[Active-l] (NEWS) Today's Cultural Warfare Update

[R'ykandar Korra'ti]

Here's a quick CWU for today; mostly I want it out actually for  
Andrew Mohlery, the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary president,  
and his comments about how GBLT people should be eliminated thorough  
prenatal intervention if and when that becomes possible, and -  
probably more importantly, in the long run - how even if there is a  
biological basis for sexual orientation is found that doesn't matter;  
fags still must be stopped. The amazing part is that a few days  
later, he condemns Ann Coulter's comments at CPAC, thus proving that  
you can say any evil thing you want and it's just fine, just as long  
as you don't use _bad words_.

Anyway, here's a bunch of other news.

Equality Florida activist arrested for handing out flyers at Largo,  
Florida city commission meeting;

New York Sun coverage of CPAC has a bit of the god talk in it;

Ann Coulter at CPAC with her "faggot" remarks;

lj user elfs pointed out an article on anti-abortion-rights groups  
having the phone-company-cobranding thing for donations; I'm bringing  
it up to the top level in this CWU;

Kentucky Fairness Alliance update on the attempt to ban same-sex  
health benefits by companies in Kentucky; a vote to take the bill out  
of committee and onto the floor failed today on an 8-8 tie, which is  
good, but there's going to be an attempt to get a discharge position  
passed to revive the bill;

Seattle Times opinion chiding the Army over its refusal (so far) to  
allow Wiccan soldiers to have the symbol of their faith on their  
grave markers; this is allowed for various other religions;

_First Things_ writer Peter Leithart condemns Senator Obama's  
emphasis on health care reform on the basis that in health,  
_suffering is good for you_, and "secular humanists" want that  
suffering to stop, so are bad; he proclaims that "Secular Humanists  
'worship the human body itself'" with a focus on health care;

Andrew Sullivan commentary on the whole Ann Coulter / "Faggot" issue  
- not on the initial commentary, but on her defense of it the day after;

Albert Mohler, head of The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary,  
"the flagship school of the Southern Baptist Convention and one of  
the largest seminaries in the world," endorses complete elimination  
of GBLT people via prenatal intervention if such a thing becomes  
possible. He's also doing something else important: laying the  
groundwork for 'okay, sexual orientation is innate and biologically  
determined - and _no excuse_.' He says that rather explicitly:  
"Christians must be very careful not to claim that science can never  
prove a biological basis for sexual orientation. We can and must  
insist that no scientific finding can change the basic sinfulness of  
all homosexual behavior";

Albert Mohler, just a few days after calling for the elimination of  
all gay people via prenatal intervention if possible, condemns Ann  
Coulter's "faggot" commentary, thus proving once again that you can  
say however evil and vile a thing you want and it's just fine with  
these people _as long as you don't use naughty words_;

Focus on the Family is against Barak Obama - he's for abortion  
rights, domestic partnerships (but against marriage, but they say the  
two are the same thing), and supports the teaching of evolutionary  
theory and specifically not creationism/"intelligent design";

New Jersey Assemblyman Michael Doherty (R) and Assemblywoman Allison  
Littell McHose (R) introduce marriage ban in New Jersey;

Focus on the Family news item/ACTION ITEM to support ban of embryonic  
stem-cell research in Nebraska;

Okay, so this is weird; Focus on the Family headlines, "University  
Students Expelled for Expressing Faith - Christianity deemed a threat  
to others"; once you get to the text, it's apparently a health code  
issue and they aren't supposed to be washing each others' feet; FotF  
wonk Bruce Hausknecht asks "Is this university located in Georgia or  
communist China?"; Google News is not helping, particularly, so I  
don't really know what's going on, though I did find an article  
saying that the Alliance Defense Fund was suing the university;

Faith and Freedom Network condemns vote in Washington State for  
limited domestic partnerships.


