Governor's signature makes N.J. 3rd state with civil unions
Dec 22, 2006
By Staff
Baptist Press
TRENTON, N.J. (BP)--New Jersey became the third state to legalize civil unions when Gov. Jon Corzine signed Dec. 21 into law a bill that grants homosexual couples all the legal benefits of marriage under state law.
Vermont and Connecticut also have civil unions. California has something similar but calls them domestic partnerships. Massachusetts remains the lone state with full-fledged "gay marriage."
Corzine, a Democrat, signed the bill into law approximately two months after the New Jersey Supreme Court ordered the legislature to pass a law granting same-sex couples, "on equal terms, the rights and benefits" of marriage. The justices, in their 4-3 decision, gave legislators the option of legalizing either "gay marriage" or civil unions. Legislators chose the latter, and set out to pass the law by year's end.
"We must recognize that many gay and lesbian couples in New Jersey are in committed relationships, and deserve the same benefits and rights as every other family in the state," Corzine said in a statement.
The bill passed the Assembly 56-19 and the Senate 23-12. Both are controlled by Democrats.
The new law, though, has made few people happy. Homosexual activists had wanted the court to go ahead and legalize "gay marriage" -- something the three dissenting justices supported.
"It's a step forward, but it's not true equality," Veronica Hoff, 52, a lesbian who attended the bill-signing, said, according to the Associated Press.
Lambda Legal, one of the organizations that brought the lawsuit, has pledged to continue fighting for "gay marriage" within the state.
“The court’s decision in Lewis v. Harris gave the New Jersey legislature an historic opportunity to deliver equality, dignity and fairness to families," David Buckel, an attorney with the homosexual group Lambda Legal, said in a statement. "There is no reason to enact civil unions other than to send the message that our families are not worthy of equality."
Conservatives, meanwhile, say the new law is another step toward the decline of the family. Five states now grant homosexual couples virtually all the legal benefits of marriage. Four of those states adopted their laws following a court order.
"Children will be taught from as early as kindergarten that same-sex unions are an equivalent alternative to heterosexual marriage," Toni Meyer Sr., research analyst for the New Jersey Family Policy Council, said in an online analysis. "Right now in Massachusetts kids are being taught how to have homosexual sex and impressionable teens are taught to be open to the idea that they may in fact turn out to be homosexual.
Corzine's signature means homosexual activists went 0-for-3 in 2006 in three major "gay marriage" lawsuits. Supreme courts in New Jersey, New York and Washington state all ruled there was no constitutional right to "gay marriage." But identical lawsuits in four states -- California, Connecticut, Iowa and Maryland -- are still pending.
--30--
Compiled by Michael Foust. For more information about the national debate over "gay marriage," visit http://www.bpnews.net/samesexmarriage
Copyright © 2001 - 2006 Southern Baptist Convention, Baptist Press
Friday, December 22, 2006
MARRIAGE DIGEST: Wisconsin governor supports passage of civil unions law; Mass. court hears amendment arguments
MARRIAGE DIGEST: Wisconsin governor supports passage of civil unions law; Mass. court hears amendment arguments
Dec 22, 2006
By Michael Foust
Baptist Press
MADISON, Wis. (BP)--Wisconsin voters may have approved a constitutional amendment banning same-sex civil unions, but Gov. Jim Doyle says the political battle over the issue is far from over.
The state's voters passed an amendment on Election Day banning both "gay marriage" and Vermont-style civil unions by a margin of 59-41 percent. During his successful re-election campaign Doyle, a Democrat, urged a vote against the amendment. Now, Doyle says it was unfair for amendment supporters to place the civil unions ban in the text.
"I do not believe people in Wisconsin would have voted 'no' on civil unions," Doyle told The Capital Times newspaper in Madison.
The constitutional amendment, placed on the ballot by legislators, prohibits the legalization of "gay marriage" and anything "substantially similar to that of marriage" for unmarried couples. It was designed to ban Vermont-style civil unions and California-style domestic partnerships.
Doyle told the newspaper the issue of civil unions isn't dead yet and that such unions are "one of the things people should be looking at and discussing."
Others, though, disagree.
"I think the people spoke loudly and clearly that they don't want gay marriage or gay marriage by a different name to be legalized in this state," state Rep. Mark Gundrum, a Republican and a co-author of the amendment, told The Times. "In Vermont and Connecticut, it's marriage in everything but the letters used to describe it. That would not be permitted under the amendment."
Civil unions supporters could try to place their own constitutional amendment on the ballot, essentially reversing the effects of the one adopted in November. But to do that an amendment must pass in two consecutive legislative sessions.
Ironically, the legislature placed the amendment on the ballot only after Doyle vetoed a statute in 2003 banning "gay marriage." Unlike statutes, constitutional amendments cannot be vetoed by the governor.
Wisconsin is one of 27 states that have adopted a marriage amendment.
MASS. COURT HEARS ARGUMENTS -- An attorney representing Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney and 10 other plaintiffs asked the highest court in Massachusetts Dec. 20 to declare the recent actions of state legislators on a proposed marriage amendment unconstitutional.
At least twice in recent months, the legislature has recessed without voting on the proposed constitutional amendment, even though both sides say it has the votes to pass. Romney and others argue the Massachusetts Constitution requires legislators to act on the proposal.
John Hanify, the attorney representing Romney, conceded to the justices that the court could not force the legislature to vote, The Boston Globe reported. But Hanify said justices could place pressure on legislators by calling their actions illegal.
"We're not asking you to tell the legislature how to do their business," he said, according to The Globe. "We're only asking you to declare what their constitutional obligations are."
Legislators are scheduled to meet again Jan. 2. If they adjourn that day without voting on the amendment, then the amendment dies. If it passes, then it must pass once more during the next session in order to appear on the 2008 ballot. Romney hopes the court rules by Jan. 2.
The amendment, which would prohibit "gay marriage," needs the support of only one-fourth of legislators. Approximately 170,000 state citizens signed petitions to place the amendment before the body.
HIGH HURDLE IN FLORIDA -- If a proposed constitutional marriage amendment makes the Florida ballot in 2008, it will need approval by 60 percent of the voters to pass.
That's because on Election Day, voters adopted a constitutional amendment requiring that all future amendments receive 60 percent of the vote, instead of a simple majority as now required. The amendment passed, 58-42 percent.
The proposed marriage amendment has yet to qualify, but it's close. Supporters say they are roughly 35,000 signatures short of the 611,000 required. Petitions can be downloaded at www.florida4marriage.org.
Copyright © 2001 - 2006 Southern Baptist Convention, Baptist Press
Dec 22, 2006
By Michael Foust
Baptist Press
MADISON, Wis. (BP)--Wisconsin voters may have approved a constitutional amendment banning same-sex civil unions, but Gov. Jim Doyle says the political battle over the issue is far from over.
The state's voters passed an amendment on Election Day banning both "gay marriage" and Vermont-style civil unions by a margin of 59-41 percent. During his successful re-election campaign Doyle, a Democrat, urged a vote against the amendment. Now, Doyle says it was unfair for amendment supporters to place the civil unions ban in the text.
"I do not believe people in Wisconsin would have voted 'no' on civil unions," Doyle told The Capital Times newspaper in Madison.
The constitutional amendment, placed on the ballot by legislators, prohibits the legalization of "gay marriage" and anything "substantially similar to that of marriage" for unmarried couples. It was designed to ban Vermont-style civil unions and California-style domestic partnerships.
Doyle told the newspaper the issue of civil unions isn't dead yet and that such unions are "one of the things people should be looking at and discussing."
Others, though, disagree.
"I think the people spoke loudly and clearly that they don't want gay marriage or gay marriage by a different name to be legalized in this state," state Rep. Mark Gundrum, a Republican and a co-author of the amendment, told The Times. "In Vermont and Connecticut, it's marriage in everything but the letters used to describe it. That would not be permitted under the amendment."
Civil unions supporters could try to place their own constitutional amendment on the ballot, essentially reversing the effects of the one adopted in November. But to do that an amendment must pass in two consecutive legislative sessions.
Ironically, the legislature placed the amendment on the ballot only after Doyle vetoed a statute in 2003 banning "gay marriage." Unlike statutes, constitutional amendments cannot be vetoed by the governor.
Wisconsin is one of 27 states that have adopted a marriage amendment.
MASS. COURT HEARS ARGUMENTS -- An attorney representing Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney and 10 other plaintiffs asked the highest court in Massachusetts Dec. 20 to declare the recent actions of state legislators on a proposed marriage amendment unconstitutional.
At least twice in recent months, the legislature has recessed without voting on the proposed constitutional amendment, even though both sides say it has the votes to pass. Romney and others argue the Massachusetts Constitution requires legislators to act on the proposal.
John Hanify, the attorney representing Romney, conceded to the justices that the court could not force the legislature to vote, The Boston Globe reported. But Hanify said justices could place pressure on legislators by calling their actions illegal.
"We're not asking you to tell the legislature how to do their business," he said, according to The Globe. "We're only asking you to declare what their constitutional obligations are."
Legislators are scheduled to meet again Jan. 2. If they adjourn that day without voting on the amendment, then the amendment dies. If it passes, then it must pass once more during the next session in order to appear on the 2008 ballot. Romney hopes the court rules by Jan. 2.
The amendment, which would prohibit "gay marriage," needs the support of only one-fourth of legislators. Approximately 170,000 state citizens signed petitions to place the amendment before the body.
HIGH HURDLE IN FLORIDA -- If a proposed constitutional marriage amendment makes the Florida ballot in 2008, it will need approval by 60 percent of the voters to pass.
That's because on Election Day, voters adopted a constitutional amendment requiring that all future amendments receive 60 percent of the vote, instead of a simple majority as now required. The amendment passed, 58-42 percent.
The proposed marriage amendment has yet to qualify, but it's close. Supporters say they are roughly 35,000 signatures short of the 611,000 required. Petitions can be downloaded at www.florida4marriage.org.
Copyright © 2001 - 2006 Southern Baptist Convention, Baptist Press
Military in Iraq celebrating Christ amidst war, chaplain says
Military in Iraq celebrating Christ amidst war, chaplain says
Dec 22, 2006
By Staff
Baptist Press
BAGHDAD, Iraq (BP)--A Southern Baptist chaplain in Iraq says military personnel are celebrating the birth of Christ in the midst of a war-torn country.
Chaplain LTC Jim White, 3rd Infantry Division, says "in spite of the circumstances," America's finest are celebrating Christmas in Baghdad and throughout Iraq. White, stationed in Baghdad, requested prayer for members of the military who are away from family during the Christmas season -- that they may "sense God's presence each and every day."
Following is the full text of White's message to Southern Baptists:
"Here in Baghdad our soldiers are celebrating the Christ in Christmas in spite of the circumstances. All across our area of operations, Christmas trees are going up, choirs are singing. We're celebrating the birth of our Lord. On behalf of all military Southern Baptist chaplains, we'd like to thank you for your support and wish each of you a Merry Christmas. We'd like to ask you to lift us up in prayer this time of prayer, praying for our Soldiers and Sailors and Airmen and Marines as they go about their work in some of the most dangerous places in the world. As they go about that work, may they sense God's presence each and every day.
"We also [ask that you] pray for our families and loved ones back home, [asking] that you will lift them up before our Lord in a very special way, that they might sense His presence also and that they might have the Christmas spirit and bring us all safely home to them. We also ask that you'll pray for each of our chaplains, that they will sense the when, the where and the how to share God's love this Christmas season to all that they serve. Meanwhile, here in Baghdad, we continue to celebrate the Christ of Christmas."
Copyright © 2001 - 2006 Southern Baptist Convention, Baptist Press
Dec 22, 2006
By Staff
Baptist Press
BAGHDAD, Iraq (BP)--A Southern Baptist chaplain in Iraq says military personnel are celebrating the birth of Christ in the midst of a war-torn country.
Chaplain LTC Jim White, 3rd Infantry Division, says "in spite of the circumstances," America's finest are celebrating Christmas in Baghdad and throughout Iraq. White, stationed in Baghdad, requested prayer for members of the military who are away from family during the Christmas season -- that they may "sense God's presence each and every day."
Following is the full text of White's message to Southern Baptists:
"Here in Baghdad our soldiers are celebrating the Christ in Christmas in spite of the circumstances. All across our area of operations, Christmas trees are going up, choirs are singing. We're celebrating the birth of our Lord. On behalf of all military Southern Baptist chaplains, we'd like to thank you for your support and wish each of you a Merry Christmas. We'd like to ask you to lift us up in prayer this time of prayer, praying for our Soldiers and Sailors and Airmen and Marines as they go about their work in some of the most dangerous places in the world. As they go about that work, may they sense God's presence each and every day.
"We also [ask that you] pray for our families and loved ones back home, [asking] that you will lift them up before our Lord in a very special way, that they might sense His presence also and that they might have the Christmas spirit and bring us all safely home to them. We also ask that you'll pray for each of our chaplains, that they will sense the when, the where and the how to share God's love this Christmas season to all that they serve. Meanwhile, here in Baghdad, we continue to celebrate the Christ of Christmas."
