petition

In planning a ceremony to mark the tenth anniversary of the September 11th attacks, New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg has kept a policy observed in previous years and declined to invite religious leaders to speak at the events, which a spokesman says is to make sure “the focus remains on the families.” Of course, the Religious Right is now apoplectic and using their outrage at Bloomberg as their latest fundraising tool.

The Traditional Values Coalition emailed members today pleading for donations to stop Bloomberg’s attempts “to exterminate expressions of faith” and set up a fundraising page warning that “Islamists Continue Conquest of New York City…Islamists are spiking the football at Ground Zero! All while Mayor Bloomberg bans faith from New York's 9/11 ceremonies?!”

The American Center for Law and Justice, the right-wing legal outlet founded by Pat Robertson and led by Jay Sekulow, launched a petition demanding Bloomberg change his “damaging policy now” and include clergymen and prayer in the event. Bryan Fischer of the American Family Association said it was a “travesty that Mayor Bloomberg is so confused and clueless about America’s history, and so confused and clueless about the threat Islam poses to the West,” arguing that prayer should be included in the ceremonies but restricted to only Christian and Jewish clergy.

The Family Research Council has its own petition and prayer alert to oppose Bloomberg’s “shocking assault on religious liberty,” calling on members to pray to “Help the Mayor see that he has made a mistake and reverse his decision. Stir the families who will attend the 9/11 memorial service to insist that You, Lord, be honored there”:

The beginning of America's precipitous moral decline can be traced, statistically, to 1962, when atheist Madeleine Murray O'Hare's [sic] legal assault resulted in prayer being removed from public schools. Since then, the U.S. Supreme Court has repeatedly upheld prayer in public ceremonies. Bloomberg's behavior is not a matter of legal philosophy, dullness or insensitivity; it is a deliberate defiance and insult to people of faith across America.

More important to Bible believers, it is an insult to God upon whom our nation depends for our safety. Amid unprecedented natural disasters, economic calamity, homeland threats, wars abroad, troubles in our families and schools, etc., we must not insult God.

The FRC referenced the 1962 Supreme Court case Engel v. Vitale and the 1963 Abington v. Schempp, in which Madalyn Murray O’Hair, an atheist, and Edward Schempp, a Unitarian Universalist, sued against laws in their states that required their children to partake in religious exercises like Bible study and reading the Lord’s Prayer. The Court found such policies a violation of the First Amendment’s Establishment Clause and the Free Exercise Clause.

Many in the Religious Right see the cases as the critical juncture where America turned its back on God. Pat Robertson writes in The New Millennium:

On June 25, 1962, the Supreme Court ruled in a case titled Engle v. Vitale [sic] that state-sponsored prayer could not be said in public school rooms. On June 17, 1963, the court ruled in the case of Abington v. Schempp that the Holy Bible could not be read to students in classrooms.

…

Acting on behalf of all the citizens of the United States, our government has officially insulted Almighty God and has effectively taken away from all public school children any opportunity for even the slightest acknowledgment of God’s existence. By rejecting Him, we have made the Protector and Champion of the United States his enemy.

The events that followed are not coincidence. On November 22, 1963, less than six months after the Bible-reading decision, President John F. Kennedy was assassinated. Within two years after that decision, America was massively embroiled in its second most painful war, which decimated our treasure, our servicemen, and our national resolve.

Robertson goes on to blame Watergate, the 1973 oil crisis, stagflation and the Iranian revolution on the rulings.

David Barton got his start in Religious Right politics by authoring the booklet, What Happened in Education?, where he argues that the removal of school prayer caused SAT scores to plummet. Barton claimed that the two cases represented “the first occasion in national recorded history that the public inclusion of God in academic endeavors had been officially prohibited,” as the only event “corresponding to the time of the beginning of the downturn in scores was the banning of God and of religious principles from schools.” He concludes by urging schools to reintroduce explicitly Christian teachings if they want to reverse the trend.

It’s interesting that the FRC brought up the school prayer cases: both the case of school prayer and clergy participating in the September 11th anniversary ceremonies show the Religious Right trying to gin up panic over a supposed but not actual infringement on religious freedom, and then warning of divine punishment when they don’t get their way.

Family Research Council senior fellow Peter Sprigg appeared today on The Matt Friedeman Show on the American Family Association’s American Family Radio to discuss the budding controversy over the right-wing “charity” service CGBG. The progressive groups AllOut.org and Change.org have persuaded over 200 retailers to leave the CGBG, a for-profit group that allows customers to shop at companies online and direct part of their proceeds to right-wing organizations like FRC and Focus on the Family – success that, unsurprisingly, has got the Religious Right up in arms.

