First Amendment

The Religious Right looks to Maggie Gallagher and Robert George for intellectual cover when arguing that same-sex couples shouldn’t be allowed to marry, but whatever credibility they have as independent scholars will be put to the test by their new venture, the National Organization for Marriage.

Gallagher, president of the low-key Institute for Marriage and Public Policy (and perhaps most famous for taking money from the Bush Administration while promoting its marriage policy), and George, a Princeton professor, started NOM in order to lobby against marriage equality for same-sex couples and to campaign against legislators connected to the issue. The group ran this billboard in Massachusetts before the state’s 2007 election (image via Good As You):

The group is airing a radio ad in New Jersey against a bill that would allow same-sex couples to marry, featuring a child saying, “God creating Adam and Eve? That was so old-fashioned.” Although the bill, entitled “Civil Marriage and Religious Protection Act,” explicitly states that no religious group would be required to sanction any marriage (a requirement the First Amendment prohibits anyway) , the NOM ad hits on public fears that marriage equality for same-sex couples would imperil churches, stating, “They also want to penalize traditional New Jersey churches with threats to state tax exemptions and adoption licenses.”

There is an interesting story developing down at Pat Robertson’s Regent University.  It seems as if one of the students, Adam M. Key, doesn’t seem to like Robertson much and doesn’t really fit the stereotype of the typical Regent student:

Key, a bearded 23-year-old with a tableau of tattoos, would seem an odd fit at the evangelical Christian institution Robertson founded in 1978.

Key, a Lutheran, describes himself as a “liberal Christian” who heads the campus’ small “Christian Left” organization.

The tattoos reflect his passion for justice and the legal system. The colorful jumble of images features the U.S. Constitution written on a scroll, the Magna Carta, the Torah, phrases such as “due process,” and men of principle such as Martin Luther, Sir Thomas More and former Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes Jr.

One startling image shows Osama bin Laden juxtaposed with Robertson.

“I believe they’re both reprehensible people,” Key said, “but I defend their right to believe whatever they want.”

Key, who is from Texas, said he had wanted to attend a Christian institution with a law school accredited by the American Bar Association, such as Regent. One motivating factor, he said, was “the opportunity to show people that liberalism isn’t a sin.”

Key said he has a grade-point average close to 3.0 and that he’s on track to graduate from the three-year program in 2½ years. He said he was only vaguely familiar with Robertson and his political views when he applied to Regent.

Key reportedly posted a photo of Robertson appearing to make an obscene hand gesture on his Facebook page, which he took from a freeze-frame of a YouTube video of Robertson scratching his face on “The 700 Club” - and apparently the folks at Regent didn’t find it funny:

Regent officials gave Key two choices: publicly apologize for posting the picture and refrain from commenting about the matter in a “public medium,” or write a brief defending the posting. He faces punishment that could include expulsion.

Key, a second-year law student, said he refused to apologize and “be muzzled” by the university, so he composed the document, which includes citations from noted First Amendment cases.

…

Key said that Jeffrey Brauch, dean of the law school, rejected his brief and that he now awaits disciplinary action under the university’s Standard of Personal Conduct. At one point during the controversy, Key said, he was escorted by three armed security guards from the university’s public relations office.

And now Robertson U. has gone a step further and ordered Key to submit to a Regent-approved mental health counselor:

Adam M. Key, 23, was ordered to undergo a mental-health evaluation before he can return to classes. He also was ordered to undergo counseling if a mental-health provider that is acceptable to the university deems it appropriate, and to provide a report showing that he has completed any treatment plan required.

Key also must agree to allow the mental-health provider to provide regular updates on his treatment to the school.

Presumably, Key’s case won’t be discussed when Regent Law School students gather for this:

LAW 774 First Amendment Law (3) Survey of the protections guaranteed by the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution. Topics covered include freedom of religion, the establishment clause, freedom of speech and freedom of the press.

Yesterday, a collection of extremist right-wing groups, including BOND and Repent America, along with former Navy chaplain and fringe-right folk hero Gordon Klingenschmitt, held a press conference at the U.S. Capitol to protest Senate hate crimes legislation. The event continued the right-wing’s on-going effort to falsely portray an upcoming Senate bill that would add sexual orientation, gender, and disability to the existing federal hate crime law, as an attack on Christianity.

