 |
          
  |
|
|
Two
bills (which were combined into one bill, H.R. 2176) which would have expanded gambling
were defeated on Wednesday. Also,
attempts to undermine the Unlawful Internet Gambling Act were also defeated in
the House. CitizenLink reports.
The
AP also reports.
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?
As
AdvanceUSA reported
last June, when Jim Holsinger was nominated by President Bush to be surgeon
general, radical homosexual interest groups smeared his reputation and
convinced the U.S. Senate to stall his nomination because of his religious
convictions concerning homosexuality and for sound medical reports he issued on
the health dangers of homosexual activity.
Holsinger is a Methodist and has taken public stands in defense of
Biblical teaching on homosexuality while serving his church in leadership
positions.
It
appears Jim Holsinger has been vindicated by the United Methodist Church as
that body recently upheld the traditional definition of marriage and biblical
teaching on sexual morality at its recent global conference. The
Institute on Religions and Democracy explains.
It
has been a full year since George W. Bush first nominated Holsinger, and his
nomination is still stalled in the U.S. Senate.
It is a shame that a man’s religious convictions can be used to smear
his reputation and prohibit him from serving his country.
Rebecca
Hagelin reports. Excerpt:
Who could argue with the idea that, when it
comes to sex education, our teenagers should be taught to say “no”? Considering
what’s at stake (their health, their future, their dignity as human beings,
their morality) -- and because we love them and want what’s best for them --
nothing short of a clear-cut abstinence message will do.
At least, that’s how it appears out here in
the Real World. In the rarified air of a congressional hearing room, it’s
another matter. According to several witnesses (including John Santelli of the
Guttmacher Institute, and Max Siegel of the AIDS Alliance for Children, Youth
& Families) who spoke recently before the House Committee on Oversight and
Government Reform, abstinence education is not only impractical, it’s
dangerous.
Read
full
article here.
Read
the Heritage Foundation’s study on the effectiveness of
abstinence education here.
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?
As
the Weekly Standard reports, with an influx of membership in Africa combined
with a growing conservative evangelical movement in the United States, the United
Methodist Church could begin to take more conservative positions on issues
such as homosexuality, abortion, family, and Christian doctrine at its quadrennial
global conference now meeting in Texas.
Already, a well-publicized anti-Israel resolution has been defeated, and
observers are expecting to see more surprising results in the future.
The
United Methodist Church is a global and highly influential organization (with a
large facility right next to the U.S. Supreme Court), and it is encouraging to
think that they might soon adopt a more Biblical understanding of sexual morality,
the family, and the right to life.
Concerned citizens would do well to pray that this influential
organization would cease to undermine traditional morality and the right to
life with its resources and policies.
The
Institute on Religion and Democracy has been watching and reporting on the
developing conservative movement within Methodism, and their
website is a helpful resource for monitoring these developments.
AdvanceUSA
thanks Sen. Browback for defending
abstinence education in hearings being held today in the House of
Representatives. Excerpt:
"Studies have shown that abstinence
education is effective in decreasing the number of teen pregnancy and rates of
sexually transmitted diseases among youth," said Brownback. "Clearly
our current approach to sex education is not working; STD rates among teens are
rising, and it is irresponsible of us to silence the abstinence message. We
need more funding for abstinence programs, not less. Cutting funding to such
valuable programs will only have negative results as we see teens, and even
pre-teens, engage in risky sexual behavior."
Click here for
more.
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?
Janice
Shaw Crouse explains how recent encouraging trends in teen pregnancy rates shows
the value of abstinence education despite what proponents of so-called “comprehensive
sex education” would have us believe.
Excerpt:
There is still much to be done in changing
attitudes and promoting the well-being of America’s young people, but teen
sexual activity is down, teen pregnancies are down and teen abortions are down.
That is great news from the cultural battle fields.
Over the past decade, we have offered our
nation’s teens a bright future and expected the best from them. Not
surprisingly, they have met the challenge and are seizing the opportunities to
grasp all the possibilities available to their generation. Our national
leadership needs to continue to keep faith with them by supporting abstinence education
as clearly the best choice for their current and future well-being.
Her
insight is very timely and relevant as Congress will soon hold hearings on
whether to maintain abstinence education funding in the budget as LifeNews
reports. Excerpt:
The House Committee on Oversight and
Government Reform plans the hearing for April 23 to supposedly review the
effectiveness of abstinence education.
