Institutional Religious Liberty vs. Protection of Children
Such appears to be the fundamental conflict in a Bay Area lawsuit, where alleged abuse victims are arguing they ought to be able to sue the Church for negligent hiring, firing and supervision of abusive priests. (link via Amy Welborn)
Alameda County Superior Court Judge Ronald Sabraw issued a temporary ruling Thursday stating a 2002 state law temporarily lifting the statute of limitation on damage suits against institutions that protected known child molesters gave abuse victims the right to sue.
Arguing for the church, lawyer Paul Gaspari said the Constitution forbade punishing the church for the standards it sets for the ordination of priests.
"If a religious institution chooses to ordain a known child molester that it felt had truly repented, it has that constitutional right," Gaspari said. "The government may not second-guess that choice."
Marci Hamilton, a lawyer assisting the abuse victims' legal team, argued that repentance was not relevant to the issue of culpability.
Tuesday, September 21, 2004
Sunday, September 19, 2004
Abortion and the Conscience of the Nation
I had always been a little unclear on what Ronald Reagan's position on abortion was, so I did a Google search and discovered that he wrote the above titled essay on the 10th anniversary of Roe v. Wade in 1983. Quite an amazing man was our 40th President.
What, then, is the real issue? I have often said that when we talk about abortion, we are talking about two lives—the life of the mother and the life of the unborn child. Why else do we call a pregnant woman a mother? I have also said that anyone who doesn't feel sure whether we are talking about a second human life should clearly give life the benefit of the doubt. If you don't know whether a body is alive or dead, you would never bury it. I think this consideration itself should be enough for all of us to insist on protecting the unborn.
The case against abortion does not rest here, however, for medical practice confirms at every step the correctness of these moral sensibilities. Modern medicine treats the unborn child as a patient. Medical pioneers have made great breakthroughs in treating the unborn—for genetic problems, vitamin deficiencies, irregular heart rhythms, and other medical conditions. Who can forget George Will's moving account of the little boy who underwent brain surgery six times during the nine weeks before he was born? Who is the patient if not that tiny unborn human being who can feel pain when he or she is approached by doctors who come to kill rather than to cure?
I had always been a little unclear on what Ronald Reagan's position on abortion was, so I did a Google search and discovered that he wrote the above titled essay on the 10th anniversary of Roe v. Wade in 1983. Quite an amazing man was our 40th President.
What, then, is the real issue? I have often said that when we talk about abortion, we are talking about two lives—the life of the mother and the life of the unborn child. Why else do we call a pregnant woman a mother? I have also said that anyone who doesn't feel sure whether we are talking about a second human life should clearly give life the benefit of the doubt. If you don't know whether a body is alive or dead, you would never bury it. I think this consideration itself should be enough for all of us to insist on protecting the unborn.
The case against abortion does not rest here, however, for medical practice confirms at every step the correctness of these moral sensibilities. Modern medicine treats the unborn child as a patient. Medical pioneers have made great breakthroughs in treating the unborn—for genetic problems, vitamin deficiencies, irregular heart rhythms, and other medical conditions. Who can forget George Will's moving account of the little boy who underwent brain surgery six times during the nine weeks before he was born? Who is the patient if not that tiny unborn human being who can feel pain when he or she is approached by doctors who come to kill rather than to cure?
Friday, September 17, 2004
Myth: Only Smart People Attend UC Berkeley
A picture is worth a thousand words when it comes to the intellectual bankruptcy of the Left.
A picture is worth a thousand words when it comes to the intellectual bankruptcy of the Left.
To An Extent, A Good Decision
A California Court of Appeal has thrown out a case filed by a man who claimed that unmarried/cohabitating couples of the opposite sex should have the same right to file a wrongful death lawsuit as cohabitating same-sex couples.
Jack Holguin said the law's exclusion of unmarried heterosexual couples violates his equal protection rights. Holguin's girlfriend, Tamara Booth, was killed in a car accident. They had lived together for three years, but never married.
The Los Angeles County trial judge dismissed the complaint, and the 1st District affirmed, holding that the state Legislature had "rational bases" for not extending partnership benefits to "cohabiting unmarried couples in general."
Although I understand the illogic of the law that the plaintiff in this matter was trying to expose and eliminate, I think the decision by the Court of Appeal was proper for two reasons: 1) an equal protection violation ruling would have resulted in sexual orientation being given the equivalent status of race, sex and ethnicity (all of which are constitutionally protected classifications); and 2) cohabitation by unmarried couples of the opposite sex would have been legally endorsed (i.e., "blessed").
A California Court of Appeal has thrown out a case filed by a man who claimed that unmarried/cohabitating couples of the opposite sex should have the same right to file a wrongful death lawsuit as cohabitating same-sex couples.