BOND’s Jesse Lee Peterson puts the legislation into perspective:

“If Christians don’t wake up to what is happening, they will look around one day and realize that they cannot even mention the name of God or disagree with homosexuality.”

Klingenschmitt then more specifically describes the threat:

“If this bill passes, they will come into our churches, they will grab your sermon notes, they will go after your congregation if any pastor preaches against the sin of homosexuality and then a nut in the crowd later goes out and commits a crime. They will accuse him as a codefendant and charge him with a hate speech crime.”

Of course there’s no such thing as a “hate speech crime” in this bill or the existing federal hate crimes law, which targets only violent crimes that cause people bodily harm.  In fact, the “Hate Crimes Prevention Act” already passed by the House includes explicit language protecting the First Amendment rights that Klingenschmitt and his colleagues claim are being threatened.

Repent America’s Michael Marcavage says that the bill’s focus on violent acts is somehow part of a secret strategy:

“[Hate-crime legislation proponents are] doing this in a strategic manner because they say it only applies to violence or violent acts.”

Sure, the law may SAY it only applies to violent crimes, and sure, it may include clear protections for religious leaders and anyone else to speak out against homosexuality, but it’s all part of a slippery slope that will lead to preachers being dragged from their pulpits.

Ah, the old slippery slope argument. Remember then-Senator Rick Santorum insisting that overturning laws against sodomy would lead to acceptance of man-dog sex? Coincidently, this contention also happened to be presented during the press conference by Rev. Jonathan Hunter of LEARN:

“Pastors not only have a right, but an obligation to state emphatically that, according to scripture, a man or woman should not perform a sex act with a person of the same sex, nor with a dog, nor with a snake, nor with a hamster or any other creature.”

As we previously noted, even the urban legend website Snopes.com has debunked the Religious Right’s claims about the hate crimes law. And a group of religious leaders held their own press event in support of the law a day earlier.  But when it comes to portraying supporters of legal protection for gay Americans as enemies of religious liberty, right-wing leaders don’t let the truth get in the way of a good story.

In the past year, the IRS has investigated some churches over whether their political advocacy exceeded their non-profit parameters in the tax code -- in which contributions are private and tax deductible – and pushed into the realm of regulated political action committees that give up some of the subsidies for charity and are required to disclose their work on behalf of candidates for office. Yesterday, reporter Michael Haverluck of Pat Robertson’s CBN looked at this complex issue, and whittled it down to its corresponding far-right talking point:

Will pastors' ability to speak to their congregations about social and moral issues erode, or will their appeals to the First Amendment protect this right?

Haverluck cited as an example the activities of World Harvest Church of Ohio, led by televangelist Rod Parsley. Parsley, along with fellow Columbus-area megachurch pastor Russell Johnson, partnered with Ken Blackwell for a series of church “policy briefings” and political rallies, encouraging pastors across the state to mobilize their members to “vote their values” – all while Blackwell was running for governor. At issue was not “speak[ing] … about social and moral issues” so much as the pastors’ apparently brazen use of their churches to campaign for a candidate. Their efforts to build a new church-based political machine are described in People For the American Way’s report on these so-called “Patriot Pastors.”

In Haverluck’s telling, Parsley just happened to bump into Blackwell a couple of times:

Though Pastor Rod Parsley invited Republican and Democratic candidates to World Harvest Church's events, only Ohio Secretary of State Ken Blackwell showed up.

Blackwell is a conservative Christian who opposes abortion and gay marriage. His stance on these issues with Parsley motivated 56 liberal clergy to call for in an IRS investigation.

One complaint accuses Parsley of supporting Blackwell's run for governor by letting him speak at events. Another claims that Parsley planned on having Blackwell on his radio spots, a baseless allegation denied by the pastor and the politician.

It is also contested without evidence that Parsley's "Reformation Ohio" project, aiming to register 400,000 new voters, seeks only conservatives.

In fact, Parsley and Johnson hosted Blackwell as the featured guest speaker at numerous events, in which the candidate was honored with some award or endorsed explicitly from the stage. Parsley even flew Blackwell to one “Patriot Pastor” function on a church-owned plane. This campaign was only part of a broader agenda to promote Blackwell at bigger and bigger rallies featuring famous religious-right leaders, leading up to the primary election and beyond, and indeed including radio spots featuring Blackwell. The radio spots and the rallies with James Dobson never materialized, but far from being a “baseless allegation,” this plan was posted publicly on Johnson’s “Ohio Restoration Project” web site in 2005: you can read it here.

