 |
          
  |
|
|
|
Daniel Herbster reporting
 Probably the greatest long-term issue facing our nation is the nomination and confirmation of well-qualified, originalist judges and justices to federal benches. One organization seeking to ensure that happens is the Judicial Confirmation Network. It is my privilege to interview my friend and colleague Gary Marx who is the Executive Director of JCN.
DH: Gary, thanks for taking the time to answer our questions. Let’s start with a general question. Why is the issue of judges so important?
GM: I think that judicial selection is still the most powerful all encompassing issue for conservatives. There will be times where an issue like immigration will become red-hot but a judge can come along and single handedly ignore the constitution and the law at will and impose their own view of immigration laws upon a state or the nation. Conservatives now understand that no matter whether you are a social, economic, or national security conservative we all unite around the need to have judges who will be faithful to the text of the constitution. Conservatives understand just how the Supreme Court and constitutionalist judges impact our children and grand children. Supreme Court nominations are perhaps the longest lasting legacy of every U.S. president.
DH: How is the Judicial Confirmation Network involved in this issue?
GM: During the Roberts and Alito confirmation battles, the Judicial Confirmation Network built a network or grassroots leaders in key states to pressure Senators to support a fair up-or-down vote and confirm these constitutionalist judicial nominees.
DH: How would you describe a good justice or judge? What kinds of characteristics or qualities define a solid judicial nominee?
Daniel Herbster reporting
 In the stem cell debate, you will often here proponents of unethical embryonic stem cell research say that we have hundreds of thousands of “leftover embryos” from IVF clinics and that the “only” thing to be done with them is to kill them for use in research. Besides the fact that the numbers of available embryos is greatly exaggerated (when you consider that most parents of frozen embryos want to keep them), the fact that human embryos can be and have been adopted by couples unable to have children on their own shows that death in the lab is not the only option for IVF embryos.
One organization seeking to publicize this exciting adoption option is Nightlight Christian Adoptions. I recently came across their website (http://www.embryoadoption.org/) and I am happy to share with you my interview with Ron Stoddart, the Executive Director of NCA.
Note: The above photo is President Bush, soon after vetoing an unethical embryonic stem cell research funding bill, holding a child who was adopted as an embryo.
DH: Ron, why should we care about what happens to “leftover” IVF embryos?
RS: It is a scientific fact that life begins at conception. The argument is over when life is deserving of protection. There are certainly those who would rather argue that embryos are not life – or are not persons – rather than admit that they just don’t want to afford them the same protection as life that is further developed. They have a fear that if we accord too much respect to embryos then it will be an opening to have Roe v. Wade overturned. I believe that all human life is sacred and deserving of protection. The fact that the embryos have been frozen does not change their nature and they deserve a chance at continued life.
DH: About how many unused embryos are there in this country, and how many of those are even available for research purposes?
RS: The best estimates are that there are about 500,000 embryos currently frozen in fertility clinics around the United States. The decision about the fate of the embryos rests with the family who created them (except in Louisiana where they are protected from destruction). Different surveys have attempted to estimate how many families would donate their embryos for research, so the estimate varies from 15,000 embryos and up. The reality is that the vast majority of families with stored embryos do not know what to do and are struggling with their decision. We are trying to encourage them to have the embryos implanted, if not in the family who created them then in an adoptive family.
DH: Should we respect the rights of human embryos the same way we do for adult human beings? What is the state of the law regarding the treatment of embryos?
RS: A person’s a person regardless how small. There is a lot of wisdom in these words from the WHO. My answer to the question is “yes.” The state of the law, except for Louisiana, is that embryos are treated with slightly more respect than property. Most of the conflicts have arisen when a couple is divorcing. In those cases, the courts have consistently sided with the spouse who wants to destroy the embryos rather then allowing the other spouse to implant them or donating them to another couple. Not much respect there.
DH: What is the mission of Nightlight Christian Adoptions? How long have you been in operation, and how did it get started?
Daniel
Herbster reporting
 Have
you ever been frustrated by the way the news media often fails to make the
distinction between adult and embryonic stem cells when talking about research
funding or medical results? The Repair Stem Cell Institute is trying
to do something about it, and I had the opportunity to interview the Chairman
and Founder of this organization, Don Margolis.
DH: Don, what are the differences
between adult and embryonic stem cells?
