Rep. Bauer and The Mother of All Hypocrisies

It is not my intent to weigh in on the “right to work” issue, but the high drama is hard to leave out of any discussion of what is happening at your state capitol.

Last night, House Democrats walked out for the third time this session. This action holds up the process and reminds everyone of their five-week trip to a Comfort Inn in Illinois last year. That departure killed numerous bills including a 2011 right to work proposal.

Late last week, House Democrats threw out a new notion that could stall right to work for a while.Rep. Pat Bauer wants right to work to be a referendum issue rather than a legislative one. However,the irony of this proposal is remarkable. Former Speaker of the House, Pat Bauer, single-handedly blocked Marriage Protection referendums for more than six years. If he were Speaker today, he’d still be blocking a people’s vote on marriage protection. 

Now, Rep. Bauer says that the people should be allowed to vote on right to work. The differences between the two issues are not insignificant. Marriage is under assault from unelected judges who have virtually no voter accountability and only a voter approved Constitutional amendment can protect our marriage laws. This is very different than a statutory proposal moving through the elected bodies of the legislature in which people can express their opinions and hold their Senators and Representatives accountable. An employment policy law can be changed at any time following an election, an activist judge’s ruling cannot.

Our web site poll found that 75% of you support right to work. I recognize that there are many readers who may live in union households or simply oppose right to work but agree with AFA on family and moral matters. This is not an issue on which AFA is taking an official position.

(I do have my own views on RTW and its supposed pros and cons. I will admit that I do have a hard time ignoring what Thomas Jefferson said about compelling a man to furnish funds for the propagation of ideas he disbelieves and abhors being tyrannical in regard to some of the liberal anti-family agendas and politicians many unions support. Yet, I realize that many union families agree with me on their money going for such political agendas, but honestly worry about future wage earnings under right to work.)

Last night the non-partisan Legislative Services Agency issued an opinion on the Democrat’s referendum amendment calling it “unconstitutional.” It will be interesting to see how this referendum idea unfolds, if it is legally viable. We will wait and see if it is adopted, and if Hoosiers will be swayed one way or another after hearing hundreds upon hundreds of radio and TV ads for and against forced unionization.

Out of the Mouth of Anti-Family Activists, True Intent is Revealed

A leading activist in Canada has put in writing what many parents and pro-family leaders have believed for a long time. Writing for Xtra Vancouver, Managing Editor Robin Perelle blasted parents with traditional beliefs saying, “your outdated morals are no longer acceptable, and we will teach your kids the new norms.” Perelle said that children should be taught to endorse the homosexual agenda.

In response to Ms. Perelle’s public admission, homosexual blogger Daniel Villarreal wrote, “I and a lot of other people want to indoctrinate, recruit, teach, and expose children to queer sexuality AND THERE’S NOTHING WRONG WITH THAT! We want educators to teach future generations of children to accept queer sexuality. In fact, our very future depends on it.” (This is an interesting imperative if gay activists really believe that homosexuality is an in-born genetic behavior.)

Villarreal didn’t stop there. He added: “Why would we push anti-bullying programs or social studies classes that teach kids about the historical contributions of famous queers unless we wanted to deliberately educate children to accept queer sexuality as normal?”

Indiana BMV Celebrates Homosexual Recruitment Center

Homosexual activists are celebrating the Indiana Bureau of Motor Vehicles decision to allow a specialty license plate that celebrates and helps to fund a homosexual teen recruitment center called the Indy Youth Group.

The BMV had rejected the homosexual plate, and even withstood a failed legal attempt by the ACLU of Indiana to force such a plate into existence. This year, for some reason, they have approved the plate. Other plate efforts, which have not been initially approved by the BMV, such as the In God We Trust plate now appearing on 2 million Hoosier cars, went to the legislature for approval.   It is highly unlikely that a license plate for a group encouraging homosexual behaviors among minors would even get a committee hearing.

As news of this first of a kind in the nation license plate circulates, questions may arise about the Daniels Administration’s trickle down values or oversight of this agency and why the BMV reversed course in less than a year.

One has to wonder, since health risks are obviously not a consideration, if a cigar-smoking club could get a specialty license plate now.

What if there was an effort for a specialty license plate to fund an Exodus affiliate ministry in Indiana that helps people overcome same-sex attraction? Can you imagine the outcry or an ACLU lawsuit over an ex-gay organization plate?

Yet, it is not merely the approval of a controversial plate. The BMV web site, which has a large “PRIDE” title, states that part of the plate fees will “build capacity for gay straight alliances in high schools across the state.” Do you think the BMV would have ever approved funds from theChoose Life plate to set up “Teens For Life” clubs or “Exodus Youth” programs in Indiana high schools?   (The choose life plate doesn’t fund anything political or associated with the right to life movement. The funds go for adoption aid and agencies.)

Indiana agencies should remain neutral in the political culture wars raging over societal values. They shouldn’t take actions that undermine the family or support risky lifestyle choices for minor children.

Family And Freedom Days Educate on Legislative Process

Last week I mentioned Advance America’s Family and Freedom Days. I mistakenly implied that these educational events occurred every Tuesday. They, in fact, are scheduled for January 24th andFebruary 14th. You can print out a church bulletin insert and learn more about these events at this link: http://www.advanceamerica.com/pdf/AAIFamilyFreedomDays2012.pdf

Grassroots Training Event this Saturday!

Our Grassroots training event in Westfield will occur this Saturday starting at 8:30 am and going until noon. We need a certain number of attendees for our workshops to be effective. If you plan on attending, but have not yet let us know, please email me at micah@afain.net The cost to attend the seminar at The Journey Church, 17716 Eagletown Road in Westfield is $20.

Court Turns Away Challenge to Indiana Voucher Program

Late last week, the Indiana State Teachers Association lost their first legal effort to block the state’s new school voucher program for lower income families. On Friday, Marion Superior CourtJudge Michael Keele ruled that the School Choice Scholarship Program did not violate the Indiana Constitution because the state isn’t directly funding religious schools. The Judge found that like other aid programs, it gives vouchers to parents, who can choose where they want to use them.

The ruling also rejected arguments that the program unconstitutionally took funds away from public schools and sent money to private schools. Judge Keele wrote that the Indiana Constitution allows “educational options outside of the public school system.”

Around 4,000 of roughly a million Hoosier school students are in the new voucher program. Those numbers are expected to grow this fall. Many news stories have called this a major defeat for the opponents of the program. Nevertheless, the ISTA is expected to appeal the ruling on to higher courts.

Including Creation with Evolution in Public School

Senate Bill 89 is a one-sentence bill authored by Senator Dennis Kruse. It allows a local school board to choose to allow alternatives to the theory of evolution to be taught in life origins discussions as alternative theories. The bill is simple and it leaves the decision up to local school authorities. Still, we expect fierce opposition to even this modest proposal when the bill receives a public hearing on the afternoon of January 25th.

No related posts.

What Will He Ask of His Final Session?

Governor Mitch Daniels is going to reveal his legislative agenda for his final General Assembly session on December 16th. At that time he is also expected to state his position on proposed “right to work” legislation that Republican House and Senate leaders have called their top priority for 2012.

AFA of Indiana will be one of the many players in the political process watching to see what the Governor proposes.Shocker: Politicians Who Don’t Play by the Rules

You probably will not be surprised to learn that when politicians in New York forced through a law to redefine marriage over the will of the people this summer, they violated their own rules, and possibly the state constitution along the way. (A poll taken a week before the law was passed found that a majority of New Yorkers did not want same-sex marriage and even more preferred to allow the people to vote on the matter, rather than the state legislature.)

What is surprising is that a New York Judge has sided with the Liberty Counsel agreeing that rules were violated and thus further legal review of the law is appropriate. Judge Robert Wiggens ruling yesterday is a blow to Governor Andrew Cuomo and New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg. The judge specifically called Governor Cuomo’s excuse for violating state open door laws “disingenuous.” Yet, he didn’t stop there. The Judge also disapproved of the “clear arm-twisting by the Executive on the Legislative [that] permeates this entire process.”

Whether this case ultimately leads to a redo of the law in the proper manner, or an actual vote of the people on this issue as a remedy is probably a long shot, but it is an interesting case to watch. It would be nice to see a judge slap the hands of elected politicians who so intentionally rule over the will of the people. This would be particularly rewarding when politicians went so far as to discard laws and their own rules adopted to protect the public and the integrity of the legislative process.

Climate Change and Public Confidence

In what some are calling “Climategate 2” another review of thousands of emails from various scientists at the very center of the global warming computer models should have everyone concerned. The email dump comes two years to the day of a similar release stemming from Freedom of Information Act requests.

Regardless of your view on the issue of global warming, the apparent intentional cooking of the data by scientists in order to promote a political agenda, (fueled in large part by government funding to scientists and schools in expectation of certain results), is very troubling. Science should be transparent, fact based and impartial in order for the public to have confidence in its claims.

The emails make it pretty clear that many scientists at the center of climate change research understand that this is foremost a political issue. It also is clear that the scientists pushing a global warming model believe that their case is weak and very dependent upon doctoring the numbers and the data.

You can read more about this interesting story at these two Forbes Magazine links:

http://www.forbes.com/sites/jamestaylor/2011/11/23/climategate-2-0-new-e-mails-rock-the-global-warming-debate/

http://www.forbes.com/sites/larrybell/2011/11/29/climategate-ii-more-smoking-guns-from-the-global-warming-establishment/

Saying “No” in the Best Interest of Women and Children

In 2005 Canada became the fourth country to unravel the logical time-tested boundary of one man and one woman marriage in acquiescence to homosexual activists and secularists. It didn’t take long before those waiting in the wings made their move. As polygamy.com a Maine based US entity notes in their motto, “polygamy: the next civil rights battle,” there are many groups cheering on the homosexual activists because of their odd desire to twist marriage like it is mere Silly Putty.

(By the way, calling one’s sexual desire or behavior a “civil right” is essentially an illogical claim that our founders pledged their “lives, fortunes, and sacred honor” for a sweeping right to do what is wrong, or back in their day, was also a crime.)

Last week a Supreme Court Judge in British Columbia surprised many when he handed down a 350-page ruling against polygamy. Chief Justice Robert Bauman found that the law prohibiting polygamy was justified because “(w)omen in polygamous relationships are at an elevated risk of physical and psychological harm,” and children “suffer more emotional, behavioral and physical problems, as well as lower educational achievement than children in monogamous families.”

Justice Bauman’s decision noted that young girls frequently enter into polygamous marriages with much older men and face health risks from early sexual activity and pregnancy, while young men are often forced out of polygamous communities to reduce competition for wives. And Bauman concluded that being exposed to these things, ideas and harmful gender perceptions in polygamous households harms children.

Polygamy advocates argued that Canada’s laws against polygamy were rooted in Christian belief and as such should be rejected. Bauman disagreed, “Polygamy was not prohibited because it was a religious belief, or, to turn the coin, because Parliament wanted to impose a Christian religious belief in monogamous marriage. I find that the original prohibition was prompted by largely secular concerns with perceived harms associated with the practice to women, children and society. As I have discussed, socially imposed universal monogamy, while embraced by Christianity, had its roots in Greco-Roman society,” his ruling states.

It is rather remarkable that this judge would rule this way given the fact that the very same logic, could have, and should have been used to prohibit same-sex marriage. Had Canada considered the significant physical and mental health risks of homosexuality, the harm to children raised in homosexual homes, the dramatically higher rates of domestic violence and substance abuse, our neighbors to the north would likely have left marriage alone six years ago.

An appeal of Bauman’s ruling is expected. Already an upset law professor at the University of Toronto is complaining that an appeal is needed because Judge Bauman’s ruling is a pro-marriage statement and therefore a moral judgment that she cannot accept. “You can’t just say that marriage is better than non-marriage . . . What happened to swingers? What happened to people who are adulterous?“Prof. Brenda Cossman told the Toronto Globe.

Apparently, in Cossman’s mind, even those who reject marriage should be able to get married, or because there are some who trash their own marriage, marriage itself should be legally dismantled.

Congress May End Help That Could Mean a Lot to AFA

One of the consequences of this continuous “great recession” is that fewer and fewer Hoosiers have money on hand for regular contributions to donation run organizations like AFA of Indiana. Yet, there are still many ways in which you might be able to help support AFA-IN. In fact, I have included a flyer on this subject in our December year-end letter, which many of you will receive in a week or two.

One of those options for support of AFA is called a “Charitable Rollover Gift” to AFA of Indiana from an Individual Retirement Account. If someone is over 70, they can contact their IRA plan custodian and ask that a charitable gift from the IRA (up to a $100,000 maximum) be given to AFA of Indiana to help support our mission to defend your values. However, this charitable rollover is only an available option until December 31, 2011 unless Congress takes action to extend the waiving of federal income tax penalties on such a gift. If this is an option that you would like to discuss with a family member or your IRA custodian, our Federal Tax ID number is: 35-1684594. You can also call us at 317-257-7221.