Jack Holguin said the law's exclusion of unmarried heterosexual couples violates his equal protection rights. Holguin's girlfriend, Tamara Booth, was killed in a car accident. They had lived together for three years, but never married.
The Los Angeles County trial judge dismissed the complaint, and the 1st District affirmed, holding that the state Legislature had "rational bases" for not extending partnership benefits to "cohabiting unmarried couples in general."
Although I understand the illogic of the law that the plaintiff in this matter was trying to expose and eliminate, I think the decision by the Court of Appeal was proper for two reasons: 1) an equal protection violation ruling would have resulted in sexual orientation being given the equivalent status of race, sex and ethnicity (all of which are constitutionally protected classifications); and 2) cohabitation by unmarried couples of the opposite sex would have been legally endorsed (i.e., "blessed").
Why "Everybody Loves Raymond" is the Only Reason to Watch CBS
The colonel who allegedly pressed to have Bush's National Guard records "sugarcoated" categorically denies ever having done so.
In his first public statement since "60 Minutes II" aired a program claiming it had unearthed damaging memos, retired Col. Walter Staudt told ABC News that Bush was a highly qualified officer who passed all the necessary tests.
"I never pressured anybody about George Bush because I had no reason to," Staudt said.
Staudt, who served as brigadier general of Bush's unit in Texas, retired in 1972. A purported memo by Bush's squadron commander Col. Jerry Killian dated Aug. 18, 1973 -- 18 months after Staudt left the Guard -- said Staudt was putting on pressure to "sugar coat" the performance evaluation of Lt. Bush.
CBS has tried to explain the discrepancy by suggesting Staudt still was in the sphere of influence.
But Staudt said that after his retirement he had no involvement in Guard affairs.
"I didn't check in with anybody -- I had no reason to," he said. "I was busy with my civilian endeavors, and they were busy with their military options. I had no reason to talk to them, and I didn't."
The colonel who allegedly pressed to have Bush's National Guard records "sugarcoated" categorically denies ever having done so.
In his first public statement since "60 Minutes II" aired a program claiming it had unearthed damaging memos, retired Col. Walter Staudt told ABC News that Bush was a highly qualified officer who passed all the necessary tests.
"I never pressured anybody about George Bush because I had no reason to," Staudt said.
Staudt, who served as brigadier general of Bush's unit in Texas, retired in 1972. A purported memo by Bush's squadron commander Col. Jerry Killian dated Aug. 18, 1973 -- 18 months after Staudt left the Guard -- said Staudt was putting on pressure to "sugar coat" the performance evaluation of Lt. Bush.
CBS has tried to explain the discrepancy by suggesting Staudt still was in the sphere of influence.
But Staudt said that after his retirement he had no involvement in Guard affairs.
"I didn't check in with anybody -- I had no reason to," he said. "I was busy with my civilian endeavors, and they were busy with their military options. I had no reason to talk to them, and I didn't."
Wednesday, September 15, 2004
Tuesday, September 14, 2004
I Wonder...
Up to now, the White House has been pretty dead silent over Rathergate (sorry, I haven't yet figured out how to superscript the "th" on Blogger). I'm beginning to wonder if the Bush team might have had an inkling that the CBS memos were bogus, but instead of expending their own time and energy in proving it and picking a fight with a big television network, simply left it to the New Media to expose the fraud. Maybe not so out of the question, seeing as how the issue of Bush's military history is largely irrelevant with the American public and the Bush campaign has its own blog.
Up to now, the White House has been pretty dead silent over Rathergate (sorry, I haven't yet figured out how to superscript the "th" on Blogger). I'm beginning to wonder if the Bush team might have had an inkling that the CBS memos were bogus, but instead of expending their own time and energy in proving it and picking a fight with a big television network, simply left it to the New Media to expose the fraud. Maybe not so out of the question, seeing as how the issue of Bush's military history is largely irrelevant with the American public and the Bush campaign has its own blog.
Willful Deception?
Was CBS really duped? The following ABC News report reveals that at least two professional document examiners had expressed some doubt to CBS about the authenticity of the alleged Killian memos. (link via Kerry Spot). Perhaps a congressional investigation into this would be appropriate.
Emily Will, a veteran document examiner from North Carolina, told ABC News she saw problems right away with the one document CBS hired her to check the weekend before the broadcast.
"I found five significant differences in the questioned handwriting, and I found problems with the printing itself as to whether it could have been produced by a typewriter," she said.
Will says she sent the CBS producer an e-mail message about her concerns and strongly urged the network the night before the broadcast not to use the documents.
"I told them that all the questions I was asking them on Tuesday night, they were going to be asked by hundreds of other document examiners on Thursday if they ran that story," Will said.