Blackwell’s lopsided loss in 2006 was certainly a major setback to Parsley’s efforts to build a “Patriot Pastor” political machine, but don’t count the charismatic pastor out: His new book, “Culturally Incorrect,” is currently 15 on Publisher’s Weekly’s bestseller list.

Rev. Jerry Falwell died today in Lynchburg, Virginia. People For the American Way President Ralph Neas issued this statement:

We extend our condolences to Rev. Jerry Falwell’s family and friends. He was an effective advocate for his vision of America, a vision with which we strongly disagreed.

PFAW has been monitoring and responding to Falwell for over 25 years. The pastor often returned the favor – as, for example, when he cited us as a factor in causing the September 11, 2001 attacks:

I really believe that the pagans, and the abortionists, and the feminists, and the gays and the lesbians who are actively trying to make that an alternative lifestyle, the ACLU, People For the American Way - all of them who have tried to secularize America - I point the finger in their face and say "you helped this happen."

The Carpetbagger Report revisits some significant moments from Falwell’s career, from Larry Flynt to the Clinton tapes to Tinky Winky. Falwell remained an outspoken and controversial figure until the end, but below are some more memorable quotes from the early years.

According to the National Organization for Women, Joseph Scheidler once likened his militant Pro-Life Action Network to a “pro-life mafia.” Now, Scheidler is celebrating the final dismissal of a lawsuit that sought to hold his group’s (sometimes violent) intimidation activism accountable to an anti-mob racketeering law. “I’ve waited 21 years for this news!” said Scheidler. The ruling following a Supreme Court decision last year that federal racketeering laws don’t apply to organized crime without extortion or robbery.

Troy Newman, president of the current incarnation of Operation Rescue, praised Scheidler as a “true American hero.” The original Operation Rescue, run by Randall Terry, was also part of the NOW v. Scheidler lawsuit, but Terry agreed to a permanent injunction against his brand of clinic blockades and a monetary settlement back in 1998. (Terry, who declared bankruptcy to evade the settlement, found himself in the news again two years ago as the spokesman for Terri Schiavo’s parents.)

Throughout the period of militant anti-abortion protesting, when clinic bombings and murders of doctors spotted the headlines, Scheidler was unapologetic about his group’s tactics. “I’m doing what I have to do. So what? I’ve got some misdemeanors … I don’t consider myself a criminal,” he said (AP, 12/5/93). He bragged about his unusual actions, such as absconding with fetal remains (Wash. Post, 12/6/93) or picketing the homes of doctors (“Home Pickets Work,” USA Today, 10/19/95).

That was the title of a People For the American Way Foundation report in 2000 documenting the appalling ways that the Bible was being taught in Florida public schools. (Actual test question:  " Why is it hard for a non-Christian to understand things about God?”)  But “The Good Book Taught Wrong” would also certainly be the end result if a Texas bill to require that school districts offer Bible classes becomes law.

Under the headline “Bible Belt Refuses to Buckle under on Religious Courses,” the Family Research Council celebrates a bill introduced by Texas Rep. Warren Chisum that would require every school district in the state to offer elective high school Bible classes.

The committee considering the legislation held its hearing on the first day of Passover.  A letter from People For the American Way, which testified against the legislation, spells out the myriad legal problems with the bill, including sectarian language and a failure to require or fund any teacher training, in spite of the enormous difficulties of teaching about the Bible in a constitutional manner in a public school.  Without that kind of training, even in a properly designed course it’s likely some classes would be more like Sunday School than the kind of objective course required by the Supreme Court for teaching about the Bible in public schools.

In fact, a recent study by Southern Methodist University biblical studies professor Mark Chancey conducted for the Texas Freedom Network found that of 25 school districts offering Bible courses in Texas in 2005-2006, only three were doing it right. One district included Veggie Tales videos. Another included a PowerPoint presentation, "God's Roadway For Your Life," with slides proclaiming "Jesus Christ is the one and only way."

The North Carolina-based National Council on Bible Curriculum in Public Schools exists to push this kind of legislation, and continues to falsely claim that “we’ve never been legally challenged.” In fact, a curriculum written by the NCBCPS lost a legal challenge in Florida and a number of school districts have declined proposals to adopt the NCBCPS courses when they get the facts.