Here are a couple of case study examples of how this might work as a gift to AFA-IN or as part of a required minimum distribution from one’s IRA:

http://www.rcgf.org/CaseStrategies/Henry.pdf

http://www.rcgf.org/CaseStrategies/Landy.pdf

No related posts.

Rumors of My Death Have Been Greatly Exaggerated 

Political commentators looking for a clear trend among Hoosier voters may be disappointed this morning. They may be left with fairly minor observations like “voters are looking for new faces.”   Yet, even that claim is to be tempered as many incumbent mayors in Fort Wayne, Indianapolis, Terre Haute, Kokomo and Goshen won re-election. Scores of incumbent city council members also held on yesterday in cities all across the state. Many races that were expected to be close were not. Other races were closer than predicted. In cities like Indianapolis, Elwood, Anderson and Evansville, Republicans won mayoral races but Democrats held or gained control of the City Councils. In Fort Wayne, and Goshen, Democrats held mayoral seats, but the GOP gained majorities on the city Council. Gary, Indiana elected their first female mayor, former Indiana Attorney General Karen Freeman-Wilson. Both political parties can point to significant victories in various cities to one degree or another.

One headline that you won’t find this year is a claim of the demise of the Democratic Party following a beating last year, a lousy economy, and the drag of President Obama’s failures on Hoosier Democrats. You will also not hear much of Democrat apathy or poor voter turnout of their base due to the “Obama economy” and the President’s ratings. Considering a continuous 9% unemployment rate, this is rather remarkable. This predicts a huge political battle of epic proportions a year from now.

As for AFA of Indiana’s perspective there may be one observation of interest. Battles over religious freedom will still occur at the city level, but the homosexual demand groups are going to have to change their strategy in many Hoosier cites. For example, the city councilor in Fort Wayne, Karen Goldner, who had championed their effort to elevate homosexual or cross-dressing behaviors to the same moral equivalency as race was easily defeated by newcomer Russ Jehl. This is a victory indicates that the activists’ agenda for a sexual orientation ordinance is dead there.

In Goshen this issue reappeared when a local Christian radio station brought it to the attention of their listeners because supporters had pledged to bring up the issue again after a defeat in 2009. However, it appears as though they have even fewer supporters on the council after yesterday’s election than they did then. Similarly in Columbus, another city targeted by this effort, which is being funded by homosexual billionaire Tim Gill and global socialist George Soros’ Tides Foundation through the Indianapolis-based Indiana Equality, the Republicans swept every office including a seat held by the Democrats since 1967.

You can probably expect homosexual demands groups to push for marriage like efforts in Indianapolis through a domestic partnership bill or other parts of their agenda in Evansville where they have a sympathetic newly elected Republican mayor and a strong Democrat majority on the city council.

These city issues are efforts to create special behavior based rights which can then be pointed back toward should a court case ever seek to overturn Indiana’s marriage statutes. In several states, homosexual demands groups have shrewdly and logically argued in their legal briefings that a state cannot preserve marriage as only between a man and a woman when several cities in that state give other special rights and protections to homosexuals.

Such city ordinance efforts always conflict with the religious liberties of employers, employees, churches, charities and much needed groups like the Boy Scouts and the Salvation Army. They also set up legal liability problems for businesses because of the fluid and ambiguous definitions around homosexual behaviors, which most employees and employers would prefer to be left out of the business environment completely.

In Springfield, Ohio, a pastor gave a remarkable sermon on this very issue a week ago in advance of a city referendum on a sexual orientation ordinance.  From start to finish, it is one of the best-researched current issue sermons I have ever heard on this topic. I would encourage you to take some time to listen to this excellent 35-minute audio explaining the problems with these types of city ordinances here:

http://www.ccv.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/11/Watchman-on-the-Wall-Sermon-FCC-Springfield-Craig-Grammer.mp3

No related posts.

Oh That Voodoo, That You Do, When You Protect Church Freedoms

Yesterday, I attended the final Joint Summer Study Committee on Child Care Issues in the Indiana House Ways and Means Committee room. I sat next to a friend who mentioned how contentious this committee had been. It didn’t take long for this to play out in this final hearing.

The contention boils down to those who want to give state government more power over church childcare ministries in order to improve some daycare center conditions, versus those who see this as a violation of the true meaning of “a wall of separation” envisioned to keep government out of churches. The hearing took a weird turn when Chairman Tim Wesco moved through the short agenda to end the meeting. Senator Travis Holdman began a rather lengthy talk about his time doing mission work in Haiti many years ago and the difficulties he ran into in trying to help children with medical assistance. As he spoke, I found myself thinking, “please don’t go where I think you’re going with this.” Unfortunately, he did!  Senator Holdman spoke about the power that Voodoo witch doctors have in many of the villages of Haiti and their power to turn people into zombies. He then turned his example into an attack upon Eric Miller of Advance America and I would assume, myself, for our opposition to his bill last year. He compared our efforts to that of the Witch Doctors who give people a zombie drug because people repeated our concerns about his bill on church daycare regulations.

Senate Bill 56 was a bill that, among other thing, would have required church childcare ministry centers to have “nutritionally balanced snacks” and given the state the power to fine or shut down a church ministry without a court order. The bill had some reasonable expectations too, but its supporters revealed their purpose when they repeatedly called it only “a first step.”  What then, is step number two that the government has planned for Indiana churches?

The bill was promoted as a way to protect children, without a doubt, a noble goal. However, it is unclear how new regulations and yearly inspections by a bureaucrat from Indianapolis would be more effective than parents. Moms or dads are at their child care center every morning and afternoon to drop off and pick up their most precious loved one and they care about conditions.  Moreover, if there are centers out there that are unsafe, as Senator Holdman and others claim, why not call the police department or the department of health about those specific centers? This could be an enforcement issue as much as anything else.

I spoke with a pastor after the hearing who told me that what many on that committee do not seem to realize is the great lengths churches with day care centers are going in regard to insurance and lawsuit concerns to ensure good care for children today.

Interestingly, he and Eric Miller both thought that there is a safe way to achieve the stated desire of Sen. Holdman. Churches would probably welcome offers of assistance, information and training from Family and Social Services about child safety and facility conditions. Rep. Wesco attempted to add recommendations for the state to offer such assistance into the minutes of the committee in regard to child safety and child abuse reporting. However, Senator Holdman opposed this effort, claiming that it fell so far short of what he had hoped the committee might do legislatively (regulations), that he could not support it. Rep. Wesco’s recommendation was therefore deleted from the final committee draft.

In spite of being labeled as a practitioner of “Indiana Christian Voodoo” held over “superstitious” pastors, I still want to give Senator Holdman the benefit of the doubt in regard to his intent. However, long before he was a legislator, this battle has raged between those in the child care industry who do not like that our founders set up in principle a different, more favorable view of ministry. The day care industry does not really like competing with churches. Many simply want children only in government run childcare centers. Intentionally or not, Sen. Holdman has aligned himself with those secular, big government forces.

The lines were drawn today for another battle between the “good” intentions of government verses the role of parents and the freedoms of churches. We’ll see how far this effort gets next year. One thing is for sure, this issue is not going away . . . no matter what spell we cast over the matter.

Being “Pro-Life” is Not Enough

With less than two weeks until Election Day it is good to remember the importance and the value of your vote. One problem for any kind of political constituency is having its support and votes taken for granted by politicians. As an example, I would argue that 96% of African-Americans voting Democratic year in and year out might not be in the best political interests of black Americans. Yet, such a problem falls at the feet of the voter as much as it does the politician who takes those votes for granted regardless of his political actions, abilities or positions.

Let’s be honest. The same could often be said of socially conservative Christian voters (of any race). Many people assume that if a political candidate is “pro-life” then he must be pro-family and socially conservative. Many Republicans have realized this assumption and therefore act as if all that matters to securing the votes of 40% of the GOP base is abortion. (There are also Democrat politicians who think just being pro-life can secure the votes of socially conservative Democratic voters.) Pro-life and pro-family groups may have also contributed to this single-issue perception over the years.

Take, for example, the two candidates running for mayor of Evansville. The Republican claims to be pro-life, but both candidates are actively helping raise money for a multi-state homosexual demands group. Both are pushing for the indoctrination of children in schools (under the guise of safety) and both are helping to undermine marriage.

Incidentally, I always find it amazing when people are shocked by homosexual publications with ads, pictures and other items that verge on pornographic. Why aren’t more politicians worried, when their pictures, or praise, appear in homosexual publications that most parents would never allow in their home or near their children? You’d like to think those running for the highest offices in a city or state have better discernment in regard to the sensibilities of families who constantly fight a sex-obsessed culture intent on destroying the innocence of children.

This problem goes all the way up the ladder. There are presidential candidates who are doing this as well. In fact, it could be argued that one candidate who recently released a strong pro-life video (the day after missing the most important pro-life vote in a year) is anything but pro-family or socially conservative.

This raises two interesting questions. First, what is your vote worth, what price do you put on it? Second, what criteria does a candidate have to meet to get your vote?

Last week I spoke with a nationally known pro-family leader who just joined a new pro-life group in Ohio. Another member of that group is Dr John Wilke, a legendary grandfather of the pro-life movement who served as the President of National Right to Life for over a decade. The new group will not give any candidate for office their pro-life endorsement unless that candidate can agree with the principles of the Manhattan Declaration. (http://manhattandeclaration.org/the-declaration/read.aspx)

Not every candidate who deserves your support will agree with you on every issue. Some of my closest friends in the legislature do not even vote the same on every issue upon which AFA takes a position. However, since I began at AFA of Indiana, our donor polls consistently reveal that there are three issues out of 20 in our survey that always come up with 80%+ support, and rate 10+ points higher than all the others. Those three are my personal price for support. As best I can, I will not give any candidate my vote unless they will defend the fundamental right to life, protect marriage, the cornerstone of the family, and guard our religious liberties against the agenda of atheists and secularists. Because I believe I am accountable for my vote to God, if a candidate or both candidates are substantially wrong on any of these three, I will not vote for that candidate or I will skip that race altogether if both are wrong on these essential values. (By the way, another principle I hold is that I will not give campaign money to a political party which might work against my values through their support of candidates whom I would not give my vote. Therefore, I only donate to certain candidates who meet my criteria.)

As the 2011 election draws near, this is just my personal opinion. You will have to have your own criteria, but I thought this might be a good time for some food for thought before you head to the polls.

No related posts.

Just How Bad is It?   Pretty Bad

If you feel like you have been crushed financially, you probably have. A new report finds that the US standard of living has declined longer and more steeply in the last three years than during any time since the government began that measurement fifty years ago. The average American now has $1,315 less in disposable income than at the onset of the Great Recession three years ago.Something Has Happened In America on the Way to Church 

Throughout the 20th Century, America’s churches (of which there are perhaps as many as 400,000 today) were not very socially stratified. Attendance by economic or social status was not all that distinct from group to group. However, a new study looking back over the last fifty years has found that the bottom may now be falling out of church attendance among white middle class Americans.

The scholarly study from sociologists at Johns Hopkins University and the University of Virginia called,No Money, No Honey, No Church, has found that low or moderately educated white middle class Americans are abandoning church. However, attendance rates for those with 2 yrs or more of college education in the studied age group of 25-44 are holding fairly steady.

While the rate of church attendance since the 1970’s has been in decline in America, the rates for moderately educated, working class whites have now declined at twice the rate of more affluent whites (from 38% to 23%). This is significant given that the moderately educated working class make up 60 percent of the adult white population.

The scholars point to two reasons for this, the first being economic decline. While I have some questions why this would keep people from church, the other theory in the report is much more compelling. In short, the white middle class and, therefore, the church have also become victims of the culture war. 

Americans with college degrees are now more likely to have successful marriages and families and they have higher church attendance rates. In contrast, moderately educated whites are now less likely to marry, more likely to divorce and more likely to have adopted worldly views of premarital sex.

The study concludes that, “moderately educated whites are now less likely to be married with children, and to hold familistic views, they may also be less likely to feel comfortable or interested in regularly attending churches that continue to uphold conventional norms, either implicitly or explicitly.”

The report warns that this is not a good development because of the positive societal benefits churches create. In describing this church effect, the report observes, “When moderately educated white men and women can attain strong and stable marriages, they can find reinforcement for the lives they lead from their churches. In other words, white married couples attend church with their children partly as a way of displaying to their fellow congregants, who are often their neighbors and friends, their sense of responsibility and their commitment to familism – and also to gain reinforcement for their moral view of the world.”

It is somewhat ironic that whether a church wants to stand up on the front lines for marriage and the values of virtue and family, or if it chooses to not make waves, the fallout from the culture war may already be negatively impacting its attendance numbers. As more people embrace a culture that constantly opposes the Judeo-Christian ethic, both our churches and our people suffer.