----- 1 -----
Equality Florida activist in Largo arrested for handing out anti- 
discrimination flyers
Published by Pam Spaulding
Pandragon
March 2nd, 2007

http://pandagon.net/2007/03/02/equality-florida-activist-in-largo- 
arrested-for-handing-out-anti-discrimination-flyers/

Michael at Pushing Rope reports that Nadine Smith of Equality Florida  
was was taken into custody, allegedly for “resisting arrest” after  
handing out flyers (saying “Don’t Discriminate”) at the Largo City  
Commission meeting where City Manager Steve Stanton was fired.

This was additional drama on top of the already insane situation  
where the highly regarded Stanton, after announcing that he was  
beginning the process of transitioning to become a woman, was hung  
out to dry by his colleagues at the behest of fundie pastor Charlie  
Martin of the First Baptist Church of Indian Rocks and fundies  who  
waged a week-long campaign to destroy Stanton’s career.

Blogger Wayne Garcia was there when Smith was arrested:

Isn’t anyone in Largo ashamed of their police department’s over- 
reaction in the case of Nadine Smith? The executive director of  
Equality Florida was arrested for handing out flyers at Tuesday’s  
commission meeting. Four cops, a felony charge, more than $5,000 bail  
for handing out flyers? Looks like Largo is putting itself on the map  
not just for prejudice but for stamping out free speech. Thanks for  
shining a bright light on the worst of Pinellas, folks.

[...]

Police contend Nadine Smith, executive director of the gay and  
lesbian advocacy group Equality Florida, became disruptive when they  
told her stop distributing the fliers in violation of a city ordinance.

…Fliers present a fire hazard; plus, when they end up on the floor,  
people can slip on them, McMullen said.

Given the already emotionally charged meeting, city officials also  
thought that fliers could become further disruptive, McMullen said.

[More at URL]


----- 2 -----
Conservative Conference Heralds ‘Mission From God'
By RYAN SAGER
New York Sun
March 2, 2007

http://www.nysun.com/article/49639

WASHINGTON, D.C. — "We're going to get the band back together, and  
we're on a mission from God."

That was the message out of the first day of the 34th annual  
Conservative Political Action Conference, taking place yesterday,  
today, and tomorrow at the Omni Shoreham Hotel in Washington, D.C.

The quotation, lifted from the Blues Brothers, came from Richard  
Viguerie, a direct-mail pioneer known as one of the "funding fathers"  
of the conservative movement. Speaking on the conference's first  
panel, "Strategies for a Bold Conservative Future," Mr. Viguerie  
declared that conservatives "should withhold our support from all of  
the top-tier candidates" for the 2008 Republican presidential  
nomination — referring to Mayor Giuliani, Senator McCain of Arizona,  
and the former governor of Massachusetts, Mitt Romney.

"I feel very angry and betrayed," Mr. Viguerie said. "We, as  
conservatives, need new leaders."

[More at URL]


----- 3 -----
Coulter reference to Edwards as "faggot" gives rise to questions for  
media
Media Matters
Fri, Mar 2, 2007 7:37pm EST

http://mediamatters.org/items/200703030002

In a March 2 speech to the Conservative Political Action Conference  
(CPAC), right-wing pundit Ann Coulter said she "can't really talk  
about" Democratic presidential candidate and former Sen. John Edwards  
(NC) because "you have to go into rehab if you use the word 'faggot.'  
" The CPAC audience applauded her comment. Coulter's comments, which  
aired on CSPAN, were also documented by the weblog Think Progress. It  
was not the first time Coulter has smeared a prominent Democrat with  
a homophobic epithet, and it is not the first time that Coulter has  
ridiculed Edwards. Will the media call on Republican presidential  
hopefuls attending the CPAC conference to denounce her smear?

 From Coulter's March 2 speech:

COULTER: Oh, and I was going to have a few comments on the other  
Democratic presidential candidate, John Edwards. But it turns out  
that you have to go into rehab if you use the word "faggot," so I'm  
-- so I'm kind of at an impasse, can't really talk about Edwards. So  
I think I'll just conclude here and take your questions.

