Supreme Court

Bachmann Invites Jay Sekulow To Teach Her Constitution Class

Jay Sekulow runs the American Center for Law and Justice, the Religious Right organization founded by Pat Robertson to be a right-wing counterweight to the ACLU.  In that capacity, Sekulow has recently been leading the fight against the construction of the so-called "Ground Zero Mosque."

Today, Sekulow had Rep. Michele Bachmann on his radio program to discuss last night's State of the Union address and her response and during the conversation Sekulow asked her about the Tea Party classes on the Constution she is hosting for members of Congress featuring the likes of Justice Antonin Scalia and Wallbuilders' David Barton ... and apparently also Sekulow:

Bachmann: Our opening speaker was Justice Antonin Scalia. We had both Democrats and Republicans - we had four Democrat members of Congress. It was very civil, it was very open and we hope to invite all of the Supreme Court Justices to come and speak to us. But we also hope to have people like yourself, Jay - we've invited you to come and speak to members of Congress, to speak about the Constitution. The topic will be up to the speakers choice but the whole purpose and intent is to have members thinking about the Constitution and our limitations under the Constitution. That has not been a focus here in Congress in recent years. We intend to change that and this was a very good first meeting this week.

Sekulow: I look forward to participating [and] we appreciate you're not only representing the people of your district, you're representing all of use that share the concerns and the desire to see Constitutional Conservatism placed forward and Congresswoman, thanks for being with us and thanks for the bold stand you are taking in Washington.

Bachmann: Thank you. You're wonderful and thank you for your ministry.

Right Wing Leftovers

  • Apparently, Rick Santorum is never going to stop defending his comments about President Obama and abortion.
  • Joseph Farah thanks Matt Drudge and Rush Limbaugh for making the Birthers "respectable."
  • I suspect that is Supreme Court Justices appointed by Democrats decided to skip a Republican president's State of the Union, the Right would throw an absolute fit.
  • Randy Thomasson says the ACLU and the Communist Party are "kissing cousins."
  • Finally, this is the title of Bryan Fischer's latest blog post: "A Christan Defense of Running Up The Score."

Stemberger Sets Up Legal Defense Fund Backed By Religious Right, Anti-Muslims Activists

As we have noted several times in recent weeks, John Stemberger, president of the Florida Family Policy Council, is facing the possibility of being disciplined by the Florida Supreme Court for misconduct during the Rifqa Bary saga as well as a $10 million lawsuit from the lawyer who represented Bary's Muslim parents.

Stemberger insists that the wild allegations he threw around when he was representing Bary in Florida are protected by the First Amendment and that the lawsuit and misconduct complaint are merely an "attempt to squelch any criticism, legitimate or not, of Islam and its tenets" and so he has now set up a legal defense fund with the support not only of Bary, but of several Religious Right leaders:

"Would you please help my friend and lawyer John Stemberger? He defended me at no cost and helped me gain my freedom and is now being attacked by the Muslim lawyer who opposed me in court. Thank you for supporting me.  Will you now also help and support John?" - Rifqa Bary

“America needs warriors who will stand on principle and fight for truth. John Stemberger is a true warrior who has defended American principles through his bold defense of Rifqa Bary. Now the Islamic elements in America want to destroy him. Keep fighting, John.” -General William G. Boykin (retired), United States Deputy Undersecretary of Defense for Intelligence.

“John Stemberger was and is a true patriot for defending Rifqa Bary in court and so we should now all consider helping him defend against these attacks by the same lawyer who fought against Rifqa getting her freedom. The Founding Fathers created the First Amendment to protect exactly the type of political and religious speech involved in this case.”- Historian David Barton, Wallbuilders

“John Stemberger is a man of courage and principle. We need to stand by him now. I support John and would ask you to consider doing the same.” – Former Speaker of the House, Newt Gingrich

“In today’s politically correct culture few people are willing to stand up to the threats against our faith, our families and our freedoms. That is why I am grateful for John Stemberger who has stood up for those who are vulnerable and defenseless, including Rifqa Bary. Now join me in standing with John.” - Tony Perkins, Family Research Council, Washington, D.C.

“I was thrilled to see John Stemberger’s courageous defense of Rifqa Bary, our precious sister. He took a courageous stand and is paying the price because of it. We need people like this who are willing to lay their lives down for the cause of truth and justice on behalf of those who have no strength. Let’s stand with our brother.” - Lou Engle, Founder, TheCall Inc.

Stemberger Sets Up Legal Defense Fund Backed By Religious Right, Anti-Muslims Activists

As we have noted several times in recent weeks, John Stemberger, president of the Florida Family Policy Council, is facing the possibility of being disciplined by the Florida Supreme Court for misconduct during the Rifqa Bary saga as well as a $10 million lawsuit from the lawyer who represented Bary's Muslim parents.