Copyright © 2001 - 2006 Southern Baptist Convention, Baptist Press
‘95 percent’ premarital sex survey is connected to Planned Parenthood
‘95 percent’ premarital sex survey is connected to Planned Parenthood
Dec 22, 2006
By Erin Roach
Baptist Press
NASHVILLE, Tenn. (BP)--One of the most popular news stories circulating in recent days is a study by the Guttmacher Institute in New York that says 95 percent of Americans have had premarital sex. But there’s more to the story than is being reported.
“It would be more forthright for the Guttmacher Institute to mention in its reports that it is the research arm for Planned Parenthood,” Richard Ross, founder of the True Love Waits abstinence movement, told Baptist Press. “Corporate profits and staff salaries at Planned Parenthood depend on abortion services.
“Helping Americans abandon any sense that sex belongs in marriage is essential to boosting the demand for those abortion services. Knowing of the tie between Planned Parenthood and Guttmacher could help readers watch for any possible bias creeping into research,” Ross said.
Comments from the study’s author, Lawrence B. Finer, indicate his motivation may be to suggest that programs promoting abstinence until marriage are not worth American taxpayer dollars.
“This is reality-check research,” Finer said in a news release Dec. 19. “Premarital sex is normal behavior for the vast majority of Americans, and has been for decades. The data clearly show that the majority of older teens and adults have already had sex before marriage, which calls into question the federal government’s funding of abstinence-only-until-marriage programs for 12-29-year-olds.
“It would be more effective to provide young people with the skills and information they need to be safe once they become sexually active -- which nearly everyone eventually will,” Finer added.
However, Finer's assertion does not square with other studies. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention reported in 2003 that 47 percent of teenagers had had sex, compared to 54 percent in 1991. And the Heritage Foundation said in 2004 that young women who take a virginity pledge are at least 40 percent less likely to have a child out of wedlock and 12 times more likely to be virgins when they marry, compared to young women who do not make such a pledge.
The Bush administration has given abstinence programs hundreds of millions of dollars in federal funding, and Wade Horn, assistant secretary for children and families at the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, told the Associated Press the abstinence approach is useful.
“One of its values is to help young people delay the onset of sexual activity,” Horn said. “The longer one delays, the fewer lifetime sex partners they have, and the less risk of contracting sexually transmitted disease.”
Pat Fagan, a fellow at the Heritage Foundation think tank in Washington, told USA Today the Guttmacher study is “an attack on abstinence” and its release at the end of the year is “part of a major Congressional battle about to start in January and February … to get rid of abstinence funding.”
Though it has already been released online, the study called “Trends in Premarital Sex in the United States, 1954-2003” will be published in the January/February issue of “Public Health Reports,” a journal of the U.S. Public Health Service.
Finer concluded in his study that because people are sexually active before marriage and are waiting longer to get married, young adults have an especially great need for accurate information about how to protect themselves against pregnancy and sexually transmitted diseases, the news release noted.
But Ross, a professor of student ministry at Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary in Fort Worth, Texas, disagrees with Finer’s willingness to concede the defeat of abstinence.
“The logic that accompanies this new report seems to be this: When behavior becomes normative, it becomes morally acceptable,” Ross told BP. “I wonder if the folks at Guttmacher would apply that logic to other behaviors among the young. For example, most research indicates that almost all children and youth tell lies from time to time. Should schools and families just accept that as a fact of life and stop calling the young to truthfulness?
“Similarly, most research indicates that almost all children and youth sometimes cheat at school. Should we instruct schools to stop trying to ‘legislate morality’ by punishing cheaters?” Ross said. “Of course there is much about the human condition that is far less than perfect. The question is, Do we just accept every new level of human coarsening as normative and even moral or do we do strive to lead people toward the very best?”
Ross said that since the year True Love Waits became a national movement in 1993, teenage sexual behavior, sexually transmitted diseases, abortions and live births before marriage have declined for 12 consecutive years.
“The fact that many Americans have been immoral during that period does not negate the fact that there are many among the young who are responding beautifully to a clear, positive call to morality and purity,” he said.
The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention reported in 2003 that 47 percent of teenagers had had sex, compared to 54 percent in 1991. And the Heritage Foundation said in 2004 that young women who take a virginity pledge are at least 40 percent less likely to have a child out of wedlock and 12 times more likely to be virgins when they marry, compared to young women who do not make such a pledge.
Copyright © 2001 - 2006 Southern Baptist Convention, Baptist Press
Dec 22, 2006
By Erin Roach
Baptist Press
NASHVILLE, Tenn. (BP)--One of the most popular news stories circulating in recent days is a study by the Guttmacher Institute in New York that says 95 percent of Americans have had premarital sex. But there’s more to the story than is being reported.
“It would be more forthright for the Guttmacher Institute to mention in its reports that it is the research arm for Planned Parenthood,” Richard Ross, founder of the True Love Waits abstinence movement, told Baptist Press. “Corporate profits and staff salaries at Planned Parenthood depend on abortion services.
“Helping Americans abandon any sense that sex belongs in marriage is essential to boosting the demand for those abortion services. Knowing of the tie between Planned Parenthood and Guttmacher could help readers watch for any possible bias creeping into research,” Ross said.
Comments from the study’s author, Lawrence B. Finer, indicate his motivation may be to suggest that programs promoting abstinence until marriage are not worth American taxpayer dollars.
“This is reality-check research,” Finer said in a news release Dec. 19. “Premarital sex is normal behavior for the vast majority of Americans, and has been for decades. The data clearly show that the majority of older teens and adults have already had sex before marriage, which calls into question the federal government’s funding of abstinence-only-until-marriage programs for 12-29-year-olds.
“It would be more effective to provide young people with the skills and information they need to be safe once they become sexually active -- which nearly everyone eventually will,” Finer added.
However, Finer's assertion does not square with other studies. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention reported in 2003 that 47 percent of teenagers had had sex, compared to 54 percent in 1991. And the Heritage Foundation said in 2004 that young women who take a virginity pledge are at least 40 percent less likely to have a child out of wedlock and 12 times more likely to be virgins when they marry, compared to young women who do not make such a pledge.
The Bush administration has given abstinence programs hundreds of millions of dollars in federal funding, and Wade Horn, assistant secretary for children and families at the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, told the Associated Press the abstinence approach is useful.
“One of its values is to help young people delay the onset of sexual activity,” Horn said. “The longer one delays, the fewer lifetime sex partners they have, and the less risk of contracting sexually transmitted disease.”
Pat Fagan, a fellow at the Heritage Foundation think tank in Washington, told USA Today the Guttmacher study is “an attack on abstinence” and its release at the end of the year is “part of a major Congressional battle about to start in January and February … to get rid of abstinence funding.”
Though it has already been released online, the study called “Trends in Premarital Sex in the United States, 1954-2003” will be published in the January/February issue of “Public Health Reports,” a journal of the U.S. Public Health Service.
Finer concluded in his study that because people are sexually active before marriage and are waiting longer to get married, young adults have an especially great need for accurate information about how to protect themselves against pregnancy and sexually transmitted diseases, the news release noted.
But Ross, a professor of student ministry at Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary in Fort Worth, Texas, disagrees with Finer’s willingness to concede the defeat of abstinence.
“The logic that accompanies this new report seems to be this: When behavior becomes normative, it becomes morally acceptable,” Ross told BP. “I wonder if the folks at Guttmacher would apply that logic to other behaviors among the young. For example, most research indicates that almost all children and youth tell lies from time to time. Should schools and families just accept that as a fact of life and stop calling the young to truthfulness?
“Similarly, most research indicates that almost all children and youth sometimes cheat at school. Should we instruct schools to stop trying to ‘legislate morality’ by punishing cheaters?” Ross said. “Of course there is much about the human condition that is far less than perfect. The question is, Do we just accept every new level of human coarsening as normative and even moral or do we do strive to lead people toward the very best?”
Ross said that since the year True Love Waits became a national movement in 1993, teenage sexual behavior, sexually transmitted diseases, abortions and live births before marriage have declined for 12 consecutive years.
“The fact that many Americans have been immoral during that period does not negate the fact that there are many among the young who are responding beautifully to a clear, positive call to morality and purity,” he said.
The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention reported in 2003 that 47 percent of teenagers had had sex, compared to 54 percent in 1991. And the Heritage Foundation said in 2004 that young women who take a virginity pledge are at least 40 percent less likely to have a child out of wedlock and 12 times more likely to be virgins when they marry, compared to young women who do not make such a pledge.
Copyright © 2001 - 2006 Southern Baptist Convention, Baptist Press
N. Korea Nuke Talks End Without Deal
Dec 22, 8:59 AM (ET)
By BO-MI LIM
BEIJING (AP) - The first talks on North Korea's nuclear program since the communist nation tested an atomic device ended Friday without an agreement to move ahead on disarmament or schedule further negotiations.
During five days of meetings in Beijing, negotiators said Pyongyang refused to talk about its nuclear weapons program, and instead stuck to its demand that the U.S. remove financial restrictions it has imposed on the regime.
North Korea's main nuclear envoy said Friday the communist nation would bolster its atomic arsenal in response to U.S. pressure.
"The U.S. is taking a tactic of both dialogue and pressure, and carrots and sticks," Kim Kye Gwan told reporters. "We are responding with dialogue and a shield, and by a shield we are saying we will further improve our deterrent."
Chinese envoy Wu Dawei released a statement saying the sides simply reaffirmed a September 2005 agreement where the North pledged to disarm in exchange for security guarantees and aid. The countries - China, Japan, Russia, the U.S. and the two Koreas - agreed to return home and "reconvene at the earliest opportunity," Wu said.
Earlier, Japan's top envoy questioned whether the talks would survive as a forum for dealing with North Korea's weapons if they failed again to make any progress.
Japan's Prime Minister Shinzo Abe said after the talks ended Friday, however, that he still believes the six-nation framework is the most effective means of getting a breakthrough.
In more than three years of meetings, the North has only committed in principle to disarm but taken no concrete steps to do so - instead going ahead with its first nuclear test on Oct. 9.
"There will be opinions questioning the credibility of the six-party talks," Japanese envoy Kenichiro Sasae said, without elaborating. He did not say what alternative formats would be proposed, if any.
The U.S. envoy accused North Korea ahead of Friday's meetings of not addressing the actual issue of its atomic programs.
"When the (North) raises problems, one day it's financial issues, another day it's something they want but they know they can't have, another day it's something we said about them that hurt their feelings," U.S. Assistant Secretary of State Christopher Hill said. "What they need to do is to get serious about the issue that made them such a problem ... their nuclear activities."
Pyongyang says the U.S. is waging a campaign to isolate North Korea from the international financial system and has insisted that it end. The U.S. accuses North Korea of involvement in counterfeiting $100 bills and of money laundering, and has blacklisted a Macau bank that it alleges the North used to launder money to fund its weapons program.
American and North Korean experts had separate talks on the issue this week in Beijing, but made no breakthroughs and were tentatively set to meet in the United States next month.
"We have requested the U.S. to release the sanctions first and then go into a discussion on substantive issues for the implementation" of the September 2005 agreement, Kim said.
Even when it takes up the nuclear issue, Kim said the North wouldn't immediately talk about dismantling the bombs it has already made. But he promised the North won't launch a nuclear attack or sell its atomic technology.
"Since we are already a proud nuclear state, we have already announced that we will not threaten other countries with nuclear (weapons) and fully live up to our responsibility of preventing proliferation," Kim said.
---
Associated Press reporters Mari Yamaguchi and Audra Ang contributed to this report.
Copyright 2006 Associated Press. All right reserved.
By BO-MI LIM
BEIJING (AP) - The first talks on North Korea's nuclear program since the communist nation tested an atomic device ended Friday without an agreement to move ahead on disarmament or schedule further negotiations.
During five days of meetings in Beijing, negotiators said Pyongyang refused to talk about its nuclear weapons program, and instead stuck to its demand that the U.S. remove financial restrictions it has imposed on the regime.
North Korea's main nuclear envoy said Friday the communist nation would bolster its atomic arsenal in response to U.S. pressure.
"The U.S. is taking a tactic of both dialogue and pressure, and carrots and sticks," Kim Kye Gwan told reporters. "We are responding with dialogue and a shield, and by a shield we are saying we will further improve our deterrent."
Chinese envoy Wu Dawei released a statement saying the sides simply reaffirmed a September 2005 agreement where the North pledged to disarm in exchange for security guarantees and aid. The countries - China, Japan, Russia, the U.S. and the two Koreas - agreed to return home and "reconvene at the earliest opportunity," Wu said.
Earlier, Japan's top envoy questioned whether the talks would survive as a forum for dealing with North Korea's weapons if they failed again to make any progress.
Japan's Prime Minister Shinzo Abe said after the talks ended Friday, however, that he still believes the six-nation framework is the most effective means of getting a breakthrough.
In more than three years of meetings, the North has only committed in principle to disarm but taken no concrete steps to do so - instead going ahead with its first nuclear test on Oct. 9.
"There will be opinions questioning the credibility of the six-party talks," Japanese envoy Kenichiro Sasae said, without elaborating. He did not say what alternative formats would be proposed, if any.
The U.S. envoy accused North Korea ahead of Friday's meetings of not addressing the actual issue of its atomic programs.