DM: The
difference is easily described when you don't use the common names but instead
use their reason for existing, which is easier to understand. Adult stem cells are more aptly REPAIR stem
cells (RSC); they know how to do just one function: REPAIR a sick part of the
body. Embryonic stems cells are
PROLIFERATING stem cells (PSC). They
know how to proliferate through some stages and become a zygote, then
proliferate through more stages and become a fetus, then proliferate again
until it is a baby. REPAIR stem cells repair. They repair so much and so well
that 100-plus diseases are being effectively treated with RSC around the
world. Meantime, PSC constantly
frustrate embryonic researchers by refusing to behave as repair cells because,
well, they are NOT. Even when well-trained to repair a disease, PSC may do it
but then off they go, wherever they wish, fighting the attempt to stop them
from proliferating and sometimes they can completely rebel and become tumors.
Now you can see why the treated disease score, after 10 years, is RSC, over
100; PSC, zero.
DH: Why is it so hard for the
media to mention the fact that there is more than one type of stem cell (not
all of which have ethical concerns)? Do
you think there is often an intentional effort to blur the distinction?
DM: The
American news media is more inclined to cover embryonic stem cell news and
trends. I'm hoping that the reason for this slanted news coverage is because
most writers, reporters and editors are uninformed about repair stem cell
science and how relevant this science is right now in treating those 100-plus
diseases, about half of them considered incurable by modern medicine. This is,
of course, is one of the main reasons why The Repair Stem Cell Institute LLC
(RSCI) was created a few months ago. My goal and the goal of my world-class
Science Advisory Board is to educate and inform the American public and news
media community about repair stem cell science and its treatment centers
located around the world. No company or
institution in the world can match the RSCI Science Advisory Board in stem cell
skills and knowledge – no one comes close! Then again, not many in the world
(outside of bloggers) are fighting the science battle for RSC.
DH: What is the The Repair Stem Cell Institute
and what is its mission?
Daniel Herbster reporting
 Pregnancy resource centers are on the front lines of the abortion conflict, giving real options for pregnant women contemplating an abortion by showing them love and giving them accurate information about the innocent life within them. Also, in order for the pro-life movement to be victorious, the younger generations (and “generations yet unborn” as Edmund Burke would have said) must be trained and recruited to carry the battle standard into the future. With these facts in mind, pro-lifers would do well to participate in the third annual Wash for Life.
It is my pleasure to interview Jonathan Tonkowich who is the Director and creator of the Wash for Life. The Wash for Life seeks to recruit and educate the younger generation by enlisting them to wash cars and donate the funds raised to local pregnancy resource centers. Find out more about the Wash for Life at washforlife.com and by reading my interview with Jonathan below.
DH: Jonathan, thanks for doing this interview. We appreciate your time. First, what is the Wash for Life and what is its purpose?
JT: The Wash for Life is hundreds of groups all over the country (and now the world thanks to individuals in Canada and Kenya) who unite on the same Saturday in early September and hold car washes to raise money for their local pregnancy resource center. All the money is donated by the individual groups to their local centers and we collect the stories and total numbers.
We have three main goals for the Wash for Life.
1 – To support the work of pregnancy resource centers. These centers are such an important part of the pro-life movement. They are at the front lines helping real people in difficult situations with their love and compassion.
2 – To recruit a new generation of pro-life leaders and advocates. The Wash for Life is a great way for young people to get involved in bringing about the end of abortion. We have so many stories from the first two washes of young people becoming passionate and excited about working for the cause.
3 – To let the world know that our generation is pro-life. Our generation has been damaged and diminished by abortion. We have seen the destruction it has caused and we need to have voice in speaking out against it.
DH: Who came up with the idea for the Wash for Life and how did it get started?
JT: I actually had the idea while sitting in math class my senior year of college at Thomas AquinasCollege in Santa Paula, CA. The idea stuck with me and I could not stop thinking about it. I knew God must be telling me something. I prayed about it and then started talking with some of my friends. That summer (2006) we all moved to Virginia and worked out of my parent’s basement making phone calls and sending emails trying to get as many groups all over the country to participate.
DH: What is the date for this year’s Wash for Life?
JT: This year the date will be September 13th.
DH: How could our readers start their own Wash for Life in their own neighborhoods?
JT: It’s quite simple and easy. You just hold a car wash at your church, your school, your local gas station, or even your driveway on September 13th. Then donate the money you raise to your local pregnancy care center (if you need help locating one we are more than happy to help you).