As Media Matters for America documented, Coulter called former Vice  
President Al Gore a "total fag" on the July 27 edition of MSNBC's  
Hardball, claiming immediately that the comment was "a joke." At the  
end of the interview, host Chris Matthews said: "Thanks for coming  
on. And a smart lady. Her book's called Godless. Sometimes being  
smart isn't enough for a civil discourse. We'd love to have her back."

[More at URL, including video clip from CSPAN]


----- 4 -----
Faith-based phone company connects in N.H.
By Cindy Kibbe
Published: Friday, Feb. 18, 2005

http://www.nh.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20050218/ 
BUSINESSREVIEW01/50216014

Faith-based long-distance telephone companies - a growing trend  
elsewhere in the United States - are gaining a foothold in New  
Hampshire. Co-branding technology with theology, several Christian  
telecommunications firms promise big savings on phone bills while  
making donations to charities and non-profit organizations all over  
the world. But is it a case of "doing God's work" or "buyer beware"?

Founded in December 2003, OneChristianVoice, a long-distance phone  
service of Vancouver, Wash.-based Christian Media Technologies,  
currently has more than 2,000 subscribers in New Hampshire, according  
to Jay Jessup, founder and CEO of Christian Media Technologies. "We  
don't know what it is, but New England and New Hampshire in  
particular are going like gangbusters," he said.

[More at URL]


----- 5 -----
From: "Kentucky Fairness Alliance" <info at kentuckyfairness.org>
Date: Thu, 08 Mar 2007 00:43:09 GMT
Subject: Celebrate and Stand Strong on Fair Healthcare

Healthcare Discrimination Fails Committee Vote!

Dear Terri,

It's sweet to win a battle as important as today's committee vote,  
but this win only means we have momentum behind us. Rest assured our  
opponents will fight back twice as hard after losing this one. We  
can't let up for a second.

We've had a roller coaster of a week since House Health and Welfare  
Committee Chair Tom Burch first called hearings on SB 152, the lead  
Healthcare Discrimination bill, last Thursday. We've fought  
relentlessly against the anti-fairness industry's attempt to dictate  
Kentucky policy at the expense of Kentucky families.

Today, we scored a major victory, as the committee remained  
deadlocked at 8-8 and failed to advance the bill.

Unfortunately the anti-fairness industry will be equally relentless  
in promoting their agenda. Extremist legislators will probably try a  
procedural move, to advance the healthcare discrimination bill  
without the committee's consent. We'll be urging Representatives to  
vote against this so-called discharge petition.

Please do everything you can to support our Fair Healthcare Lobby Day.

Meet us in Capitol Annex Room 111 any time after 8:00 a.m. tomorrow,  
and lobby House members face-to-face.

Call the legislative message line at 1-800-372-7181, andleave a  
message for your Representative and for House leadership.
A live operator will ask (a) your name and contact information, (b)  
the legislators you want to leave a message for, and (c) your message.

Simply say you want to leave a message for your representative and  
for House leadership. If you don't know your representative's name  
you can ask the operator for help or look it up here .

SUGGESTED MESSAGE: "I'm a fair-minded Kentuckian, and I believe in  
protecting all families. I oppose Senate Bill 152. We should be  
encouraging employers to expand access to healthcare - not restrict it."

Send an e-mail to every member of the House using ourone-click advocacy.

Encourage all the fair-minded people you know to call and email their  
representatives using tell-a-friend.

Thank you, and congratulations on everything we've achieved so far!

Keep on fighting,
Christina, Wes, & Misty
Your Kentucky Fairness Alliance Staff


----- 6 -----
A soldier's freedom of religion
Snohomish County opinion
By Gary Clark
Special to The Times
Wednesday, March 7, 2007

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/opinion/2003604082_snoclark07.html

The U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs has been denying surviving  
family members the right to have a Wiccan pentacle, and possibly  
other religious symbols, placed on the grave markers of deceased  
soldiers who were their husbands or wives, sons or daughters.