But the documents became a key part of the 60 Minutes II broadcast questioning President Bush's National Guard service in 1972. CBS made no mention that any expert disputed the authenticity.
"I did not feel that they wanted to investigate it very deeply," Will told ABC News.
A second document examiner hired by CBS News, Linda James of Plano, Texas, also told ABC News she had concerns about the documents and could not authenticate them. She said she expressed her concerns to CBS before the 60 Minutes II broadcast.
"I did not authenticate anything and I don't want it to be misunderstood that I did," James said. "And that's why I have come forth to talk about it because I don't want anybody to think I did authenticate these documents."
Side Note: Nothing like a little network competition to bring out some truth.
Was CBS really duped? The following ABC News report reveals that at least two professional document examiners had expressed some doubt to CBS about the authenticity of the alleged Killian memos. (link via Kerry Spot). Perhaps a congressional investigation into this would be appropriate.
Emily Will, a veteran document examiner from North Carolina, told ABC News she saw problems right away with the one document CBS hired her to check the weekend before the broadcast.
"I found five significant differences in the questioned handwriting, and I found problems with the printing itself as to whether it could have been produced by a typewriter," she said.
Will says she sent the CBS producer an e-mail message about her concerns and strongly urged the network the night before the broadcast not to use the documents.
"I told them that all the questions I was asking them on Tuesday night, they were going to be asked by hundreds of other document examiners on Thursday if they ran that story," Will said.
But the documents became a key part of the 60 Minutes II broadcast questioning President Bush's National Guard service in 1972. CBS made no mention that any expert disputed the authenticity.
"I did not feel that they wanted to investigate it very deeply," Will told ABC News.
A second document examiner hired by CBS News, Linda James of Plano, Texas, also told ABC News she had concerns about the documents and could not authenticate them. She said she expressed her concerns to CBS before the 60 Minutes II broadcast.
"I did not authenticate anything and I don't want it to be misunderstood that I did," James said. "And that's why I have come forth to talk about it because I don't want anybody to think I did authenticate these documents."
Side Note: Nothing like a little network competition to bring out some truth.
No Stranger to Persecution
A priest-journalist recalled the late Bishop Giovanni Gao Kexian of Yantai as "a reserved and timid man" whose name is added to the "ranks of the martyred who gave their lives for Christ in China."
The bishop died "in an unknown prison in northern China," said Father Bernardo Cervellera, director of the AsiaNews agency.
On Saturday the Vatican announced the bishop's death and at the same time confirmed his episcopal consecration.
The 76-year-old prelate died last month, and his body was sent to his relatives. The Vatican noted that there had been no news of him for some time.
Bishop Gao "lived underground for most of his life," Father Cervellera said. " Only now, after his death, has his ordination by the Vatican [as bishop] been made public."
"When he was arrested in 1999, news reports said that he was either a layman or at best a priest ... to avoid him any further legal persecution by China's security apparatus," the director of AsiaNews said.
Only "three years ago was his status as bishop of Shandong [province] finally made public," explained Father Cervellera, of the Pontifical Institute of Foreign Missions.
According to the priest, the prelate had been raised in the Catholic faith among the underground Christians living in China's largest Catholic community, Hebei province.
"Today, there are an estimated 1.5 million Catholics in this province, most of them belonging to the underground Church, guilty in the government's eyes of exercising what in theory is a constitutionally guaranteed right, namely, the right to practice their religion," Father Cervellera said.
A priest-journalist recalled the late Bishop Giovanni Gao Kexian of Yantai as "a reserved and timid man" whose name is added to the "ranks of the martyred who gave their lives for Christ in China."
The bishop died "in an unknown prison in northern China," said Father Bernardo Cervellera, director of the AsiaNews agency.
On Saturday the Vatican announced the bishop's death and at the same time confirmed his episcopal consecration.
The 76-year-old prelate died last month, and his body was sent to his relatives. The Vatican noted that there had been no news of him for some time.
Bishop Gao "lived underground for most of his life," Father Cervellera said. " Only now, after his death, has his ordination by the Vatican [as bishop] been made public."
"When he was arrested in 1999, news reports said that he was either a layman or at best a priest ... to avoid him any further legal persecution by China's security apparatus," the director of AsiaNews said.
Only "three years ago was his status as bishop of Shandong [province] finally made public," explained Father Cervellera, of the Pontifical Institute of Foreign Missions.
According to the priest, the prelate had been raised in the Catholic faith among the underground Christians living in China's largest Catholic community, Hebei province.
"Today, there are an estimated 1.5 million Catholics in this province, most of them belonging to the underground Church, guilty in the government's eyes of exercising what in theory is a constitutionally guaranteed right, namely, the right to practice their religion," Father Cervellera said.