Please sign up on our website and we will post your carwash location on our website, so those in the area who want to support can visit your carwash. After your carwash email us your results, your pictures, and your stories, so we can share them. You are joining thousands of others all across the country to be part of a huge nationwide car wash.
DH: Why did you decide to benefit pregnancy resource centers? Why do you think the work they do is so important?
Daniel Herbster
reporting
I had the opportunity
to interview Rick Schatz, the President and CEO of the National Coalition for the Protection
of Children & Families, about his work protecting families. Here is my interview with Rick.
DH: What is the
mission of the National Coalition? Are
you primarily concerned with local or national issues?
RS: Our mission
at the National Coalition for the Protection of Children & Families is to move the people of God to embrace, live
out, preserve and advance the truth of biblical sexuality. We address and
are concerned about pornography, the sexualized messages of the culture,
premarital sex among teens and young adults, marriage and the redefinition of
marriage, and the homosexual political agenda.
We are concerned with both national and local issues. On the national level, we work with
denominations, major corporations, the Department of Justice, Federal
Communications Commission, and CTIA – The Wireless Association. Locally, we work with churches, Christian
schools, para-church ministries and individual believers and their families
through our regional offices located in Atlanta,
Charlotte, Columbus,
Kansas City, New England, Seattle,
St. Louis and here in Cincinnati where our corporate headquarters are located.
DH: How did it get started?
RS: Jerry Kirk was senior pastor of College Hill
Presbyterian Church in Cincinnati.
Through his counseling he recognized pornography and the sexualized culture
were having a devastating impact on marriages and especially young people. He formed the National Coalition in 1983 and
then left the pastorate at College Hill in 1986 to be full time with the National
Coalition.
DH: What are some of your greatest achievements
as an organization?
RS: From a national perspective, we have
encouraged the development, passage and implementation of some of the strongest
legislation in our nation’s history focused on illegal pornography and sex tourism. We have encouraged law enforcement efforts of
the Justice Department and FCC, and have challenged corporations such as
Abercrombie & Fitch, AT&T and General Motors to leave the pornography
business and reduce the sexual content of their marketing efforts.
We have developed some powerful materials, both written and
visual, educating pastors, Christian leaders, parents and young people about
the threat of pornography and the sexualized culture in which we live. In addition, we have brought together the
broadest range of the faith community in the history of our country to address
pornography by forming the Religious Alliance Against Pornography (RAAP) in
1986. RAAP has been used to meet with
two Presidents and five Attorneys General over the years and has played a major
role in educating the faith community in the United States.
Through our regional offices, we have worked with hundreds
of churches and Christian schools across the country through the distribution
of materials, speaking engagements, conferences and retreats. Our website and media and public relations
efforts have reached millions of Americans with the message of the National
Coalition and have encouraged parents to talk to their children about sexuality
and the threats of our culture.
DH: How can people make a difference in their
communities for families and against pornography? What are some practical steps they could take
to make their communities safer and cleaner?
Daniel Herbster
reporting
 The American Association of
Christian Schools is “the oldest national voice for Christian school
education.” Their office in Washington,
DC works to ensure that the rights of parents to choose how to educate their
children are protected, and to keep Christian educators informed of important
issues facing our nation. AdvanceUSA has
worked closely with AACS on a number of occasions and it is a real pleasure to
interview my colleague and good friend Maureen Wiebe who is the Legislative
Director for AACS in Washington, DC.
DH: What is the
mission of AACS in general, and specifically in Washington, DC?
MW: Hi Dan.
Thanks for this opportunity to talk about AACS and what we do here in
our DC office.
In general, AACS is a
service organization, so our mission is to provide services to our Christian
schools to aid them in the great work they are doing. These services include educational materials
(journals, etc.), accreditation and certification for schools and teachers,
competitions for students, and legislative oversight. I think many people are most familiar with
AACS through our National Fine Arts Competition, but our scope of service is
actually much larger than that.
Specifically in Washington,
DC, we are responsible for the
legislative oversight aspect of the AACS services. Our goal here is to be a liaison between our
Christian schools and the federal government.
While we don't seek federal funds for our ministries, we want those in
the government to know we are here so our freedoms continue to be
protected. In addition, we strive to participate
in the process on other issues, particularly those social issues which we as
Christians would take a strong stand – i.e. marriage, family values, the life
issue.