This has been causing quite an uproar, to say the least, because the  
soldiers died serving their country. Yet their country, where freedom  
of religion is one of its basic rights, is denying a deceased  
soldier's right of religious freedom when the VA denies Wiccan and  
other religious symbols on his or her military marker. I believe this  
is due, in part, to well-meaning people who simply do not understand  
that the Wiccan pentagram is not a symbol of the devil. Instead, it  
is well known, to anyone who has a computer, that the Wiccan symbol,  
a five-pointed star in a circle, represents the integration of the  
body and spirit, and the spiritual mastery of the four elements. This  
is not satanic worship. The pentagram has a history predating  
Christianity.

By contrast, my Air Force dog tags (1962-1966) listed my religion as  
Presbyterian. For those of you who do not know, the Presbyterian  
cross is allowed as a symbol on the grave marker for a veteran.  
Researchers state that the Presbyterian cross is actually the Celtic  
cross, and both are nearly identical. The Celtic cross originated  
about 5000 BCE, long before the advent of Christianity. In early  
Scotland, the Druids used the Celtic cross.

[...]

Gary Clark of Marysville is a veteran who retired from the Washington  
Department of Veterans Affairs, where he worked in Seattle with  
homeless and incarcerated veterans.

[More at URL]


----- 7 -----
Humanism and Health Care
By Peter Leithart
First Things
Tuesday, March 6, 2007, 3:05 PM

http://www.firstthings.com/onthesquare/?p=653

I got a letter, a signed letter, from Senator Barack Obama the other  
day—me and several million other Americans. He’s running for  
president, you see, and he wants my support in helping him change the  
political landscape. What concerns people, it seems, is not the  
“magnitude of our problems” but the “smallness of our politics.”  
Americans are “hungry for a different kind of politics,” and Obama’s  
campaign is “about answering that call.” He really means this. We can  
tell because he underlined that sentence.

What is not advertising copy is the prioritization of health care in  
Obama’s agenda. What accounts for the passion this issue generates?  
The political reasons for putting that at the top of the list are  
obvious: Health-care costs hit many people very directly, and by  
prioritizing health Obama demonstrates his compassion.

[...]

The obsession with health care, however, goes deeper, and expresses  
an outlook best described in theological terms. In his bracing little  
book on Secularization, Edward Norman, former chancellor of York  
Minster, describes the conflict between Christianity and what he  
calls Secular Humanism by contrasting their attitudes toward  
suffering. Christianity “was founded in an act of expiatory pain, has  
regarded human suffering as not only inseparable from the nature of  
life on earth, as a matter of observable fact, but also as a  
necessary condition in spiritual formation.” Christians seek, of  
course, to alleviate suffering, but God, not human suffering, is the  
center of the moral universe.

Secular Humanism, by contrast, does not believe in sin and cannot see  
how any good could emerge from human suffering. Humanity is  
perfectible, and if we will only work together we will be able to  
remove “anything that can be represented as an affront or an  
impediment to the painless existence of men and women.” Morality is  
reduced to “the palliation of whatever humans themselves regard as  
the cause of their suffering or deprivation.” Having given up the  
worship of God, Secular Humanists “worship the human body itself.” Is  
it any wonder then that politicians, as well as the media, “routinely  
accord priority to items of health-care policy, critiques of the  
state of hospital waiting lists, apparent scandals relating to  
medical practices”?

This is a box outside of which Senator Obama cannot think, and this  
is why his agenda looks so thoroughly Clintonesque. Here’s a  
suggestion: If he wants to transform American politics, perhaps his  
next fund-raising letter should say something along the lines of  
“Pain may be good for you.”