Monday, September 13, 2004
Politically Correct Wimps
L.A. County designs a new "neutral" seal for the purpose of appeasing the "neutral" anti-Christians from the ACLU.
A cross floating in the sky above the Hollywood Bowl was removed from the revamped seal to prevent a lawsuit from the American Civil Liberties Union with regard to the constitutional separation of church and state.
That and the other changes were made with an eye toward retaining the look and feel of the original seal, said county chief administrative officer David Janssen, who oversaw the redesign.
"There was a strong opinion by the county counsel that, if sued, the county would lose," Janssen said. "The county decided to substitute an unconstitutional symbol with another that is presumably constitutional, and yet reflects the same thing: the role of the missionaries in the founding of Los Angeles."
L.A. County designs a new "neutral" seal for the purpose of appeasing the "neutral" anti-Christians from the ACLU.
A cross floating in the sky above the Hollywood Bowl was removed from the revamped seal to prevent a lawsuit from the American Civil Liberties Union with regard to the constitutional separation of church and state.
That and the other changes were made with an eye toward retaining the look and feel of the original seal, said county chief administrative officer David Janssen, who oversaw the redesign.
"There was a strong opinion by the county counsel that, if sued, the county would lose," Janssen said. "The county decided to substitute an unconstitutional symbol with another that is presumably constitutional, and yet reflects the same thing: the role of the missionaries in the founding of Los Angeles."
New Dean is a Starr
Former Whitewater prosecutor, Ken Starr, assumes the dean's position at the Malibu (Malibu!) based and Church of Christ affiliated Pepperdine Law School.
Starr's appointment is generally regarded by Pepperdine and the broader legal community as a boon for the law school. It's widely thought that he has potential to be a star in raising funds and in improving scholarship and teaching, along with attracting high-caliber faculty and students. The law school, founded in 1970, has more than 700 students and 35 professors who are tenured or on track toward earning tenure.
"Profile-wise, he's going to be great, getting our name out there," said Valerie Lopez, a third-year Pepperdine law student from Clifton, N.J. "We don't have the highest reputation in comparison to other schools here, like UCLA or USC."
Pepperdine previously offered Starr the role of dean over both its law and public policy schools in 1997, and he accepted, only to withdraw days later after the disclosure that he would leave the Whitewater probe in midstream created a furor. Starr said his change of plans had nothing to do with the public reaction, but with concerns raised by his Whitewater deputies that it would be "a premature departure" that could hurt the investigation.
Former Whitewater prosecutor, Ken Starr, assumes the dean's position at the Malibu (Malibu!) based and Church of Christ affiliated Pepperdine Law School.
Starr's appointment is generally regarded by Pepperdine and the broader legal community as a boon for the law school. It's widely thought that he has potential to be a star in raising funds and in improving scholarship and teaching, along with attracting high-caliber faculty and students. The law school, founded in 1970, has more than 700 students and 35 professors who are tenured or on track toward earning tenure.
"Profile-wise, he's going to be great, getting our name out there," said Valerie Lopez, a third-year Pepperdine law student from Clifton, N.J. "We don't have the highest reputation in comparison to other schools here, like UCLA or USC."
Pepperdine previously offered Starr the role of dean over both its law and public policy schools in 1997, and he accepted, only to withdraw days later after the disclosure that he would leave the Whitewater probe in midstream created a furor. Starr said his change of plans had nothing to do with the public reaction, but with concerns raised by his Whitewater deputies that it would be "a premature departure" that could hurt the investigation.
Dark Knight For Dads
Well, Robin was his ward, so I guess this makes some sense. (link via Drudge)
A protester dressed as Batman scaled up the front wall of Buckingham Palace on Monday afternoon, reaching a ledge near the balcony where the royal family appears on ceremonial occasions, campaigners and witnesses said.
The protester was identified as Jason Hatch, 33, from Gloucester, a member of the Fathers 4 Justice group, which is campaigning for greater custody rights for divorced or separated fathers.
(...)
"We've got a guy dressed as Batman who's on Buckingham Palace on a balcony." said Matt O'Connor, spokesman for the group.
Well, Robin was his ward, so I guess this makes some sense. (link via Drudge)
A protester dressed as Batman scaled up the front wall of Buckingham Palace on Monday afternoon, reaching a ledge near the balcony where the royal family appears on ceremonial occasions, campaigners and witnesses said.
The protester was identified as Jason Hatch, 33, from Gloucester, a member of the Fathers 4 Justice group, which is campaigning for greater custody rights for divorced or separated fathers.
(...)