Giving Hoosiers A Second Chance

In the August AFAIN newsletter, I wrote a short article showing that the number of prisoners in the US has gone from just 196,429 in 1970 to 2,186,230 in 2005. This is an increase of 800% in just 35 years. Prison overpopulation, recidivism rates, prison costs and construction have all become significant issues for government, as the family and morality declines. (Around 80% of people in prison come from homes in which there was not a married father present.)

Governments can keep building prisons or farm them out to private corporations as a cost savings to taxpayers, but such things are not a real solution to such a pervasive problem.

There are many things that could be proposed. One option is to try to cut down on the recidivism rate for lower level crimes. That is an avenue Representative Eric Turner tried as an author of House Bill 1211 which successfully passed the legislature this year. This “Second Chance” law seeks to address the problem with a series of incentives. The law seeks to help those who have paid their sentences and were a non-violent, non-sex crime, offender. If the individuals are seeking professional or educational goals, the convicted individual can petition a court to keep their arrest record private, including for employment applications. There is an 8-year period in which the individual cannot have committed a crime following their sentence as a requirement of being able to petition for the second chance benefits. The prosecutor in the case can oppose the petition, which may lead to a hearing on the matter.

There are some legislators who want to revisit and make some small changes to the Second Chance Law, but it is a subject that needed consideration. In fact, Rep. Turner recently received an award from a coalition of groups dealing with addiction issues for his passage of HB 1211.

For years many inner city ministers have been complaining about convicted individuals, who have served their time and changed their ways, being completely shut out of the job market, which can force many of them back toward crime. House Enrolled Act 1211 may be a step to help those people re-enter society as productive, good citizens who forever avoid being among the statistics of an exploding prison population.

Government Argues for Dangerous New Intrusions Into US Churches

When a story about a religious freedom case comes across the airwaves or the Internet, if you’re like me, you probably assume that the radical secularists at the ACLU are at it again. This may be why the story of a church lawsuit before the US Supreme Court involving a Lutheran school’s termination of a teacher’s contract is such a surprise.

This time the Obama Administration has pushed a court case all the way up to the top asking the Justices to side with their desire to punish churches and to dictate their employment policies. They are doing this even though in the last ten years all twelve US Federal Circuit Courts have rejected their argument against religious liberty.

The question centers on whether the government can overrule or even weigh in on employment matters at churches or religious institutions. Solicitor General Donald Verrilli argued in his brief that the government should be able to tell churches whom it can or cannot hire or fire, regardless of the church’s teachings, thereby opposing the existing religious exemption.

Currently, the government can typically overrule the exemption only if the employee’s offices or duties can be shown to be phony or entirely secular. The Obama Administration apparently wants to eliminate this exemption entirely, which should send chills down the back of every pastor reading this email. 

It is one thing to have wacky activists trying to force EEOC regulations onto churches and religious institutions as a blatantly obvious political move designed to equate homosexual behaviors with skin color. It is quite another to have the top officials at the US Department of Justice arguing for a pathway for the government to do exactly the same thing.

America: To Occupy or Not to Occupy

Although there is a lot of discussion about the Occupy Wall Street protests occurring in cities across the nation, and a lot of overly favorable coverage that may overlook some of its radical, anarchist and Marxist elements, more Americans do not agree with the participants.

A new USA Today/Gallup Poll finds that more Americans blame Washington, DC than Wall Street for the nation’s economic problems. When asked who is more to blame for the weak state of the economy, 64% of people chose the federal government. Only 30% chose big financial institutions.

Most Americans (54%) still believe that our economic system is fair to them, compared to 44% who said it is not. Some polls have found that most Americans still have not yet made up their mind on how they view the Occupy Wall Street protestors. The survey of 1,026 adults was taken on October 15th and 16th 2011.

No related posts.

Your Worldview Affects What You Choose to Watch

The Hollywood Reporter recently hired the firm of Penn Schoen Berland for an extensive survey of registered voters in order to study their movie viewing habits. The poll finds that a person’s worldview does impact where they spend their dollars in terms of entertainment as well as how they react to Hollywood in general.

The study reveals that in spite of Hollywood’s pervasive liberalism, many on the business side of the industry worry about political activities and comments far more than you may think. They have reason for concern too. Republicans and Tea Party activists are more likely to consider a celebrity’s political views before dropping money on movies tickets. Thirty-five percent of Republicans and 45% of Tea Party activists say that they consider a star’s political position before viewing a film, compared to only 20% of Democrats.

During the survey, actor Morgan Freeman made some controversial remarks against conservatives and the Tea Party. The survey found that 24% of movie goers were aware of Freeman’s comments. His movie Dolphin Tale originally had considerably higher interest among conservative and religious moviegoers, but following those remarks 34% of conservatives and 37% of Tea Partiers said they became less interested in the film. (In contrast, 42% of liberals said their interest in the movie increased after Freeman’s comments.)

Overall, Democrats are bigger moviegoers, perhaps due to Hollywood’s liberal reputation, something perceived by both Democrats and Republicans. The survey found that Democrats are much more likely to embrace our pop culture and to want to be “in the know” about it. In the last six months, Democrats have seen an average of almost six movies (5.7) but Republicans have seen fewer than four.

Another finding is that Republicans are more likely to wait for a movie to go to video to watch it at home. Democrats are more likely to pay to see a film on opening weekend. The study’s authors conclude that, “typically when you see a movie, it will reflect a Democrat’s values. Republicans are not getting the films they want.”

When they go to the theater, the differences continue. Republicans distinctively prefer family films. Democrats like more on the edge films. This showed up in the study on favorites. Republicans were more likely to name classics and Oscar winners such as The Sound of Music and It’s a Wonderful Life. Democrats chose films like Bonnie and Clyde and The Silence of the Lambs. Among recent films, Republicans were much more likely to choose Soul Surfer and Secretariat. Democrats chose as their tops recent films, The Social Network, Bad Teacher and Easy A (the last two are both morally and religiously offensive comedy films about teen/school sex.)

Republicans are more prone to say that they disapprove of the profanity and sex in movies, yet both parties agree there is too much of each in today’s films.

A majority of Democrats say that Hollywood films are generally inspiring and uplifting. A majority of Republicans disagree with this notion. Not surprisingly, 62% of Democrats say that Hollywood shows America in a positive light. Only 32% of Republicans believe this. Only 21% of Democrats say that Hollywood portrays the US Military in a negative light, compared to 44% of Republicans who feel this way.

Church Comes Up with Jesus Version 2.0

The last two weeks have not been the greatest for the reputation of the Jesus Metropolitan Community Church in the Midwest. Although not a particularly large “denomination,” the church does have a loyal national following. In fact it is said that the largest JMCC church in the Midwest is here in Indianapolis. Unlike the Southern Baptists or the Assemblies of God, the JMCC generally gets a whole lot of favorable press from those in the media who love the novelty of a homosexual church.

Mark Bidwell, a Metropolitan Community Church pastor in Ferndale, Michigan (who also served as a chaplain for the local police department) has had to resign after a man whom he met on a homosexual internet site overdosed on Methamphetamine in Bidwell’s home during an anonymous, multiple, sex orgy. Reports indicate that Rev. Bidwell had picked up Michael Fitch that night and took him to his home where the two men injected crystal Methamphetamine and had sex. Fitch then contacted another man online who came to the pastor’s house and joined them, though Bret Colpaertclaims that he did not take the drugs. Colpaert apparently did not know either man beforehand. While Fitch was sitting on the side of the pastor’s bed, Colpaert noticed that he had stopped breathing and began to turn blue. Rev. Bidwell called the police, but by the time Fitch arrived at the hospital he was already dead. It is not exactly the kind of news story that makes folks think very highly your church.

In Indianapolis, the homosexual Jesus Metropolitan Community Church, which recently renamed itself “The Life Journey Church” isn’t helping its reputation much either with a new citywide billboard and yard sign campaign asking “Who Stole Jesus?”

The good news, they claim, is that Jesus has been taken and the Life Journey church has now found the true Jesus of the Bible. We should all rejoice when anyone, including those struggling with same-sex attraction finds Jesus. Just as when he found many of us and other readers as liars, adulterers, cheaters, and any other or all other kinds of sinners that we as fallen humans are in the shadow of a Holy God. Yet, we aren’t to stay that way with a saving faith. This is why AFA of Indiana strongly supports ministries like Exodus International and Parents and Friends of Ex-gays, which offer faith-centered help in overcoming same-sex attraction and gender identity confusion.

Life Journey Church makes a valid point that many churches today are not teaching, promoting, worshiping or following Jesus, or the full picture of Jesus.

However, it doesn’t take a very long look at their web site to realize that Life Journey is doing the exact same thing they accuse other churches of doing.  As the Jesus Metropolitan Church denomination founder, Troy Perry, readily admits, he created a new denomination to justify his homosexual lifestyle (which he calls his gift from God) and therefore he places the Bible second to his desired view of sexual behavior. In his 1990 book he explained, “What influences lead us to new ways of understanding Scripture? New scientific information, social change, and personal experience are perhaps the greatest forces for change in the way we interpret the Bible and develop beliefs.”

Life Journey Church is following in the footsteps of its founder in how it reinterprets the Bible. This is the same church that spent over $50,000 on billboards claiming that David and Jonathan were homosexual, Naomi and Ruth were lesbians and that Jesus affirmed homosexuality. So, if you see blue and white yard signs or billboards around Indianapolis from the Life Journey Church asking, “who stole Jesus?” the answer is “they did!”

Great Inventors Have Great Failures, But Not Always Like This

As you know, America lost two great historic figures last week; Fred Shuttlesworth and Steve Jobs. Both men profoundly changed our nation. I was a fan of Apple products for almost twenty years almost exclusively before it was cool to use their platform of computers. Many people have compared Steve Jobs to Thomas Edison, and I think they are exactly right. Among other things, Apple has forever changed how we view and treat data, music, movies and computing. Yet, for every great inventor there are often lots of failures.   Unfortunately, Jobs’ greatest failure was unnecessary and perhaps the only one that he never learned from and then built upon.

Steve Jobs was known for being very private about his life, even the fact that he was adopted into the Jobs family, as the child of a single birth mother was not widely known until recently. In his last interview with his biographer, the author was taken aback by how personal Jobs became, even giving him pictures of his adoptive family for the book. When asked why he finally showed this personal side, Jobs said, “I want my kids to know me.”  (Implying that they would need to read the biography to learn about their dad.)

Jobs changed how millions of people communicate every day. He made billions, which gave him what so many Americans worship and desire, but at the end of the day, he needed an author to reach his own children on his behalf.

Civil Rights Leader Was a Defender of that Movement

The other loss this week was the passing of Rev. Fred Shuttlesworth who was an original founder of the Southern Christian Leadership Conference with Rev. Martin Luther King. In fact, Shuttlesworth is among the three top civil rights leaders most often mentioned together by historians of that era, the other two being Dr. King and Rev. Ralph Abernathy.

I have a board member who knew Rev. Shuttlesworth in his latter years. The renowned leader was always a champion of human rights, kindness and fair treatment toward others. He was also proud of the history of the civil rights movement and did not want to see it’s legacy diminished, cheapened or hijacked by new political activists. The always bold and outspoken Rev. Shuttlesworth wrote a statement in that regard several years ago when he was again the interim leader of the SCLC for my Board member. Here is part of that statement, which he titled, “Is Gay Rights a Civil Rights Issue?”:

“I was among the original five who started the Southern Christian Leadership Conference (SCLC), and our primary focus back then was to put an end to racial segregation under the Jim Crow system. As the SCLC’s first secretary, I never took down anything in our minutes that addressed the issue of gay rights. The issue of gay rights was not our focus, and should not be confused with The Civil Rights Movement.

The big question being asked today is whether or not gay rights and civil rights are one and the same. Despite what many of this world may argue, I cannot waiver from the God-established principle that marriage is a union meant to be shared between a man and a woman; and should not ignored! God created men to be husbands of wives, and women to be wives. Nowhere in the Bible did Jesus sanction same sex marriages, so as a minister and a devoted follower of the teachings of Christ, I cannot personally endorse nor support same sex marriages on any level.”

You probably will not see this aspect of Rev. Shuttlesworth reported anywhere else, but I can assure you that his view is far more prevelant than many people realize.  Among the African American community, particularly its church leaders the equating of a sexual behavior with one’s inborn, unchangeable, benign skin color is offensive.

Early Voting Has Begun

Lastly, I want to remind our readers that this is an election year for local city offices.  Early voting began this week. You can vote early up until the day before Election Day at your local county clerk’s office. To find out who is on your ballot, click here:
https://indianavoters.in.gov/PublicSite/Public/FT1/PublicOnBallotSearch.aspx

No related posts.