DH: What is your
position at AACS and what kind of projects and responsibilities does it
involve?
MW: I serve as
the Legislative Director for AACS. My
job is to track legislation and keep our schools and ministries informed of what
is happening on Capitol Hill that might affect our schools. I also work to keep those in the government
aware of the issues that are important to the AACS ministries. This requires me to attend meetings, network
with other conservatives and staffers on the Hill, meet with Congressmen,
communicate with our schools through email letters and alerts, and do some
speaking at teacher conventions. In
addition, our office here sends out a weekly email newsletter called "The
Washington Flyer" which keeps people informed of current events that
affect our ministries.
DH: Why is it so
important that Christian education have an advocate in our nation’s capital?
Daniel
Herbster reporting
I had the
opportunity to interview Mark Tooley about his work with UMAction
at the Institute on Religion and Democracy. The following is my interview
with Mark.
DH: What is UMAction
and how would you sum up its mission? Do you see it as more of a
theological or political movement or both?
MT: UMAction
is the Methodist program of the IRD. Its goal is to foster accountability
and reform within United Methodism. We’re not political in the sense that
we endorse candidates or specific legislation in civil society. We are
political in that we are concerned about the church’s public policy witness. We
are theological in that we vigorously affirm the official, orthodox teachings
of our church. DH: I understand
that you were very active in the recent United
Methodist Church’s
global conference in Forth Worth, Texas.
Are you encouraged by what took place there?
MT: Yes,
I’m encouraged by the growing numbers and influence of the non-U.S. church,
especially in Africa. They are the hope of the church’s future.
But the church still faces many battles ahead.
DH: What kinds of
decisions were reached on pro-life issues?
MT: There
were some small, incremental steps supporting parental consent and affirming
the sacredness of unborn human life. We narrowly failed to remove church
agencies from the Religious Coalition for Reproductive Choice. Had the
vote been NOT on the last day, when many of the Africans had left, we probably
would have won.
DH: What progress
was made in affirming the traditional definition of marriage and Biblical
teaching on sexual morality?
Daniel Herbster reporting
 Dr. David Prentice is one of the foremost experts on bioethics in the country. He has valuable science experience from his days as researcher and teacher, and he now works for groups like the Family Research Council and Do No Harm speaking out on some of the most important (though sometimes confusing) ethical issues facing our society today. I’ve had the opportunity to meet Dr. Prentice a number of times and have heard him speak often so it is a distinct pleasure to interview him today and share with you his scientific expertise.
DH: First off, tell our readers a little about yourself. What did you do before you came to FRC? What are your responsibilities at FRC and Do No Harm?
DP: Before FRC, I spent almost 20 years as Professor of Life Sciences at Indiana State University, at the same time as Adjunct Professor of Medical & Molecular Genetics for Indiana University School of Medicine.
During those years I taught and did lab research, and also spent a few years in administration.
My job description now is somewhat similar: I lecture, give briefings, and testify about science, especially the scientific facts regarding stem cells, cloning, and other biotechnologies.
DH: You often hear people say that we should “leave science to the scientists,” that we who have ethical concerns with particular research techniques have no right to an opinion if we are not scientists ourselves. Is this true? Do we as a society have a stake in deciding what research should or should not be allowed? Why is this notion so dangerous?
 DP: Some scientists might like that, but the fact is that society sets the agenda, both in terms of what's allowed as well as what resources are provided to science. Everyone has a stake in this discussion, because everyone is affected. Leaving these decisions just to one group means we abdicate our responsibility to help form a strong society.
DH: Dr. Prentice, what are stem cells?
DP: A stem cell has 2 main characteristics: (1) It continues to grow and divide, making copies of itself, and (2) given the correct signal, a stem cell can form many different specialized cells of the body.
DH: What are the two general types of stem cells, and are there any ethical differences between them?
Daniel Herbster reporting
 Exodus International is the largest network of former homosexuals in the world and assists local ministries around the world in helping people overcome same-sex attraction and the homosexual lifestyle through a relationship with Christ. They also use their unique expertise to speak out on important cultural and societal issues. I’ve had the opportunity to work with members of Exodus on a number of occasions so it’s great to be able to interview my friend Randy Thomas who is Vice President of Exodus. The following is my interview with Randy.
DH: Randy, how long has Exodus been in existence and how did it get started?