"When the (North) raises problems, one day it's financial issues, another day it's something they want but they know they can't have, another day it's something we said about them that hurt their feelings," U.S. Assistant Secretary of State Christopher Hill said. "What they need to do is to get serious about the issue that made them such a problem ... their nuclear activities."
Pyongyang says the U.S. is waging a campaign to isolate North Korea from the international financial system and has insisted that it end. The U.S. accuses North Korea of involvement in counterfeiting $100 bills and of money laundering, and has blacklisted a Macau bank that it alleges the North used to launder money to fund its weapons program.
American and North Korean experts had separate talks on the issue this week in Beijing, but made no breakthroughs and were tentatively set to meet in the United States next month.
"We have requested the U.S. to release the sanctions first and then go into a discussion on substantive issues for the implementation" of the September 2005 agreement, Kim said.
Even when it takes up the nuclear issue, Kim said the North wouldn't immediately talk about dismantling the bombs it has already made. But he promised the North won't launch a nuclear attack or sell its atomic technology.
"Since we are already a proud nuclear state, we have already announced that we will not threaten other countries with nuclear (weapons) and fully live up to our responsibility of preventing proliferation," Kim said.
---
Associated Press reporters Mari Yamaguchi and Audra Ang contributed to this report.
Copyright 2006 Associated Press. All right reserved.
Court will decide if California voters were right
Court will decide if California voters were right
2000 vote overwhelmingly limited marriage to 1 man, 1 woman
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted: December 21, 2006
7:50 p.m. Eastern
© 2006 WorldNetDaily.com
Nearly two-thirds of all Californians six years ago agreed that marriage is to be limited to one man and one woman, but that doesn't impress the California Supreme Court, which has agreed to review – and re-decide – the issue.
That leaves a state constitutional amendment as the only way to protect traditional marriage in a state where a number of the justices on the high court have become activists for the "gay" agenda, according to a family values organization.
"Everyone who knows that marriage is for a man and a woman needs to wake up and donate to VoteYesMarriage.com, or else real marriage will be flushed down the drain," said Randy Thomasson, a spokesman for the pro-family coalition that is sponsoring The Voters Right to Protect Marriage initiative.
That proposal, officials hope, will be on the 2008 ballot.
"The VoteYesMarriage.com constitutional amendment is the only way to stop judges and politicians from destroying the beautiful, natural institution of marriage between a man and a woman. The California State Constitution is the highest law in the land, higher than the Legislature and the state Supreme Court, and stronger than a regular statute," Thomasson said.
The state had approved, through an initiative, a definition of marriage being limited to one man and one woman in 2000, but the state Supreme Court hasn't ever ruled on the constitutionality of that limit. In 2004, the justices did agree that the city of San Francisco overstepped its authority by creating new "marriage licenses" for same-sex duos and issuing them. However, Justices Joyce Kennard and Kathryn Werdegar at that point wanted those homosexual marriage licenses to continue, and they both remain on the bench. Then earlier this year, Justice Carole Corrigan, who has supported "gay" marriage, was added to the court.
"The people of California spoke in 2000, and the people's voice should be heard," said Senior Counsel Glen Lavy, of the Alliance Defense Fund, which will be participating in the arguments before the court.
"Political special interests shouldn't trump their voice regarding what's in the best interests of families and children," Lavy said. "This is the question the California courts will ultimately be deciding: Who is more important: our children and the voice of the people or politicians and special interest groups?"
The ruling from the California Court of Appeal came in October and said: "Courts simply do not have the authority to create new rights, especially when doing so involves changing the definition of so fundamental an institution as marriage. Judges are not free to rewrite statutes to say what they would like, or what they believe to be better social policy."
"Activists may desperately try again and again to redefine it, but marriage means one man and one woman," said Lavy "Everything else is counterfeit."
There are a total of six combined marriage cases that will be reviewed by the court, officials said.
Former Assemblyman Larry Bowler, R-Elk Grove, said the "writing is on the wall" that the state Supreme Court wants California to become like Massachusetts, which has given formal approval to homosexual marriages.
"While regular folks are preparing to celebrate Christmas, the California Supreme Court and the California Legislature are scheming to destroy marriage and the people's vote on marriage," he said. "The only remaining option is for the people to rise up, donate $2 million to place the VoteYesMarriage.com amendment on the California ballot, and pass it to permanently and fully protect marriage from the threat of judges and politicians."
During November voters in seven more states rejected the idea of "gay marriage" by implementing constitutional amendments that protect the biblical concept of holy matrimony – that is between one man and one woman only.
But legal experts warned afterwards that homosexuals undoubtedly will try to bypass the will of voters however they can.
"When you look at the country as a whole, it's obvious where Americans stand on marriage. But the battle is not over. The opposition will continue to attempt to bypass the will of the people," Lavy said at the time.
In the Nov. 7 election, voters in Colorado, Idaho, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Virginia and Wisconsin all adopted such amendments. Colorado voters went even one step further, emphatically rejecting a referendum that would have allowed the extension of benefits to "domestic partners," a plan that would have created an "alternate marriage" plan for homosexuals.
Lavy endorsed marriage amendments "on both the state and federal level because they are the only way to prevent special interests from using the courts to sidestep the will of the people."
To date, in 27 out of 28 states where a constitutional amendment to protect traditional marriage has been proposed, voters have adopted it, sometimes by margins as high as 8-1.
Lavy said more information about protecting marriage is available at www.domawatch.org, which stands for Defense of Marriage Act, state laws that also have been used to protect marriage.
States Issues Analyst Mona Passignano, of the Colorado Springs-based Focus on the Family Action, told WND that "gay" marriage supporters are running into a simple problem.
"What they're running up against is that people just want traditional marriage protected," she said.
During 2005, Texas and Kansas voters approved marriage protection amendments, and in the sweep of the 2004 vote, 13 states took the same action, including voters in Arkansas, Georgia, Kentucky, Mississippi, Montana, Oklahoma, North Dakota, Utah, Michigan, Ohio and Oregon who did so on the same night. Missouri and Nevada also voted for the plan. Five other states had done so in earlier elections and another two dozen states have taken the same action, but by statute, not constitutional amendment.
2000 vote overwhelmingly limited marriage to 1 man, 1 woman
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted: December 21, 2006
7:50 p.m. Eastern
© 2006 WorldNetDaily.com
Nearly two-thirds of all Californians six years ago agreed that marriage is to be limited to one man and one woman, but that doesn't impress the California Supreme Court, which has agreed to review – and re-decide – the issue.
That leaves a state constitutional amendment as the only way to protect traditional marriage in a state where a number of the justices on the high court have become activists for the "gay" agenda, according to a family values organization.
"Everyone who knows that marriage is for a man and a woman needs to wake up and donate to VoteYesMarriage.com, or else real marriage will be flushed down the drain," said Randy Thomasson, a spokesman for the pro-family coalition that is sponsoring The Voters Right to Protect Marriage initiative.
That proposal, officials hope, will be on the 2008 ballot.
"The VoteYesMarriage.com constitutional amendment is the only way to stop judges and politicians from destroying the beautiful, natural institution of marriage between a man and a woman. The California State Constitution is the highest law in the land, higher than the Legislature and the state Supreme Court, and stronger than a regular statute," Thomasson said.
The state had approved, through an initiative, a definition of marriage being limited to one man and one woman in 2000, but the state Supreme Court hasn't ever ruled on the constitutionality of that limit. In 2004, the justices did agree that the city of San Francisco overstepped its authority by creating new "marriage licenses" for same-sex duos and issuing them. However, Justices Joyce Kennard and Kathryn Werdegar at that point wanted those homosexual marriage licenses to continue, and they both remain on the bench. Then earlier this year, Justice Carole Corrigan, who has supported "gay" marriage, was added to the court.
"The people of California spoke in 2000, and the people's voice should be heard," said Senior Counsel Glen Lavy, of the Alliance Defense Fund, which will be participating in the arguments before the court.
"Political special interests shouldn't trump their voice regarding what's in the best interests of families and children," Lavy said. "This is the question the California courts will ultimately be deciding: Who is more important: our children and the voice of the people or politicians and special interest groups?"
The ruling from the California Court of Appeal came in October and said: "Courts simply do not have the authority to create new rights, especially when doing so involves changing the definition of so fundamental an institution as marriage. Judges are not free to rewrite statutes to say what they would like, or what they believe to be better social policy."
"Activists may desperately try again and again to redefine it, but marriage means one man and one woman," said Lavy "Everything else is counterfeit."
There are a total of six combined marriage cases that will be reviewed by the court, officials said.
Former Assemblyman Larry Bowler, R-Elk Grove, said the "writing is on the wall" that the state Supreme Court wants California to become like Massachusetts, which has given formal approval to homosexual marriages.
"While regular folks are preparing to celebrate Christmas, the California Supreme Court and the California Legislature are scheming to destroy marriage and the people's vote on marriage," he said. "The only remaining option is for the people to rise up, donate $2 million to place the VoteYesMarriage.com amendment on the California ballot, and pass it to permanently and fully protect marriage from the threat of judges and politicians."
During November voters in seven more states rejected the idea of "gay marriage" by implementing constitutional amendments that protect the biblical concept of holy matrimony – that is between one man and one woman only.
But legal experts warned afterwards that homosexuals undoubtedly will try to bypass the will of voters however they can.
"When you look at the country as a whole, it's obvious where Americans stand on marriage. But the battle is not over. The opposition will continue to attempt to bypass the will of the people," Lavy said at the time.
In the Nov. 7 election, voters in Colorado, Idaho, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Virginia and Wisconsin all adopted such amendments. Colorado voters went even one step further, emphatically rejecting a referendum that would have allowed the extension of benefits to "domestic partners," a plan that would have created an "alternate marriage" plan for homosexuals.
Lavy endorsed marriage amendments "on both the state and federal level because they are the only way to prevent special interests from using the courts to sidestep the will of the people."
To date, in 27 out of 28 states where a constitutional amendment to protect traditional marriage has been proposed, voters have adopted it, sometimes by margins as high as 8-1.
Lavy said more information about protecting marriage is available at www.domawatch.org, which stands for Defense of Marriage Act, state laws that also have been used to protect marriage.
States Issues Analyst Mona Passignano, of the Colorado Springs-based Focus on the Family Action, told WND that "gay" marriage supporters are running into a simple problem.
"What they're running up against is that people just want traditional marriage protected," she said.
During 2005, Texas and Kansas voters approved marriage protection amendments, and in the sweep of the 2004 vote, 13 states took the same action, including voters in Arkansas, Georgia, Kentucky, Mississippi, Montana, Oklahoma, North Dakota, Utah, Michigan, Ohio and Oregon who did so on the same night. Missouri and Nevada also voted for the plan. Five other states had done so in earlier elections and another two dozen states have taken the same action, but by statute, not constitutional amendment.
College prez backtracks on cross removal
College prez backtracks on cross removal
Announces 'plaque' to mark Christian beginnings of historic chapel
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted: December 22, 2006
1:00 a.m. Eastern
© 2006 WorldNetDaily.com
The president of the College of William and Mary College has begun backtracking over his decision to remove a donated bronze cross from the school's historic Wren Chapel, but students and alumni say his proposal for a "permanent plaque" just isn't enough.
WND broke the story on Oct. 27 when university administrator Melissa Engimann circulated an e-mail noting that the cross was going to be stored in order to make the chapel "less of a faith-specific space."
Now President Gene Nichol has sent an e-mail to the "college community" admitting that he "acted too quickly and should have consulted more broadly" in deciding to remove the cross. So to make up for that, he said a plaque would be put up in the chapel and the cross would be put on the altar for extended hours on Sunday.
Students and alums who have assembled in a group called SaveTheWrenCross.org, however, said that wasn't good enough.
"Nichol acknowledged that his unilateral action upset many current students and alumni, who believed that his decision was a dilution of the history and traditions of the College and an example of an animus toward religion in general and Christianity in particular," the group said.
"After apologizing for his failure to involve others in this historic decision, Nichol went on in his letter – apparently unaware of the irony – to dictate what he obviously thinks is a compromise solution to the problem he created," said the organization, which had collected almost 7,500 signatures on a petition seeking the return of the cross.
He promised, first, that he will have placed in Wren Chapel "a permanent plaque to commemorate the Chapel's origins as an Anglican place of worship and symbol of the Christian beginnings of the College." Second, Nichol ordered that 'the altar cross be displayed throughout the day on Sundays with expanded hours.'"
"It is the Wren Chapel, not the Wren Spare Room," wrote Karla Bruno, a 1981 graduate. "Nichol does not address the idea that the Chapel with the cross on permanent display was indeed welcoming as witnessed by the plethora of non-Christian and secular events that have been held there over the years. No one has been turned away because they were not Christian.
"If a visitor is insulted by the history and tradition of William and Mary and chooses to leave a tour and not apply to the College for admission, perhaps that is just as well. We should not be remodeling ourselves to suit a particular sort of applicant – the very narrow sort," she said.
Another graduate, Karen Hall, of the Class of 1978, said Nichols' argument doesn't make sense.
"He explains … the cross has made a number of people feel uncomfortable in the chapel. I would venture to guess that a far greater number of people have been made uncomfortable by the removal of the cross. Why is it that one group's discomfort is enough to merit drastic action, but the other group's discomfort is virtually worthless?"