Government Caught Pink Handed Inflating Numbers

As you recall, while campaigning, Senator Barack Obama appeared to be one of the most electrifying, populist, hopeful and promising presidential candidates to seek that office since Ronald Reagan. In reality however, President Obama is the most liberal and ideologically extreme of any person to occupy the White House in our lifetimes. He is seemingly a true believer in this agenda. He appears unwilling to deviate from his worldview in part perhaps because, (even by his own admissions), he spent his whole life surrounded by America-hating radicals seeking to undermine the foundations of our nation and constantly disparaging the values essential to those foundations. It should be no surprise then that the Obama administration has been caught fabricating numbers on behalf of those seeking to tear apart marriage and sexual virtue, the keys to a healthy civilization. The US Census Bureau has been forced to admit that it has been artificially inflating the numbers of same-sex households in America by nearly twice their actual numbers.

This effort has had some success too. Not long ago, I received a phone call from a reporter wanting to write a story about the growing number of same-sex households in Indiana as revealed by this Census data. The reporter had figured out that those living together are the most likely to marry should our laws ever be redefined. These new numbers might represent some sort of trend or growing number of those experiencing discrimination, even though people can live outside the norm more freely today than ever before in history. (In fact, those who abide by rational traditional mores are becoming the ones society increasingly looks down upon.)

Under the revised Census data, the number of same sex households in the entire US, both married, where allowed, and unmarried, is less than ¾ of a million, or only about 1% of the number of heterosexual married households. (That percent is even smaller as a percent of all heterosexual couple led households when the numbers of unmarried cohabiting heterosexuals are included.)

In Indiana, the revised numbers indicate that there are less than 6,000 same-sex households statewide, rather than 10,200 reported in 2010. By comparison there are 1.25 million married heterosexual households in the state. Social liberals would like to upend Indiana’s schools, textbooks, religious and charitable institutions and various other parts of society to dramatically redefine marriage to order accommodate four-tenths of one percent of households. What lifestyle not practiced by 99.6% of the population might we be forced to embrace next?

Another myth perpetuated by cultural liberals is that homosexuality makes up ten percent of the population. Even at that, the pop culture’s constant obsession with the homosexual agenda has skewed American’s views far worse. A recent poll found that most Americans now believe that nearly 25% of the population engages in homosexuality.

In reality, the percentage of people who exclusively experience homosexuality in regard to three criteria: attraction, behavior and self-identification is incredibly small at only 0.6% of men and 0.2%of women. If you use only the broadest of these criteria, self-identification, just 2.8% of US males and 1.4% of females identify as homosexual or lesbian. Incidentally, this data comes from the US National Health and Life Survey the same study and same number cited in the legal brief signed by thirty-one leading homosexual demands groups filed in the 2003 Lawrence v. Texas Supreme Court case. Yet, this reality has not hindered the over-inflated numbers in news stories, articles, web sites, blogs, editorials, etc. If you “Google” the term “ten percent gay” it will bring up 3 million (2,970,000) hits.

It seems obvious that there are those in this administration who want to advance a particular narrative in regard to homosexuality and marriage. It surprised many that this agenda would be so extensive that it would even include the number crunchers at the Census Bureau.
(One of the criteria courts have established to determine minority and civil rights recognition is the demonstration of political powerlessness among the disaffected group. That is a discussion for another day.)

A Look at Some Other Numbers for Indiana

Today, on twenty-three radio station dials in twenty-two cities across Indiana, our AFA radio news minute will cover the news of the latest abortion numbers from the Indiana State Department of Health. The news story notes the significant increase (16%) in chemical abortions (RU-486) from the previous year.

The most recent data recently released by the ISDH, through the Indiana Induced Termination of Pregnancy Report for 2008 has some other numbers that may interest you. Here is more Indiana abortion data:

• In 2008 there were a total of 10,919 abortions performed in Indiana;

• Of the 10,919 abortions performed, 95.9% (10,469) were performed on Indiana residents;

• Out of 10,919 abortions in Indiana, only 367 occurred in a hospital;

• Of the 1,269 chemical abortions in 2008, only one occurred in a hospital;

• All but two abortions in 2008 occurred in five Indiana counties: Allen (595); Lake (2,140); Marion (6,601); Monroe (855) and St. Joseph (726);

• The largest age group, accounting for 34.4% of abortive women, occurred among women aged 20-24 years old.

• A statistic that I cannot understood finds that an astonishing 62% of Hoosier women having an abortion have had at least one previous live birth. Only 37.2 percent of women terminating their pregnancies have never had a baby.

• Of the 10,919 Indiana abortions in 2008, 6,830 had never had an abortion before.

• For more than 4,089 women obtaining an abortion in Indiana in 2008 it was their second, third or forth one;

• As is the case with so much of the social science literature, marriage is a critical part of a stable society and vitally important in so many ways to the lives of children. In 2008, 83% of the women obtaining an abortion in Indiana were not married.

• Most abortions, 62.6% are performed upon white women in Indiana;

• Although African-Americans accounted for only 10% of the Indiana population in 2008, 29.8% of all abortions were performed on blacks, something many people believe is a statistic still following in paths of the original “negro plan” concocted by Planned Parenthood’s founder Margaret Sanger, a rabid racial eugenicist who described minorities as “human weeds.”

Big Victory for Cultural Standards of Broadcast Decency!

After just three episodes and increasing sponsorship problems, NBC announced Monday that it was canceling its new show, “The Playboy Club.” The announcement comes after 116 national and state groups mostly made up of conservatives like AFA-IN but also some national feminists like Gloria Steinem, supported an effort called “Close the Club.” They contacted sponsors expressing their concerns about the messages the show sent about women, decency and morality.

These groups have a reason to question why our culture should promote the Playboy Club in an already porn drenched and sex obsessed society. In just the last three years 36 porn stars have died from suicide, drugs or murder. Another 100 have died of AIDS. The number of “stars” whom our society would claim have it all, fame, beauty, fortune and massive sexual freedom and access, who have died at young ages, with no hope or happiness left, through their efforts is astonishing.

Former porn star Shelley Lubben, (who found redemption through faith in Jesus Christ and is now witnessing to those in the industry) has chronicled scores of those deaths, and other problems such as drug abuse and disease that are rampant in the industry. No one who idolizes this with what they see on television can imagine what groups like the Pink Cross Foundation and anti-porn have found.  (I am not totally comfortable linking to or recommending those kind of ex-star sites. They serve a purpose, but they understandably feel called to warn about the degradation of the industry that Hollywood and society totally ignores. There is good information there, but it is not pretty, overly modest, or for the squeamish.)

By the way, at the 2003 meeting of the American Academy of Matrimonial Lawyers, attendees stated that 58% of their divorces were now a result of a spouse looking at excessive amounts of pornography online. The last thing America needs is another gateway TV path leading people into this destructive and addictive problem.

Fatherhood Movie Has Excellent Opening Weekend

The important new fatherhood movie, Courageous, had a great opening weekend. Courageous debuted on just 1,161 theater screens, one-third of the number of most of its competitors, yet it was still # 5 at the box office and # 1 in terms of earnings, selling $8.8 million worth of tickets. This should equate to an even larger audience and its appearance in more theaters across the US.

Persuasive Internet Movie Also Has A Huge Opening Week

Courageous is not the only highly talked about movie this week. Half a million people in its first week have viewed the powerful apologetics documentary “180.” This is the new “man on the street” interview, (though it is obviously a California street,) with Ray Comfort and mostly young adults. It has a lot of people talking as they see people re-evaluating their views, particularly on life and moral relativism. You can watch as people see their logic crumble causing them to confront the weakness of their worldview here: http://www.180movie.com/

Save the 9/11 Memorial Cross

American Atheists have now singled out an item from the rubble of the September 11th attack on the US. They want a cross censored from the new 9/11 memorial museum at the World Trade Center site.

The 17 ft tall metal cross was discovered intact during search and recovery efforts. It consists of two metal beams from the center that became a recognized symbol of hope and patriotism in the weeks and months following the attack on America. Yet, these secularists have filed a lawsuit against its inclusion in the museum. They claim that it promotes Christianity and somehow diminishes the civil rights of non-Christians. There are other religious items from the rubble such as a Star of David and a Bible included in the museum, but the cross really seems to bother the secularists.

You can sign a petition to keep the cross at the museum here:

http://www.grimmforcongress.com/save911cross/index.html

No related posts.

AFA of Indiana News Service Continues to Expand

I am happy to report that the Thy Word Network of Christian radio stations has picked up our daily Indiana centered audio news minutes. This news service is now running in Evansville on 101.5 FM in Loogootee on 88.7 FM and in Albion on 91.7 FM.

The news minutes have been airing in Fort Wayne, Valparaiso, Elkhart, Kokomo and almost a dozen stations affiliated with WFRN. We very much appreciate these radio stations and now Thy Word Network is airing these news minutes featuring the voice of well known Family News in Focus andFocus on the Family radio’s Bob Ditmer.

We still need and welcome other radio stations, particularly in central Indiana, that may want to air this free service.   Samples of these can be heard our web site.   Email me if I can answer any questions that program managers or station owners may have on the delivery of these audio files in various formats or via an FTP site.Ron Paul Wins AFAIN Presidential Website Poll – Hands Down!

Last week, I asked whom you would most like to see become the Republican nominee for President in 2012. A few months earlier, we had posted a similar presidential poll and Congressman Ron Paul did quite well then too. At that time, Mitch Daniels was a possible candidate and, understandably, our governor easily won our poll.

It is not a surprise, given his loyal following, that the Texas congressman won our poll this time. It is however a bit odd that we received three times as many votes in this poll as any other and thatCongressman Paul received 90% of the votes. Rep. Paul received a whopping 2,009 votes compared to Texas Governor Rick Perry, who came in second, with just 66 votes.

I believe the teenage term for this is that “we’ve been punk’d.”   I’m OK with that.   Those Paul followers who loaded up the vote and took our poll viral are welcome at our site.  I hope that they stayed there longer than to just click the Ron Paul button and also read several of the articles on our webpage.

I do not have a favorite candidate whom I’d like to see the GOP nominate. There are things I like about each of them. In the case of Rep Paul I admire his straight talk, which I think is actually more evident and perhaps even appealing with him than it was with Senator John McCain. I also admire his fiscal conservatism.  There are also concerns and questions that I have about each of the GOP candidates, including Dr. Paul.

I know that I am going to get a lot of angry emails and unfortunately people who will also unsubscribe from this weekly e-list because of where I am headed next.  However, if you hire a plumber, you expect him to fix pipes. You expect your butcher to cut meat. You expect your mechanic to repair your car. As the head of a leading pro-family organization I also have a job to do in educating people about the values of social conservatives and those matters that impact our Judeo-Christian heritage.  I try to do this regardless the cost or hostile reaction.  So here I go with some information for your consideration that I expect you may not have read anywhere else.

I am interested in where all of the candidates stand on the issues of greatest concern to the mission of AFA of Indiana. If a candidate has a voting record or legislative history, reviewing that may be more important than his or her campaign rhetoric. Although in reviewing the Family Research Council’s voting scorecard, it is noticeable that Rep. Paul has missed several of their key votes over the years. Still I have some concerns with many of those he has cast on some very important moral or cultural matters.

Here are some of those votes:

In 2002 Representative Lamar Smith authored the Child Obscenity and Pornography Prevention Act (H.R. 4623) that would prevent trafficking in child pornography and obscenity and seek to prevent the use of child pornography and obscenity to facilitate crimes against children. The bill passed the House 413-8. Rep. Paul voted “no.”

In 2003 Representative Deborah Pryce authored legislation that would require that the block grants already going to states as a part of the 1996 Welfare Reform Act to include abstinence-until-marriage, healthy marriages and responsible fatherhood programs. Rep. Paul voted “no.”

That same year, Representative Dave Weldon authored the Human Cloning Prohibition Act (H.R. 534) that would ban the creation of and trafficking in cloned human embryos, both embryonic and experimental. It would also ban the importation of “any product derived from” cloned human embryos. This bill would establish both criminal and civil penalties for cloning. The bill banning human cloning passed the House with 241 votes.  Rep. Paul voted “no.”

In 2004 Representative Melisa Hart authored legislation (H.R. 1997) to recognize the unborn child if that child was killed in a violent crime involving a pregnant woman. The bill passed the House with 254 votes. The Unborn Victims of Violence Act passed the Congress and President George W. Bushsigned it into law with a public Whitehouse signing ceremony. Rep. Ron Paul voted “no.”

That same year, Representative Fred Upton (R-MI) authored a key bill of interest to those concerned about the hostile culture and pollution on television. H.R. 3717, the Broadcast Decency Act, sought to increase the financial penalties for violations of federal laws against the transmission of obscene, indecent, and profane materials by television and radio broadcasters. The bill passed the House on a 321-22 vote. Rep. Paul voted “no.”

In 2006, Rep. Marilyn Musgrave authored the Marriage Protection Amendment to prevent federal courts from overturning state laws and forcing states to recognize same-sex marriages performed in other states.   It also prevented the federal government from undefining marriage to mean anything any present or future group desires. The bill passed 236-187. Rep. Paul voted “no.”