Chisum’s bill would require every one of the 1,031 school districts in Texas to come up with their own classes, with the Bible – any version or translation – as the textbook.   On one hand, Chisum insists that the classes would be purely secular in nature:

"We're not going to preach the Bible, we're going to teach the Bible and how it affects all of our writings, documents and the formation of our government," Mr. Chisum said. "We're taking it as a document that has historical value."

But Chisum’s explanation for what he’s trying to achieve does imply a bit of preaching:

 "I would hope that we get a better-prepared student to go out into the world and understand what they believe, ... how it's [this country] put together, why we are different from some others on this planet."

The United States doesn't have more resources, he said, "but we do better. A lot of it's because of what's written in that book, because we have a moral standard. Not everybody has a moral standard."

And Rep. Leo Berman, a joint author of the bill, seems to have an even more overtly religious purpose in mind:

Representative Leo Berman says, "Today, with Christian symbols being taken out of everything, off our county squares, manger scenes, crosses, I think it's time that we put something back, and give kids who want to study the Old and New Testament an option on campus to actually elect that to study."

"I don't believe there's such a thing as the separation of church and state. In fact, the First Amendment to the Constitution actually calls on the United States Congress to make sure, to ensure that people are allowed to practice their religion," says Berman.

If Chisum’s bill passes, it’s likely that school officials across the state would be forced to invest scarce school district funds defending themselves from a wave of litigation that would put Rep. Berman’s theory about church-state separation to a challenging legal test.

Next month, GLSEN’s annual “Day of Silence” will be held with students from around the country pledging to “be quiet all day to protest the discrimination, harassment and abuse—in effect, the silencing—faced by lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender students and their allies in schools.”

Unsurprisingly, the anti-gay Right is not about to let this silent protest go by without comment.  

The Alliance Defense Fund is promoting its own trademarked “Day of Truth” to counter the “Day of Silence,” which it claims is “part of their overall strategy to change how our society perceives homosexual behavior … the Day of Silence is a misnomer, because what is truly being silenced is the Truth.” 

Scheduled for the day after the GLSEN event, the “Day of Truth” is designed to give anti-gay students an opportunity to “stand up for their First Amendment right to hear and speak the Truth about human sexuality in order to protect that freedom for future generations.”

As ADF’s 14-page instruction manual [PDF] states:

It is our responsibility to point the hurting person tempted by or even trapped in homosexual behavior to this healing love and merciful grace. Love does not mean condoning or ignoring things that are wrong or that cause harm. When Christ loved someone, like the woman caught in adultery (John 8:11), he expressed compassion for her. He also gave her the loving direction to “go now and leave your life of sin.” As followers of Christ, we must take action when someone is trapped in sinful behavior that separates them from God (John 8:24). We must be able to speak the Truth and direct people to their need for a personal relationship with Jesus Christ and to find the all forgiving love of God.    

In order to accomplish this, ADF recommends that students wear T-shirts and pass out cards with the following message:

I am speaking the Truth to break the silence.

Silence isn’t freedom. It’s a constraint.

Truth tolerates open discussion, because the Truth emerges when healthy discourse is allowed.

By proclaiming the Truth in love, hurts will be halted, hearts will be healed, and lives will be saved.

But for a coalition of right-wing groups - including Concerned Women for America, Peter LaBarbera’s Americans For Truth, Massachusetts Resistance, and the ex-gay Stephen Bennett Ministries - counter-protesting just isn’t enough. Apparently, the idea of having students even witnessing the “Day of Silence” is far too dangerous and it is better if parents just keep their children home from school altogether:   

A national pro-family coalition, www.NotOurKids.com, is calling upon parents to keep their children home from school on April 18 -- to avoid GLSEN's homosexual "Day of Silence," in which students and some supportive faculty intentionally remain silent throughout the school day to protest alleged oppression of homosexuals.

…

"Teenagers deserve an opportunity to study English, history, math, and science -- without being subjected to pro-homosexual proselytizing sanctioned by school authorities. Students shouldn't be forced to self-censor or adopt beliefs contrary to those of their parents and places of worship," said Linda Harvey of Mission America, a coalition member.  "Even the strongest of our junior high and high school children are not equipped to serve as frontline soldiers in this culture war."