In Nichol's note, he said he'd asked Louise Kale, the director of the historic campus, to put up the plaque "to commemorate the Chapel's origins" and put the cross back on the altar in the chapel on Sundays.
But Will Coggin, who is planning to graduate in the spring, said Nichol didn't address the issue at hand. "By his own logic, he is now ordering the Chapel to be unwelcoming one day of the week. Thousands of alumni and hundreds of students have called for the return of the old policy, and I will continue to fight for them."
The old policy was that the cross was on permanent display on the altar of the chapel, and was removed only when someone using the room asked that it be removed. Nichol's new policy is that the cross is permanently in storage, and will be brought out only on special request.
"If one takes Mr. Nichol's arguments for removing the cross to their logical conclusion, then the altar, the altar railings, the pews and all other religious symbols should be removed so that the Chapel is welcoming to atheists and the non-religious. In fact, the building should be renamed 'Wren Banquet Hall' because calling it a 'chapel' might be unwelcoming," said Cesar Conda, a graduate in 1983.
The protest group noted in its statement that Nichol himself suggested a "broader College discussion" of the issue, but, "to this day, there has not been a single communication about the decision from the College to all alumni.
"Instead, Nichol has … offered what is essentially another fiat."
The group said its top priority will be for the school's Board of Visitors to talk about the issues at the next meeting, in February.
Nichol wrote that he was distressed about "potential students" touring the Chapel, and choosing to leave immediately after, or a Jewish student who vowed to never return to the building. Singing groups also, he noted, have been "discomfited" by the cross.
But another graduate noted that if someone objects so violently to a symbol of someone else's religion, the problem is with that person, not the symbol.
SaveTheWrenCross.org is an ad hoc coalition of students and alumni who oppose the removal of the century-old cross, which was given to the college by Bruton Parish Episcopal Church in the 1930s.
The students, who organized their group just days after the announcement, had been unsuccessful in getting a change. That's even as nearly 7,500 people were signing its petition, and the school produced only one written complaint about having the cross present.
Former Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O'Connor has not returned messages left by WND seeking a comment.
She recently was named chancellor of the college. It was during her tenure in the Supreme Court that a growing intolerance by the court for religious symbols – particularly Christian symbols – in public places became evident.
The Wren Chapel, built about 274 years ago, became an integral part of the university when it was a Christian school.
The petitions simply want the old policy back.
"We, the undersigned students and alumni of the College, and concerned citizens of the Commonwealth of Virginia, disagree with your order to remove the Wren Cross from display on the Wren Chapel altar," the petition says.
"The Wren Cross was given to Wren Chapel by Williamsburg neighbor Burton Parish Episcopal Church in the 1930s and has been a fixture on the altar ever since that time. Before your order, the policy was that if a group or individual using the Wren Chapel desired to not have the Wren Cross on display during their use of the Wren Chapel, then the Wren Cross was removed during such event and then returned to the altar.
"We petition you to rescind your October 2006 order and return to the policy that had governed the display of the Wren Cross prior to your inauguration as the 26th President of the College on April 7, 2006."
"In the name of tolerance, we have intolerance; in the name of welcoming, we have hostility, and in the name of unity, we now have division," said junior Joe Luppino-Esposito.
Announces 'plaque' to mark Christian beginnings of historic chapel
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted: December 22, 2006
1:00 a.m. Eastern
© 2006 WorldNetDaily.com
The president of the College of William and Mary College has begun backtracking over his decision to remove a donated bronze cross from the school's historic Wren Chapel, but students and alumni say his proposal for a "permanent plaque" just isn't enough.
WND broke the story on Oct. 27 when university administrator Melissa Engimann circulated an e-mail noting that the cross was going to be stored in order to make the chapel "less of a faith-specific space."Now President Gene Nichol has sent an e-mail to the "college community" admitting that he "acted too quickly and should have consulted more broadly" in deciding to remove the cross. So to make up for that, he said a plaque would be put up in the chapel and the cross would be put on the altar for extended hours on Sunday.
Students and alums who have assembled in a group called SaveTheWrenCross.org, however, said that wasn't good enough.
"Nichol acknowledged that his unilateral action upset many current students and alumni, who believed that his decision was a dilution of the history and traditions of the College and an example of an animus toward religion in general and Christianity in particular," the group said.
"After apologizing for his failure to involve others in this historic decision, Nichol went on in his letter – apparently unaware of the irony – to dictate what he obviously thinks is a compromise solution to the problem he created," said the organization, which had collected almost 7,500 signatures on a petition seeking the return of the cross.
He promised, first, that he will have placed in Wren Chapel "a permanent plaque to commemorate the Chapel's origins as an Anglican place of worship and symbol of the Christian beginnings of the College." Second, Nichol ordered that 'the altar cross be displayed throughout the day on Sundays with expanded hours.'"
"It is the Wren Chapel, not the Wren Spare Room," wrote Karla Bruno, a 1981 graduate. "Nichol does not address the idea that the Chapel with the cross on permanent display was indeed welcoming as witnessed by the plethora of non-Christian and secular events that have been held there over the years. No one has been turned away because they were not Christian."If a visitor is insulted by the history and tradition of William and Mary and chooses to leave a tour and not apply to the College for admission, perhaps that is just as well. We should not be remodeling ourselves to suit a particular sort of applicant – the very narrow sort," she said.
Another graduate, Karen Hall, of the Class of 1978, said Nichols' argument doesn't make sense.
"He explains … the cross has made a number of people feel uncomfortable in the chapel. I would venture to guess that a far greater number of people have been made uncomfortable by the removal of the cross. Why is it that one group's discomfort is enough to merit drastic action, but the other group's discomfort is virtually worthless?"
In Nichol's note, he said he'd asked Louise Kale, the director of the historic campus, to put up the plaque "to commemorate the Chapel's origins" and put the cross back on the altar in the chapel on Sundays.
But Will Coggin, who is planning to graduate in the spring, said Nichol didn't address the issue at hand. "By his own logic, he is now ordering the Chapel to be unwelcoming one day of the week. Thousands of alumni and hundreds of students have called for the return of the old policy, and I will continue to fight for them."
The old policy was that the cross was on permanent display on the altar of the chapel, and was removed only when someone using the room asked that it be removed. Nichol's new policy is that the cross is permanently in storage, and will be brought out only on special request.
"If one takes Mr. Nichol's arguments for removing the cross to their logical conclusion, then the altar, the altar railings, the pews and all other religious symbols should be removed so that the Chapel is welcoming to atheists and the non-religious. In fact, the building should be renamed 'Wren Banquet Hall' because calling it a 'chapel' might be unwelcoming," said Cesar Conda, a graduate in 1983.
The protest group noted in its statement that Nichol himself suggested a "broader College discussion" of the issue, but, "to this day, there has not been a single communication about the decision from the College to all alumni.
"Instead, Nichol has … offered what is essentially another fiat."
The group said its top priority will be for the school's Board of Visitors to talk about the issues at the next meeting, in February.
Nichol wrote that he was distressed about "potential students" touring the Chapel, and choosing to leave immediately after, or a Jewish student who vowed to never return to the building. Singing groups also, he noted, have been "discomfited" by the cross.
But another graduate noted that if someone objects so violently to a symbol of someone else's religion, the problem is with that person, not the symbol.
SaveTheWrenCross.org is an ad hoc coalition of students and alumni who oppose the removal of the century-old cross, which was given to the college by Bruton Parish Episcopal Church in the 1930s.
The students, who organized their group just days after the announcement, had been unsuccessful in getting a change. That's even as nearly 7,500 people were signing its petition, and the school produced only one written complaint about having the cross present.
Former Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O'Connor has not returned messages left by WND seeking a comment.
She recently was named chancellor of the college. It was during her tenure in the Supreme Court that a growing intolerance by the court for religious symbols – particularly Christian symbols – in public places became evident.
The Wren Chapel, built about 274 years ago, became an integral part of the university when it was a Christian school.
The petitions simply want the old policy back.
"We, the undersigned students and alumni of the College, and concerned citizens of the Commonwealth of Virginia, disagree with your order to remove the Wren Cross from display on the Wren Chapel altar," the petition says.
"The Wren Cross was given to Wren Chapel by Williamsburg neighbor Burton Parish Episcopal Church in the 1930s and has been a fixture on the altar ever since that time. Before your order, the policy was that if a group or individual using the Wren Chapel desired to not have the Wren Cross on display during their use of the Wren Chapel, then the Wren Cross was removed during such event and then returned to the altar.
"We petition you to rescind your October 2006 order and return to the policy that had governed the display of the Wren Cross prior to your inauguration as the 26th President of the College on April 7, 2006."
"In the name of tolerance, we have intolerance; in the name of welcoming, we have hostility, and in the name of unity, we now have division," said junior Joe Luppino-Esposito.
Vandalism is a hate crime, nativity defender suggests
Vandalism is a hate crime, nativity defender suggests
Catholic leader cites 'devil horns' put on baby Jesus figure
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted: December 22, 2006
1:00 a.m. Eastern
© 2006 WorldNetDaily.com
A prominent Catholic leader says a rolling wave of vandalism to nativity scenes across the country this year isn't really vandalism: it's a series of hate crimes.
"The vandals in Norwalk, Connecticut, gave us an idea," said Catholic League President William Donohue. "Not only did they trash a nativity scene, they wrote profanity and drew satanic symbols on one of the figures. This isn't the act of some crazy drunks – it is the act of hate-filled persons."
There have been dozens, perhaps hundreds, of incidents of damage to nativity displays this Christmas season, officials have confirmed. "Some of these attacks were clearly motivated by malice," Donohoe continue. "The baby Jesus figure stolen in Plaistow, N.H., was later returned, having been defiled by a pair of devil horns. In Sioux Falls, S.D., someone crushed the face of the statue of Jesus.
"What's worse, the creep in Des Moines, Iowa, burned Jesus' face, doused the statue with red nail polish, and twisted the electrical cord around its neck," he said.
He said his organization has tabulated nearly four dozen attacks on the Christian holiday displays.
So far, under the Catholic League's compilation, there have been thefts from or vandalism on nativity scenes in Tucson, Ariz. ; Millbrae, Calif.; Mission Viejo, Calif; Moorpark, Calif; San Francisco, Calif; Naugatuck, Conn.; Waterbury, Conn. (Jesus was taken, but one of the arms was left behind); Fort Walton Beach, Fla.; Des Moines, Iowa; Sioux City, Iowa; Ammon, Idaho; Chicago, Ill. (32 figures of baby Jesus were nabbed—they were later dumped on the lawn of a Catholic church); Jackson County, Ill. (two incidents); Tinley Park, Ill.; Floyd County, Ind.; Fort Wayne, Ind.; Montgomery County, Ind.; Wichita, Kan.; Hardin, Ky.; Lafayette, La. (two incidents); Youngsville, La.; Fitchburg, Mass.; Southborough, Mass.; Winthrop, Maine; Portage Township, Mich.; Fayettville, N.C.; New Bern, N.C.; Columbus, Neb. (12 baby Jesus figures were stolen in one day); Plaistow, N.H.; Dover, Ohio; Utica, Ohio (three incidents); Artemis, Pa.; Bucks County, Pa.; Greenfield, Pa.; Hilton Head, S.C.; Halom City, Texas; Santa Fe, Texas; Salt Lake City, Utah; Winfield, W.Va. and West Allis, Wis.
Some of the cases have been straightforward to solve. In Kansas, for example, a member of a pro-life organization had placed a nativity display on a strip of public land near the clinic of late-term abortionist George Tiller, and one of his workers found it "offensive" and moved it behind fence on the clinic's property.
Others remain under investigation by police, including a case in Draper, Utah. There reporters were told a picture of King Herod was taped to the nativity scene, blindfolds were put on Mary and Joseph and baby Jesus was stolen.
An accompanying note said, "King Herod has taken your baby Jesus," Pastor Harry Berg of Draper Friends Christian Church, said.
Police there are investigating it as a hate crime.
Donohue said the "hooligan" who stole a manger in Southborough, Mass., left the surrounding secular decorations untouched.
"In a few days it will be Christmas, and I imagine that, in your homes, you are putting the final touches to your nativity scenes, which are such an evocative depiction of Christmas," said Pope Benedict XVI in a statement. "I hope that this important element, not only of our spirituality but also of our culture and art, may endure as a simple and eloquent way to remember the One Who came 'to dwell among us.'"
There's even a LordNapping.com website for those who take baby Jesus figurines.
The site argues that the thefts should be celebrated and seen as acts of liberation – as long as the statues are placed in an inn for Christmas.
Authorities are using unusual methods to punish those who taken the statues, too. In Ohio, Brian Patrick and Jessica Lange, each 19, had been ordered to lead a donkey through the town of Fairport Harber after they admitted defacing a statue of baby Jesus from a nativity at St. Anthony's Catholic Church.
Police there said in that case the baby Jesus was stabbed and the numerals "666" were painted on it.
In one town a 70-year-old grandmother stole the infant Jesus on a lark.
The Catholic League is the nation's biggest Catholic civil rights organization, and defends individual Catholics and the institutional church from defamation and discrimination.