The same year, Senator John Ensign authored the Child Interstate Abortion Notification Act. The bill (S.403) attempted to help protect a state’s authority by making it a crime to transport a minor girl across state lines in circumvention of a state’s parental notification law. The House added a provision requiring abortion facilities to notify a girl’s parent before they perform an abortion on an out-of-state minor. The bill passed the House with 264 votes. Rep. Paul voted “no.”

This was the second time that Rep. Ron Paul had voted against an effort to prevent the subversion of state abortion laws designed to protect minors and parental rights. In 2001, Rep. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen authored the Child Custody Protection Act (HR 476) amending Title 18 of the US Code to address this problem.   In this case, ten years ago, Rep. Paul was ‘for it before he was against it.’  Rep. Shelia Jackson Lee attempted to kill the bill by having it recommitted to the Judiciary Committee to stall a final vote, or to rewrite (water down) the bill in committee.  Rep. Paul voted “no” to that unsuccessful effort by Rep. Jackson-Lee, but he then voted “no” on the bill’s final passage.

In 2007 Indiana Congressman Mark Souder authored an amendment (H.AMDT 465) to remove federal tax dollars from the needle exchange program for drug abusers in Washington DC. The amendment narrowly failed on a 208-216 vote. Rep. Paul voted “no.”

Last year Indiana Congressman Mike Pence lead the Republican House floor effort to defeat a an amendment by Rep. Patrick Murphy to allow openly homosexual individuals to serve in the U.S. Military as part of the National Defense Authorization Act. The amendment passed 234-194, with just three Republicans voting “yes.”  Rep. Paul was one of them.   Rep. Paul had previously voted against allowing homosexuals to openly serve in the armed forces, but he recently changed his position after meeting with several homosexual activists at his Texas office.

This Spring Speaker of the House John Boehner attempted to revive the Washington, DC school choice scholarship program for poor families, which President Obama had ended.   H.R. 471, theScholarships for Opportunity and Results Act passed the House 225-195, but did not make it through the Reid-controlled Senate.  Rep. Paul voted “no.”

As you know, any politician holding office for any length of time builds up a record of votes that can be dissected or highlighted in different ways. There are a great many votes on social issues that Congressman Paul has cast in defense of life, religious liberty and family that AFAIN would applaud.  Those votes can also be seen in the Family Research Council scorecards. It is not my purpose to change anyone’s view of Rep. Ron Paul.  Still, you deserve to know the facts.  I suspect that many of those who voted in our web poll may not have been aware of the votes listed above.  You can now judge Rep. Paul’s discernment and consistency on social issues for yourself.

I know from experience that merely questioning Rep. Ron Paul’s positions can often elicit a very harsh reaction. I have been told many times that I simply do not understand Rep. Paul because I have refused to concede that every vote he casts is because he alone truly understands and reveres the Constitution.  Even if I were to concede this claim, do I need to remind some people that there is a higher, older and far more important document that addresses these issues too? It is one, which the Congressman professes allegiance to as well, and it is the book that he placed his hand upon when he took his oath of office. I am not sure how he squares that fact with these votes, but that is not for me to decide.

Politics are a strange thing and virtually impossible to predict. By the time a much smaller 2012 primary field finally gets around to Indiana, I might personally be a Ron Paul follower, too.   For now, these votes concern me and are among the many things I am looking at as I look at all of the presidential candidates.  I have not seen anyone mention this troublesome side of Rep. Ron Paul’s voting record on moral and cultural matters.  For this reason, I thought it might interest you too.

America Needs You To Be Courageous This Weekend

This Friday, the most important movie of 2011 will open and it needs your support. I was fortunate enough this spring to see an advanced showing of the new movie Courageous. It is a powerful film from the makers of Fireproof and Facing the Giants. The film is about the importance of fathers, a subject our nation desperately needs to reconsider.  The success of this movie in ticket sales this weekend will be a key part of its distribution at more theaters across the nation.

The success of Courageous will also encourage other film companies to make more movies that treat faith and values with respect, accurately portraying it as an important part of the lives of Americans, rather than something to be mocked, undermined or ignored on the screen.

American’s View of Government Sours

The Gallup Polling firm has just released its findings of their annual Governance Survey that was taken earlier this month. The findings in this extensive survey are numerous. Here are just a few:

An overwhelming 81% of Americans say that they are dissatisfied with the way the country is being governed. That is a record setting level not even seen during Watergate, in which 66% of Americans were dissatisfied. This dissatisfaction is seen among 65% of Democrats and 92% of Republicans.

Although Americans’ view of how Washington can handle foreign issues has increased somewhat, their view of the government’s handling of domestic issues has plummeted to a forty year low.

In short America’s view of Washington and government has become profoundly negative. How this might impact voter turnout, upcoming elections and even support for groups like AFA of Indiana trying to fight the good fight is unknown. There is definitely trouble in paradise and Americans are either getting really fed up or throwing up their hands in retreat. Regardless, the next few years will certainly be ones for the books and writings of future historians.

No related posts.

AFA of Indiana Continues to Help Make Your Voice Heard

When the mail arrives at Indianapolis Congressman Andre Carson’s office today, his staff should receive a packet containing a cover letter and 22 pages of petition signatures asking him to apologize for his racially charged comments. As you know, the Congressman told a mostly African-American audience that there were members of congress and many in the TEA Party who want to see blacks lynched.

I want to thank the nearly 600 Hoosiers who signed our online petition launched late last week asking Rep. Carson to produce evidence of such an astonishing claim or issue a public apology for his reckless and hurtful allegation. In our letter, I assured the Congressman that I would pass along his response without any commentary from me to this e-list. Another State Stands Up to Protect Marriage

This week the legislature of North Carolina passed a measure by the necessary two-thirds margin to allow voters in the Tar Heel state to have a say on marriage protection. They may become the 31st state to pass a marriage amendment. Every time the people have been asked if the importance of gender in marriage should remain, or be discarded, they vote to keep marriage between a man and a woman.

Interestingly, in order to get 75 votes, a compromise had to be made with some Democrat opponents (though the vote to protect marriage included both Republicans and Democrats.) Rather than a November vote, which would pull in social conservatives and increase the Republican voting base, the marriage protection vote will occur instead during North Carolina’s May primary.

This wasn’t the only big news about marriage this week, though you may not hear much about this second item. A lot of money went into a congressional race in yesterday’s special election to fill the seat vacated by discredited New York Congressman Anthony Weiner. The Brooklyn and Queens district is a 3-1 Democrat district, (which is also 40% Jewish) that was previously held by ultra-liberalSen. Charles Schumer. A Democrat has held that district since the 1920’s.

The national media sees the 6-piont victory by Republican Bob Turner over Democrat New York Assemblyman David Weprin as a rejection of President Barack Obama and his handling of the economy. There is certainly a lot of truth to this observation. Yet, it is also worth noting that Weprin recently voted to undefine marriage in New York, a week after a poll found that 56% of voters wanted marriage to remain between a man and a woman. Although this has not been mentioned in most of the national reports, it was one of the issues that came up locally in the district and hurt Assemblyman Weprin.

310 Million Americans with 310 Million Gods

While large numbers of Orthodox Jews in New York’s 9th Congressional District may not be able to accept a rewriting of God’s design for the family and raising children, it seems that more and more Americans in the last ten years are reshaping God’s expectations to fit their own desires.

A story appearing in USA Today reports that since 1991 more Americans are shaping religion according to their own preferences and drifting away from clearly defined denominational teachings. (Historically, religion is usually understood to be about principles that change man, rather than man changing religious principles.)

Pollster George Barna observes this shift noting, “”We are a designer society. We want everything customized to our personal needs — our clothing, our food, our education,” he says. “Now it’s our religion.”

Barna’s new book and survey on faith in America finds that every major positive trend line is pointed downward except for one. More Americans say that they have “accepted Christ as their Savior” than in 1991 (35% then to 40% today). However, other findings separate belief from religious practices. More Americans say that they have not been in a church in the last six months (24% then to 37% today). Fewer Americans than in 1991 read the Bible outside of church (45% then to 40% today), fewer volunteer at church (27% then to 19% today), fewer attend an adult Sunday School program (23% then to 15% today), fewer call the Bible accurate (46% then to 38% today) and fewer define God as all knowing (74% then to 67% today).

Barna explains this cultural trend, “People say, ‘I believe in God. I believe the Bible is a good book. And then I believe whatever I want.” I have to wonder if the many churches over the last decade that have been so willing to reshape faith in hope of being more relevantn and appealing have unwittingly also contributed to this pliable, cafeteria style faith.

The  USA Today article notes that studies of other religions such as one recently reported in the Jewish magazine Moment are finding similar trends. These changes  in religious practice and belief seem to reveal the depth of our postmodern society where truth is increasingly relative and up for grabs from person to person.

Don’t Know Much About History

For years there have been concerns expressed surrounding school textbooks being used by a liberal activists pushing an agenda because of what is or is not emphasized in curricula. An interesting blog post including pictures of a third grade history textbook may serve to continue those worries. The textbook, “Our American Heritage” by McGraw Hill, a company with many Indiana ties, seems to be an example of selective history helping advance an agenda.

Here is what the blog reports about this textbook published last year:

There is but one sentence devoted to the Bill of Rights. It reads, “These rights [of citizens] are listed in the part of the U.S. Constitution called the Bill of Rights.”

• Two pages cover the Declaration of Independence
• Two pages describe the Constitution, all of which are devoted to the three branches of government and separation of powers
• No pages are devoted to James Madison and the authors of the Constitution; there is no mention of federalism
• Six pages are spent describing the background of Paul Revere
• Ten pages are devoted to the history of democracy in ancient Greece.
• George Washington and Abraham Lincoln are mentioned only in passing, almost as if they are immaterial scenery on the road to diversity and social Utopia.

In the section entitled “America’s Freedom Fighters“:

• Eight pages are spent covering the life of Frederick Douglass
• Five pages on Susan B. Anthony
• Six pages on Mary McLeod Bethune, (a black educator an adviser to FDR)
• Zero pages are devoted to the life of Abraham Lincoln

In fact, the entire Civil War is described only as a backdrop to the lives of Frederick Douglas and Mary McLeod Bethune.

In the section entitled “The Fight for Freedom Continues”:

• Seven pages are spent on praise for FDR
• Six pages on Eleanor Roosevelt
• Six pages are devoted to Thurgood Marshall
• Six pages are spent on LBJ’s life and the wondrous effects of “Great Society”
• Six pages are spent on Cesar Chavez and the lionization of the labor movement

There is no list of American Presidents in the children’s textbook.

GOP Debate Reopens HPV Vaccine Controversy

The Republican presidential debate that aired on CNN this week involved a heated exchange betweenCongresswoman Michele Bachman and Texas Governor Rick Perry on the issue of an HPV vaccine.

It is not my intention to analyze the exchange or to dissect the candidates’ answers and allegations. Yet, I realize that this subject may sound familiar to many readers, as AFA of Indiana was deeply involved in this matter when an HPV bill passed the Indiana legislature a few years ago. That bill, authored by state Sen. Connie Lawson, originated as a mandate tied to school admission. We opposed the introduced version of the bill, but not the vaccine itself or the final version that reached the Governor’s desk.

At the time, the HPV vaccine was very new and there were several questions surrounding its safety and effectiveness. Our position was not automatically against a vaccine mandate. Almost all vaccine matters under Indiana law include a longstanding opt-out provision, though historically it has generally not been widely known or used outside of certain religious groups. We try to make sure that all vaccine proposals include this provision.

HPV is the Human Papillomavirus. It is a sexually transmitted disease that is largely responsible for cervical cancers, genital warts in both men and women and anal cancer among homosexual males. Unlike mumps, measles or other communicable diseases in which a mandate may be understandable due to an outbreak quickly infecting entire classrooms or schools, HPV is behaviorally spread. It is not an airborne pathogen caught by bystanders.

The greatest concern that I expressed in every media interview I could on the HPV vaccine was that the legitimate emotional desire to save women from a horrible cancer often overlooked the shortcomings of the vaccine. Gardisil only protects women from the HPV viruses strains accountable for cervical cancer. There are up to 30%, which may still cause cervical cancer that the vaccine may not touch. Gardasil also has very limited effectiveness against genital warts. Parents really needed to know this limitation.

There were also the questions about the duration of the vaccine proposed for 12-year-old girls. Some reports indicated that the vaccine would not last until most women marry in their 20’s. Therefore, the vaccine has benefits, but it is not a silver bullet for cancer. Without such an understanding, it risks giving women, and parents, a false sense of security in regard to their remaining health risks and sexual choices.

This is why we were pleased that the bill was modified from a school admission mandate to a provision requiring schools to give information about the vaccine’s availability to parents who could then discuss its pros or cons with their family physician and decide if and when the vaccine is right for their child.

No related posts.