[More at URL]


----- 8 -----
Faggot
Andrew Sullivan
06 Mar 2007

http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/the_daily_dish/2007/03/ 
faggots.html

I watched Ann Coulter last night in the gayest way I could. I was on  
a stairmaster at a gym, slack-jawed at her proud defense of calling  
someone a "faggot" on the same stage as presidential candidates and  
as an icon of today's conservative movement. The way in which Fox  
News and Sean Hannity and, even more repulsively, Pat Cadell, shilled  
for her was a new low for Fox, I think - and for what remains of  
decent conservatism. "We're all friends here," Hannity chuckled at  
the end. Yes, they were. And no faggots were on the show to defend  
themselves. That's fair and balanced.

I'm not going to breathe more oxygen into this story except to say a  
couple of things that need saying. Coulter has an actual argument in  
self-defense and it's worth addressing. Her argument is that it was a  
joke and that since it was directed at a straight man, it wasn't  
homophobic. It was, in her words, a "school-yard taunt," directed at  
a straight man, meaning a "wuss" and a "sissy". Why would gays care?  
She is "pro-gay," after all. Apart from backing a party that wants to  
strip gay couples of all legal rights by amending the federal  
constitution, kick them out of the military where they are putting  
their lives on the line, put them into "reparative therapy" to "cure"  
them, keep it legal to fire them in many states, and refusing to  
include them in hate crime laws, Coulter is very pro-gay. As evidence  
of how pro-gay she is, check out all the gay men and women in America  
now defending her.

Her defense, however, is that she was making a joke, not speaking a  
slur. Her logic suggests that the two are mutually exclusive. They're  
not. And when you unpack Coulter's joke, you see she does both. Her  
joke was that the world is so absurd that someone like Isaiah  
Washington is forced to go into rehab for calling someone a "faggot."  
She's absolutely right that this is absurd and funny and an example  
of p.c. insanity. She could have made a joke about that - a better  
one, to be sure - but a joke. But she didn't just do that. She added  
to the joke a slur: "John Edwards is a faggot." That's why people  
gasped and then laughed and clapped so heartily. I was in the room,  
so I felt the atmosphere personally. It was an ugly atmosphere,  
designed to make any gay man or woman in the room feel marginalized  
and despised. To put it simply, either conservatism is happy to be  
associated with that atmosphere, or it isn't. I think the response so  
far suggests that the conservative elites don't want to go there, but  
the base has already been there for a very long time. (That's why  
this affair is so revealing, because it is showing which elites want  
to pander to bigots, and which do not.)

[More at URL]


----- 9 -----
Is Your Baby Gay? What If You Could Know? What If You Could Do  
Something About It?
Posted: Friday, March 02, 2007 at 3:40 am ET
Albert Mohler
Albert Mohler is head of the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary

http://www.albertmohler.com/blog_read.php?id=891

What if you could know that your unborn baby boy is likely to be  
sexually attracted to other boys? Beyond that, what if hormonal  
treatments could change the baby's orientation to heterosexual? Would  
you do it? Some scientists believe that such developments are just  
around the corner.

[Editor's note: the story he's referring to has been rather rebutted  
by the scientists involved, who say that the MSM misunderstood their  
research, but that's secondary to the main point.]

For some time now, scientists have been looking for a genetic or  
hormonal cause of sexual orientation. Thus far, no "gay gene" has  
been found -- at least not in terms of incontrovertible and accepted  
science. Yet, it is now claimed that a growing body of evidence  
indicates that biological factors may at least contribute to sexual  
orientation.

[...]

More to the point, Gray understands that such a development would  
reshape the abortion and gay-rights debates in America:

Conservatives opposed to both abortion and homosexuality will have to  
ask themselves whether the public shame of having a gay child  
outweighs the private sin of terminating a pregnancy (assuming the  
stigma on homosexuality survives the scientific refutation of the  
Right's treasured belief that it is a "lifestyle choice.") Pro-choice  
activists won't be spared either. Will liberal moms who love their  
hairdressers be as tolerant when faced with the prospect of raising a  
little stylist of their own? And exactly how pro-choice will liberal  
abortion-rights activists be when thousands of potential parents are  
choosing to filter homosexuality right out of the gene pool?