Stemberger insists that the wild allegations he threw around when he was representing Bary in Florida are protected by the First Amendment and that the lawsuit and misconduct complaint are merely an "attempt to squelch any criticism, legitimate or not, of Islam and its tenets" and so he has now set up a legal defense fund with the support not only of Bary, but of several Religious Right leaders:

"Would you please help my friend and lawyer John Stemberger? He defended me at no cost and helped me gain my freedom and is now being attacked by the Muslim lawyer who opposed me in court. Thank you for supporting me.  Will you now also help and support John?" - Rifqa Bary

“America needs warriors who will stand on principle and fight for truth. John Stemberger is a true warrior who has defended American principles through his bold defense of Rifqa Bary. Now the Islamic elements in America want to destroy him. Keep fighting, John.” -General William G. Boykin (retired), United States Deputy Undersecretary of Defense for Intelligence.

“John Stemberger was and is a true patriot for defending Rifqa Bary in court and so we should now all consider helping him defend against these attacks by the same lawyer who fought against Rifqa getting her freedom. The Founding Fathers created the First Amendment to protect exactly the type of political and religious speech involved in this case.”- Historian David Barton, Wallbuilders

“John Stemberger is a man of courage and principle. We need to stand by him now. I support John and would ask you to consider doing the same.” – Former Speaker of the House, Newt Gingrich

“In today’s politically correct culture few people are willing to stand up to the threats against our faith, our families and our freedoms. That is why I am grateful for John Stemberger who has stood up for those who are vulnerable and defenseless, including Rifqa Bary. Now join me in standing with John.” - Tony Perkins, Family Research Council, Washington, D.C.

“I was thrilled to see John Stemberger’s courageous defense of Rifqa Bary, our precious sister. He took a courageous stand and is paying the price because of it. We need people like this who are willing to lay their lives down for the cause of truth and justice on behalf of those who have no strength. Let’s stand with our brother.” - Lou Engle, Founder, TheCall Inc.

Right Wing Round-Up

Right Wing Round-Up

Leading GOP Contenders to Speak At Forums Hosted By Iowa's Leading Anti-Gay Group

The other day, Brian noted that Former Minnesota Governor Tim Pawlenty would soon be heading to Iowa to discuss "pro-family issues, all the way from life and marriage to economic policy and energy policy" at a forum being hosted by the right-wing group The Family Leader

The Family Leader is the new group that is being run by Bob Vander Plaats after his successful effort to remove three state Supreme Court justices over the court's gay marriage ruling ... and it looks like Pawlenty will be just the first in a series of GOP presidential hopefuls to participate in such forums for the anti-gay group: 

The series line-up begins with former Minnesota Governor Tim Pawlenty on Monday, February 7. Former U.S. House Speaker Newt Gingrich, former Pennsylvania Senator Rick Santorum, Minnesota Congresswoman Michele Bachmann, and businessman and radio host Herman Cain have also made commitments to participate. Other invited speakers include former Arkansas Governor Mike Huckabee, Indiana Governor Mitch Daniels, South Dakota Senator John Thune, former Alaska Governor Sarah Palin, Mississippi Governor Haley Barbour, and Indiana Representative Mike Pence.

“Iowans play a vital role in hosting the first-in-the-nation presidential caucus, and it is our privilege to offer this Presidential Lecture Series in order to provide our very influential base an opportunity to gain insight into our political process,” said Bob Vander Plaats, president and CEO of The FAMiLY LEADER. “Our base is serious about its role in the political process and the Presidential Lecture Series is a focused strategy to facilitate meaningful exposure to our constituents.”

It is worth pointing out that Vander Plaats' crusade against the Supreme Court continues to this day, leading a former advisor to declare that he has become "obsessed with the gay-marriage issue" and that his effort had deep support from many of the national anti-gay Religious Right groups, including the American Family Association and its bigot-in-chief Bryan Fischer.

Leading GOP Contenders to Speak At Forums Hosted By Iowa's Leading Anti-Gay Group

The other day, Brian noted that Former Minnesota Governor Tim Pawlenty would soon be heading to Iowa to discuss "pro-family issues, all the way from life and marriage to economic policy and energy policy" at a forum being hosted by the right-wing group The Family Leader

The Family Leader is the new group that is being run by Bob Vander Plaats after his successful effort to remove three state Supreme Court justices over the court's gay marriage ruling ... and it looks like Pawlenty will be just the first in a series of GOP presidential hopefuls to participate in such forums for the anti-gay group: 

The series line-up begins with former Minnesota Governor Tim Pawlenty on Monday, February 7. Former U.S. House Speaker Newt Gingrich, former Pennsylvania Senator Rick Santorum, Minnesota Congresswoman Michele Bachmann, and businessman and radio host Herman Cain have also made commitments to participate. Other invited speakers include former Arkansas Governor Mike Huckabee, Indiana Governor Mitch Daniels, South Dakota Senator John Thune, former Alaska Governor Sarah Palin, Mississippi Governor Haley Barbour, and Indiana Representative Mike Pence.

“Iowans play a vital role in hosting the first-in-the-nation presidential caucus, and it is our privilege to offer this Presidential Lecture Series in order to provide our very influential base an opportunity to gain insight into our political process,” said Bob Vander Plaats, president and CEO of The FAMiLY LEADER. “Our base is serious about its role in the political process and the Presidential Lecture Series is a focused strategy to facilitate meaningful exposure to our constituents.”