Demonizing the TEA Party, Widening the Divide

It has been a busy week of media opportunities and “hits” following the news release we sent asking Indianapolis Congressman Andre Carson to apologize for equating those with whom he disagrees to people who lynched African-Americans. Carson told a black audience that some of his colleagues in Congress and the TEA Party would like to see them “hanging from trees.” He then created another news cycle when he refused to apologize for his remarks claiming that they were based in the truth.
One columnist, editorializing on the front page of the Indianapolis Star Metro Section, said she was glad Rep. Carson said what he said and hoped he never apologized because he spoke “for many” in the African-American community who felt that same way. Of course, she misses the fact that “many” people in certain communties have agreed with Margaret Sanger, Adolph Hitler, Bull Connor, Louis Farrakhan or David Duke on various racial matters. That doesn’t make those views true, legitimate or worthy of praise or promotion by a member of the US Congress.

Another commentator on PBS Indiana Week in Review insisted that there were racists in the TEA Party.  She said she knew this with certainty by the way that the TEA Party reacted so fiercely to Rep. Carson. (To the contrary, it has been my observation that people will often under-react to a true allegation, and over-react to a false smear.)

Rep. Carson’s comments were not his first attack on the TEA Party using fear or race-baiting tactics. He claimed that TEA Party activists used the “N” word against him repeatedly in Washington, DC during a health care rally. Yet, various videotapes of the incident and a $100,000 reward for evidence all failed to turn up proof of one single slur against the Hoosier congressman.

There is a pattern of rhetoric here that seems intentional. Over the weekend, Jimmy Hoffa, head of the Teamsters Union told an audience in Michigan, just before President Obama spoke, that they were at “war” with the TEA Party and that they should “take these (expletives) out.”

Congresswoman Frederica Wilson (D-FL) told a Miami audience in late August, “Let us all remember who the real enemy is. The real enemy is the Tea Party.”

Congressman Jesse Jackson, Jr (D-IL) recently compared Texas Governor Rick Perry with Confederate President Jefferson Davis and claimed that Perry’s support of the 10th Amendment was a defense of slavery.

In August Congresswoman Maxine Waters told a group in California that “the TEA Party can go to Hell” which echoes a voicemail I received at AFA-IN over the weekend. (I wonder sometimes if people who say this and claim to embrace tolerance or compassion really understand the place where they want people.)

President Obama was sold to the American voter in 2008 as a great unifier, even though little evidence in his background or sparse record ever suggested it. Many commentators have surmised that “white guilt” caused many voters to vote for someone whom they really did not know or agree with merely to have been a part of electing the first black president. Early on, there were some glimpses of a possibility for unity, but they have long since vanished.

2012 promises to be an interesting election year. Let’s hope that the name-calling, fear mongering and smear tactics fizzle out before 2011 ends. The US electorate deserves better than what we have experienced in the last three weeks. They deserve substantive, rational discussions of public policy and philosophical differences. I still believe that even those mentioned above are capable of such responsible dialogue and debate.

Massive Analytical Review Links Choice to Depression

A meta-analysis of 22 studies from 1995-2009 involving 877,000 women has both sides of the abortion debate talking. The report from Priscilla Coleman of Bowling Green State University appears in the prestigious British Journal of Psychology. It finds that women who have undergone an abortion have an 81% higher risk for mental health problems and are more likely to experience depression, attempt suicide or abuse alcohol.

A Sign of the Times?

With Americans in record numbers not seen since the Great Depression now on welfare, part of the US economy is responding. Pizza Hut, Long John Silvers, Taco Bell and Kentucky Fried Chicken want to take food stamps from the 45.8 million Americans receiving them. In the past, federal guidelines have generally prevented the welfare program from being used on prepared food. The USDA is apparently reconsidering this under a review of a provision adopted in the 1970’s by SNAP (the USDA’s Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program). Federal records show that restaurants and hunger advocates have been lobbying to allow the use of food stamps at fast food outlets.

Between 2005 and 2010 the number of businesses certified by the SNAP program to receive food stamps increased from 156,000 to 209,000. During that same time, food stamp benefits grew from $28.5 billion to an astonishing $64.7 billion annually.

You No Longer Have to Wait, for “78”

I intend to write more about this at a later date, but I am very excited to announce the availability of a new book I have reviewed called 78. The book is from Peter Heck, a high school government teacher, an up and coming radio talk show host in Kokomo, a columnist for AFA’s One News Now and a very popular speaker at TEA Party events.

I will not totally explain the book, other than to say that its premise is that far more Americans agree with us than our culture reveals, so why is our nation seemingly in decline?

You can learn more and purchase this excellent new book at www.peterheck.com

Movie Tip – Robert Duvall’s Latest Deserves Support

I almost never go to the theater for an adult movie. (Why pay money to be offended?) Occasionally we will take the kids to see a children’s film. Over the weekend my wife and I saw a new movie that really deserves your support for its noble goals. The movie is called, “Seven Days in Utopia” staringRobert Duvall.

The movie is a golf film, but more than that it is a film about life, restoration and family. The movie is G rated, yet it is for adults, much like the films of the Golden Age of Hollywood (the 1930’s & 40’s) when almost all films made for adults were also G rated.  Seven Days in Utopia is a movie well worth seeing.

A Point of Personal Observation

Cultural changes, public values and individual worldviews held today interest me. For this reason, I am far more aware that we are living in a post-Christian America than many critics think I am. (The difference is that, unlike them, I believe this is a sad cultural shift in the wrong direction for America.)

I have always strived to convey Truth through means other than religion at AFA-IN. I believe that good science finds and reflects Truth. Thus, rather than quote what the Bible has said about the family, using the mountains of social science research showing that a married mother and father are the best environment for children, may be more persuasive in a culture that has drifted away from its historic faith moorings.

Quite often, people will contact me to argue about something I have written or said through AFA of Indiana. Many times they will bring up a religious aspect to a policy disagreement. When that happens, I will then often point out what God says about an issue.

Almost always, the reaction is the same - indignation and shock.  People today somehow believe that it is impossible to know the mind of God, even though He has made so many things so very clear in His scriptures. It is as if a false notion has taken hold that God set humans up for failure by hiding his plans for our lives. It is as if He created some sort of truth game in which He moves the shells around on a table as we point and try to guess the right shell, holding His true meaning underneath.

Does this mean that we will fully understand absolutely everything in the Bible? No, but so many things are quite clear. And those clear principles can be understood and expected.  Notice what one of the greatest orators of the early American era, legislator, and Secretary of State to three presidents, said:

“I believe that the Bible is to be understood and received in the plain and obvious meaning of its passages; for I cannot persuade myself that a book intended for the instruction and conversion of the whole world should cover its true meaning in any such mystery and doubt that none but critics and philosophers can discover it.” - Daniel Webster

It is not that such things are not clearly understandable today. It is that such things are more counter-cultural than ever before in our nation’s history.  I believe this is causing angst, personal inner-conflict, confusion and a desire to dismiss or rewrite what God intends for human behavior.

My pastor hit this point right out of the ballpark on Sunday. I thought you might want to hear and consider this in a sermon series he is doing in preparation for a Biblical look at end times speculation, which seems to be on the rise.  You can hear his sermon audio at this link for “How Should We Study Bible Prophecy? – Part 2” http://www.hscaudio.org/

No related posts.

Hi, Remember Me? Let’s be Friends

Computers and the Internet have changed the face of the world in very short order. They have impacted how we communicate, shop, work and entertain ourselves, just to name a few areas. There are a lot of good things about this innovative revolution. Technology is a morally neutral item itself. It can be used for great good in areas such as public safety, information access, business production and speedy communication or it can be a great evil in the hands of hackers and pornographers.Has this impacted the backbone of our society? The answer seems to be yes when it comes to “social networking,” but it’s not often a positive impact. A recent study from Loyola Universityindicates that Facebook is now cited as playing a role in 20% of all divorces. That number may actually be low. The same study found that Facebook is the number one destination source for online evidence in divorce matters and, in 50% of divorces, it is the primary evidence source.

In another study by the American Academy of Matrimonial Lawyers, divorce lawyers believed that about 80% of those in a divorce situation are using Facebook or some kind of social networking to communicate with affairs. Two-thirds of attorneys in this survey said that Facebook was the “primary source” of evidence.

Those statistics represent not just evidence of infidelity with an old boyfriend or girlfriend, but other legal battles involving child custody and the misbehavior of a parent evidenced by a photo snapped at a party, for example, which winds up on Facebook. Divorce is usually but one short step in a long battle. It legally ends a marriage, but seldom brings an end to the conflict between parents.

In January, online analysts with Neilson Ratings found that 135 million Americans used Facebook that month, accounting for nearly 70% of the country’s Internet users. The average time an Internet user spends on Facebook is seven hours a month. This is far longer than less than 30 minutes that the average monthly user will spend on Amazon, for example. (This is why AFA of Indiana and I each have a fairly active Facebook page, and it is why we are looking at the ability for you to share these emails on that site.)

I’d like to see a study of relationships that begin on Facebook and check those failure rates when reality sets in and life is no longer the same as it was when the newly reunited Facebook couple were in high school or college. (Guess what? There probably was a reason why you were not a couple then, or why it didn’t work out, which you have both forgotten all these years later. The greener grass notion is almost always a myth.)

America’s divorce rate has not increased with the advent of Facebook and social networking, (it remains at a consistently high rate) but there’s no denial that as communication changes, Facebook plays a role now in starting and ending relationships. It is a warning to users to be very careful about the dangers social networking, which is a world full of fantasy in which people can appear however they wish regardless of the realities of life. It is a reminder to always protect and invest in your marriage, and to limit your time in the world brought to you on a wire, a modem and a telephone jack.

News of the Weird – Give A Politician A Platform, and He Will Use It

Under Indiana’s part-time legislature (which AFA-IN strongly supports over a full-time one) there is not much that happens between May and November in legislative policy. The lone exception is the process of Summer Study Committees. Each year about a dozen of these bi-partisan interim committees are organized. Legislators are assigned to various committees based upon their interests and experience in certain issues. This year those committees include Education, Natural Resources, Economic Development, Employment, Criminal Code, Child Care, Criminal law and Sentencing, State Tax and Financing, Charity Gaming and Insurance.

The purpose of these committees is for further study of issues that came up during the legislative session. The claim is that this allows legislators to look more in depth at issues. However, I guess it depends upon the legislator as to how they use their summer and their elected power.

Recently, Representative Charlie Brown (D-Gary) went after the CEO of Walgreens drug stores in an official letter reprimanding the company. When he was checking out at the cash register, a Walgreens employee offered to up-sell him a candy bar with his purchases. Rep. Brown went off on her and asked why she would offer him something as non-nutritious as candy. She told him that it was store policy to suggestive sell items (as is likely the case for retail stores everywhere.) This apparently irritated the legislator to the point of actually writing the Walgreens CEO.

As reported in the Indianapolis Star, Rep. Brown wrote in his letter, “The interruption of a sales transaction in order to offer a tempting but exceptionally unhealthy candy bar serves only to undermine the difficult task before us in attempting to aid Hoosiers in making better decisions related to their health.” “For heaven’s sake, why candy? I can only surmise that such items carry a large profit motive.”

Oh no . . . it’s the evil profit motive again used upon us sheep!

Rep. Brown is an interesting character with whom I agree on very little, including the candy policies at Walgreens. Yet, there was a remarkable report recently finding that adult obesity rates have increased in 16 states last year (including Indiana) with 12 states now reporting at least 30% of their populations as obese.

Indiana’s adult obesity rate is 29.1%, an increase of 60% over the last fifteen years. Our childhood obesity rate is 14.6% placing us at #15 for adults and #27 among children in the state rankings. Only one state in the nation, Colorado, has an adult obesity rate of less than 20%, but just barely at 19.8%.

Only one state in the nation, Colorado has an adult obesity rate below 20% — at 19.8%. Mississippi ignominiously leads the fat pack with a 34.4% rate of obesity. No states showed a decrease since the previous year. Four years ago, according to the report “F for Fat”, only one state had an obesity rate over 30%. Twenty years ago, no state had an obesity rate above 15%. Today, two-out-of-three (38 states total) have an adult obesity rate over 25%. According to the report, the state with the lowest adult obesity rate today, would have been the state with the highest rate in 1995.

Rep. Brown may have a point about a lack of nutrition in candy, but I think our health problems go a whole lot farther than the occasional candy bar from Walgreens.

Questions About Indiana’s School Voucher Plan?

The Indiana Department of Education has launched a new web site to answer questions for schools and parents, (including applications) for Indiana’s new school voucher plan. It is one of two such web sites. Those two sites are:

www.doe.in.gov/schoolchoice

http://www.MyChoiceIned.com

A Christian Alternative to the Liberal Agendas of Seniors Group

During the health care debate last year there were concerns raised by many people in regard to the political agenda of various seniors groups, most notably the AARP (American Association of Retired People).