[...]

8. If a biological basis is found, and if a prenatal test is then  
developed, and if a successful treatment to reverse the sexual  
orientation to heterosexual is ever developed, we would support its  
use as we should unapologetically support the use of any appropriate  
means to avoid sexual temptation and the inevitable effects of sin.

[More at URL]


----- 10 -----
Recovering Civility . . . and Refusing to Deny the Obvious
Posted: Monday, March 05, 2007 at 4:33 pm ET
Albert Mohler

http://www.albertmohler.com/blog_read.php?id=893

Ann Coulter is a woman of many gifts and many right ideas. She can be  
an eloquent spokeswoman for conservative convictions and a prophetic  
critic of secular liberalism. Unfortunately, she can also be her own  
worst enemy.

Last week, as she addressed the American Conservative Union's  
Political Action Conference, she made a deplorable reference to  
former Sen. John Edwards.  Here are her words, as spoken to the  
conference:

[...]

Mean? Ann Coulter has turned herself into the evil queen of mean. She  
has lowered herself to embarrassing theatrics and crude humor. More  
seriously, she clearly does not mean all insults as a joke. In a  
recent book, she attacked some 9/11 widows as publicity hounds. She  
has a tawdry record of cheap shots, crude slurs, and indefensible  
personal attacks.

Conservative institutions cannot afford any association with this  
kind of language or attack. The issues are far too serious to be  
treated in this manner, and the very convictions Ann Coulter often  
defends are now sullied by association with her.

[More at URL]


----- 11 -----
The New Name in Liberalism
Barack Obama's building a rep as a different kind of Democrat. But  
the more you examine him on the issues, the more familiar he looks.
by Matt Kaufman
Focus on the Family Action

http://www.citizenlink.org/citizenMag/A000003989.cfm

Political pundits across the political spectrum think Sen. Barack  
Obama could be the next president, and they could be right. The young  
black senator from Illinois comes across as charming and thoughtful,  
a potential healer for our national divisions. He's “soothing,”  
writes George Will: “For a nation with jangled nerves, and repelled  
by political snarling, he offers a tone of sweet reasonableness.” In  
style, he's the Democrat least like Hillary Clinton, who's definitely  
not soothing; and as Will says, “Many Democrats who are desperate to  
win are queasy about depending on her.”

[...]

For all his hand wringing, Obama is basically an across-the-board  
abortion-rights backer. Even in the case of partial-birth abortion,  
he insists that any ban contain a “health” exception—and as a trained  
attorney, he must know that amounts to a blanket license for the  
practice, determined simply by the claims of the abortionists  
themselves.

[...]

Like nearly all politicians, Obama claims to oppose same-sex  
marriage. But he wants to create its virtual equivalent in “civil  
unions.” And he even says he's “open to the possibility” of one day  
supporting full-blown same-sex marriage, by name. His professed  
Christianity won't get in the way, and not just on the usual  
separation-of-church-and-state grounds. In an aside, he says he's  
“not willing to accept a reading of the Bible” that gives weight to  
“an obscure line in Romans.” (That would be a reference to Romans  
1:26-27 as “unnatural” and “perversion.”)

[...]

He's pro-evolution and wants to keep challenges to that view,  
including intelligent design, out of classrooms.

[More at URL]


----- 12 -----
Marriage-Amendment Push in Garden State
Focus on the Family
3-6-2007

http://www.citizenlink.org/CLBriefs/A000004068.cfm

Two New Jersey assembly members have joined pro-family advocates in  
pressing for a voter-approved constitutional amendment to preserve  
marriage, the Bridgeton News reported.

Last October, the state Supreme Court mandated that the Legislature  
offer the rights and benefits of marriage to same-sex couples.  
Lawmakers responded by passing a civil-unions bill.