RT: In 1976, sixty-two ministry leaders met in California to talk about their efforts to help those dealing with unwanted same-sex attraction and how they, as independent ministries, could network to help one another in this effort. The vision and name for Exodus was born out of obvious parallels that could be drawn from the Children of Israel leaving Egypt and entering the Promise Land. These visionaries had the accurate view that being “gay” should not be the only option for those with same sex attractions. They knew that our “Promise Land” was the knowledge of and relationship with Jesus Christ. They knew that there was so much more to life than what a gay ideology was offering and so they developed the network we now know as Exodus. Thirty-three years later our network has over 200 member agencies across North America who reach thousands of people seeking help. We are also affiliated with other ministries around the world who offer this perspective on homosexuality to a world hungering for positive alternatives.
Sixty-two people cast a vision that has now helped millions of people and educated millions more about biblical sexuality.
DH: One of the tenants of our modern, politically correct culture holds that sexual orientation is inherent and unchangeable but “gender identity” is unfixed and can change. Do you think this is true, and how does Exodus’s unique perspective relate to this issue?
RT: Recently I wrote on my personal blog a post called “The Transgender Double Standard.” In it I shared, ‘It’s always astounded me how willing some in the gay activist community are to celebrate someone surgically altering their body to “become” who they perceive to be internally. Yet when I determine I want to reorient my sexual orientation, which does not require drastic surgery or body altering drugs, according to those same activists, I am the one doing damage to myself and others by simply holding to a particular worldview that brings me contentment and sexual reorientation. The transgendered are applauded for radically altering their bodies while I am scolded for holding the belief that I would be happier living out who I truly am regardless of my past life as a gay identified man. It¹s ok for someone to ignore what they were obviously born as, but for people like me - we are told being “gay” is genetic and should be embraced because we have no other option.’
This is a terrible conundrum for militant gay activism because their own moral relativism is being exposed. We were all created with free will. We all have the ability to define right and wrong for ourselves. The issue with moral relativism is that eventually it will prove out to be hypocritical because it is self based moral judgments instead of God¹s creative intent which is unchanging. Sixteen years ago I decided that maybe God’s intent for my sexuality and identity just might be beyond my own seemingly logical conclusions. I started to question everything in life and attempting to live out my identity and sexuality in accordance with my faith. My identity has completely changed in that I am not a “gay” man anymore. I am a Christian. I will hopefully be known as a man of God. My sexual orientation has shifted a great deal as a byproduct of my pursuing purity and holiness.
Notice I said shifted. I am not above temptation and if temptation happens, I know why and what to do about it. Regardless, homosexuality does not have the power to determine who I am or how I steward my sexuality.
DH: Would you mind telling us about your background and how you came to work at Exodus?
By Daniel Herbster
 I recently corresponded with Bryan Wickens, president of Reclaim Our Culture Kentuckiana (ROCK), and asked him about the work he does fighting sexually oriented businesses and protecting families. Visit reclaimourculture.org for more information. Below is my interview with Bryan.
DH: Bryan, thanks for taking the time to tell our readers about your work in the culture war fighting against pornography and for families in Kentuckiana. First of all, for our readers who may not be familiar with the term, what is Kentuckiana, and how much area does it contain? Is it basically the greater Louisville area?
BW: Thanks, Daniel. Kentuckiana usually means central Kentucky up to central Indiana and that is definitely where ROCK’s focus began. During the past couple of years, however, as we have expanded our reach and been invited to join in on national initiatives and projects, we are recognized now as ROCK and have interests in projects across the country. Since our staff lives in the Kentuckiana region, we will of course always have the communities that ROCK was born out of at the heart of anything we do. But it is imperative to us that we not confine our work to one geographic circle in that the issues we face today are certainly not confined to one geographic circle.
DH: How did ROCK get started, and how long has it been operating?
BW: ROCK was created in March 2004 in response to a series of articles reporting on the unrestrained growth of sex business in the Kentuckiana area and their related negative effects on the community. As a result, a group of citizens, concerned about the state of affairs of our culture came together to form ROCK. This group simply said “enough is enough” and decided to do something, to get off the sidelines – to change Kentuckiana for the better.