Catholic leader cites 'devil horns' put on baby Jesus figure
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted: December 22, 2006
1:00 a.m. Eastern
© 2006 WorldNetDaily.com
A prominent Catholic leader says a rolling wave of vandalism to nativity scenes across the country this year isn't really vandalism: it's a series of hate crimes.
"The vandals in Norwalk, Connecticut, gave us an idea," said Catholic League President William Donohue. "Not only did they trash a nativity scene, they wrote profanity and drew satanic symbols on one of the figures. This isn't the act of some crazy drunks – it is the act of hate-filled persons."
There have been dozens, perhaps hundreds, of incidents of damage to nativity displays this Christmas season, officials have confirmed. "Some of these attacks were clearly motivated by malice," Donohoe continue. "The baby Jesus figure stolen in Plaistow, N.H., was later returned, having been defiled by a pair of devil horns. In Sioux Falls, S.D., someone crushed the face of the statue of Jesus.
"What's worse, the creep in Des Moines, Iowa, burned Jesus' face, doused the statue with red nail polish, and twisted the electrical cord around its neck," he said.
He said his organization has tabulated nearly four dozen attacks on the Christian holiday displays.
So far, under the Catholic League's compilation, there have been thefts from or vandalism on nativity scenes in Tucson, Ariz. ; Millbrae, Calif.; Mission Viejo, Calif; Moorpark, Calif; San Francisco, Calif; Naugatuck, Conn.; Waterbury, Conn. (Jesus was taken, but one of the arms was left behind); Fort Walton Beach, Fla.; Des Moines, Iowa; Sioux City, Iowa; Ammon, Idaho; Chicago, Ill. (32 figures of baby Jesus were nabbed—they were later dumped on the lawn of a Catholic church); Jackson County, Ill. (two incidents); Tinley Park, Ill.; Floyd County, Ind.; Fort Wayne, Ind.; Montgomery County, Ind.; Wichita, Kan.; Hardin, Ky.; Lafayette, La. (two incidents); Youngsville, La.; Fitchburg, Mass.; Southborough, Mass.; Winthrop, Maine; Portage Township, Mich.; Fayettville, N.C.; New Bern, N.C.; Columbus, Neb. (12 baby Jesus figures were stolen in one day); Plaistow, N.H.; Dover, Ohio; Utica, Ohio (three incidents); Artemis, Pa.; Bucks County, Pa.; Greenfield, Pa.; Hilton Head, S.C.; Halom City, Texas; Santa Fe, Texas; Salt Lake City, Utah; Winfield, W.Va. and West Allis, Wis.
Some of the cases have been straightforward to solve. In Kansas, for example, a member of a pro-life organization had placed a nativity display on a strip of public land near the clinic of late-term abortionist George Tiller, and one of his workers found it "offensive" and moved it behind fence on the clinic's property.
Others remain under investigation by police, including a case in Draper, Utah. There reporters were told a picture of King Herod was taped to the nativity scene, blindfolds were put on Mary and Joseph and baby Jesus was stolen.
An accompanying note said, "King Herod has taken your baby Jesus," Pastor Harry Berg of Draper Friends Christian Church, said.
Police there are investigating it as a hate crime.
Donohue said the "hooligan" who stole a manger in Southborough, Mass., left the surrounding secular decorations untouched.
"In a few days it will be Christmas, and I imagine that, in your homes, you are putting the final touches to your nativity scenes, which are such an evocative depiction of Christmas," said Pope Benedict XVI in a statement. "I hope that this important element, not only of our spirituality but also of our culture and art, may endure as a simple and eloquent way to remember the One Who came 'to dwell among us.'"
There's even a LordNapping.com website for those who take baby Jesus figurines.
The site argues that the thefts should be celebrated and seen as acts of liberation – as long as the statues are placed in an inn for Christmas.
Authorities are using unusual methods to punish those who taken the statues, too. In Ohio, Brian Patrick and Jessica Lange, each 19, had been ordered to lead a donkey through the town of Fairport Harber after they admitted defacing a statue of baby Jesus from a nativity at St. Anthony's Catholic Church.
Police there said in that case the baby Jesus was stabbed and the numerals "666" were painted on it.
In one town a 70-year-old grandmother stole the infant Jesus on a lark.
The Catholic League is the nation's biggest Catholic civil rights organization, and defends individual Catholics and the institutional church from defamation and discrimination.
Hamas threatens attacks on U.S.
Hamas threatens attacks on U.S.
Terrorist warns 'Middle East is full of American targets'
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted: December 22, 2006
1:00 a.m. Eastern
By Aaron Klein
© 2006 WorldNetDaily.com
TEL AVIV – Members of Hamas are debating whether to carry out attacks against the United States and may hit American targets if the U.S. continues to support Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas' call for new elections, Hamas leaders told WND in a series of interviews.
"There is no doubt that Abu Mazen (Abbas) was encouraged to decide early elections after receiving American promises to support him politically and military," Abu Abdullah, a leader of Hamas' Izzedine al-Qassam Martyrs Brigades, the group's declared "resistance" department, told WND.
The terror leader accused the U.S. of instigating a Palestinian civil war.
"Here the Americans did not support the elections, they actually gave their support and their encouragement to a Palestinian civil war. It is our duty to prove to the Americans that they chose the wrong policy exactly like it is the case in Iraq," said Abu Abdullah, considered one of the most important operational members of Hamas' so-called military wing.
Abu Abdullah told WND Hamas has not yet decided to attack the U.S., "but one cannot guarantee that this will be the situation if the conspiracy of chasing our government succeeds."
Asked which U.S. targets Hamas would hit, Abu Abdullah replied, "Do you think that I can give you an answer to this question? I can say that the Middle East is full of American targets and the world has had the occasion to learn what are the weapons of the anti-American forces in the region."
In a move widely seen as an attempt to dismantle the Hamas-led government, Abbas' this past weekend called for new Palestinian elections, prompting violent clashes in the Gaza Strip between Hamas and Abbas' Fatah party.
Hamas, which won parliamentary elections in January, has threatened to boycott the proposed new elections, calling them "illegitimate."
Hamas-Fatah clashes in Gaza have killed at least 16 Palestinians the past five days.
According to multiple reports, the U.S. has been arming and training Fatah militants to bolster them in clashes against Hamas.
A number of Hamas members, including Prime Minister Ismail Haniyeh, have claimed in recent days Abbas' call for new elections was orchestrated with the U.S.
Meetings held to debate attacks on U.S.
Several Hamas leaders told WND meetings were held in recent weeks in the Gaza Strip and the West Bank to discuss the possibility of targeting the U.S. due to its perceived support of Fatah against Hamas.
Abu Abdullah told WND Hamas' political decision for now is to try to convince the international community, including the U.S., they must "recognize and respect the democratic choices of the Palestinian people and to respect its government."
But, he said, if new elections indeed are held, "I would not be surprised if a change takes place in our present policy regarding attacks against American targets in the region."
"We are saying that in case of a scenario where elections are something concrete and not a political threat like it seems to be now, there is a real possibility that resistance forces in the region will hit American targets. The U.S. is maintaining its support to the idea of the elections and so is the American servant (British Prime Minister) Tony Blair," Abu Abdullah said.
Abbas yesterday said a national unity government between his party and Hamas was still possible, but that for now he was forging ahead with his call for new elections. As PA president, he has the authority to order new ballots.
After almost a week of fighting that saw top members of both factions targeted, Fatah and Hamas yesterday agreed to a truce and began withdrawing militants from the streets. But hours after the cease-fire was declared, Hamas gunmen killed two Fatah police officers, sparking a new round of clashes.
Experts: Hamas capable of attacks inside U.S.
While the latest Hamas threats warned of attacks against American interests in the region, some terrorism experts and senior security officials previously told WND Hamas has cells inside the U.S. that are technically capable of attacking within the country.
"We have information Hamas agents have been on U.S. soil the past few years and that the group may currently have up to 100 agents operating inside America," an FBI counterterrorism agent in New York told WND last October.
The comments reaffirm earlier testimony to the U.S. Senate in which FBI Director Robert Mueller stated, "Although it would be a major strategic shift for Hamas, its United States network is theoretically capable of facilitating acts of terrorism in the United States."
Mueller last February described a Hamas network the FBI believes may be operating in the U.S. mostly for fundraising purposes. While many suspected Hamas-linked charities such as the national Holy Land Foundation have been shut down, the FBI suspects others are still functioning in the U.S.
Holy Land, once one of the largest Islamic charitable organizations in the U.S., closed amid accusations the group was a front for Hamas.
Intelligence sources said the FBI believes Hamas' current U.S. network includes trained jihadists capable of carrying out advanced attacks. Some of the Hamas agents are suspected of involvement with al-Qaida, the sources said.
Yehudit Barsky, director of the Middle East and International Terrorism Center at the American Jewish Committee, said, "Hamas does have people in America who are Muslim Brotherhood-oriented who support Hamas and who could carry out attacks. ... This presence in the U.S. exists."
Terrorism expert Steve Emerson, whose research was credited with helping to close Holy Land, told WND, "Hamas has an extensive infrastructure in the U.S. mostly revolving around the activities of fundraising, recruiting and training members, directing operations against Israel, organizing political support and operating through human-rights front groups. While Hamas has not acted outside Israel, it has the capability of carrying out attacks in America if it decided to enlarge the scope of its operations."
There have been previous indications Hamas indeed has agents operating inside the U.S.
In August 2004, Ismail Selim Elbarasse, a long-time Hamas money man, was arrested reportedly after authorities witnessed his wife videotaping Maryland's Chesapeake Bay Bridge from their SUV as Elbarasse drove. The images captured by Mr. Elbarasse's wife included close-ups of cables and other features "integral to the structural integrity of the bridge," according to court papers.
In an FBI affidavit requesting a search warrant for Elbarasse's house obtained by WND, special FBI agent Shawn Devroude states, "In previous years, al-Qaida commanders and officials stationed in Western countries, including the United States, have recruited Hamas operatives and volunteers to carry out reconnaissance or serve as couriers.
"With the increased law enforcement pressure since 9-11, there has been a renewed emphasis by al-Qaida to find confirmed jihadist supporters in the U.S. by trying to enlist proven members of other groups such as Hamas to make up for the vacuum on the field level."
Also in August 2004, two suspected high-level Hamas operatives, Mohammed Salah and Abdelhaleem Ashqar, were detained in the U.S. and charged with providing material support to Hamas, racketeering and money laundering.
Ashqar, under house arrest in Virginia, denied to WND he was involved with Hamas fundraising and claimed doesn't know of any Hamas networks operating in America.
In November 2003, Jamal Aqal, a Canadian immigrant born in Gaza, was arrested in Israel under suspicion of receiving weapons and explosives training from Hamas for use in future terror attacks in Canada and New York City. Aqal pleaded guilty in 2004 to planning to kill American and Canadian Jewish leaders and Israeli officials traveling in the U.S.
Terrorist warns 'Middle East is full of American targets'
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted: December 22, 2006
1:00 a.m. Eastern
By Aaron Klein
© 2006 WorldNetDaily.com
TEL AVIV – Members of Hamas are debating whether to carry out attacks against the United States and may hit American targets if the U.S. continues to support Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas' call for new elections, Hamas leaders told WND in a series of interviews.
"There is no doubt that Abu Mazen (Abbas) was encouraged to decide early elections after receiving American promises to support him politically and military," Abu Abdullah, a leader of Hamas' Izzedine al-Qassam Martyrs Brigades, the group's declared "resistance" department, told WND.
The terror leader accused the U.S. of instigating a Palestinian civil war.
"Here the Americans did not support the elections, they actually gave their support and their encouragement to a Palestinian civil war. It is our duty to prove to the Americans that they chose the wrong policy exactly like it is the case in Iraq," said Abu Abdullah, considered one of the most important operational members of Hamas' so-called military wing.
Abu Abdullah told WND Hamas has not yet decided to attack the U.S., "but one cannot guarantee that this will be the situation if the conspiracy of chasing our government succeeds."
Asked which U.S. targets Hamas would hit, Abu Abdullah replied, "Do you think that I can give you an answer to this question? I can say that the Middle East is full of American targets and the world has had the occasion to learn what are the weapons of the anti-American forces in the region."
In a move widely seen as an attempt to dismantle the Hamas-led government, Abbas' this past weekend called for new Palestinian elections, prompting violent clashes in the Gaza Strip between Hamas and Abbas' Fatah party.
Hamas, which won parliamentary elections in January, has threatened to boycott the proposed new elections, calling them "illegitimate."
Hamas-Fatah clashes in Gaza have killed at least 16 Palestinians the past five days.
According to multiple reports, the U.S. has been arming and training Fatah militants to bolster them in clashes against Hamas.
A number of Hamas members, including Prime Minister Ismail Haniyeh, have claimed in recent days Abbas' call for new elections was orchestrated with the U.S.
Meetings held to debate attacks on U.S.
Several Hamas leaders told WND meetings were held in recent weeks in the Gaza Strip and the West Bank to discuss the possibility of targeting the U.S. due to its perceived support of Fatah against Hamas.
