Proponents Of Prop 8 Leave An LA Times Editor Speechless

The Los Angeles Times editorial board has a long-standing practice of inviting representatives on both sides of an issue to meet with them (separately) before publishing editorial opinions. This gives each side an opportunity to express their feelings and gives the editors a deeper understanding of the issues.

The LA Times published their opinion on Proposition 8 in an editorial on August 8th. Apparently though, some interesting and outlandish statements were made during a meeting with supporters of Prop. 8 that weren't published in the opinion piece that opposed that measure.

Karin Klein, who is an editor and was at that meeting, published her account of it at the LA Times Blog Opinion L.A.. Karen said:

At one point, the conversation turned to the "activist judges" whose May ruling opened the door to same-sex marriage, and how similar this case was to the 1948 case that declared bans on interracial marriage unconstitutional. According to one of the Prop. 8 reps, that 1948 ruling was OK because people are born to their race and thus are in need of constitutional protection, while gays and lesbians choose their homosexuality. So much for the expert opinions of the American Psychological Assn. and the American Academy of Pediatrics that people cannot choose their sexuality. Oh, those activist doctor types.

As if that weren't bad enough, Karen went on to say that one Prop 8 supporter said:

Gay rights are not as important as children's rights, and it's obvious that same-sex couples who married would "recruit" their children toward homosexuality because otherwise, unable to procreate themselves, they would have no way to replenish their numbers.

Even though Karen is an accomplished and seasoned editor, she said that she was left momentarily speechless. She also said that the recruitment argument "made no logical sense at all."

Wouldn't it be great if the editors here in Arizona and in Florida held their own meetings and then reported on those. Give a fanatic the opportunity to talk in that kind of environment and they will invariably show themselves to be the idiotic fools they really are. We just need to make sure that they have that opportunity and that the media covers their comments in earnest.

Right-Wingers Setting Up Challenge To Separation Of Church And State

A few weeks ago, onlinejournal.com posted an excellent article by Mel Seesholtz, Ph.D.. Apparently the rightwing-nuts are planning a multi-pronged event in September that they hope will end-up before the Supreme Court.

Their objective is to force a challenge to the restrictions that prevent any religion from using its pulpits and/or resources to openly politic for or against candidates and legislations that they support or oppose.

The Alliance Defense Fund, a group of lawyers dedicated to realizing the Dominionist goal of marrying church and state, has taken another step in that direction.

The Pulpit Initiative
Reclaiming pastors’ constitutional right to speak Truth from the pulpit


On Sunday, September 28, 2008, we are seeking pastors who will preach from the pulpit a sermon that addresses the candidates for government office in light of the truth of Scripture. The sermon is intended to challenge the Internal Revenue Code’s restrictions by specifically opposing candidates for office that do not align themselves and their positions with the Scriptural truth. By standing together and speaking with one voice, it is our hope to recapture the rightful place of pastors and churches in American life. [italics added]

On July 11, the propaganda organ of Don Wildmon’s American Family Association ran an article, titled “Wildmon: Prop. 8 vote crucial in culture battle.” That article said (in part):

The Arlington Group, a coalition of about 60 pro-family groups and ministries, will stress the importance of the November 4 vote in California on Proposition 8, a proposed constitutional amendment that would protect traditional marriage. To do that, pastors will be encouraged to use one Sunday in September to focus on the sanctity of marriage. Churches also will be encouraged to take up a special offering which will go toward the fight for marriage in California. [italics added]

Not only do these people want the pulpit politicized, they want the worship service turned into a political fund-raising event!

The article is incredibly informative and eye-opening. I would strongly urge you to go to onlinejournal.com and read it for yourself.

VA Director Prohibits Voter Registration In VA Hospitals

On May 5th, the Secretary of Veterans Affairs, James B. Peake issued a directive banning nonpartisan voter registration drives at federally financed nursing homes, rehabilitation centers and shelters for homeless veterans. This is insanity!

According to the NY Times article, because of this ban, disabled and confined veterans who have made enormous, life changing sacrifices to defend our freedoms, not the least of which is the right to vote, are being cut off from even being able to register.

On June 30th Connecticut Secretary Of State Susan Bysiewicz visited the VA Hospital in West Haven to distribute information on the state’s new voting machines and to register veterans to vote. She was not even allowed inside the hospital.

On the sidewalk outside, Secretary Bysiewicz met Martin O’Nieal, a 92-year-old veteran who lost a leg while fighting the Nazis in WWII. O'Nieal has been a resident of the hospital since 2007 and he told her that he wanted to vote last year but there was no information at the hospital about how to register and the nurses could not answer his questions about how or where to cast a ballot. What's wrong with this picture?

The two reasons Peake issued this ban are astoundingly idiotic. First, he claims that voter registration drives are disruptive to the care of its patients. You've got to be kidding me!

Second, he claims that VA employees cannot help patients register to vote because the Hatch Act forbids federal workers from engaging in partisan political activities. This interpretation of the Hatch Act is completely out of left field. There is nothing partisan about registering people to vote as long as you don't promote a particular candidate or political position.

This insidious, immoral, unpatriotic and extraordinarily hypocritical action taken by Secretary Peake is, quite simply, disgusting!

What is the government afraid of? Other than maybe Barack Obama might be elected. I've personally talked with quite a few veterans while waiting to be seen for appointments at my local VA and I unexpectedly found that the overwhelming majority said that they intended to vote for Obama. Maybe also because the latest polls of active duty men and women show that a majority are not opposed to gays serving openly in the military which indicates a significant change in attitude among the people actually defending our country.

According to the article, bills that would require the department to repeal the ban have been filed in both houses of Congress. They need to be signed into law no later than Oct. 1, so that veterans in V.A. care don’t miss their states’ deadlines to register to vote in the fall elections. That this is even necessary is mind boggling!

As a veteran myself, I am going to shoot off a quick email to both my Senator and my Congressman about this.

To read the full article, go to: NY Times

UPDATE...
I just got off the phone with Council for the Senate Rules Committe, Adam Ambrogi. He told me that Senate Bill S3308, introduced by Senators Diane Feinstein and John Kerry, should move to the Senate for a vote when they return in September.

He also told me that House Bill HR6625, introduced by Congressman Robert Brady, was passed unanimously just before breaking for recess.

Mr. Ambrogi gave me his direct line and asked that if I hear any other information about voter registration in VA facilities or these bills to contact him. So, if anyone out there has or comes across anymore information please leave a message at the "Comments" link below or contact me via email.

UPDATE - 8/16/08...
According to a posting at Advocate.com today, troops serving abroad have given nearly six times as much money to Obama's presidential campaign as they have to McCain's. Apparently what the vets at the VA center here told me (see story above) seems to be the sentiment pretty much service-wide.

To read the full story go to: Advocate.com