However, leading abstinence critic Henry
Waxman will chair the panel.
He has repeatedly gone after abstinence
programs with wild-eyed claims that they are rife with inaccurate medical data
and unrealistic expectations.
Waxman has invited five witnesses to take
the anti-abstinence side in support of comprehensive sex education and just one
abstinence proponent.
The
House of Representatives has approved
a version of PEPFAR anti-AIDS funding that is much improved from the original
version which would have mandated abortion funding, drastically cut back
abstinence and faithfulness education, and weakened anti-prostitution
provisions. Though significant
improvements have been made to the bill, not all conservatives support the
measure because of fiscal concerns over massive spending increases and concerns
that there is insufficient accountability over how funds are spent. The bill will now go to the U.S. Senate.
Should
broadcasters be allowed to air patently indecent or obscene content at any time
of day (including when children are likely to be in the audience)? Kristen Fyfe gives a helpful explanation of
the case and provides examples of current and future abuses by broadcasters.
Excerpt:
As it stands the
Supreme Court is due to consider broadcast indecency in the 2008-2009
term. The 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals
ruled last year in Fox v. FCC that “fleeting” expletives should not be fined by
the FCC. The FCC appealed the ruling to
the Supreme Court, which has not examined the indecency issue since it ruled in
the Pacifica case in 1973. For more on the Supreme Court’s decision to hear the
fleeting expletives case, click
here.
Until the Supreme
Court acts to clarify broadcast decency issues, it appears the networks are
going to do everything in their power to thumb their collective noses at the
FCC and in effect, the American public.
All in the name of “entertainment.”
Isn’t that hilarious?
Janice
Shaw Crouse, Ph.D., has a helpful column today about the
importance and effectiveness of abstinence education and explains why
radical leftist organizations and politicians are so determined to eliminate it
completely. Congress should increase
abstinence education funding, not cut it.
Read Crouse’s
article for more details. Excerpts:
It is incomprehensible that leaders of
organizations working with teens would oppose abstinence. The increase in abstinence programs has been
effective in reversing trends that some believed were irreversible. It is clear from my analysis of official data
that abstinence education is behind the current decreases in teen births, teen
abortion and the number of teens engaged in sexual activity.
While the left claims that abstinence
education is a too-simplistic “just say no” campaign, the programs teach teens
how to say “no” and give them the skills and character development needed for
them to be able to say “no” effectively.
And many teens need to learn that sexually active girls regret their
early sexual activity — nearly two-thirds (63 percent) state that they wish
they had waited to have sex.
…
Many teens don’t know the facts, and the
comprehensive sex education programs do not inform them. A Maryland teenager, Stephen, was part of a
conversation with friends who claimed that “everyone is doing it.” Stephen told them that, statistically, teens
today are less sexually active. They
were surprised; they had not heard that important fact in their so-called
“full-coverage” sex education program.
Stephen summed up our view when he asked,
“Don’t you think our sex ed programs should tell us that more and more teens
are choosing to stay abstinent and how they are doing it?”
CitizenLink
reports. Excerpt:
“With
3 million teen girls infected with STIs, safer sex in adolescents does not
exist,” said Linda Klepacki, sexual health analyst for Focus on the Family
Action. “For the current and future health of teens, we must teach them how to
have strong relationships not based on sex.”
The
American Journal of Health
Behavior published a study in January showing that students who
receive abstinence education are 50 percent less likely to initiate sex.
Furthermore, last
year’s report by the federal Department of Health and Human Services showed
that some comprehensive sex-education curricula taught in the nation's schools
essentially have no impact on behavior.
Valerie
Huber, executive director of the National Abstinence Education Association,
said it is important to look at the growing body of research showing abstinence
education as the only curriculum that successfully addresses teen pregnancies,
STIs and the emotional consequences of teen sex.
Pro-family groups are encouraged that the Supreme Court has decided to hear a broadcast indecency case brought by the FCC. Hopefully, the court will rule that the FCC can regulate even so-called “fleeting instances” of profanity during hours when children are likely to be watching TV or listening to radio.
For more information on this court case or about the issue of broadcast indecency, click here.
Dr. Miriam Grossman, M.D. takes an insightful look at the recent statistics regarding female STD rates and uses her professional experience to explain some of the educational factors contributing to this crisis. Excerpt:
That so many American girls have a sexually transmitted infection should come as no shock. Rather, the shock should be at the madness in our country that we call sexuality education.
| | |