Abu Abdullah told WND Hamas' political decision for now is to try to convince the international community, including the U.S., they must "recognize and respect the democratic choices of the Palestinian people and to respect its government."
But, he said, if new elections indeed are held, "I would not be surprised if a change takes place in our present policy regarding attacks against American targets in the region."
"We are saying that in case of a scenario where elections are something concrete and not a political threat like it seems to be now, there is a real possibility that resistance forces in the region will hit American targets. The U.S. is maintaining its support to the idea of the elections and so is the American servant (British Prime Minister) Tony Blair," Abu Abdullah said.
Abbas yesterday said a national unity government between his party and Hamas was still possible, but that for now he was forging ahead with his call for new elections. As PA president, he has the authority to order new ballots.
After almost a week of fighting that saw top members of both factions targeted, Fatah and Hamas yesterday agreed to a truce and began withdrawing militants from the streets. But hours after the cease-fire was declared, Hamas gunmen killed two Fatah police officers, sparking a new round of clashes.
Experts: Hamas capable of attacks inside U.S.
While the latest Hamas threats warned of attacks against American interests in the region, some terrorism experts and senior security officials previously told WND Hamas has cells inside the U.S. that are technically capable of attacking within the country.
"We have information Hamas agents have been on U.S. soil the past few years and that the group may currently have up to 100 agents operating inside America," an FBI counterterrorism agent in New York told WND last October.
The comments reaffirm earlier testimony to the U.S. Senate in which FBI Director Robert Mueller stated, "Although it would be a major strategic shift for Hamas, its United States network is theoretically capable of facilitating acts of terrorism in the United States."
Mueller last February described a Hamas network the FBI believes may be operating in the U.S. mostly for fundraising purposes. While many suspected Hamas-linked charities such as the national Holy Land Foundation have been shut down, the FBI suspects others are still functioning in the U.S.
Holy Land, once one of the largest Islamic charitable organizations in the U.S., closed amid accusations the group was a front for Hamas.
Intelligence sources said the FBI believes Hamas' current U.S. network includes trained jihadists capable of carrying out advanced attacks. Some of the Hamas agents are suspected of involvement with al-Qaida, the sources said.
Yehudit Barsky, director of the Middle East and International Terrorism Center at the American Jewish Committee, said, "Hamas does have people in America who are Muslim Brotherhood-oriented who support Hamas and who could carry out attacks. ... This presence in the U.S. exists."
Terrorism expert Steve Emerson, whose research was credited with helping to close Holy Land, told WND, "Hamas has an extensive infrastructure in the U.S. mostly revolving around the activities of fundraising, recruiting and training members, directing operations against Israel, organizing political support and operating through human-rights front groups. While Hamas has not acted outside Israel, it has the capability of carrying out attacks in America if it decided to enlarge the scope of its operations."
There have been previous indications Hamas indeed has agents operating inside the U.S.
In August 2004, Ismail Selim Elbarasse, a long-time Hamas money man, was arrested reportedly after authorities witnessed his wife videotaping Maryland's Chesapeake Bay Bridge from their SUV as Elbarasse drove. The images captured by Mr. Elbarasse's wife included close-ups of cables and other features "integral to the structural integrity of the bridge," according to court papers.
In an FBI affidavit requesting a search warrant for Elbarasse's house obtained by WND, special FBI agent Shawn Devroude states, "In previous years, al-Qaida commanders and officials stationed in Western countries, including the United States, have recruited Hamas operatives and volunteers to carry out reconnaissance or serve as couriers.
"With the increased law enforcement pressure since 9-11, there has been a renewed emphasis by al-Qaida to find confirmed jihadist supporters in the U.S. by trying to enlist proven members of other groups such as Hamas to make up for the vacuum on the field level."
Also in August 2004, two suspected high-level Hamas operatives, Mohammed Salah and Abdelhaleem Ashqar, were detained in the U.S. and charged with providing material support to Hamas, racketeering and money laundering.
Ashqar, under house arrest in Virginia, denied to WND he was involved with Hamas fundraising and claimed doesn't know of any Hamas networks operating in America.
In November 2003, Jamal Aqal, a Canadian immigrant born in Gaza, was arrested in Israel under suspicion of receiving weapons and explosives training from Hamas for use in future terror attacks in Canada and New York City. Aqal pleaded guilty in 2004 to planning to kill American and Canadian Jewish leaders and Israeli officials traveling in the U.S.
Meet 'Mary Christmas' -- No Joke!
Meet 'Mary Christmas' -- No Joke!
By Dorie Turner
Associated Press
CBNNews.com -- GAINESVILLE, Ga. -- Don't bother making jokes. This family has heard them all. No, they don't communicate directly with Santa Claus.
They don't celebrate the holidays year-round, and they certainly have some not-so-cheerful days. The smirks and the wisecracks are just part of life when your last name is Christmas, and especially so when two of your family members are named - Mary.
"People ask me all the time, `What were your parents thinking?'" said the younger Mary Christmas, 30. "I never minded. It's a conversation piece."
It all started on Christmas Day 1935, when the elder Mary wedded Henry Christmas, becoming Mary Christmas. They had Bob Christmas, who married Peggy and had six children.
Mary was born first and named for her grandmother. The spirit of the season took hold again when Christy Noel, now 23, was born in December.
And it doesn't end there. Bob's brother married Cathy Holiday, and they had a daughter named Carol. And Bob's sister married into the White family, becoming Jeane Christmas White.
The Christmas family lives up to its cheerful name. They are a lively bunch, finishing each other's sentences and laughing at a constant stream of jokes.
"You can tell we're a happy family," said the elder Mary Christmas, who is 90.
So what is Christmas like at the Christmases'?
Christmas Eve involves a family dinner, a church service, the reading of the Christmas story from the Bible and then one gift per family member. The children - ranging in age from 12 to 30 - build forts in the living room out of blankets and furniture and fall asleep watching Christmas movies. Christmas Day includes a big family brunch with biscuits and gravy, and a Christmas dinner.
The Christmas children agree that the only time their last name gets old is roll call at school. Many of them roll their eyes and groan at the thought.
"The first day of the semester in college, I was like, `Here we go,'" said the younger Mary, who graduated from Liberty University in Lynchburg, Va., where one of her professors made her stand up in front of a large lecture hall full of students when he saw her name on the class list.
Peggy said the name keeps her on her toes.
"When you're out shopping and things, you make sure you're not grumpy or rude to someone who's helping you because in the end when you go to pay, they see your name is Christmas," she said.
They also embrace their holiday heritage. The younger Mary's e-mail address begins with "jinglebells."
Despite the lighthearted way the Christmases talk about their name, they take it very seriously, too.
"It would be my goal that our lives as a family exemplify not just the birth of Christ, but the life of Christ," said Robby, 28.
With that, he was met with a chorus of amens from the rest of the Christmases.
Copyright 2006 by The Associated Press. All rights reserved.
By Dorie Turner
Associated Press
CBNNews.com -- GAINESVILLE, Ga. -- Don't bother making jokes. This family has heard them all. No, they don't communicate directly with Santa Claus.
They don't celebrate the holidays year-round, and they certainly have some not-so-cheerful days. The smirks and the wisecracks are just part of life when your last name is Christmas, and especially so when two of your family members are named - Mary.
"People ask me all the time, `What were your parents thinking?'" said the younger Mary Christmas, 30. "I never minded. It's a conversation piece."
It all started on Christmas Day 1935, when the elder Mary wedded Henry Christmas, becoming Mary Christmas. They had Bob Christmas, who married Peggy and had six children.
Mary was born first and named for her grandmother. The spirit of the season took hold again when Christy Noel, now 23, was born in December.
And it doesn't end there. Bob's brother married Cathy Holiday, and they had a daughter named Carol. And Bob's sister married into the White family, becoming Jeane Christmas White.
The Christmas family lives up to its cheerful name. They are a lively bunch, finishing each other's sentences and laughing at a constant stream of jokes.
"You can tell we're a happy family," said the elder Mary Christmas, who is 90.
So what is Christmas like at the Christmases'?
Christmas Eve involves a family dinner, a church service, the reading of the Christmas story from the Bible and then one gift per family member. The children - ranging in age from 12 to 30 - build forts in the living room out of blankets and furniture and fall asleep watching Christmas movies. Christmas Day includes a big family brunch with biscuits and gravy, and a Christmas dinner.
The Christmas children agree that the only time their last name gets old is roll call at school. Many of them roll their eyes and groan at the thought.
"The first day of the semester in college, I was like, `Here we go,'" said the younger Mary, who graduated from Liberty University in Lynchburg, Va., where one of her professors made her stand up in front of a large lecture hall full of students when he saw her name on the class list.
Peggy said the name keeps her on her toes.
"When you're out shopping and things, you make sure you're not grumpy or rude to someone who's helping you because in the end when you go to pay, they see your name is Christmas," she said.
They also embrace their holiday heritage. The younger Mary's e-mail address begins with "jinglebells."
Despite the lighthearted way the Christmases talk about their name, they take it very seriously, too.
"It would be my goal that our lives as a family exemplify not just the birth of Christ, but the life of Christ," said Robby, 28.
With that, he was met with a chorus of amens from the rest of the Christmases.
Copyright 2006 by The Associated Press. All rights reserved.
Marines Charged in Iraqi Civilian Deaths
Marines Charged in Iraqi Civilian Deaths
By Thomas Watkins
Associated Press Writer
December 22, 2006
CBNNews.com -- CAMP PENDLETON, Calif. - With eight Marines charged in connection with the deaths of 24 Iraqi civilians, the Marine Corps sent a clear message to its officers: They will be held accountable for the actions of their subordinates.
In the biggest U.S. criminal case involving civilian deaths to come out of the Iraq war, four of the Marines - all enlisted men - were charged Thursday with unpremeditated murder.
But the remaining four Marines in the case are officers, the highest ranking among them a lieutenant colonel. They were charged with dereliction of duty for failing to report or properly investigate the killings in the Iraqi town of Haditha last year.
The case marks the largest number of U.S. officers to be charged in an alleged crime since the start of the Iraq war, said John Hutson, a former Navy judge advocate general.
"The honorable thing is not to 'protect' your subordinates," said Hutson, who is now president of New Hampshire's Franklin Pierce Law Center. "The honorable thing is to look above that and realize they have a greater responsibility to the Marine Corps and military justice system."
Lt. Col. Jeffrey R. Chessani, 42, of Rangely, Colo., was charged with failing to accurately report and thoroughly investigate a possible violation and dereliction of duty. He could face dismissal and up to two years in prison.
Hutson said officers play an integral role in the way crimes are reported and how military justice is handled. He said if the officers did fail to properly investigate the deaths, their failures were more enduring "than these guys who allegedly murdered people."
Besides Chessani, officers charged in connection with how the incident was investigated or reported included 1st Lt. Andrew A. Grayson, 25; Capt. Lucas McConnell, 31, of Napa, Calif., and Capt. Randy W. Stone, 34, a military attorney.
The charges followed an investigation into Iraqi allegations that Marines went on a rampage after one of their own was killed by a bomb.
Staff Sgt. Frank D. Wuterich, 26, was charged with the unpremeditated murder of 12 people, and the murder of six others by ordering Marines about to enter a house to "shoot first and ask questions later," according to court papers released by his attorney, Neal Puckett. He faces the possibility of life in prison if convicted.
Puckett said his client carried out the killings in accordance with his training.
"There's no question that innocent people died that day, but Staff Sergeant Wuterich believes, and I believe, they did everything they were trained to do," he said.
Wuterich was also charged with making a false official statement and soliciting another sergeant to make false official statements.
Sgt. Sanick P. Dela Cruz, 24, of Chicago, was accused of the unpremeditated murders of five people and making a false official statement with intent to deceive.
Lance Cpl. Justin Sharratt, 22, of Canonsburg, Pa., was accused of the unpremeditated murder of three Iraqis. Lance Cpl. Stephen B. Tatum, 25, of Edmund, Okla., was charged with the unpremeditated murders of two Iraqis, negligent homicide of four Iraqi civilians and a charge of assault upon two Iraqis.
The Marines, who are based at Camp Pendleton, have been under investigation since March. None will be placed in pretrial confinement, because they are not deemed a flight risk or a danger to themselves or others, said Col. Stewart Navarre, chief of staff for Marine Corps Installations West.
The Iraqis were killed in the hours following a roadside bomb that rocked a Marine patrol on the morning of Nov. 19, 2005. The blast killed Lance Cpl. Miguel Terrazas of El Paso, Texas, and injured two others. The Marine Corps said again Thursday that insurgents fired guns after the blast.
In the aftermath, five men were shot as they approached the scene in a taxi and others - including women and children - died as Marines went house to house in the area, clearing homes with grenades and gunfire.
Terrazas' father denounced the charges.
"What they are doing to our troops ... it's just wrong," he told The Associated Press in Texas. "I feel for their families. They are in my prayers."
Defense attorneys have said their clients were doing what they had been trained to do: respond to a perceived threat with legitimate force. The Marines remained in combat for months after the killings.
A criminal probe was launched after Time magazine reported in March, citing survivor accounts and human rights groups, that innocent people were killed.