It is worth pointing out that Vander Plaats' crusade against the Supreme Court continues to this day, leading a former advisor to declare that he has become "obsessed with the gay-marriage issue" and that his effort had deep support from many of the national anti-gay Religious Right groups, including the American Family Association and its bigot-in-chief Bryan Fischer.

FRC Pressuring House Republicans To Eliminate Marriage Equality in DC

Yesterday we noted that the National Organization for Marriage was undaunted by the fact that the Supreme Court had rejected the Religious Right's challenge to Washington DC's marriage equality law and was vowing to continue the fight and expecting the new Republican majority in the House to help them.

It turns out that the Family Research Council had exactly the same idea and is calling upon its activists to contact Rep. Darrell Issa and urge Congress to "override the D.C. government's decision" and either "reject the marriage law outright or order the District to adopt a new statute that would put this issue on the ballot":

Tuesday's decision was not an endorsement of gay "marriage" in this city or anywhere else. It was simply the court recognizing its own limitations. On matters affecting the District, Congress is the absolute authority. The justices are leaving it to them to clean up this mess, or not.

Last year, when the city council exploited the process and forced same-sex "marriage" on the District, House leaders could have--and should have--gotten involved. Instead, members chickened out and did nothing. Fortunately for D.C. voters, times--and the party majorities--have changed. I've been discussing possible steps GOP leaders could take to do what the city didn't do: give the people a voice. Believe it or not, Congress has the power to override the D.C. government's decisions any time it wants. It could reject the marriage law outright or order the District to adopt a new statute that would put this issue on the ballot. What the Left doesn't want you to know is that D.C. doesn't have the authority to block referendums on marriage. Only Congress does.

"The answer for us," Bishop Jackson said yesterday, "is to return to the political process." And you can help! With a strong new Speaker at the helm, Americans can demand that our nation's capital follow our nation's law--which is that marriage is the union of a man and woman. Rep. Darrell Issa (R-Calif.) is the Chairman of the House Government Oversight Committee. As a representative from California, where Proposition 8 is under attack, he knows firsthand the importance of leaving these issues in voters' hands. Email or call him (202-225-3906) today and encourage him to give the people of Washington, D.C. the same opportunity.

FRC Pressuring House Republicans To Eliminate Marriage Equality in DC

Yesterday we noted that the National Organization for Marriage was undaunted by the fact that the Supreme Court had rejected the Religious Right's challenge to Washington DC's marriage equality law and was vowing to continue the fight and expecting the new Republican majority in the House to help them.

It turns out that the Family Research Council had exactly the same idea and is calling upon its activists to contact Rep. Darrell Issa and urge Congress to "override the D.C. government's decision" and either "reject the marriage law outright or order the District to adopt a new statute that would put this issue on the ballot":

Tuesday's decision was not an endorsement of gay "marriage" in this city or anywhere else. It was simply the court recognizing its own limitations. On matters affecting the District, Congress is the absolute authority. The justices are leaving it to them to clean up this mess, or not.

Last year, when the city council exploited the process and forced same-sex "marriage" on the District, House leaders could have--and should have--gotten involved. Instead, members chickened out and did nothing. Fortunately for D.C. voters, times--and the party majorities--have changed. I've been discussing possible steps GOP leaders could take to do what the city didn't do: give the people a voice. Believe it or not, Congress has the power to override the D.C. government's decisions any time it wants. It could reject the marriage law outright or order the District to adopt a new statute that would put this issue on the ballot. What the Left doesn't want you to know is that D.C. doesn't have the authority to block referendums on marriage. Only Congress does.

"The answer for us," Bishop Jackson said yesterday, "is to return to the political process." And you can help! With a strong new Speaker at the helm, Americans can demand that our nation's capital follow our nation's law--which is that marriage is the union of a man and woman. Rep. Darrell Issa (R-Calif.) is the Chairman of the House Government Oversight Committee. As a representative from California, where Proposition 8 is under attack, he knows firsthand the importance of leaving these issues in voters' hands. Email or call him (202-225-3906) today and encourage him to give the people of Washington, D.C. the same opportunity.

Iowa GOP Hopes to Ban Gay Marriage and Civil Unions as Vander Plaats Mobilizes Pastors

The battle over marriage equality in Iowa is heating up as Republicans in the State House are moving forward with plans to ban gay marriage and civil unions, an attempt to reverse a unanimous 2009 State Supreme Court decision in favor of marriage equality. To amend the constitution, “an amendment would require approval by state lawmakers during two legislative sessions, and then approval by voters at the ballot box.” Encouraged by major Republican gains in the midterm elections and the removal of three pro-equality Justices through retention votes, Iowa Republicans have emphasized restrictions on gay-rights and reproductive-rights in their legislative agenda, and Religious Right leader Bob Vander Plaats is pressing for the removal of the entire Supreme Court.

Vander Plaats’s new organization, The Family Leader, recently blasted pro-equality faith leaders in an alert message that questions their faith, stating: “167 ‘religious’ leaders signed a letter delivered to the Iowa Legislature saying that people of faith support homosexual ‘marriage.’ Don’t stay silent while others speak for you and misrepresnt [sic] God.” The group calls on pastors to sign an alternative petition which describes “homosexual behavior” as “immoral and sinful” and “harmful both to the individuals who choose to participate in it and the society that chooses to accept it.”