It’s rather ironic that the AFA is helping the FRC denounce the pressure campaign against the CGBG, as the AFA itself led boycotts against Ford, Home Depot, Old Navy, Pepsi, and Glee along with pressure campaigns against Burger King, Toyota, Lexus and Cellular South to stop running ads on Glee and Google and Disney to drop out of the It Gets Better Project. But this double-standard should come as no surprise, as the FRC endorsed the AFA’s boycott campaign against McDonalds and led its own campaign against Wal-Mart.

Sprigg and Freideman alleged that FRC is only facing a backlash from gay rights and women’s rights groups because the group oppose marriage equality. However, the AllOut.org petition urging companies to drop CGBC doesn’t mention the FRC’s position on marriage at all, instead focusing on FRC’s advocacy for laws criminalizing homosexuality, opposition to anti-bullying efforts and dishonest attempts to tie homosexuality to pedophilia.

Sprigg: People are afraid of the homosexual activists and they’re particularly afraid of this character assassination that comes in the form of the word ‘hate.’ Nobody wants to be accused of participating in ‘hate’ and so throwing that word  ‘hate’ around becomes a trump card even when nothing that we have done can reasonably be called  ‘hate.’ On the contrary, everything we do is motivated by love for the people who are hurt by this lifestyle.

Friedeman: Well, again I think what Tony Perkins has done and Peter Sprigg you by extension, you just say, we’re asking people, and AFA does this all the time as well, you urge retailers to remain neutral in the culture wars, the current cultural battles, particularly when you come down to something like homosexuality.

Such a claim is hard to believe coming from Peter Sprigg, who:

• Said that he would “much prefer to export homosexuals from the United States than to import them into the United States because we believe homosexuality is destructive to society.”

• Supported the criminalization of homosexuality.

• Lobbied to make it harder for students to join Gay-Straight Alliances because “homosexuality is harmful to society.”

• Argued that gays and lesbians shouldn’t be judges because a gay judge can’t “be held up as a role model.”

• Linked homosexuality to pedophilia even when scientists rejected their correlation.

• Opposed allowing same-sex partners or their adopted children from collecting their deceased partner or parent’s Social Security benefits.

• Cheered on Lisa Miller after she kidnapped her daughter and fled to Central America in order to evade court order granting custody to her former partner.

But the LGBT community, Sprigg says, should see all these as acts of love.

Recently, a Facebook page and petition have been launched asking PBS to let the Sesame Street characters Bert and Ernie get married to which executives have responded by explaining that they cannot get married because they are puppets "and do not have a sexual orientation."

But, of course, the Religious Right is utterly incensed by the idea of this and so now we get to listen to Concerned Women for America bring on Matt Barber to go off on a patented anti-gay tirade about "sexual anarchists" are out to target your children and "plant this poison in their impressionable little minds":

The sexual anarchist lobby, we have long said, that they are targeting our children for indoctrination and for sexualization. I have to ask why must these moral anarchists sexualize everything? They are so sex-centric ... and these idiots need to leave our children alone and let kids be kids.

The larger lesson to take away from this is that children are the future and the homosexual activist lobby, sexual anarchists in general, the sexual relativism movement, they understand this so they have to reprogram kids and sexualize kids so that they can do away with that natural aversion to this idea of sexual behavior between a man and a man or a woman and a woman. We intuitively reject this notion because it's unnatural.

It's infuriating that they must, in order to own the future, get a hold of the minds of these young kids and plant this poison in their impressionable little minds. And the good news through all of this is that it really removes the mask - it exposes the sexual anarchy movement for what they are and it lets everybody know what we've said all along: they are targeting your children.

Wendy Wright may be out of a job at Concerned Women for America. Once President and CEO of the powerful Religious Right organization, she appears to have been eclipsed by the new CEO Penny Young Nance. Now, Wright has been completely removed from CWA’s leadership page and her bio was taken down (you can still see her cached page). In fact, she is listed as “Past President, Concerned Women for America” on this new social conservative petition opposing government social services programs.

An outspoken opponent of evolution science, reproductive freedom and LGBT rights, Wright had a long career marshalling the Religious Right.

She was a frequent visitor to the White House during the Bush administration, although wasn’t a fan of the Obama administration’s attempts to bring progressive and conservative groups together to reduce the need for abortion (she claims there is never a “need” for abortion). On LGBT rights issues, Wright lobbied hard against hate crimes laws, the repeal of Don’t Ask Don’t Tell and the Employment Non-Discrimination Act. She flatly dismissed a comprehensive study that showed the fitness of gay and lesbian parents and said that she and her allies were victims of discrimination from “homosexual activists,” while doubting the existence of any discriminatory laws in the US. In 2008, Wright blasted Hallmark for allegedly trying to “destroy the family” by supposedly pushing “homosexual messages.”

“There is no evidence of evolution from one species to another,” she told evolutionary biologist Richard Dawkins, arguing that there is no substantiation for evolutionary theory. Wright also argued that evolution science was responsible for “horrific abuses against human beings.”

