stuff doesn't do any good if the people of Alaska's heart isn't right with God."

Is there any doubt about what is going on here?

Too often (and falsely) called "fake news," Comedy Central's The Daily Show really is about "exposing fake news," as much of the "news" is full of hypocrisy. The Palin-Affair is the best example yet.

Thanks, Jon Stewart.

We have all heard about the Republican Party's Vice Presidential nominee's un-wed daughter's pregnancy. No doubt you have heard the Republican/Right responses about how horrible the "Liberal Media" are. Yada, yada. Just another week of news, eh?

But here is the rub: the final exposure of the hypocrisy of those pundits and purveyors of "values" and "morals."

When is comes to YOUR FAMILY it is "hands off!" When it comes to OTHER FAMILIES it is "adhere to our values!"

Privacy, Pregnancy and Double Standards, By Ellen Goodman:

Then along came the news that her 17-year-old daughter, Bristol, is pregnant. Immediately, the “family values” folks who have fashioned a political wedge out of moral judgments began insisting that anyone who remarked on this baby bump was an insensitive invader of privacy.

What did James Dobson of Focus on the Family say? This teen pregnancy showed that “she and her family are human.” Tony Perkins at the Family Research Council praised Bristol for “choosing life in the midst of a difficult situation.” A spokeswoman for the Campaign for Family Values called the Palins “an American family out there living out their values.”

Thanks, James. Thanks, Tony. Thanks for your support.

A Private Matter—for Everyone, By Marie Cocco:

President Bush “believes that this is a private family matter,” says White House spokeswoman Dana Perino. The talking points circulated at the GOP convention in St. Paul, Minn., are in remarkable concurrence: “This is a very personal matter for the family,” a suggested script distributed to delegates and leaked to the press says.

No pro-choice activist could say it better.

"No pro-choice activist could say it better. " I could not say it better than that.

And does all this tell us about sex education?

Why Bristol’s Pregnancy Matters, By Joe Conason:

It seems fair to assume, however, that Sarah Palin’s enthusiasm for “abstinence-only” sex education, which is shared by Sen. McCain, helped to cause her daughter’s misfortune. As a politician who insists on lecturing adolescents to abstain without teaching them about contraception, she may never have informed Bristol how to protect herself from an unwanted pregnancy and sexually transmitted disease. Her views on reproductive rights—including opposition to abortion even in cases of rape and incest—are too extreme even for her running mate.

So, now the Republican Party's Vice Presidential nominee's pregnant daughter is a model spokeswoman for why abstinence-only sex education is not the 100% end all that its proponents say it is.

P.S.

As a reminder that the abortion "issue" is really about a woman's right to privacy, here is an excerpt from the ROE v. WADE Supreme Court decision:

This right of privacy, whether it be founded in the Fourteenth Amendment's concept of personal liberty and restrictions upon state action, as we feel it is, or, as the District Court determined, in the Ninth Amendment's reservation of rights to the people, is broad enough to encompass a woman's decision whether or not to terminate her pregnancy.

...

We, therefore, conclude that the right of personal privacy includes the abortion decision, but that this right is not unqualified and must be considered against important state interests in regulation.

Alleged Scheme Involved Homeless:

In October 2006, Los Angeles police officers videotaped an ambulance “dumping” five homeless patients. They later determined that the patients had been recruited as “human pawns in a scheme by hospitals, doctors, ambulance companies and others to defraud” health insurance programs, according to the city attorney’s complaint.

And on Wednesday, federal agents raided three private for-profit hospitals — Los Angeles Metropolitan Medical Center, City of Angels Medical Center, and Tustin Hospital and Medical Center in Orange County — in connection with an alleged fraud scheme involving federal Medicaid and state Medi-Cal health insurance programs.

I was reading that Times article about how many homeless people in Los Angeles were being exploited by some hospitals to "bilk tens of millions of dollars from the federal and state health insurance programs," and it popped into my head that would it not be a wonderful thing -- and I am sure that it does happen and therefore is a wonderful thing -- if churches and religious organizations worked to help the homeless? Was not the White House Office of Faith-Based and Community Initiatives created just for such purposes?

This is from that "Compassion in Action" website:

The President opens his remarks, "How beautiful was that? From being a homeless mother of two to introducing the President of the United States. There has to be a higher power. I love being with members of the armies of compassion, foot soldiers in helping make America a more hopeful place. Every day you mend broken hearts with love. You mend broken lives with hope. And you mend broken communities with countless acts of extraordinary kindness."

"Armies of compassion." Really?

It is not getting much press, this further exploitation of the homeless by Los Angeles area hospitals. (It is early; just reported in the Times today.)

And just as my heart was light inside my chest as I thought of how churches and religious organizations could help....
read more

Hmmmm....

From Reuters, Groups still unhappy with abortion proposal:

Family planning groups said on Friday they were still planning to lobby against a proposed new regulation aimed at countering state laws that require certain health care workers to provide contraception to women.

A widely circulated version of the draft regulation would have cut off federal funds to hospitals and states that attempt to compel medical providers to offer legal abortion and contraception services to women.

Health and Human Services Secretary Mike Leavitt said a version of the regulation is still under consideration.

From the Los Angeles Times, Birth control: is administration backing down -- or not?:

Mike Leavitt, secretary of Health and Human Services, said he never meant to create a stir over birth control. In proposing a new HHS regulation last month, he said, he only meant to protect the "right of conscience" of federally funded healthcare providers whom he wants spared dismissal because of their objections to birth control or abortion.

Ftom the Washington Post: Birth Control Fears Addressed:

Health and Human Services Secretary Mike Leavitt has denied that a controversial draft regulation would redefine common birth control methods as abortion and protect the rights of doctors and other health-care workers who refuse to provide them.

In a statement posted on his blog on Thursday, Leavitt appeared to try to allay fears that the proposed regulation would create sweeping new obstacles to women seeking a variety of commonly used contraceptives, such as birth control pills and the Plan B emergency contraceptive.

"An early draft of the regulation found its way into public circulation before it had reached my review," Leavitt said. "It contained words that lead some to conclude my intent is to deal with the subject of contraceptives, somehow defining them as abortion. Not true."

Leavitt's statement, however, failed to alleviate concerns among members of Congress, family planning advocates, women's health activists and others.

They all say that it is just about "values." Not really. It is a battle to prevent them from forcing, via legislation, people to give up control over their own bodies and lives.

Look folks, if you want to live "biblically," by all means do so. But, why do you want to force people who you do not know nor even live in your community -- even those who live a thousand miles from you, and have no interaction with you nor impact on you -- to do the same?