The mobilization of pastors by The Family Leader comes at a time when, according to the Des Moines Register, Republican leaders are trying to prohibit not only gay marriage but also other forms of legal rights for gay couples such as civil unions and domestic partnerships. The Register reports:

House Republicans will introduce legislation this week to begin the process to amend the Iowa Constitution to ban not only same-sex marriage but also civil unions and domestic partnerships.

That prospect raised alarm with civil rights advocates, who said it would legalize discrimination.

Republicans, who took control of the House in the Nov. 2 elections, had pledged to pass a measure this legislative session that would eventually allow Iowans a vote on same-sex marriage. But the resolution they've prepared is more sweeping than that, a move intended to help place finality on the issue of the legality of same-sex unions, said Rep. Dwayne Alons, R-Hull, who is the lead sponsor of House Joint Resolution 6.

"I think the biggest issue is that if that (a same-sex marriage ban) is carried forward, and then Iowa does civil unions and recognizes that as a substitute status, then, from what I've seen in other states," people would come to consider same-sex civil unions as equal to marriage, Alons said.

As of late Wednesday, no Democrats had signed on as co-sponsors of the bill. Fifty-six of the 60 House Republicans are listed as co-sponsors. The measure is expected to easily pass the House, but Senate Majority Leader Mike Gronstal has vowed to block consideration of a same-sex marriage amendment in that chamber.

The resolution says: "Marriage between one man and one woman shall be the only legal union valid or recognized in this state."

Des Moines attorney James Benzoni said such an amendment would run counter to the intent of Iowa laws that prohibit discrimination based on sexual orientation.

"The problem you're going to have is that it allows prejudice," Benzoni said. "It's going to open the door now for discrimination, for bullying, for treating people as second-class citizens."

The wording raised questions about whether private companies and governments in Iowa could still extend benefits to domestic partners. State government, for example, provides domestic partnership benefits to same-sex couples.



Those who agree with the Iowa Supreme Court ruling have noted that same-sex couples have in previous years been shut out from hospital visitation and inheritance rights. The U.S. Government Accountability Office has listed more than 1,100 benefits the government provides to married couples.

The Rev. Keith Ratliff Sr. of Des Moines, president of the NAACP State Conference for Iowa and Nebraska, has helped lead protests against same-sex marriage. He said Wednesday he agrees with the attempt to also keep domestic partnership or civil unions from gaining legal status.

Ratliff said he believes same-sex marriage further erodes the family, similar to the way that two-income families have eroded traditional nuclear families.

"I think there is an immediate consequence to gay marriage because people let their guard down in relation to what the word of God says," Ratliff said.

Iowa GOP Hopes to Ban Gay Marriage and Civil Unions as Vander Plaats Mobilizes Pastors

The battle over marriage equality in Iowa is heating up as Republicans in the State House are moving forward with plans to ban gay marriage and civil unions, an attempt to reverse a unanimous 2009 State Supreme Court decision in favor of marriage equality. To amend the constitution, “an amendment would require approval by state lawmakers during two legislative sessions, and then approval by voters at the ballot box.” Encouraged by major Republican gains in the midterm elections and the removal of three pro-equality Justices through retention votes, Iowa Republicans have emphasized restrictions on gay-rights and reproductive-rights in their legislative agenda, and Religious Right leader Bob Vander Plaats is pressing for the removal of the entire Supreme Court.

Vander Plaats’s new organization, The Family Leader, recently blasted pro-equality faith leaders in an alert message that questions their faith, stating: “167 ‘religious’ leaders signed a letter delivered to the Iowa Legislature saying that people of faith support homosexual ‘marriage.’ Don’t stay silent while others speak for you and misrepresnt [sic] God.” The group calls on pastors to sign an alternative petition which describes “homosexual behavior” as “immoral and sinful” and “harmful both to the individuals who choose to participate in it and the society that chooses to accept it.”

The mobilization of pastors by The Family Leader comes at a time when, according to the Des Moines Register, Republican leaders are trying to prohibit not only gay marriage but also other forms of legal rights for gay couples such as civil unions and domestic partnerships. The Register reports:

House Republicans will introduce legislation this week to begin the process to amend the Iowa Constitution to ban not only same-sex marriage but also civil unions and domestic partnerships.

That prospect raised alarm with civil rights advocates, who said it would legalize discrimination.

Republicans, who took control of the House in the Nov. 2 elections, had pledged to pass a measure this legislative session that would eventually allow Iowans a vote on same-sex marriage. But the resolution they've prepared is more sweeping than that, a move intended to help place finality on the issue of the legality of same-sex unions, said Rep. Dwayne Alons, R-Hull, who is the lead sponsor of House Joint Resolution 6.

"I think the biggest issue is that if that (a same-sex marriage ban) is carried forward, and then Iowa does civil unions and recognizes that as a substitute status, then, from what I've seen in other states," people would come to consider same-sex civil unions as equal to marriage, Alons said.