Wright even contends that environmental protection efforts are devastating for humanity, arguing in the Resisting the Green Dragon series: “the policies that environmental groups and even these evangelical groups got behind were ones that would consign the poorest people around the world to grinding poverty, to disease, to premature death.” During the debate over health care reform, Wright claimed that the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act violated all of the Ten Commandments and mocked the law’s plans to combat racism in the health care sector.

We’ll miss you Wendy! Although I have a feeling you won’t be gone for long…

It looks like the good folks over the Liberty Counsel have finally had enough and are literally declaring their independence with their new "Declaration of Independence 2011" petition that they want you to sign. 

Declaring that "in America, we do not suffer tyrants!," Liberty Counsel is asking people to pledge their lives to resist  the "abusive and lawless regime in the Executive Branch and in the United States Congress":

We The People, therefore, appealing to the Supreme Judge of the world, solemnly declare our full intention, by any lawful means available, to remove from office all those politicians and office holders who have been complicit in…

the trampling of our liberties,
the undermining of our religious freedoms,
the overt and intentional subversion of our Constitution,
overstepping the boundaries of their law-based authority,
the advancement and promotion of a socialist agenda,
the massive expansion of a federal government through agencies and czars whose goal is to “fundamentally transform America!”

We break the bonds between us and them.

We declare, by the Rights afforded us by our Creator, that we are Duty bound to expose and resist all unlawful decrees and policies, such as the extensive list presented above, as have been or may yet be issued by the present abusive and lawless regime in the Executive Branch and in the United States Congress.

And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of Divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes, and our sacred Honor.

A coalition of groups opposed to abortion rights wants the government to place graphic warning labels on emergency contraceptives and abortion clinics in the same way cigarette packs are now required to display explicit images. Disregarding the fact that abortion is an exceptionally safe medical procedure, a spokesman for the campaign said, “If you’re going to force cigarette manufacturers to put graphic images on every single pack of cigarettes, you should do the same thing with abortion.” In fact, a number of states already force doctors to read false statements that abortion causes breast cancer and other ailments. In a petition-drive launched by organizations including The Radiance Foundation (best known for placing billboards that refer to legal abortion as “black genocide”), Operation Rescue, Pro-Life Nation, and Students for Life, the coalition urges the government to impose labels to shame women:

The FDA recently announced new restrictions on cigarette packages, forcing manufacturers to feature prominent graphic images on the front of every cigarette package to warn smokers of harmful effects that smoking can have on their health and those around them.

When picking up their cigarette packages, smokers will see pictures of a man blowing smoke out of a hole in his neck, a smoker’s mouth riddled with cancer, a baby under a cloud of smoke, and a deceased man, among other colored graphics.

This marks the biggest change in cigarette package warnings in over a quarter of a century and notes the shift in American public opinion about smoking. Smoking has become passe.

Yet, what about abortion?

Where are the warning labels on abortion?

Where are the warnings to tell women that abortion will kill their child and scar them for life?

Sign your name to this petition to tell the FDA that all abortion facilities and abortion-causing drugs should come with graphic warning labels - showing women what an abortion really does.

Last week, Brian first reported that in an interview on the made-up controversy surrounding NBC omitting “under God” from a broadcast of the Pledge of Allegiance, Missouri Rep. Todd Akin declared to the Family Research Council’s Tony Perkins that “at the heart of liberalism really is a hatred for God.”

Akin’s remark, unsurprisingly, has not gone over very well with religious leaders in Missouri, with one group passing around an online petition demanding that he apologize.

But Akin is not backing down. First, a spokesman told the St. Louis Post-Dispatch tried to “clarify” his boss’s comments, saying that Akin was just talking about general philosophical differences between liberals and conservatives about the role of God in government:

Akin Communications Director Steve Taylor said the point Akin was trying to make was that there is a basic difference between the tenets of liberalism and conservatism. Conservatives believe rights are granted by God and it is the responsibility of government to aid in protecting them, Taylor said.

“Liberals believe rights are granted by government,” he said. “Congressman Akin believes those two concepts define the basic debate between the two ideologies.”

Akin’s comments were off the cuff, Taylor said, and with more time to articulate his point he could have “provided a more artful answer.” But he wasn’t talking about anyone’s individual relationship with God, Taylor said, only the “defining principles of two political ideologies.”

Then, in an interview yesterday with a Missouri radio station, recorded by Think Progress, Akin refused to apologize, saying he just meant that liberals have “a hatred for public references for God.”

Listen to Akin’s original remarks here:

Akin: This was something that was done systematically, it was done intentionally, and is tremendously corrosive in terms of all of the values and everything that’s made America unique and such a special nation.

Perkins: Why would NBC do this?