There are alternative organizations which are not associated with the liberal causes that AARP lobbies toward or aligns itself with that have seen a lot of growth since AARP endorsed Obamacare and other causes. Those groups include United Seniors Association, Focus Over 50 and one calledUnited Christian Seniors Association whose web site you may want to check out. United Christian Seniors includes many of the same benefits that AARP offers and they have programs and services for anyone over 50. You can learn more about this group at: http://unitedchristianseniors.org/

Abortion: It’s What They’re All About

This spring, the Planned Parenthood Federation of America recently posted what they call their service numbers for 2009 on their web site. Some of the numbers are quite revealing by comparison. Although they present themselves as a center for a wide array of women’s issues, prenatal care (a big part of many, perhaps most women’s lives at some point) is virtually non-existent. Adoption information fares even worse. In fact, 97.6 % of pregnant women going to Planned Parenthood were sold abortion services, compared to only 2.4% of pregnant women who received non-abortion services. These non-abortive health care services to pregnant women have been declining over the previous three years.

No related posts.

Why is New York’s Shame Indiana’s Pride?

I will be the first to say that I was tired of hearing about New York Congressman Anthony Weiner’s scandal even before the mainstream media really picked it up. As the story was incessantly repeated on the hour, became impossible to ignore, and was fodder for late night TV jokes and double entendres, it started to reveal our nation’s widespread moral confusion.

What Anthony Weiner did was wrong. The fact that he is a Congressman is mostly additional information. Some would say that his sending a lewd picture of himself to women he was conversing with on the Internet is “more wrong” because he is an elected official and probably did so on the public’s time. That argument may or may not matter depending upon whether one buys into the shaky notion that being a wretch in private, or toward your spouse can be disconnected from public service after hours. (Our founders certainly did not believe that bad character could be compartmentalized in order to hold office.)Oddly, right in the midst of this national scandal, many Hoosiers, some of whom surely must have disapproved of Congressman Weiner’s underwear photos, were applauding far worse public displaysunder the guise of “diversity” that were also subsidized, in small part, by taxpayers.

On Saturday, the homosexual Indy Pride parade and festival included dozens of skimpily underwear clad men publicly behaving on the streets of Indianapolis in ways that make Rep. Weiner look like a candidate for sainthood. We are told tens of thousands (including children) observed and applauded these individuals’ displays.   In fact, the day after Indy Pride, the Indianapolis Star ran a front page Metro section story claiming that Indy Pride had become “mainstream.” Yet, the dozens of sad and disturbing pictures we have of Saturday’s events, just like those at all previous Pride events, could not be printed in that very paper.

Perhaps Congressman Weiner’s biggest mistake was that he didn’t hop up on a float and dance around with a bunch of other men in Speedos or near nothing briefs as part of a homosexual event. Had he sent pictures of that demonstration of “pride” claiming his “diversity” and “rights,” he might widely be praised, ignored or excused today.

Our sex-saturated culture is obviously robbing people of all common sense and moral discernment. It is hardly a surprise that NBC is on the verge of a new TV series about the Playboy Club clearly designed for provocation and the mainstreaming of porn. By the way, you can sign a petition to NBC with concerns over this new show here: http://www.closetheclubonnbc.com/

Why is it that the behavior that has become New York’s shame is central Indiana’s pride? Is this not a legitimate question?

For some, the public embrace of these controversial homosexual displays is quite emphatic.  Yesterday, a lead columnist in the Indianapolis Star blasted me for raising concerns about the vulgar nature of Indy Pride. According to the columnist I convinced the Mayor’s office at the last minute not to assign a fire truck, police Humvee and paid firemen and police officers to be part of the pride parade. (AFA-IN simply pointed out that aligning with the homosexual demands groups’ controversial political agendas, raunchy public behavior, adult businesses, leather bondage groups, cross-dressers, abortion advocates, drag queens, religious bigots and drug legalization groups was not a very wise trend to set for public officials and city agencies. After all, “what you condone, you become a part of.”)

If AFA of Indiana’s efforts (and other pro-family leaders whom the paper called “the likes of Micah Clark”) to expose this event did cause the city to pull back significantly (Greg Ballard still made a first ever Indy Pride mayoral appearance) then it is another verification of Edmund Burke’s observation that “evil prevails when good people do nothing.” 

It was your support of AFA, your prayers for this situation and your contacting the mayor and city councilors that significantly thwarted some of the city, (i.e. taxpayer funded), involvement that may have otherwise occurred had you not stood with us.

Is Being Pro-Gay, Really Pro-Gay?

During this whole Indy Pride incident I received some interesting feedback from people who thought that I was being “un-Christian” because AFA of Indiana would not applaud homosexuality or remain silent . . . after all, “God is love” and “we should be loving.”  This is a common misperception in our postmodern society in which emotion overrules truth. Sometimes, the most loving thing one can do is to say “no,” “stop”, “warning”, “don’t do that” or “there is a better way.”
Yet, when it comes to this issue, the dominant view is that the only way to be “tolerant” and “loving” is to embrace the agenda of the homosexual demands groups. Is this true? Perhaps we should ask Massachusetts, the Mecca of this liberal dogma.

The US Centers for Disease Control has released another report showing that teenagers who self-identify as gay, lesbian, bisexual or transgender engage in much, much higher rates of risky behavior including smoking cigarettes, binge drinking, and attempting suicide suggesting social, emotional, or psychological distress from their sexual lifestyle choices.
The media and many experts were quick to dismiss this report by claiming that social stigma is the main culprit. Surely that plays a role, right?

Buried the CDC report is data from two different states, Wisconsin and Massachusetts. One has had gay marriage since 2003 and therefore widespread pro-homosexual education in the public schools, which accompanies the un-defining of marriage and family. Unlike Massachusetts, Wisconsin has protected and even voted on a marriage amendment Identical to Indiana’s HJR 6, which homosexual activists claim to be among the ultimate anti-gay and hateful actions any state can take.

Which state do you suppose is a safer place for “LGBT” teens very pro-gay Massachusetts, or the more intolerant, Marriage-protecting Wisconsin?

The answer: Wisconsin by a mile. For example, about 25 percent of Massachusetts teens who self-identify as “gay” said they had missed schools because they felt unsafe, compared to 14 percent of gay identifying Wisconsin teens. More than half (50.5%) of Massachusetts gay teens said they felt “sad or hopeless” compared to 29 percent of Wisconsin teens. Thirty-three percent of Massachusetts’ gay teens attempted suicide, compared to less than 20 percent of Wisconsin teens. Massachusetts’ gay teens were about twice as likely as Wisconsin gay teens to commit a suicide attempt serious enough to require medical care (15 percent to 8 percent). (By contrast,heterosexual teens in both states were equally likely to have attempted suicide requiring medical care: around just 2 percent.)

It’s hard to be a gay teen, but if you are going to be one, it’s much better to live in Wisconsin, a state which passed a marriage amendment by 60 percent, than Massachusetts, a state which has embraced virtually every aspect the homosexual political agenda.

This data should not be too surprising. For many years we have known that even in the most liberal of European nations like Denmark, where there is no social stigma left on much of anything, homosexual teens still experience major depression and attempt suicide at rates four times higher than their heterosexual counterparts, leaving the conclusion that hopelessness is intrinsic to homosexual behavior itself.

This is why groups like AFA of Indiana must stand up against the tide and severe opposition to say “no, please don’t do this.” This is the only compassionate and responsible answer if we truly care about individuals struggling with same-sex attraction or gender identity confusion.

How Proud Would America’s Founder’s Be?

I REALLY hope that next week I can write about families, tax policy, fatherhood, resolved NFL union talks, or any other subject, but as long as we’re here and you’re still reading, we might as well look at one last matter.

A lot of people mistakenly see the homosexual political agenda as some sort of natural extension of freedom and liberty that our founders would embrace were they here today.  Rather than rehash the moral limitations our founders believed were essential to prevent liberty from turning into anarchy and licentiousness, or how they feared that this was the trend of previous republics and democracies near the end of their histories (which was about 200 years by the way), let me simply add this historic note for their perspective.

Though he admitted that he didn’t even like mentioning the behavior by name, the highly influential Sir William Blackstone made it clear that homosexuality was a great danger to societies and thus instructed it to be discouraged in law. Not too long after Blackstone’s 1769 Commentaries on the Laws of England, which every one of our founders would have studied extensively as their primary law book, John David Michaelis, authored a four-volume legal work in 1814. In it he also outlined why homosexuality must be more strenuously addressed and much less tolerated than virtually any other vice in society:

“If we reflect on the dreadful consequences of sodomy to a state, and on the extent to which this abominable vice may be secretly carried on and spread, we cannot, on the principles of sound policy, consider the punishment as too severe. For if it once begins to prevail, not only will boys be easily corrupted by adults, but also by other boys; nor will it ever cease; more especially as it must thus soon lose all its shamefulness and infamy and become fashionable and the national taste; and then . . . national weakness, for which all remedies are ineffectual, most inevitably follow; not perhaps in the very first generation, but certainly in the course of the third or fourth. . . To these evils may be added yet another, viz. [namely] that the constitutions of those men who submit to this degradation are, if not always, yet very often, totally destroyed, though in a different way from what is the result of whoredom.

Whoever, therefore, wishes to ruin a nation, has only to get this vice introduced; for it is extremely difficult to extirpate it where it has once taken root because it can be propagated with much more secrecy . . . and when we perceive that it has once got a footing in any country, however powerful and flourishing, we may venture as politicians to predict that the foundation of its future decline is laid and that after some hundred years it will no longer be the same . . . powerful country it is at present.”

No related posts.

Some Interesting Reading on State’s Rights and Abortion Funding

As you know, Planned Parenthood and the ACLU of Indiana were back in federal court on Monday trying to block the implementation of House Enrolled Act 1210 which prevents Hoosier tax dollars from going to groups that perform abortion. The judge is expected to rule on this particular request for an injunction in two weeks.

I have spent some time reading Attorney General Greg Zoeller’s Defendant’s Memorandum in Opposition to the Motion for Preliminary Injunction. There are a lot of things that stand out in that 36-page item concerning the big issue of state’s rights. (General Zoeller makes a great case for defending life and existing legally tested pro-life laws in his memo, as well.) Rather than analyze and comment on these points, for brevity, here are just a few interesting items from this memo:

- Medicaid currently covers many health services, but not abortion;

- The state currently determines many of those services which Medicaid reimburses;

- Attorney General Zoeller’s brief argues, “federal law permits Indiana to structure its Medicaid program however it sees fit.”

- Even after accepting federal funds, Section 1396c recognizes the State’s continuing prerogative to alter its Medicaid program.

- Any State that administers a non-compliant program runs the risk that the Secretary [HHS] will turn off the funding spigot, but this remains a lawful option for the State under the statute.

- Attorney General Zoeller observes, “the State is aware of no Seventh Circuit cases holding that there is a freestanding right of action to enforce federal Spending Clause statues against States under a theory of preemption.”

- Directly citing then Supreme Court Justice O’Connor, Zoeller notes, “Congress has afforded States broad flexibility in tailoring the scope and coverage of their Medicaid programs.”

- The Medicaid Act provides that “[i]n addition to any other authority, a State may exclude any individual or entity [from participating in its Medicaid program] for any reason for which the Secretary [of the Department of Health and Human Services] could exclude the individual or entity from participation in [Medicare].”

- The First Circuit has held that “this ‘any other authority’ language was intended to permit a state to exclude an entity from its Medicaid program for any reason established by state law.” The court noted that its interpretation was derived directly from the legislative history of 42 U.S.C. § 1396a:  The Committee bill clarifies current Medicaid Law by expressly granting States the authority to exclude individuals or entities from participation in their Medicaid programs for any reason that constitutes a basis for an exclusion from Medicare. . . This provision is not intended to preclude a State from establishing, under State law, any other bases for excluding individuals or entities from its Medicaid program.

The courts will determine this issue, with potential ramifications for the right to life and states’ rights. Still, it is clear that Indiana has some very strong arguments in our favor being made by Attorney General Zoeller.

Is the TEA Party a Lost Cause?

How you answer this question depends upon whether you see the glass half empty or half full. Last week, Gallup Polling released the results of a poll that basically asked Americans if they embraced socialism. When asked if the government “should redistribute wealth with heavy taxes on the rich,”47% of Americans said “yes, it should.”  More Americans said government should not redestribute wealth, but just barely. Only 49% rejected government redistribution.

Some may wonder how this polling response could be so close after two years of failed economic policies, far bigger government and billions in stimulus spending. I recently watched a fascinating PBS documentary on Huey P. Long. The “Kingfish,” the charismatic Louisiana Governor who, but for an assassin’s bullet, may have become President in 1936.

Long, like the socialist Father Charles Coughlin was a pure leftist. Long’s platform included his slogan “every man a king” as well as his “spread the wealth clubs.”  Far more overt than liberal Presidents FDR, Johnson, Carter and Obama, Huey Long constantly complained that Franklin Roosevelt didn’t go far enough, fast enough. He made these charges with an enormous amount of popular support.