As of late Wednesday, no Democrats had signed on as co-sponsors of the bill. Fifty-six of the 60 House Republicans are listed as co-sponsors. The measure is expected to easily pass the House, but Senate Majority Leader Mike Gronstal has vowed to block consideration of a same-sex marriage amendment in that chamber.

The resolution says: "Marriage between one man and one woman shall be the only legal union valid or recognized in this state."

Des Moines attorney James Benzoni said such an amendment would run counter to the intent of Iowa laws that prohibit discrimination based on sexual orientation.

"The problem you're going to have is that it allows prejudice," Benzoni said. "It's going to open the door now for discrimination, for bullying, for treating people as second-class citizens."

The wording raised questions about whether private companies and governments in Iowa could still extend benefits to domestic partners. State government, for example, provides domestic partnership benefits to same-sex couples.



Those who agree with the Iowa Supreme Court ruling have noted that same-sex couples have in previous years been shut out from hospital visitation and inheritance rights. The U.S. Government Accountability Office has listed more than 1,100 benefits the government provides to married couples.

The Rev. Keith Ratliff Sr. of Des Moines, president of the NAACP State Conference for Iowa and Nebraska, has helped lead protests against same-sex marriage. He said Wednesday he agrees with the attempt to also keep domestic partnership or civil unions from gaining legal status.

Ratliff said he believes same-sex marriage further erodes the family, similar to the way that two-income families have eroded traditional nuclear families.

"I think there is an immediate consequence to gay marriage because people let their guard down in relation to what the word of God says," Ratliff said.

NOM vows to Continue Fighting Marriage Equality in DC

Yesterday, the Supreme Court rejected the challenge to Washington, DC's marriage equality law, much to the dismay of the Religious Right.

But if you thought that was going to be the end of the challenge, think again, as the National Organization for Marriage today announced that it will continue to fight it and expects the new GOP majority in the House to help them:

Yesterday, the Supreme Court of the United States denied an appeal by marriage defenders to the DC City Council’s implementation of same-sex marriage.

Brian Brown, president of the National Organization for Marriage (NOM) pledged to continue to push for the right of District residents to vote on marriage as the union of a man and a woman:

“While we are disappointed that the US Supreme Court did not decide to take the case challenging the denial of the civil rights of District residents to vote on the definition of marriage, we are by no means done pressing this issue. With a pro-marriage majority in the new Congress we will explore a number of avenues to force the District to fulfill their constitutional responsibility to voters. As the four Court of Appeal justices who dissented in this case made clear, the District of Columbia owes it to the voters to allow them to decide the critical issue of marriage which has existed since before there was a District of Columbia. In order to curry favor with the same-sex marriage special interest group, members of the City Council have turned their backs on their own constituents. It is ironic that these same council members champion the right of District votes to be heard in national elections but then deny those same residents the right to vote on the definition of marriage. We will press our belief with Congress that the constitution of the District requires that voters be allowed to decide this important issue.”

NOM vows to Continue Fighting Marriage Equality in DC

Yesterday, the Supreme Court rejected the challenge to Washington, DC's marriage equality law, much to the dismay of the Religious Right.

But if you thought that was going to be the end of the challenge, think again, as the National Organization for Marriage today announced that it will continue to fight it and expects the new GOP majority in the House to help them:

Yesterday, the Supreme Court of the United States denied an appeal by marriage defenders to the DC City Council’s implementation of same-sex marriage.

Brian Brown, president of the National Organization for Marriage (NOM) pledged to continue to push for the right of District residents to vote on marriage as the union of a man and a woman:

“While we are disappointed that the US Supreme Court did not decide to take the case challenging the denial of the civil rights of District residents to vote on the definition of marriage, we are by no means done pressing this issue. With a pro-marriage majority in the new Congress we will explore a number of avenues to force the District to fulfill their constitutional responsibility to voters. As the four Court of Appeal justices who dissented in this case made clear, the District of Columbia owes it to the voters to allow them to decide the critical issue of marriage which has existed since before there was a District of Columbia. In order to curry favor with the same-sex marriage special interest group, members of the City Council have turned their backs on their own constituents. It is ironic that these same council members champion the right of District votes to be heard in national elections but then deny those same residents the right to vote on the definition of marriage. We will press our belief with Congress that the constitution of the District requires that voters be allowed to decide this important issue.”

DC Marriage Foes’ Voting-Rights Hypocrisy Exposed

Yesterday the U.S. Supreme Court rejected a last-ditch legal challenge to marriage equality in the District of Columbia and exposed as hypocritical posturing the claims by Bishop Harry Jackson and his Religious Right allies to be representing the interests of DC voters.

Throughout the past year’s legal challenges to DC’s marriage equality law, Jackson and his allies have argued that District voters have a civil right to vote on the city’s new marriage equality law, in spite of consistent legal opinions and court rulings that such a vote would violate the city’s Human Rights Act by putting civil rights to a vote.
 
But when the conservative U.S. Supreme Court declined to consider the clergy’s latest request, the response of one local advocate was telling. Rev. Anthony Evans called the Supreme Court’s action “a travesty of justice:”
 
“This law was forced down the church’s throat and what the Supreme Court has set up is the greatest civil war between the church and the gay community,” Evans said. “And let me just state for the record, we don’t want that fight. We love our gay brothers and sisters. But if the Supreme Court is not going to acknowledge the fact that we have a right as religious people to have a say-so in the framework of religious ethics for our culture and society, then we reject the Supreme Court on this issue.”
 