 I was asked to sit on the board of ROCK in 2004 which, at the time, was an all volunteer organization comprised of some incredible individuals. In 2005, ROCK was growing and decided to hire its first full time President. At the time, I was a partner in one of the largest law firms in our region and was feeling a call in my life to use my skills and abilities to stand up against the attacks on our values, our beliefs and our families. But leaving my law firm to become the first President of a non-profit was not really in my plans. But as so often happens, God had a different plan! To the surprise of many, I left my law practice to become President of ROCK in September, 2005. And every person at ROCK has a similar story. It is amazing how that faithfulness has been rewarded and the blessings ROCK has experienced in a short period of time.
DH: How bad was the situation in Kentuckiana when ROCK was first started, and what kind of progress have you seen since that time? What are some of your proudest accomplishments as an organization?
Daniel Herbster
reporting
Congressman Paul
Broun, who represents Georgia’s tenth district, is one of the newest members of
Congress—having won a special election last year after the previous Congressman
for the 10th district, Charlie Norwood, passed away. I
was privileged to interview Rep. Broun about his proposed bill the “Military
Honor and Decency Act” which would fully prohibit the sale of obscene and
pornographic material on military bases. The following is my interview
with Rep. Broun.
DH:
Congressman, thanks so much for doing this interview for us. First of
all, I’d like to ask you the question I always love to ask politicians.
Why did you decide to get into politics and specifically why did you run for
your current office?
PB: When I ran for
office, I was not seeking a title or political position. I ran because I firmly believe that our
nation has lost sight of its core principles, and I want to make fundamental
changes to how our government operates.
In Psalm 11, God
asks a question, “If the foundations be destroyed, what can the righteous
do?” And God tells us the answer to that
question is to return to His precepts and commandments, because a righteous
Lord loves righteousness and He will uphold our efforts on His behalf.
We have lost our
righteous zeal, and lost our once cherished principles of personal freedom,
individual accountability and responsibility, and limited government. I ran for office to restore those principles,
and I believe that He calls each one of His children to uphold those
principles. That is what I am trying to
do in Congress, at home, and everywhere I go.
DH:
You’ve recently proposed the Military Honor and Decency Act (H.R.5821) which
deals with the sale of pornographic or obscene material on military
bases. What would this bill do?
PB: Essentially, it
will close the loophole in current law that allows pornography to be sold on
military installations across the United States and around the world. The Defense Authorization Act of 1997
included a provision to prohibit the distribution and sale of all sexually
explicit material on property under the jurisdiction of the Department of
Defense (DoD). Sadly, DoD has failed to
strictly enforce this law, and has allowed blatant, obviously pornographic
material such as Playboy and Penthouse to continue to be sold on
military bases. My bill will end this
practice and force the DoD to submit to the law.
Let me be clear – if
military personnel want to buy pornography, that is their prerogative. However, the U.S. Military should not be
involved and facilitating the transaction.
The U.S. Military should not be using its resources to deliver it right
to the doors of these military personnel. My bill does not make pornography illegal, but
it would remove the U.S. military and the U.S. taxpayer from the transaction.
DH: How
did you become aware of the need for this legislation, and what are some of the
facts that convinced you this legislation was necessary?
In
our continuing series of interviews for our weekly online newsletter, we recently
interviewed Jim Pfaff of the Colorado Family
Institute.
DH: It’s finally beginning to
look like spring here in the Midwest.
Are you still snow-bound out there in Colorado?
JP:
Here on the Front Range just below the mountains we go back and forth from Spring
to Winter all the way until May, but up in the mountains, they’ll have winter
and skiing for some time to come due thanks to heavy snow all winter. They’re not talking Global Warming at the
resorts this year.
DH: What is the mission of the
Colorado Family Institute?
JP: Colorado
Family Institute (CFI) is a nonprofit, 501(c)3 research and educational
organization committed to strengthening the family. Our goal is to restore and defend traditional
moral principles in the culture by advocating for sound public policy. We are part of a nationwide network of family
policy councils associated with Focus on the Family® and Dr. James Dobson. We
educate and equip churches and citizens on important public policy issues that
affect marriage, life and the family—and ultimately to shape public opinion on
these issues.
DH: How did it get started? How long has it been around?
Daniel Herbster
reporting
The Lighted Candle Society is on the
cutting edge of the fight against pornography.
They marshal the latest scientific research on the dangerous effects of
pornography (on the individual and on society) to fight the porn industry in
the courts. I was able to interview my
fellow blogger and facebook friend Justin Hart, who is the Vice President of
Communications for the Lighted Candle Society, and the following is the text of
that interview.