The program was a stark reminder that in very tough economic times, Americans have always had a dangerous tendency to give up liberties expecting the government to take care of them.  (Huey Long was as close to a dictator as any state has ever had, and would have ruled America in the same manner, running over all sorts of checks and balances to accomplish his goals.)

If you include new data released two weeks ago from the U.S. Census Bureau the glass is looking more empty than full. For the first time in American history the percentage of single parents and cohabiting couples now exceeds married couples. In the 2010 Census, married couples now represent only 48% of all family households, down from 52% in the last Census count. A recent Pew Researchpoll found that nearly 40% of Americans say that marriage is obsolete.

This decline of marriage may catch the eye of social conservatives first, but it ought to really worry the TEA Party movement too! According to the Heritage Foundation “children born outside of marriage live in poverty 51% of the time compared with only 7% of children living in poverty in married homes. Thus the absence of a married mother and father increases the frequency of child poverty by 700 percent.”  More specifically, the Heritage Foundation notes “prolonged welfare dependency is 1700 percent more likely for children born outside of marriage.”  The National Longitudinal Survey of Youth, revealed this when it found that “children living with a married mother and father received AFDC welfare benefits only 3% of the time since their birth.” (Incidentally, Heritage also finds that marriage after illegitimacy cuts child poverty by 50%.)

In addition to overcoming the hurdle of the high number of Americans who think that the government should “spread the wealth,” smaller government, and less dependency upon it, is simply impossible if marriage continues to disappear.

Misinformation Distorts Public Viewpoint and Leads to Pandering Politicians

Gallup has also released a survey that reveals the power of the culture, media and Hollywood to shape and misinform the public. It found that most Americans falsely believe that 25% of the population is “gay.” That is ten times higher than reality. Even the recent survey by the pro-homosexual Williams Institute reconfirms that just 3% of the US population is homosexual or lesbian. Only 8 million individuals identify with homosexuality out of 288 million Americans. That equates to less than 180,000 out of 6 million Hoosiers, though some Indiana studies indicate that number is less than 100,000. Compared to the overall Indiana population, 39.4% of Hoosiers are married, yet only 0.3% of the Hoosier population consists of homosexual couples living together.

It is clear that the influence, economically, culturally and politically of this segment of society is staggering compared to their small numbers. (This is one reason why homosexuality, unlike race and skin color, does not meet the legal criteria set by courts for minority status.)

The vocal nature and media driven delusion of their demographic size may be why many politicians seem to want to pander to homosexual activists. Still, there is really no excuse for someone like the Mayor of Indianapolis to attend, or send representatives to this weekend’s Indy Pride parade and festival.

Indy Pride is a truly reprehensible display of hedonism, vulgarity, moral and spiritual confusion. Many of the photos (not those which the media chooses to show) of the floats in the parade of many men dressed in leather dog collars, just their underwear, or as women are truly sad. The Pride festival is also littered with booths for adult businesses and a whole host of other causes, which would shock and offend the sensibilities of hundreds of thousands of common-sense Hoosiers.

Please pray about this event this weekend, and that all those involved will see the error of their ways and come to know that there is a true love out there that satisfies their heart’s desire, and through Him, a spiritual hope, fulfillment and a peace that passes all understanding is available to all regardless of their past or self-perception. (For stories of individuals who have found this hope and left homosexuality for good go to: http://exodusinternational.org/resources/real-stories/ )

Indiana’s Legislative Leadership Says No to Investigation

In spite of a request signed by 20 state legislators and a series of very strong arguments by the lead author, [Senator Jim Banks], the Speaker of the House Brian Bosma and Senate President David Longhave rejected a request for a summer study committee to look into the use of and possible risks of the abortion drug RU-486.

There have been over 1,000 documented cases of complications from chemical abortions including eight deaths. The Alan Guttmacher Institute indicates that up to 25% of all abortions are now chemically induced. According to a recent call to a Planned Parenthood abortion facility in Indianapolis, they charge $500 for a surgical abortion and $425 for RU-486.

— Don’t forget to visit our web site to take our latest poll and see the newest updates atwww.afain.net

No related posts.

Governor Daniels is Out of Presidential Race, but He’s In with AFA of Indiana

As you know Governor Mitch Daniels disappointed many Hoosier voters when He announced Sunday that he would not seek the Republican nomination in 2012. However, he has won the approval of AFA of Indiana. First, Governor Daniels’ reason for not running because of his care and concern for his family having to go through the media wringer is admirable and one we applaud. What husband and father in their right mind would want their family to go through one-tenth of the mistreatment that former Alaska Governor Sarah Palin went through for merely being a conservative on the 2008 presidential ticket? Agree or disagree with him, no one can say that Governor Daniels does not have his priorities in order. (With a former California Governor in the headlines for not having his marriage and family as his priority, Governor Daniels’ consistent dedication to his wife and daughters seems all the more compelling and admirable.)Secondly, the response to our web site poll question last week revealed that there are a large number of AFA of Indiana supporters who wanted Mitch Daniels to run for president. Governor Daniels won our online web page poll. With over 640 total votes, Governor Daniels was the winner among nine choices with 30% of those vote. The other top choices were Ron Paul, Herman Cain and Michele Bachman but Governor Daniels still led the rest of the pack by 11 points or more.

It is no secret that I have had some significant policy differences with the Governor on certain social issues. I could rehash those, but I’d rather end this with a slightly different praise for our Governor.  Many of you have heard various speculations, news reports or talk radio recounts of what a Daniels campaign might have looked like given his record, some questionable statements to various groups, or other parts of his public or private life. One thing that deserves comment is the slimy innuendo that the Governor’s divorce would have given people, particularly social conservatives, reason to oppose his Presidential candidacy.

The history of Mitch and Cheri Daniels marriage is a reason to admire this family, not mock or smear them.  In a day in which 6 out of 10 new marriages end in divorce and far too many couples call it quits before they should, the divorce and remarriage of Mitch and Cheri is remarkable. I was talking with Maggie Gallagher about this recently and she observed that this was the single most impressive item in the entire Mitch Daniels resume. Gallagher is the author of The Abolition of Marriage and The Case for Marriage, two of the best books on marriage and divorce ever written. The second book,The Case for Marriage, includes a groundbreaking study from the University of Chicago following nearly 2,000 struggling married couples some of whom divorced and others who stuck it out. Five years later they found that for the most part, those who hung in there and worked through their problems were actually happier five years later than most of those who had taken the easy, no-fault divorce exit.

Mitch and Cheri Daniels experienced a divorce and then saw the error of their ways and the dangers their divorce posed to their children, and did something difficult and remarkable. They remarried each other. By all accounts, today they have a solid, committed, happy and close marriage. They and their children have benefited from this recommitment. Outside of one’s faith, nothing matters more than family. Again, we applaud the Governor for placing his family first; not once, but twice.

What if Barack Obama Had Been Aborted?

Barack Hussein Obama is the most pro-abortion president in United States history. It seems as though at every chance possible, his administration goes above and beyond to fund, promote and defend abortion. In fact, there is a New York Times story out this week that indicates that the Obama administration may go to battle with Indiana over our new law to prevent your tax dollars from going to Planned Parenthood and other abortion providers.

What if Obama had been aborted? This is not a hypothetical question wishing this President had never been born. It is a serious inquiry (with great irony,) raised by Hoosier radio talk show host Peter Heck in a provocative article appearing on AFA’s news wire. It seems, as Peter points out, that President Obama’s father was also a rabid abortion advocate.

According to newly released documents he was also successful with at least one of the young women he impregnated. However, he did not successfully convince Barack’s mother to terminate their child, who grew up to be a US Senator and then the President of the United States.  This irony is not lost on Heck whose excellent article on this new can be read here:

http://www.onenewsnow.com/Perspectives/Default.aspx?id=1352838

Experiencing Technical Difficulties

We learned that our web site contribution page was missing a minor item – a box for a donation amount (whoops!). We have fixed that omission should you like to make a tax-deductible donation to support the work of AFA of Indiana. www.afain.net

“A Role Model for Girls” Really, Yours too, Michelle?

On Sunday night millions of American youth tuned in to watch the Billboard Music Awards. The highlight of the show, according to reviewers, was a video tribute to the singer Beyonce Knowles. You may not know Beyonce from Barbara Streisand, but in one sense you should if you have children or grandchildren. She is an attractive individual who has appeared in several movies, won Grammy awards for her music and sold millions of records. She co-stared in the enjoyable movie The Pink Panther with Steve Martin. My point here is that Beyonce is considered a mainstream musical artist. She is not one like Madona or Lady Gaga who seem to exist to push the envelope and shock people.

We’ve come a long way in a certain direction since my high school days when the top pop artist like Hall & Oats had a top hit with the benign, “Your Kiss is on My List” and President Reagan’s administration had concerns about the Beach Boys playing at the White House.

Before Beyonce sang her new song, “Girls Who Run the World” she was welcomed by a video introduction from her father, artists like Stevie Wonder, and Streisand as well as First Lady Michelle Obama. The First Lady praised Beyonce and described her as, “a powerful role model for girls and young women around the world.” Oh Really?

When the video ended with great applause, Beyonce performed her new song. You can see the music video, which was similar to her Billboard performance here:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VBmMU_iwe6U

Remember again, that this is not a song from some gangster rapper.  It is from a mainstream centrist artist. This is why, after some contemplation, I included a link to the music video for parents, grandparents and church youth leaders to observe.

Here are some of the lyrics of her “song,” Girls Who Run the World.

[I guess these inane and obnoxious repetitions are what pass for a song today.  Excuse the lyrics lousy grammar, this was a cut and paste directly from her web site]

Girls, we run this motha (yeah!) GIRLS!??
Who run the world? Girls! Who run this motha?
Girls! x4?Who run the world? Girls! x4??

[This “chorus was repeated with the slang for a two word obscenity starting with the word mother about two dozen times throughout the “song.”]

[Verse 1] Some of them men think they freak this like we do. ?But no they don’t.?Make your cheques come at they neck.
Disrespect us no they won’t.??Boy don’t even try to take us.
Boy this beat is crazy.?
This is how they made me?Houston, Texas baby?
This goes out to all my girls.?That’s in the club rocking the latest.
Who will buy it for themselves and get more money later???

I think I need a barber. ?None of these hoes can fade me.

[Remember when Don Imus was kicked off the radio for using the word “Ho” which is slang for whore?  And the Rev. Al Sharpton went bonkers over it?”]

I’m so good with this. ?I remind you I’m so hood with this.??
Boy I’m just playing, come here baby.?
Hope you still like me,
If you hate me. ?My persuasion can build a nation?
Endless power, our love we can devour. You’ll do anything for me??

[Chorus] ??Who run the world? Girls! x4?Who run this motha? Girls! x4?Who run the world? Girls! x4

[Verse 2]?? It’s hot up in here. ?
DJ don’t be scared to run this, run this back.
I’m repping for the girls who taking over the world.
Have me raise a glass for the college grads.??
Anyone rolling I’ll let you know what time it is.
You can’t hold me?I broke my 9 to 5 and copped my cheque

This goes out to all the women getting it in. ?Get on your grind.
To the other men that respect what I do.?
Please accept my shine. Boy you know you love it.

[Chorus]

____________

Don’t ask me to interpret what the heck all that means. I don’t know the meaning all the street slang, but it is definitely there.  Sadly, most of our youth know exactly what she’s talking about.

My question is this: ” Mrs. Obama is this really what you endorse for America’s women as a good role model? Would you really let your girls watch, sing or act out Beyonce’s videos? What messages to America’s youth are being sent by this singer, this song, and video that are so worthy to be embraced nationally from the White House?  Does this endorsement of a role model apply for your daughters too, or just the pollution of the rest of the youth in America?”

Indiana Legislative Leaders Speak Up About Controversial Supreme Court Decision

There has been a lot of discussion about a recent Indiana Supreme Court decision affecting the Castle Doctrine in regard to police entering one’s home. Yesterday, the Republican Caucus leaders (Senate President Pro Tem David Long and Speaker of the House Brian Bosma) issued the following statement on this matter:

“After reviewing the decision of the Indiana Supreme Court in Barnes v. State of Indiana, we respectfully request that the Court grant a rehearing for the purpose of clarifying its decision. We have heard overwhelmingly from our Hoosier constituents, and legal scholars, that the language used to address the specific facts of this case may have unintentionally erased hundreds of years of common law precedent on the topic of reasonable resistance to unlawful entry. A more narrowly-tailored opinion could preserve the long-established private property rights of our citizens while continuing to protect the safety of our law enforcement officers and citizens where unique circumstances exist, such as a domestic disturbance. Many individual members of the General Assembly have begun work on potential legislation to restore these private property rights; if the Court did not intend to rescind this right, except in very limited circumstances where an emergency exists, a clarification from the Court would be extremely helpful.”

No related posts.