Evans “civil war” rhetoric seems particularly poorly chosen at a moment when Americans of all political persuasions are looking for more civility in political rhetoric, not to mention his Tea-Party-on-steroids declaration that he “rejects” the U.S. Supreme Court .
 
But what really exposes as fraudulent the claims by marriage foes to be waging a civil rights struggle on behalf of DC voters is Evans’ bragging that “he and others opposed to the marriage law lobbied GOP leaders on the Hill to strip  congressional delegate Eleanor Holmes Norton (D-D.C.) of her voting privileges on the House floor.”  Evans said his working with House Republicans to revoke even the limited floor voting privileges of DC's congressional delegate was “punishment for her wholehearted support of same-sex marriage.”
 
Of course, national Religious Right groups made it clear months ago that they don't really care about the second-class-citizen status of DC residents when they said that city officials’ support for marriage equality and the Human Rights Act is proof that the District doesn’t deserve self-determination.

DC Marriage Foes’ Voting-Rights Hypocrisy Exposed

Yesterday the U.S. Supreme Court rejected a last-ditch legal challenge to marriage equality in the District of Columbia and exposed as hypocritical posturing the claims by Bishop Harry Jackson and his Religious Right allies to be representing the interests of DC voters.

Throughout the past year’s legal challenges to DC’s marriage equality law, Jackson and his allies have argued that District voters have a civil right to vote on the city’s new marriage equality law, in spite of consistent legal opinions and court rulings that such a vote would violate the city’s Human Rights Act by putting civil rights to a vote.
 
But when the conservative U.S. Supreme Court declined to consider the clergy’s latest request, the response of one local advocate was telling. Rev. Anthony Evans called the Supreme Court’s action “a travesty of justice:”
 
“This law was forced down the church’s throat and what the Supreme Court has set up is the greatest civil war between the church and the gay community,” Evans said. “And let me just state for the record, we don’t want that fight. We love our gay brothers and sisters. But if the Supreme Court is not going to acknowledge the fact that we have a right as religious people to have a say-so in the framework of religious ethics for our culture and society, then we reject the Supreme Court on this issue.”
 
Evans “civil war” rhetoric seems particularly poorly chosen at a moment when Americans of all political persuasions are looking for more civility in political rhetoric, not to mention his Tea-Party-on-steroids declaration that he “rejects” the U.S. Supreme Court .
 
But what really exposes as fraudulent the claims by marriage foes to be waging a civil rights struggle on behalf of DC voters is Evans’ bragging that “he and others opposed to the marriage law lobbied GOP leaders on the Hill to strip  congressional delegate Eleanor Holmes Norton (D-D.C.) of her voting privileges on the House floor.”  Evans said his working with House Republicans to revoke even the limited floor voting privileges of DC's congressional delegate was “punishment for her wholehearted support of same-sex marriage.”
 
Of course, national Religious Right groups made it clear months ago that they don't really care about the second-class-citizen status of DC residents when they said that city officials’ support for marriage equality and the Human Rights Act is proof that the District doesn’t deserve self-determination.

Right Wing Leftovers

  • The Supreme Court has rejected the right-wing challenge to Washington, DC's marriage equality law.
  • The ever-brave Sarah Palin sits down for a softball interview with Sean Hannity to defend her "blood libel" video.
  • Rep. Michele Bachmann will be the keynote speaker at the March for Life Rose Dinner.
  • Don't like health care reform?  Why not sign up for a Christian health care co-op?
  • It seems that the developer's attendance estimates for the creationist theme park in Kentucky are wildly optimistic.
  • Randall Terry intends to launch a primary challenge against President Obama so that he can run graphic anti-abortion ads on television and will host a press conference announcing his campaign outside the Holocaust Museum.
  • Finally, the Sarah Palin Battle Hymn is a real thing.

Pawlenty to Meet with Anti-Gay Iowa Group

After telling the American Family Association’s Bryan Fischer that he would work to reinstate Don’t Ask Don’t Tell as President, former Minnesota Governor Tim Pawlenty will continue to court anti-gay leaders by meeting with Iowa’s Bob Vander Plaats and his organization, The Family Leader. Vander Plaats told the Des Moines Register that his group will be “hosting Governor Pawlenty in Iowa” in early February to discuss “pro-family issues, all the way from life and marriage to economic policy and energy policy.”

After losing the race for the Republican nomination for governor, Vander Plaats became a leader of Iowa’s Religious Right after he coordinated a successful campaign to block the retention of three Iowa Supreme Court justices who supported the Court’s unanimous ruling to legalize same-sex marriage. Vander Plaats, who a former aide said is “obsessed with the gay marriage issue,” has since called for the removal of the entire Supreme Court because of the Court's decision in favor of marriage equality. The Family Leader is the parent organization of Marriage Matters, the Iowa Family PAC, and the Iowa Family Policy Center, an organization that attacks “the public health crisis of same-sex activity” and tells church groups that they can “protect your children” from “homosexual activists.”