"We've got a guy dressed as Batman who's on Buckingham Palace on a balcony." said Matt O'Connor, spokesman for the group.
Friday, September 10, 2004
22 Reasons
QuandO provides a nice summary of all the arguments for why the memos produced by CBS are forgeries.
Update: The Empire wimpers back.
Update: NRO's Kerry Spot on The Empire's wimper response [BAD MOVE, CBS]:
Nothing about kerning. Nothing about the paper size. Nothing about the stationary. Nothing about the widow or the son. Nothing about proportional spacing. Nothing about the difference in tone and writing style from other memos by this author. Nothing about the anachronistic language.
They changed the story from coming from his personal files, to admitting that CBS only had a photocopy to work from. The said some typewriters had superscript. Yes, but how common were they? Would they have one of those typewriters in an Air National Guard office?
They said the font Times Roman had been around for many years before the memo. Yes, but could you do it on a typewriter?
Rather said a lot about the criticism of the story is coming from “partisan political operatives.” Like all the forensic experts cited by ABC News and the Washington Post?
Update: Reason No. 23 -- The man named in the memo who supposedly pressured Killian to "sugar coat" Bush's military evaluations had retired from the National Guard a year before the memo was allegedly written. (link via Instapundit)
QuandO provides a nice summary of all the arguments for why the memos produced by CBS are forgeries.
Update: The Empire wimpers back.
Update: NRO's Kerry Spot on The Empire's wimper response [BAD MOVE, CBS]:
Nothing about kerning. Nothing about the paper size. Nothing about the stationary. Nothing about the widow or the son. Nothing about proportional spacing. Nothing about the difference in tone and writing style from other memos by this author. Nothing about the anachronistic language.
They changed the story from coming from his personal files, to admitting that CBS only had a photocopy to work from. The said some typewriters had superscript. Yes, but how common were they? Would they have one of those typewriters in an Air National Guard office?
They said the font Times Roman had been around for many years before the memo. Yes, but could you do it on a typewriter?
Rather said a lot about the criticism of the story is coming from “partisan political operatives.” Like all the forensic experts cited by ABC News and the Washington Post?
Update: Reason No. 23 -- The man named in the memo who supposedly pressured Killian to "sugar coat" Bush's military evaluations had retired from the National Guard a year before the memo was allegedly written. (link via Instapundit)
Thursday, September 09, 2004
Not Your Grandfather's Law School
Unlike elitest uber-liberal Ruth "Buzzy"Ginsberg, Justice Antonin Scalia gives a thumbs up to cyberspace law schools like Concord Law School.
From his chambers at the Supreme Court, Ginsburg's colleague Justice Antonin Scalia conducts an hourlong online colloquium with more than 400 Concord Law School students, answering their questions and expounding on the rule of law. From chilly disdain to the warm embrace of the members of the nation's highest court: not a bad arc of change in five years. Its significance was not lost on Barry Currier, Concord's dean. "We've certainly come a long way," Currier said after the Scalia colloquium.
In many ways, the online law school has made huge strides. The year before Ginsburg was pooh-poohing it, Concord opened its virtual doors to 35 students and six faculty members. The Concord Law School Scalia "visited" now boasts roughly 1,700 students. More than 70 faculty members -- including Harvard Law School's Arthur Miller on civil procedure -- teach through a variety of methods. Mass lectures are taped and video-streamed; real-time online classroom discussions are conducted through a combination of Real Player audio and a form of instant messaging that allows teachers to direct oral questions to individual students -- and demand immediate answers, Paper Chase-style, except that the students type the replies in for all to see.
Unlike elitest uber-liberal Ruth "Buzzy"Ginsberg, Justice Antonin Scalia gives a thumbs up to cyberspace law schools like Concord Law School.
From his chambers at the Supreme Court, Ginsburg's colleague Justice Antonin Scalia conducts an hourlong online colloquium with more than 400 Concord Law School students, answering their questions and expounding on the rule of law. From chilly disdain to the warm embrace of the members of the nation's highest court: not a bad arc of change in five years. Its significance was not lost on Barry Currier, Concord's dean. "We've certainly come a long way," Currier said after the Scalia colloquium.
In many ways, the online law school has made huge strides. The year before Ginsburg was pooh-poohing it, Concord opened its virtual doors to 35 students and six faculty members. The Concord Law School Scalia "visited" now boasts roughly 1,700 students. More than 70 faculty members -- including Harvard Law School's Arthur Miller on civil procedure -- teach through a variety of methods. Mass lectures are taped and video-streamed; real-time online classroom discussions are conducted through a combination of Real Player audio and a form of instant messaging that allows teachers to direct oral questions to individual students -- and demand immediate answers, Paper Chase-style, except that the students type the replies in for all to see.