The Marine Corps initially reported that 15 Iraqis died in a roadside bomb blast, and Marines killed eight insurgents in an ensuing fire fight. That account was widely discredited and later reports put the number of dead Iraqis at 24.
Lt. Gen. James Mattis, commanding general of the Marine Corps Central Command, said Thursday that the Corps' initial news release, which said the civilians in Haditha had been killed by an improvised explosive device, was incorrect.
"We now know with certainty that the press release was incorrect, and that none of the civilians were killed by the IED explosion," Mattis said in another release.
---
Associated Press writers Allison Hoffman at Camp Pendleton, Alicia Caldwell in El Paso, Texas, and Saad Abdul Kadir in Baghdad contributed to this report.
Copyright 2006 The Associated Press
By Thomas Watkins
Associated Press Writer
December 22, 2006
CBNNews.com -- CAMP PENDLETON, Calif. - With eight Marines charged in connection with the deaths of 24 Iraqi civilians, the Marine Corps sent a clear message to its officers: They will be held accountable for the actions of their subordinates.
In the biggest U.S. criminal case involving civilian deaths to come out of the Iraq war, four of the Marines - all enlisted men - were charged Thursday with unpremeditated murder.
But the remaining four Marines in the case are officers, the highest ranking among them a lieutenant colonel. They were charged with dereliction of duty for failing to report or properly investigate the killings in the Iraqi town of Haditha last year.
The case marks the largest number of U.S. officers to be charged in an alleged crime since the start of the Iraq war, said John Hutson, a former Navy judge advocate general.
"The honorable thing is not to 'protect' your subordinates," said Hutson, who is now president of New Hampshire's Franklin Pierce Law Center. "The honorable thing is to look above that and realize they have a greater responsibility to the Marine Corps and military justice system."
Lt. Col. Jeffrey R. Chessani, 42, of Rangely, Colo., was charged with failing to accurately report and thoroughly investigate a possible violation and dereliction of duty. He could face dismissal and up to two years in prison.
Hutson said officers play an integral role in the way crimes are reported and how military justice is handled. He said if the officers did fail to properly investigate the deaths, their failures were more enduring "than these guys who allegedly murdered people."
Besides Chessani, officers charged in connection with how the incident was investigated or reported included 1st Lt. Andrew A. Grayson, 25; Capt. Lucas McConnell, 31, of Napa, Calif., and Capt. Randy W. Stone, 34, a military attorney.
The charges followed an investigation into Iraqi allegations that Marines went on a rampage after one of their own was killed by a bomb.
Staff Sgt. Frank D. Wuterich, 26, was charged with the unpremeditated murder of 12 people, and the murder of six others by ordering Marines about to enter a house to "shoot first and ask questions later," according to court papers released by his attorney, Neal Puckett. He faces the possibility of life in prison if convicted.
Puckett said his client carried out the killings in accordance with his training.
"There's no question that innocent people died that day, but Staff Sergeant Wuterich believes, and I believe, they did everything they were trained to do," he said.
Wuterich was also charged with making a false official statement and soliciting another sergeant to make false official statements.
Sgt. Sanick P. Dela Cruz, 24, of Chicago, was accused of the unpremeditated murders of five people and making a false official statement with intent to deceive.
Lance Cpl. Justin Sharratt, 22, of Canonsburg, Pa., was accused of the unpremeditated murder of three Iraqis. Lance Cpl. Stephen B. Tatum, 25, of Edmund, Okla., was charged with the unpremeditated murders of two Iraqis, negligent homicide of four Iraqi civilians and a charge of assault upon two Iraqis.
The Marines, who are based at Camp Pendleton, have been under investigation since March. None will be placed in pretrial confinement, because they are not deemed a flight risk or a danger to themselves or others, said Col. Stewart Navarre, chief of staff for Marine Corps Installations West.
The Iraqis were killed in the hours following a roadside bomb that rocked a Marine patrol on the morning of Nov. 19, 2005. The blast killed Lance Cpl. Miguel Terrazas of El Paso, Texas, and injured two others. The Marine Corps said again Thursday that insurgents fired guns after the blast.
In the aftermath, five men were shot as they approached the scene in a taxi and others - including women and children - died as Marines went house to house in the area, clearing homes with grenades and gunfire.
Terrazas' father denounced the charges.
"What they are doing to our troops ... it's just wrong," he told The Associated Press in Texas. "I feel for their families. They are in my prayers."
Defense attorneys have said their clients were doing what they had been trained to do: respond to a perceived threat with legitimate force. The Marines remained in combat for months after the killings.
A criminal probe was launched after Time magazine reported in March, citing survivor accounts and human rights groups, that innocent people were killed.
The Marine Corps initially reported that 15 Iraqis died in a roadside bomb blast, and Marines killed eight insurgents in an ensuing fire fight. That account was widely discredited and later reports put the number of dead Iraqis at 24.
Lt. Gen. James Mattis, commanding general of the Marine Corps Central Command, said Thursday that the Corps' initial news release, which said the civilians in Haditha had been killed by an improvised explosive device, was incorrect.
"We now know with certainty that the press release was incorrect, and that none of the civilians were killed by the IED explosion," Mattis said in another release.
---
Associated Press writers Allison Hoffman at Camp Pendleton, Alicia Caldwell in El Paso, Texas, and Saad Abdul Kadir in Baghdad contributed to this report.
Copyright 2006 The Associated Press
North Korea Will Increase Nuclear Arsenal
North Korea Will Increase Nuclear Arsenal
Associated Press
December 22, 2006
CBNNews.com -- BEIJING - As North Korea sees it, the U-S seeks to halt its nuclear program through "carrots and sticks," so it's responding with "dialogue and a shield."
With no agreement on disarmament or further negotiations after five days of talks, North Korea's main nuclear envoy said the communist nation would beef up its nuclear arsenal in response to U-S pressure.
Negotiators in Beijing say Pyongyang refused to talk about its nuclear weapons program, and instead stuck to its demand that the U-S remove financial restrictions.
After Japan's top envoy questioned whether there would be talks in the future, Japan's prime minister said he still believes the six-nation framework is the most effective means of getting a breakthrough.
Copyright 2006 The Associated Press
Associated Press
December 22, 2006
CBNNews.com -- BEIJING - As North Korea sees it, the U-S seeks to halt its nuclear program through "carrots and sticks," so it's responding with "dialogue and a shield."
With no agreement on disarmament or further negotiations after five days of talks, North Korea's main nuclear envoy said the communist nation would beef up its nuclear arsenal in response to U-S pressure.
Negotiators in Beijing say Pyongyang refused to talk about its nuclear weapons program, and instead stuck to its demand that the U-S remove financial restrictions.
After Japan's top envoy questioned whether there would be talks in the future, Japan's prime minister said he still believes the six-nation framework is the most effective means of getting a breakthrough.
Copyright 2006 The Associated Press
U.N. Votes on Iran Sanctions
U.N. Votes on Iran Sanctions
By John Jessup
CBN News
CBNNews.com- WASHINGTON - After months of haggling the U.N. Security Council will vote sanctions for Iran on Friday.
The revised draft is designed to put pressure on Tehran to end its nuclear enrichment program, which can be used as a source for civilian energy or to make a nuclear bomb.
During his year-end press conference, President Bush said any resolution must be clear.
Bush said, "The message will be that you -- you, Iran -- are further isolated from the world. My message to the Iranian people is you can do better than to have somebody try to rewrite history, and you can do better than having somebody who's trying to develop a nuclear weapon that the world believes you shouldn't have. There's a better way forward."
The push for a U.N. sanctions vote comes as Iran and its leaders have drawn recent attention with last week's controversial Holocaust conference.
This week's election's where young voters showed their disapproval of political hardliners, and President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's insistence to Iran's right to nuclear energy, despite the possibility of sanctions.
During a speech in Dubai, Prime Minister Tony Blair singled out Iran and Ahmadinejad as a worldwide threat.
"Here are elements of the government of Iran openly supporting terrorism in Iraq to stop a fledgling democratic process," Blair said.
Blair also highlighted Iran's involvement in de-stabilizing Lebanon's infant democracy, working against peace between Israel and the Palestinians, and its defiant drive to acquire nuclear weapons.
Blair said it was time to wake up. "Yet a huge part of world opinion is frankly almost indifferent," he said. "It would be bizarre if it weren't so deadly serious."
One country that isn't indifferent is Israel, whose top spy chief this week said Iran could have its first atomic bomb in the next three to four years.
The Christian Broadcasting Network, Inc. © 2006
By John Jessup
CBN News
CBNNews.com- WASHINGTON - After months of haggling the U.N. Security Council will vote sanctions for Iran on Friday.
The revised draft is designed to put pressure on Tehran to end its nuclear enrichment program, which can be used as a source for civilian energy or to make a nuclear bomb.
During his year-end press conference, President Bush said any resolution must be clear.
Bush said, "The message will be that you -- you, Iran -- are further isolated from the world. My message to the Iranian people is you can do better than to have somebody try to rewrite history, and you can do better than having somebody who's trying to develop a nuclear weapon that the world believes you shouldn't have. There's a better way forward."
The push for a U.N. sanctions vote comes as Iran and its leaders have drawn recent attention with last week's controversial Holocaust conference.
This week's election's where young voters showed their disapproval of political hardliners, and President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's insistence to Iran's right to nuclear energy, despite the possibility of sanctions.
During a speech in Dubai, Prime Minister Tony Blair singled out Iran and Ahmadinejad as a worldwide threat.
"Here are elements of the government of Iran openly supporting terrorism in Iraq to stop a fledgling democratic process," Blair said.
Blair also highlighted Iran's involvement in de-stabilizing Lebanon's infant democracy, working against peace between Israel and the Palestinians, and its defiant drive to acquire nuclear weapons.
Blair said it was time to wake up. "Yet a huge part of world opinion is frankly almost indifferent," he said. "It would be bizarre if it weren't so deadly serious."
One country that isn't indifferent is Israel, whose top spy chief this week said Iran could have its first atomic bomb in the next three to four years.
The Christian Broadcasting Network, Inc. © 2006
Miracle Music
Miracle Music
By Wendy Griffith
CBN News
CBNNews.com - HANOVER, Virginia - Imagine being born with no arms and no hands. How would you function? What would life be like?
Meet 12-year-old George Dennehy.
George sits first chair in the cello section of his orchestra class at Oak Knoll Middle School in Hanover, Virginia.
George was born without arms and hands. He uses his toes like fingers.
With one foot, he presses the strings, and with the other, he skillfully holds the bow.
George was born with bi-lateral upper-limb deficiency and has learned to do nearly everything with his feet -- he eats with his feet; checks his e-mail; reads the Bible; rides his skateboard - and even does art work.
He recently made a clay mask, and draws beautifully holding the pen between his toes.
"George is a very independent student," says Coleen Shepherd, his art teacher. "He comes in and gets right to work. He's an inspiration in the class - he has no limits."
After school, George and his brother James - also born without arms, share a snack and then head out for a game of soccer in the back yard with their other siblings and friends.
George is one of four adopted and three biological children of Mike and Sharon Dennehy.
The Dennehy's adopted George from Romania when he was just a baby, and soon afterward, adopted James from India.
George's mom Sharon said, "A little newsletter came in and there was a little blurred black and white picture of George. And it said, little boy born without arms desperately needs loving family to take care of him.' I told Mike, and we were terrified. But we felt God would give us the strength to do it."
"In Romania, a physical handicap is considered a curse from God," said George's dad, Mike. "So not only over there was George different, but he was actually being rejected by the workers at the orphanage. And people were telling his family he shouldn't live there. The fact that we went there and retrieved him was a way for us to share the Gospel."
What's so amazing is how easy George makes everything look. From eating, to playing the cello, having no arms is no problem.
He said, "There's a few things I can't do, but there's a lot of things I can do."
George says he believes God made him this way for a special purpose.
"God has a plan for everyone - even people with disabilities - he can still use you for His will," he said.
George also has a favorite Bible verse: "Hebrews 11:6: 'But without faith it is impossible to please Him, for he who comes to God must believe that He is, and that He is a rewarder of those who diligently seek Him,'" he said.
His friend Nick DeLille, who's known George since they were about six, says he doesn't really think of George as being different.
"We high-five with our feet! I don't care that George doesn't have arms. I actually like having a friend who doesn't have arms," said Nick .
George says that he hopes his life will serve as an example to people - with arms or without arms - that all life is valuable.
He said, "There's not one life that God created that was made for no purpose. Why would God make a life and not do anything with it? So, every life is made for a purpose."
The Christian Broadcasting Network, Inc. © 2006
By Wendy Griffith
CBN News
CBNNews.com - HANOVER, Virginia - Imagine being born with no arms and no hands. How would you function? What would life be like?Meet 12-year-old George Dennehy.
George sits first chair in the cello section of his orchestra class at Oak Knoll Middle School in Hanover, Virginia.
George was born without arms and hands. He uses his toes like fingers.
With one foot, he presses the strings, and with the other, he skillfully holds the bow.
George was born with bi-lateral upper-limb deficiency and has learned to do nearly everything with his feet -- he eats with his feet; checks his e-mail; reads the Bible; rides his skateboard - and even does art work.
He recently made a clay mask, and draws beautifully holding the pen between his toes.