Pawlenty, who is currently touring the country to promote his new book Courage to Stand, has been beefing up his credibility with the Religious Right, bragging to Bryan Fischer about his record of appointing far-right judges to Minnesota courts and calling for the reinstatement of Don’t Ask Don’t Tell:

Pawlenty to Meet with Anti-Gay Iowa Group

After telling the American Family Association’s Bryan Fischer that he would work to reinstate Don’t Ask Don’t Tell as President, former Minnesota Governor Tim Pawlenty will continue to court anti-gay leaders by meeting with Iowa’s Bob Vander Plaats and his organization, The Family Leader. Vander Plaats told the Des Moines Register that his group will be “hosting Governor Pawlenty in Iowa” in early February to discuss “pro-family issues, all the way from life and marriage to economic policy and energy policy.”

After losing the race for the Republican nomination for governor, Vander Plaats became a leader of Iowa’s Religious Right after he coordinated a successful campaign to block the retention of three Iowa Supreme Court justices who supported the Court’s unanimous ruling to legalize same-sex marriage. Vander Plaats, who a former aide said is “obsessed with the gay marriage issue,” has since called for the removal of the entire Supreme Court because of the Court's decision in favor of marriage equality. The Family Leader is the parent organization of Marriage Matters, the Iowa Family PAC, and the Iowa Family Policy Center, an organization that attacks “the public health crisis of same-sex activity” and tells church groups that they can “protect your children” from “homosexual activists.”

Pawlenty, who is currently touring the country to promote his new book Courage to Stand, has been beefing up his credibility with the Religious Right, bragging to Bryan Fischer about his record of appointing far-right judges to Minnesota courts and calling for the reinstatement of Don’t Ask Don’t Tell:

If Elected President, Pawlenty Tells Fischer He'll Reinstate Don't Ask, Don't Tell

There are few Religious Right leaders active today who can compete with the American Family Association's Bryan Fischer in terms of openly hostile bigotry against gays, Muslims, and all those who do not share his radical worldview:

So it is bound to raise a few eyebrows that former Minnesota Gov. Tim Pawlenty went on Fischer's radio program yesterday to promote his new book ... but it won't raise any eyebrows that Fischer used the opportunity to grill Pawlenty on social issues or that Pawlenty largely shared Fischer's right-wing concerns:

Fischer: If you are asked the question "should CPAC provide a place at the table for an organization like GOProud," what will you say?

Pawlenty: You know, I am not familiar with that dispute, I have heard it referenced ... but I'm not just a fiscal conservative, I'm a social conservative so I can't speak for CPAC but I can speak for myself and what I believe and I've been a strong supporter of the family, pro-life positions, traditional marriage positions - so I'm not sure what that dispute all involves. But whatever it is, I don't think we should be afraid of telling what I believe and what we believe to whatever audience. We're trying to make sure we stand what what we believe in and we share it in a way that will hopefully bring more people to our side.

Fischer: Now the Left, and homosexual activists and organizations like GOProud, one of their stated agendas is to overturn the Defense of Marriage Act, the federal law that defines marriage in federal law and for federal purposes as a union of one man and one woman. The Obama administration has made a tepid and pretty ineffective defense of that law - if you become president and that law faces a challenge under your administration, how vigorously will you defend DOMA? What will you do to make sure it's defended?

Pawlenty: I believe strongly in traditional marriage. I was co-author of the law in Minnesota that defined marriage as between a man and a woman. I've been a vocal supporter of an amendment in Minnesota that would put that into our constitution. I hope that the day comes when it is put before the voters of Minnesota. And it's not just a legal issue; it's also an important cornerstone for our society and our culture. I mean, families and traditional marriage is so important to that and I don't believe all other domestic relations should be on the same platform as traditional marriage, I just don't buy and so I've been a strong supporter of traditional marriage. I also think who you appoint to courts in this regard is important and we don't have litmus tests, so to speak, but we want strict constructionists and people who take a conservative view toward the interpretation of our laws.

Fischer: Now Roe v. Wade is obviously the critical court ruling on the abortion issue - that is a ruling that was issued in 1973 so it seems to me that candidates would have the freedom to comment on whether they thought potential nominees to the Supreme Court, would have the freedom to comment on whether they thought Roe v. Wade was properly decided from a constitutional perspective. A number of sitting Supreme Court justices have commented on the fact that they believe it was poorly decided. So that's going to be a critical issue, if you have the opportunity to appoint nominees to the federal bench - will you talk explicitly with a nominee to the federal bench about his or her view about whether they think Roe v Wade was properly decided from a constitutional basis, will that be in the nature of a litmus test for you, that question, will you bring it up, will you look for an answer?

Pawlenty: Well, I've appointed a lot of judges as the Governor of Minnesota, including at our Supreme Court, appellate court and district court level. For the first time, at least in the modern history and maybe in a long time we now have a small majority of people on our Minnesota Supreme Court we are conservative and strict constructionist. I have confidence in them and how they would approach these issues of how you interpret the law. On the specific issue of Roe. v Wade, when you tell people or ask people to be strict constructionist and you look at the Constitution, to have people say "I'm a strict constructionist" would somehow lead to a decision or a conclusion like Roe v. Wade, I think it was wrongly decided. And if you look at the reasoning behind it and the strict interpretation approach to interpreting the Constitution, I think Roe v. Wade was wrongly decided by the Court. But I have been careful that I appoint people, particularly at the appellate level, that share this strict constructionist philosophy - that at least says to me directly - I didn't have litmus test - but I do want to know that they share my view and values about the proper role of the court and the interpretation of the law, so we try to get to the bottom of that.