Wednesday, September 08, 2004
Strike Three
A third federal district court (this time in Lincoln, Nebraska) rules that the federal ban on infanticide is unconstitutional.
U.S. District Judge Richard Kopf's decision followed two similar rulings in New York and San Francisco. Those rulings are expected to be appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court.
"The decision by the court in Nebraska is disappointing but not surprising," said Jay Sekulow, chief counsel of the American Center for Law and Justice, which specializes in constitutional law and is supporting the Justice Department in defending the ban in court.
"In the opinion, the court refused to consider the expert testimony of well recognized and highly respected medical experts simply because they had not performed abortions. This conclusion is not only legally flawed but shows the hostility the court exhibits to medical experts who have respect for human life," Sekulow said.
"No one expected the constitutionality of the ban on partial-birth abortion to be decided at the federal district court level. We are hopeful that the appeals process will result in overturning the decisions of the lower courts and conclude that the law designed to end the horrific procedure known as partial-birth abortion survives these constitutional challenges," he added.
Sekulow said the cases are expected to be appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court where both sides are in for a "lengthy and critical legal battle."
A third federal district court (this time in Lincoln, Nebraska) rules that the federal ban on infanticide is unconstitutional.
U.S. District Judge Richard Kopf's decision followed two similar rulings in New York and San Francisco. Those rulings are expected to be appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court.
"The decision by the court in Nebraska is disappointing but not surprising," said Jay Sekulow, chief counsel of the American Center for Law and Justice, which specializes in constitutional law and is supporting the Justice Department in defending the ban in court.
"In the opinion, the court refused to consider the expert testimony of well recognized and highly respected medical experts simply because they had not performed abortions. This conclusion is not only legally flawed but shows the hostility the court exhibits to medical experts who have respect for human life," Sekulow said.
"No one expected the constitutionality of the ban on partial-birth abortion to be decided at the federal district court level. We are hopeful that the appeals process will result in overturning the decisions of the lower courts and conclude that the law designed to end the horrific procedure known as partial-birth abortion survives these constitutional challenges," he added.
Sekulow said the cases are expected to be appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court where both sides are in for a "lengthy and critical legal battle."
Out of Bounds!
Recently, Republican US Senate candidate Alan Keyes stated that Christ would not vote for his Democrat opponent, Barack Obama, because Mr. Obama supports the right of a woman to kill her unborn child. While certainly a controversial and politically incorrect statement, it is entirely logical, unless one is of the strange opinion that Christ did or does not regard unborn children as human beings.
Although it is unsurprising that the secular liberal media would be in an uproar over what Keyes said, the same can't really be said for certain self-identified pro-life Catholic political writers and commentators. One such writer/commentator is Rod Dreher from The Corner, who today wrote:
The news from Illinois just gets more and more depressing, doesn't it Kathryn? I'm beginning to think Alan Keyes (R-Saturn) is a Democratic plant. Depressingly enough, I've been involved in some heated debates with fellow pro-life Catholic conservatives regarding the Keyes candidacy. Some of them consider it treason to criticize Keyes, because he's pro-life. Such tunnel vision! If Nicolae Ceaucescu, the communist dictator who banned abortion in Romania, came back to life and declared for US Senate, you'd have these lemmings cheering him on because HEY, he's pro-life!
A little harsh and uncharitable if you ask me.
Recently, Republican US Senate candidate Alan Keyes stated that Christ would not vote for his Democrat opponent, Barack Obama, because Mr. Obama supports the right of a woman to kill her unborn child. While certainly a controversial and politically incorrect statement, it is entirely logical, unless one is of the strange opinion that Christ did or does not regard unborn children as human beings.
Although it is unsurprising that the secular liberal media would be in an uproar over what Keyes said, the same can't really be said for certain self-identified pro-life Catholic political writers and commentators. One such writer/commentator is Rod Dreher from The Corner, who today wrote:
The news from Illinois just gets more and more depressing, doesn't it Kathryn? I'm beginning to think Alan Keyes (R-Saturn) is a Democratic plant. Depressingly enough, I've been involved in some heated debates with fellow pro-life Catholic conservatives regarding the Keyes candidacy. Some of them consider it treason to criticize Keyes, because he's pro-life. Such tunnel vision! If Nicolae Ceaucescu, the communist dictator who banned abortion in Romania, came back to life and declared for US Senate, you'd have these lemmings cheering him on because HEY, he's pro-life!
A little harsh and uncharitable if you ask me.
Profile: Smut Lawyers, LLC
How do legal beagle defenders of porn live with themselves, you might ask? By consistently deluding themselves into thinking that graphic videos and still pictures of people perversely bonking one another is constitutionally protected speech. Of course, they draw the line at defending child porn. Why? Because they don't want to have a 'bad' reputation.