"George is a very independent student," says Coleen Shepherd, his art teacher. "He comes in and gets right to work. He's an inspiration in the class - he has no limits."
After school, George and his brother James - also born without arms, share a snack and then head out for a game of soccer in the back yard with their other siblings and friends.
George is one of four adopted and three biological children of Mike and Sharon Dennehy.
The Dennehy's adopted George from Romania when he was just a baby, and soon afterward, adopted James from India.
George's mom Sharon said, "A little newsletter came in and there was a little blurred black and white picture of George. And it said, little boy born without arms desperately needs loving family to take care of him.' I told Mike, and we were terrified. But we felt God would give us the strength to do it."
"In Romania, a physical handicap is considered a curse from God," said George's dad, Mike. "So not only over there was George different, but he was actually being rejected by the workers at the orphanage. And people were telling his family he shouldn't live there. The fact that we went there and retrieved him was a way for us to share the Gospel."
What's so amazing is how easy George makes everything look. From eating, to playing the cello, having no arms is no problem.
He said, "There's a few things I can't do, but there's a lot of things I can do."
George says he believes God made him this way for a special purpose.
"God has a plan for everyone - even people with disabilities - he can still use you for His will," he said.
George also has a favorite Bible verse: "Hebrews 11:6: 'But without faith it is impossible to please Him, for he who comes to God must believe that He is, and that He is a rewarder of those who diligently seek Him,'" he said.
His friend Nick DeLille, who's known George since they were about six, says he doesn't really think of George as being different.
"We high-five with our feet! I don't care that George doesn't have arms. I actually like having a friend who doesn't have arms," said Nick .
George says that he hopes his life will serve as an example to people - with arms or without arms - that all life is valuable.
He said, "There's not one life that God created that was made for no purpose. Why would God make a life and not do anything with it? So, every life is made for a purpose."
The Christian Broadcasting Network, Inc. © 2006
Three Enter Guilty Plea in Church Fires
Three Enter Guilty Plea in Church Fires
CBN News
CBNNews.com -- Three young men in Alabama pleaded guilty to setting fires at nine rural churches.
Matthew Cloyd, Benjamin Nathan Moseley and Russell Lee DeBusk entered the guilty pleas to federal arson and conspiracy charges in the string of church fires set on two nights in February.
Prosecutors say a night of drinking last February led to five of the fires.
Court documents show the college students set the other four, trying to throw investigators off course.
All the churches were small, rural and Baptist and included both black and white congregations.
After the fires, CBN News visited the area. We found out that while the attacks were devastating, they brought down racial barriers, rallying congregations that had never met.
"God has actually used this tragic thing for good," said Wardell Harris of Pleasant Sabine Baptist. "The people who burned it down meant it for bad. But God has made something good out of it.
The three wore orange jail jumpsuits and leg chains as they stood before U.S. District Judge David Proctor, who told them they all face minimum seven-year sentences.
The Christian Broadcasting Network, Inc. © 2006
CBN News
CBNNews.com -- Three young men in Alabama pleaded guilty to setting fires at nine rural churches.Matthew Cloyd, Benjamin Nathan Moseley and Russell Lee DeBusk entered the guilty pleas to federal arson and conspiracy charges in the string of church fires set on two nights in February.
Prosecutors say a night of drinking last February led to five of the fires.
Court documents show the college students set the other four, trying to throw investigators off course.
All the churches were small, rural and Baptist and included both black and white congregations.
After the fires, CBN News visited the area. We found out that while the attacks were devastating, they brought down racial barriers, rallying congregations that had never met.
"God has actually used this tragic thing for good," said Wardell Harris of Pleasant Sabine Baptist. "The people who burned it down meant it for bad. But God has made something good out of it.
The three wore orange jail jumpsuits and leg chains as they stood before U.S. District Judge David Proctor, who told them they all face minimum seven-year sentences.
The Christian Broadcasting Network, Inc. © 2006
Court will decide if California voters were right
Court will decide if California voters were right
2000 vote overwhelmingly limited marriage to 1 man, 1 woman
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
© 2006 WorldNetDaily.com
Nearly two-thirds of all Californians six years ago agreed that marriage is to be limited to one man and one woman, but that doesn't impress the California Supreme Court, which has agreed to review – and re-decide – the issue.
That leaves a state constitutional amendment as the only way to protect traditional marriage in a state where a number of the justices on the high court have become activists for the "gay" agenda, according to a family values organization.
"Everyone who knows that marriage is for a man and a woman needs to wake up and donate to VoteYesMarriage.com, or else real marriage will be flushed down the drain," said Randy Thomasson, a spokesman for the pro-family coalition that is sponsoring The Voters Right to Protect Marriage initiative.
That proposal, officials hope, will be on the 2008 ballot.
"The VoteYesMarriage.com constitutional amendment is the only way to stop judges and politicians from destroying the beautiful, natural institution of marriage between a man and a woman. The California State Constitution is the highest law in the land, higher than the Legislature and the state Supreme Court, and stronger than a regular statute," Thomasson said.
The state had approved, through an initiative, a definition of marriage being limited to one man and one woman in 2000, but the state Supreme Court hasn't ever ruled on the constitutionality of that limit. In 2004, the justices did agree that the city of San Francisco overstepped its authority by creating new "marriage licenses" for same-sex duos and issuing them. However, Justices Joyce Kennard and Kathryn Werdegar at that point wanted those homosexual marriage licenses to continue, and they both remain on the bench. Then earlier this year, Justice Carole Corrigan, who has supported "gay" marriage, was added to the court.
"The people of California spoke in 2000, and the people's voice should be heard," said Senior Counsel Glen Lavy, of the Alliance Defense Fund, which will be participating in the arguments before the court.
"Political special interests shouldn't trump their voice regarding what's in the best interests of families and children," Lavy said. "This is the question the California courts will ultimately be deciding: Who is more important: our children and the voice of the people or politicians and special interest groups?"
The ruling from the California Court of Appeal came in October and said: "Courts simply do not have the authority to create new rights, especially when doing so involves changing the definition of so fundamental an institution as marriage. Judges are not free to rewrite statutes to say what they would like, or what they believe to be better social policy."
"Activists may desperately try again and again to redefine it, but marriage means one man and one woman," said Lavy "Everything else is counterfeit."
There are a total of six combined marriage cases that will be reviewed by the court, officials said.
Former Assemblyman Larry Bowler, R-Elk Grove, said the "writing is on the wall" that the state Supreme Court wants California to become like Massachusetts, which has given formal approval to homosexual marriages.
"While regular folks are preparing to celebrate Christmas, the California Supreme Court and the California Legislature are scheming to destroy marriage and the people's vote on marriage," he said. "The only remaining option is for the people to rise up, donate $2 million to place the VoteYesMarriage.com amendment on the California ballot, and pass it to permanently and fully protect marriage from the threat of judges and politicians."
During November voters in seven more states rejected the idea of "gay marriage" by implementing constitutional amendments that protect the biblical concept of holy matrimony – that is between one man and one woman only.
But legal experts warned afterwards that homosexuals undoubtedly will try to bypass the will of voters however they can.
"When you look at the country as a whole, it's obvious where Americans stand on marriage. But the battle is not over. The opposition will continue to attempt to bypass the will of the people," Lavy said at the time.
In the Nov. 7 election, voters in Colorado, Idaho, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Virginia and Wisconsin all adopted such amendments. Colorado voters went even one step further, emphatically rejecting a referendum that would have allowed the extension of benefits to "domestic partners," a plan that would have created an "alternate marriage" plan for homosexuals.
Lavy endorsed marriage amendments "on both the state and federal level because they are the only way to prevent special interests from using the courts to sidestep the will of the people."
To date, in 27 out of 28 states where a constitutional amendment to protect traditional marriage has been proposed, voters have adopted it, sometimes by margins as high as 8-1.
Lavy said more information about protecting marriage is available at www.domawatch.org, which stands for Defense of Marriage Act, state laws that also have been used to protect marriage.
States Issues Analyst Mona Passignano, of the Colorado Springs-based Focus on the Family Action, told WND that "gay" marriage supporters are running into a simple problem.
"What they're running up against is that people just want traditional marriage protected," she said.
During 2005, Texas and Kansas voters approved marriage protection amendments, and in the sweep of the 2004 vote, 13 states took the same action, including voters in Arkansas, Georgia, Kentucky, Mississippi, Montana, Oklahoma, North Dakota, Utah, Michigan, Ohio and Oregon who did so on the same night. Missouri and Nevada also voted for the plan. Five other states had done so in earlier elections and another two dozen states have taken the same action, but by statute, not constitutional amendment.
2000 vote overwhelmingly limited marriage to 1 man, 1 woman
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
© 2006 WorldNetDaily.com
Nearly two-thirds of all Californians six years ago agreed that marriage is to be limited to one man and one woman, but that doesn't impress the California Supreme Court, which has agreed to review – and re-decide – the issue.
That leaves a state constitutional amendment as the only way to protect traditional marriage in a state where a number of the justices on the high court have become activists for the "gay" agenda, according to a family values organization.
"Everyone who knows that marriage is for a man and a woman needs to wake up and donate to VoteYesMarriage.com, or else real marriage will be flushed down the drain," said Randy Thomasson, a spokesman for the pro-family coalition that is sponsoring The Voters Right to Protect Marriage initiative.
That proposal, officials hope, will be on the 2008 ballot.
"The VoteYesMarriage.com constitutional amendment is the only way to stop judges and politicians from destroying the beautiful, natural institution of marriage between a man and a woman. The California State Constitution is the highest law in the land, higher than the Legislature and the state Supreme Court, and stronger than a regular statute," Thomasson said.
The state had approved, through an initiative, a definition of marriage being limited to one man and one woman in 2000, but the state Supreme Court hasn't ever ruled on the constitutionality of that limit. In 2004, the justices did agree that the city of San Francisco overstepped its authority by creating new "marriage licenses" for same-sex duos and issuing them. However, Justices Joyce Kennard and Kathryn Werdegar at that point wanted those homosexual marriage licenses to continue, and they both remain on the bench. Then earlier this year, Justice Carole Corrigan, who has supported "gay" marriage, was added to the court.
"The people of California spoke in 2000, and the people's voice should be heard," said Senior Counsel Glen Lavy, of the Alliance Defense Fund, which will be participating in the arguments before the court.
"Political special interests shouldn't trump their voice regarding what's in the best interests of families and children," Lavy said. "This is the question the California courts will ultimately be deciding: Who is more important: our children and the voice of the people or politicians and special interest groups?"
The ruling from the California Court of Appeal came in October and said: "Courts simply do not have the authority to create new rights, especially when doing so involves changing the definition of so fundamental an institution as marriage. Judges are not free to rewrite statutes to say what they would like, or what they believe to be better social policy."
"Activists may desperately try again and again to redefine it, but marriage means one man and one woman," said Lavy "Everything else is counterfeit."
There are a total of six combined marriage cases that will be reviewed by the court, officials said.
Former Assemblyman Larry Bowler, R-Elk Grove, said the "writing is on the wall" that the state Supreme Court wants California to become like Massachusetts, which has given formal approval to homosexual marriages.
"While regular folks are preparing to celebrate Christmas, the California Supreme Court and the California Legislature are scheming to destroy marriage and the people's vote on marriage," he said. "The only remaining option is for the people to rise up, donate $2 million to place the VoteYesMarriage.com amendment on the California ballot, and pass it to permanently and fully protect marriage from the threat of judges and politicians."
During November voters in seven more states rejected the idea of "gay marriage" by implementing constitutional amendments that protect the biblical concept of holy matrimony – that is between one man and one woman only.
But legal experts warned afterwards that homosexuals undoubtedly will try to bypass the will of voters however they can.
"When you look at the country as a whole, it's obvious where Americans stand on marriage. But the battle is not over. The opposition will continue to attempt to bypass the will of the people," Lavy said at the time.
In the Nov. 7 election, voters in Colorado, Idaho, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Virginia and Wisconsin all adopted such amendments. Colorado voters went even one step further, emphatically rejecting a referendum that would have allowed the extension of benefits to "domestic partners," a plan that would have created an "alternate marriage" plan for homosexuals.
Lavy endorsed marriage amendments "on both the state and federal level because they are the only way to prevent special interests from using the courts to sidestep the will of the people."
To date, in 27 out of 28 states where a constitutional amendment to protect traditional marriage has been proposed, voters have adopted it, sometimes by margins as high as 8-1.
Lavy said more information about protecting marriage is available at www.domawatch.org, which stands for Defense of Marriage Act, state laws that also have been used to protect marriage.
States Issues Analyst Mona Passignano, of the Colorado Springs-based Focus on the Family Action, told WND that "gay" marriage supporters are running into a simple problem.
"What they're running up against is that people just want traditional marriage protected," she said.
During 2005, Texas and Kansas voters approved marriage protection amendments, and in the sweep of the 2004 vote, 13 states took the same action, including voters in Arkansas, Georgia, Kentucky, Mississippi, Montana, Oklahoma, North Dakota, Utah, Michigan, Ohio and Oregon who did so on the same night. Missouri and Nevada also voted for the plan. Five other states had done so in earlier elections and another two dozen states have taken the same action, but by statute, not constitutional amendment.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