Fischer: One last question, got about forty five seconds left, put you on the hot seat one more time: we just saw the ban on homosexual service in the military repealed, overturned. Conservatives will be working over the next couple of years to see that that ban is reinstated. If you become president in 2012, will you work to reinstate the prohibition on open homosexual service in the military? Would you sign such a prohibition if it got to your desk?

Pawlenty: Bryan, I have been a public and repeat supporter of maintaining Don't Ask, Don't Tell. There's a lot of reasons for that, but if you look at how the combat commanders and the combat units feel about it, the results of those kinds of surveys were different than the ones that were mostly reported in the newspaper and that is something I think we need to pay attention to. But I have been a public supporter of maintaining Don't Ask, Don't Tell and I would support reinstating it as well.

Syndicate content

Supreme Court Posts Archive

Brian Tashman, Wednesday 10/26/2011, 4:05pm
Today on Believers Voice of Victory, David Barton told televangelist Kenneth Copeland that the only way to rejuvenate America’s education system is to instill in kids the “fear of the Lord.” Barton launched his career as a Religious Right activist with the 1989 booklet What Happened in Education?, in which he concluded that a decline in SAT scores was a result of the end of school prayer, and that only Christian teachings in schools could bring SAT scores back up. Barton explained to Copeland, a Prosperity Gospel preacher, what that instilling the “fear of the Lord... MORE
Kyle Mantyla, Monday 10/24/2011, 5:01pm
Several weeks ago, the Family Research Council's Tony Perkins hosted a press briefing at the National Press Club to discuss just what it is that the Religious Right is seeking in a Republican presidential nominee. During the Q&A, Perkins was asked to discuss the idea that the very positions that make a candidate appealing to the Religious Right are the same positions that make such candidates unappealing to the general voting population. Not surprisingly, Perkins took issue with that assessment and asserted instead that without the support of the Religious Right, no Republican candidate... MORE
Brian Tashman, Monday 10/24/2011, 4:55pm
Coverage of the Family Research Council’s Values Voter Summit this year was dominated by stories of Robert Jeffress’ criticism of the Mormon faith; Bryan Fischer’s unabashed bigotry; and the infighting that rose to the surface when Bill Bennett rebuked Jeffress and Mitt Romney, tepidly and not by name, denounced Fischer. The press coverage of the Religious Right conference was so completely focused on Jeffress and Fischer that the FRC even asked members to pray that the media will stop reporting on the story. Today FRC president Tony Perkins used his radio alert today to... MORE
Kyle Mantyla, Wednesday 10/19/2011, 5:49pm
Matt Barber says that the vandalism against the site of the event hosting Peter LaBarbera's anti-gay conference was "an act of terrorism."   Bryan Fischer tries to set the record straight regarding his views on Mormonism ... oddly, he doesn't bother to mention that he doesn't believe it deserves First Amendment protections.   The Family Research Council is now openly endorsing NARTH's anti-gay pseudo-science.   Looks like Bradlee Dean is now writing pieces for WND.   Finally, after being removed from the Alabama Supreme Court... MORE
Kyle Mantyla, Tuesday 10/18/2011, 1:55pm
On today's installment of the Liberty Counsel's "Faith and Freedom" radio program, Matt Barber and Steve Crampton discussed the Supreme Court's refusal to hear an appeal of a Fifth Circuit Court ruling denying a gay couple's request to have the names to both fathers listed on their adopted son's birth certificate. Crampton and Barber hailed it as a "supreme victory" as Barber went off about how allowing gay couples to adopt is "tragic," "unconscionable," and "reprehensible": MORE
Peter Montgomery, Thursday 10/13/2011, 10:53am
One of the sessions at the recent Values Voter Summit featured a showing of a new half-hour video produced by the American Family Association called “Divorcing God: Secularism and the Republic.” (Back in the summer it was being promoted as "Divorcing God: Secularism, Sexual Anarchy, and the Future of the Republic.") The video features an array of Religious Right leaders and academics, whose argument can be summarized this way:  America, whose greatness is decaying because the country has turned its back on the God who inspired the founding fathers, is doomed if it... MORE
Brian Tashman, Thursday 10/13/2011, 10:40am
Calvin Beisner of the Cornwall Alliance appeared on Janet Parshall’s radio show In The Market on Tuesday to discuss the “Green Dragon” film series which was made by Beisner’s group and hosted by Parshall. As we discussed in our report The ‘Green Dragon’ Slayers: How the Religious Right and the Corporate Right are Joining Forces to Fight Environmental Protection, the “Green Dragon” series represents efforts by the Religious Right and the Corporate Right to paint environmentalism as anti-Christian and ungodly: During the radio show, Parshall... MORE