Southern California's San Fernando Valley is the epicenter of the adult entertainment industry. The majority of XXX videos on the market have their roots in this strip of dingy suburbs northeast of downtown Los Angeles. But when the Valley's porn purveyors need a lawyer -- and they always need a lawyer -- many head over the Sepulveda Pass to the upscale enclave of Westwood, where the law offices of Weston, Garrou & DeWitt rest high in an innocuous white office tower.
There, surrounded by sports memorabilia, generations of family photos, and a panoramic view of the West L.A. hills, attorney Clyde DeWitt has carved out a reputation as one of the pre-eminent specialists in adult entertainment law. The five-partner practice is one of the only firms in the U.S. to focus on this unusual area, which encompasses issues from free speech to contracts to copyrights.
"It's a lot of fun," says DeWitt, a stocky 55-year-old with a rumbling baritone voice. "First Amendment is the centerpiece of what we do, because the overwhelming majority of our clients' problems are the government trying to regulate them in one way or another."
How do legal beagle defenders of porn live with themselves, you might ask? By consistently deluding themselves into thinking that graphic videos and still pictures of people perversely bonking one another is constitutionally protected speech. Of course, they draw the line at defending child porn. Why? Because they don't want to have a 'bad' reputation.
Southern California's San Fernando Valley is the epicenter of the adult entertainment industry. The majority of XXX videos on the market have their roots in this strip of dingy suburbs northeast of downtown Los Angeles. But when the Valley's porn purveyors need a lawyer -- and they always need a lawyer -- many head over the Sepulveda Pass to the upscale enclave of Westwood, where the law offices of Weston, Garrou & DeWitt rest high in an innocuous white office tower.
There, surrounded by sports memorabilia, generations of family photos, and a panoramic view of the West L.A. hills, attorney Clyde DeWitt has carved out a reputation as one of the pre-eminent specialists in adult entertainment law. The five-partner practice is one of the only firms in the U.S. to focus on this unusual area, which encompasses issues from free speech to contracts to copyrights.
"It's a lot of fun," says DeWitt, a stocky 55-year-old with a rumbling baritone voice. "First Amendment is the centerpiece of what we do, because the overwhelming majority of our clients' problems are the government trying to regulate them in one way or another."
Running Amuck
A Washington State judge effectively rules that homosexuality is the equivalent of race and ethnicity, thus finally enabling some Caucasion males the ability to claim minority status. Twisted.
Thurston County Superior Court Judge Richard Hicks was the second trial judge in four weeks to strike down Washington's Defense of Marriage Act, overwhelmingly approved by the Legislature six years ago.
Hicks, in a 38-page ruling, wrote, "The clear intent of the Legislature to limit government approved contracts of marriage to opposite-sex couples is in direct conflict with the constitutional intent to not allow a privilege to one class of a community that is not allowed to the entire community."
But Hicks went further, finding that under Washington's Constitution, homosexuals are a so-called suspect class, groups with such immutable characteristics as race or sex that entitle them to equal protection of the law.
King County Superior Court Judge William Downing, in his Aug. 4 ruling, had declined to find homosexuals a protected class, based on federal law.
Hicks' finding surprised some legal observers and outraged gay-marriage opponents.
"The court is taking a significant step in deciding the issue this way," said Peter Nicolas, a University of Washington law professor who teaches a course in sexual-orientation law. "A lot of decisions, including some from the U.S. Supreme Court, have said just the opposite."
A Washington State judge effectively rules that homosexuality is the equivalent of race and ethnicity, thus finally enabling some Caucasion males the ability to claim minority status. Twisted.
Thurston County Superior Court Judge Richard Hicks was the second trial judge in four weeks to strike down Washington's Defense of Marriage Act, overwhelmingly approved by the Legislature six years ago.
Hicks, in a 38-page ruling, wrote, "The clear intent of the Legislature to limit government approved contracts of marriage to opposite-sex couples is in direct conflict with the constitutional intent to not allow a privilege to one class of a community that is not allowed to the entire community."
But Hicks went further, finding that under Washington's Constitution, homosexuals are a so-called suspect class, groups with such immutable characteristics as race or sex that entitle them to equal protection of the law.
King County Superior Court Judge William Downing, in his Aug. 4 ruling, had declined to find homosexuals a protected class, based on federal law.
Hicks' finding surprised some legal observers and outraged gay-marriage opponents.
"The court is taking a significant step in deciding the issue this way," said Peter Nicolas, a University of Washington law professor who teaches a course in sexual-orientation law. "A lot of decisions, including some from the U.S. Supreme Court, have said just the opposite."