Akin: Well, I think NBC has a long record of being very liberal and at the heart of liberalism really is a hatred for God and a belief that government should replace God. And so they’ve had a long history of not being at all favorable toward many of things that have been such a blessing to our country.

…

Akin: This is a systematic effort to try to separate our faith and God, which is a source in our belief in individual liberties, from our country. And when you do that you tear the heart out of our country.

As Brian noted yesterday, the Religious Right was unified in its support of Paul Clement for resigning from his position at King & Spalding after the law firm backed out of defending the Defense of Marriage Act in court.

To hear the Religious Right tell it, this decision by King & Spalding was the result of a campaign of intimidation by gay rights groups - in fact, that is pretty much what the Family Research Council said:

Looking for attorneys that won't buckle under pressure? Don't bother contacting King & Spalding. In a stunning announcement, the Atlanta-based firm just dropped the most high-profile client on its books: the U.S. House of Representatives. Barely a week ago, Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) hired King & Spalding to go to bat for the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) when the Obama administration refused. Within hours, the homosexual community was up in arms. Led by the so-called Human Rights Campaign, activists promised to target the firm until its attorneys dropped the case. Five days later, they did. Unable -- and unwilling -- to take the heat, King and Spalding took the cowardly way out.

...

Once again we see how the activists who are trying to redefine marriage want to shut down any and all public debate. King & Spalding have proven that they are not advocates for the law -- but for a small but influential cabal that want to undermine policy and society.

Amazing, isn't it, how when gay rights groups dare to speak up, the FRC sees it as a campaign of intimidation ... but when Religious Right groups do it, FRC hails them for simply exercising their rights:

The Big Mac attack on family values is finally over! After a five-month boycott, Americans finally got what they ordered-McDonald's agreement to stop financing the homosexual agenda. Back in May, the fast food giant joined the Gay and Lesbian Chamber of Commerce to the dismay of millions of customers who did not feel served. At the time, company Vice President Richard Ellis refused to back down, even calling conservatives "haters" in a public statement. The American Family Association launched a national campaign to force McDonald's to eat its words. And eat them, they did! This week, McDonald's announced that Ellis had resigned from the GLCC. In an email to franchises, the company said, "It is our policy not to be involved in political and social issues. McDonald's remains neutral on same-sex marriage [and the] 'homosexual agenda...'" We thank McDonald's -- and those of you who used your buying power to encourage values on the menu and in company policy.

Just last year, Tony Perkins was part of a group called Citizens Against Religious Bigotry that was formed solely protest a proposed Comedy Central program about Jesus Christ called "JC." The group preemptively targeted potential advertisers and warned them that if they did not promise never to advertise on the show, they'd be labeled as anti-Christian bigots ... and the group quickly declared victory:

Members of the coalition wrote to more than 300 potential advertisers for this show. The letters explained the nature of the program and stated how offensive the "JC" project would be, not only to the 83 percent of Americans who identify themselves as Christians, but also to many non-Christians including those who signed the petition. Coalition members then followed up with phone calls to the advertisers, speaking directly with representatives from most of the corporations that received the original letter.

Not one single sponsor indicated their intention to buy advertising time on the "JC" program if the program ever made it to Comedy Central's air.

"With literally zero advertiser support for this program, the only reason Comedy Central would put it on their broadcast schedule is in an effort to offend Christianity and Christians. There is no valid business reason for airing 'JC.'

"In light of this demonstration of overwhelming success, the Coalition's advertiser outreach will stand down. In the event that any advertiser changes its mind, that advertiser and its executives will be publicly called to account for supporting anti-Christian bigotry."

This group have the support of dozens of Religious Right organizations ... the very same organizations who are now complaining about a campaign of "intimidation" against King and Spalding.

As Brian noted in the last post, US military action in Libya has made the Right lose its mind, so I guess it should come as no surprise that Mat Staver and Liberty Counsel have sent out an email asking activists to sign a petition demanding that Obama be impeached: 

Barack Obama's subversion of our Constitution must be stopped!

We, the American People, must call for the proper use of constitutional authority, accountability, transparency, and respect for the rule of law - in short, we must defend the Constitution of the United States!

Liberty Counsel is continuing to demand that elected officials live up to their Oaths of Office - or be FIRED, RECALLED, or IMPEACHED.

Our powerful "Defend the Constitution" Declaration issues this directive (among others) to President Obama and all  those who hold public office at the sovereign will of the voters ... When you sign our "Defend the Constitution" Declaration, we will hand deliver your mandate - along with those of tens of thousands of your fellow concerned Americans - to your Representative, Senators, and other key congressional leaders. We will also publish your views to government bureaucrats, the media, and anywhere else it is strategically advantageous.

Together, we can stop this tyranny before President Obama and his confederates succeed in remaking the United States of America into a socialist nation!