Assemblyman Michael Doherty and Assemblywoman Allison Littell McHose,  
both Republicans, agree it should be up to voters to decide the  
definition of marriage.

[More at URL]


----- 13 -----
Cornhusker State Considers Cloning Ban
Focus on the Family
3-6-2007

http://www.citizenlink.org/CLBriefs/A000004067.cfm

Nebraska lawmakers will vote this week on legislation to ban human  
cloning, The Associated Press reported.

Sen. Mark Christensen, sponsor of LB 700, wants the state to ban  
researchers from cloning human life for use in destructive embryonic  
stem-cell research.

Opponents of the bill say a ban would stifle research, but Dave  
Bydalek, executive director of Family First, said there should be  
limits to what researchers can do.

"We shouldn’t create life for the express purpose of destroying that  
life for speculative medical research even if it has the possibility  
-- with a big question mark -- of curing certain types of diseases,"  
he said. "A civil society should not use human beings as commodities."

Dawn Vargo, associate bioethics analyst for Focus on the Family  
Action, said the destruction of embryos won’t help those afflicted  
with incurable diseases.
"Cloning advocates want you to believe this research is necessary to  
treat sick and injured patients,” she said, “but in reality, this  
type of research is unethical and unnecessary for treating patients.”

TAKE ACTION:
Nebraska residents can call 1-800-292-2113 or e-mail Family First for  
more information on LB700.

FOR MORE INFORMATION:
Visit Nebraska's Family First Web site for up-to-date information on  
current state legislative matters.


----- 14 -----
University Students Expelled for Expressing Faith
Christianity deemed a threat to others.
by Wendy Cloyd, assistant editor
Focus on the Family
3-6-2007

http://www.citizenlink.org/CLNews/A000004070.cfm

A Georgia university has suspended members of a student group for  
washing new members’ feet, claiming the ancient Christian practice is  
a health risk.

[...]

“It’s ridiculous that a public university would kick a ministry off  
campus simply for exercising its First Amendment right to free speech  
and to model Christ’s ministry among its members,” said Joseph  
Martins, an attorney with National Legal Foundation. “The university  
is essentially saying that Christian groups are okay unless they  
actually practice Christianity.”

Bruce Hausknecht, judicial analyst for Focus on the Family Action,  
said the university's actions should shock anyone who values the  
First Amendment.

"The facts of this case read like a chilling George Orwell novel,  
where traditional Christian worship, beliefs and practices are  
suddenly condemned as violations of a new world order as defined by  
our new enlightened leaders -- the university administration,"  
Hausknecht said. "Is this university located in Georgia or communist  
China?"

[More at URL]


----- 15 -----
Washington Lawmakers Move Toward Gay Marriage
March 1, 2007
Faith and Freedom Network Press Release

[Received in email; no URL]
Gary Randall, President of Faith & Freedom said, "By passing the  
domestic partnership bill today, the Washington Legislature has  
chosen a path toward gay marriage."
Senator Ed Murray, Rep. Jim Moeller, and other sponsors of the bill  
have made it clear to both the press and the public that the ultimate  
prize is "marriage equality" - or gay marriage.
Randall said, "I think a number of legislators who are not  
comfortable with voting for gay marriage chose this vote as an  
alternative. Unfortunately, rather than a helpful compromise, this  
decision will most likely prove to be an enabling step toward same- 
sex marriage, as we are seeing in New Jersey."  Randall also said,  
"As this plays out over the next year or so, some lawmakers may find  
themselves at odds with their constitutes, in that a majority of  
Washington citizens do not favor gay marriage."
Jon Russell, Senior Field Director and lobbyist said, "I think the  
bill is inherently discriminatory because it extends benefits to  
homosexuals and elderly unmarried couples living together while  
excluding many other classes of relationships."
Faith & Freedom is reviewing the viable options of response.