Tuesday, September 07, 2004
The Intolerance of the "Tolerant" Left
To be a conservative Republican in San Francisco is almost like being a Ronald Reagan admirer in Cuba. I think the only thing that prevents some of these Brownshirt leftists from harrassing me is the fact that I'm of Asian descent (sometimes, playing the race card can be a good thing). (Link via Mark Shea)
The Bay Area prides itself on its openness and acceptance, but many local Republicans said they have been met with intense hostility for their political beliefs. They said they've endured everything from rude remarks to threats and physical violence.
Some said the McCarthy-era paranoia about Communists aptly describes how they often feel.
"There's a lot of teachers out there that are closet Republicans because they are so afraid if they say anything in their workplace, they will be retaliated against," said Karen King, the chair of the County's Republican Party. "That's the ugliness that I would like to get rid of. At the end of the day, I'd like to think the opposition believes in free speech as well."
Jennifer Kerns, a spokeswoman for Republican Assembly candidate Steve Poizner's campaign, said trying to register voters as Republicans in San Mateo County can be a depressing -- or even dangerous -- activity.
"One person had hot coffee thrown on him. Others have had registration forms torn up or kicked off tables. They've also been called racial slurs," Kerns said of voter-registration workers.
To be a conservative Republican in San Francisco is almost like being a Ronald Reagan admirer in Cuba. I think the only thing that prevents some of these Brownshirt leftists from harrassing me is the fact that I'm of Asian descent (sometimes, playing the race card can be a good thing). (Link via Mark Shea)
The Bay Area prides itself on its openness and acceptance, but many local Republicans said they have been met with intense hostility for their political beliefs. They said they've endured everything from rude remarks to threats and physical violence.
Some said the McCarthy-era paranoia about Communists aptly describes how they often feel.
"There's a lot of teachers out there that are closet Republicans because they are so afraid if they say anything in their workplace, they will be retaliated against," said Karen King, the chair of the County's Republican Party. "That's the ugliness that I would like to get rid of. At the end of the day, I'd like to think the opposition believes in free speech as well."
Jennifer Kerns, a spokeswoman for Republican Assembly candidate Steve Poizner's campaign, said trying to register voters as Republicans in San Mateo County can be a depressing -- or even dangerous -- activity.
"One person had hot coffee thrown on him. Others have had registration forms torn up or kicked off tables. They've also been called racial slurs," Kerns said of voter-registration workers.
Much Like His Native Fresno
Republican US Senate candidate Bill Jones seems to be an afterthought for most folks in California. Darned shame too, 'cause even though I fault Jones for switching his endorsement from Bush to McCain back in 2000, and for midwiving California's short lived and unconstitutional 'open primary' system, I really really can't stand Baghdad Barbara Boxer.
Support from Bush — which seems tepid at best — won't do Jones much good in a state where only two of five likely voters say they back the president. And though a public embrace from Schwarzenegger, whose job-approval rating stands above 60%, might help, the freshman governor so far has kept Jones at arm's length.
This is Jones' quandary. Despite campaign swings by such high-profile Republicans as Vice President Dick Cheney, Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist and Sen. John McCain, the Republican Party has not given Jones the kind of support it has given candidates in other states, a disengagement that has left the former Fresno-area rancher mired in a political bog of low name recognition, low fundraising and low voter interest.
(...)
Only half of likely Republican voters were satisfied with Jones as their candidate, though 77% said they would vote for him, according to an August poll by the Public Policy Institute of California. Nearly three-fourths of Democrats were satisfied Boxer was their candidate, and 87% said they'd vote for her.
Republican US Senate candidate Bill Jones seems to be an afterthought for most folks in California. Darned shame too, 'cause even though I fault Jones for switching his endorsement from Bush to McCain back in 2000, and for midwiving California's short lived and unconstitutional 'open primary' system, I really really can't stand Baghdad Barbara Boxer.
Support from Bush — which seems tepid at best — won't do Jones much good in a state where only two of five likely voters say they back the president. And though a public embrace from Schwarzenegger, whose job-approval rating stands above 60%, might help, the freshman governor so far has kept Jones at arm's length.
This is Jones' quandary. Despite campaign swings by such high-profile Republicans as Vice President Dick Cheney, Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist and Sen. John McCain, the Republican Party has not given Jones the kind of support it has given candidates in other states, a disengagement that has left the former Fresno-area rancher mired in a political bog of low name recognition, low fundraising and low voter interest.
(...)
Only half of likely Republican voters were satisfied with Jones as their candidate, though 77% said they would vote for him, according to an August poll by the Public Policy Institute of California. Nearly three-fourths of Democrats were satisfied Boxer was their candidate, and 87% said they'd vote for her.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)