DH: I’ve been
familiar with Justin’s work online for several months, and after communicating
with him online from time to time it was a real treat to meet him in person at
a bloggers meeting in Washington, DC recently.
He’s also one of my “facebook friends.”
I’m so grateful Justin was willing to answer my questions and let our
readers know about the great work the Lighted Candle Society is doing.
Justin, what is the Lighted Candle Society and
how did it get started?
JH: The Lighted
Candle Society was founded in 2001 by Ed Meese (former Attorney General under
Ronald Reagan) and John Harmer (former Lt. Governor of California under Reagan
in the 60s). Both John and Ed are
veterans of the culture wars, having fought for decency issues over the last
four decades.
John Harmer is the driving force behind the Lighted Candle
Society. He started the non-profit
organization to fight pornography is a very unique and unprecedented way.
DH: How long have
you been with LCS and what kind of things do you do for them?
JH: I've been
with the Lighted Candle Society for almost a year now. They really felt the need to ramp things into
high gear. I came on as Vice President
of Communications to make that happen. I
help develop the multiple websites which we maintain, organize our online
fundraising efforts, and create our action alerts to our members.
DH: How can our
readers take a stand against pornography and sexually oriented businesses in
their communities?
We
are privileged to have John Stemberger, the State Chairman of Florida4Marriage.org,
answer some of our questions about the crucial campaign going on in Florida. Here is Daniel Herbster’s interview with John. For more information check Florida4Marriage.org.
DH: Thanks for taking the time
to share about your work with our readers.
Let me start off with a softball.
Why is protecting the traditional definition of marriage so important?
JS: Goodness,
this something I could discuss for hours.
I guess the most compelling reason and yet simple reason is that kids
need a mom and a dad. Same sex marriages deprive children of the best
arrangement for human socialization.
Same sex marriages also provide the legal rationale for the creation of
polygamous marriages and group marriage arrangements. Our opponents really are trying to redefine
the human experience and radically change basic human institutions that have
served us since the beginning of time.
DH: What are you and the
Florida4Marriage.org committee hoping to accomplish in Florida and why do you
think it would be effective?
Tomorrow’s Advance Report newsletter will have a spotlight on the Home School Legal Defense Association. Here is Daniel Herbster’s interview with Will Estrada. For more information check HSLDA.org.
DH: We are grateful to be able to interview Will Estrada who is the Director of Federal Relations for the Home School Legal Defense Association (HSLDA). I’ve had the privilege to meet Will many times in our nation’s capital, and am excited about interviewing him for our readers.
Will, what is HSLDA?
WE: HSLDA was founded in 1983 by Michael Smith and Michael Farris. When HSLDA began, homeschooling was effectively illegal in 45 states. Today, we have over 80,000 member families and homeschooling is formally recognized in all 50 states. We have spent the past 25 years defending the right of parents to homeschool and advocating for homeschool freedom in the courts and legislatures.
DH: How long have you been with HSLDA and what kind of things do you do for them?
WE: I came to HSLDA in January, 2004 and worked as a legal assistant for HSLDA staff attorney Scott Woodruff. After graduating from law school in 2006, I became the Director of HSLDA’s Federal Relations Department, and serve as HSLDA’s federal lobbyist in D.C. My main task is to monitor federal legislation to make sure nothing is proposed that would negatively affect the freedom to homeschool. HSLDA’s message to the federal government is that homeschoolers want to be left alone and that homeschoolers should not be discriminated against in any scholarship or enlistment opportunity in the military. I have also recently been serving as the Director of Generation Joshua, a division of HSLDA that works to elect godly leaders. We also train and inspire the next generation to make a difference in our nation.
DH: I know a lot of people are concerned (and rightfully so) about the recent state appellate court ruling in California. Can you tell us a little about the ruling and what HSLDA is doing about it?
WE: Some have contended that the decision of the Court of Appeal in In Re Rachel L. only affects that particular family. While a court order can only direct one family to stop homeschooling, the case clearly sets a legal precedent that will be binding against all other families if this case is not reversed. (Technically, the decision is binding only in the Second District which consists of Los Angeles, San Luis Obispo, Santa Barbara, and Ventura counties. However, other appellate districts will normally treat it as persuasive precedent. If ratified by the Supreme Court of California, it formally binds all California counties.)
There are two basic issues in the case:
| | |