Religious Coalition for Choice
Posted By: wowzer on 2008-11-06
In Reply to:
I received an email last night from the above organization, RCRC.org. It is an organization supported by many major religious supporting reproductive choice. A few of the member groups are:
Catholics for Choice
The American Baptist Church
Presbyterian Church USA
United Methodist Church
Episcopal Church
United Church of Christ
Union for Reformed Judiasm
any many, many more ...
I posted this on this board because the choice issue is a political issue, as well as a faith issue for so many people.
As a Jew, I find it interesting that so many Christian organizations support reproductive choice for women. I'm curious if anyone here belongs to any of these groups or knows anything about the organization. I am still reading up on it myself.
Complete Discussion Below:  marks the location of current message within thread
The messages you are viewing
are archived/old.
To view latest messages and participate in discussions, select
the boards given in left menu
Other related messages found in our database
Many religious people are pro-choice.
.
coalition gov?
This morning I heard James Carville say that it seems Obama is looking toward more of a coalition gov., with both Democrats and Republicans in his cabinet.
This seems to me like a very good thing - one way to get cooperation from the Republicans in Congress, probably.
What do you think?
try this Republican Jewish Coalition
Not sure why it didn't show up. When I clicked on it here, it worked.
http://www.rjchq.org/Multimedia/multimediadetail.aspx?id=0c46d45c-b77a-47de-ac9c-b618e36b39b8
I also just googled RJC, so this is another alternative. Look for the "see our new tv ad." ...and much more. I'm glad I signed up for it.
Republican Jewish Coalition
Obama pressures Philly area synagogue to drop RJC Rrepresentative from a ... The RJC has launched a new series of ads raising critical issues for the Jewish ...www.rjchq.org/ - 44k - Cached - Similar pages - Note this
Once powerful Christian Coalition teeters on insolvency...see article.
Pat had better tell them to get their bankruptsy papers turned in before Oct. 17. 
Once powerful Christian Coalition teeters on insolvency
By BILL SIZEMORE, The Virginian-Pilot
© October 8, 2005
The Christian Coalition, the onetime powerhouse of the religious right founded by Pat Robertson, is struggling to stay afloat.
The group’s annual revenue has shrunk to one- twentieth of what it was a decade ago – from a peak of $26 million in 1996 to $1.3 million in 2004 – and it has left a trail of unpaid bills from Texas to Virginia. Among the creditors who have sued the coalition for nonpayment are landlords, direct-mail companies, lawyers and at least one former employee seeking back pay.
It has even come to this: The company that moved the group out of its Washington headquarters in 2002 went to small-claims court Friday in Henrico County trying to collect $1,890 that remains unpaid on its three-year-old bill.
It is the latest in at least a dozen judicial collection actions brought against the coalition since 2001. The amounts sought by creditors total hundreds of thousands of dollars.
The reasons for the group’s decline are legion, say supporters, critics and experts who have followed its trajectory. Among them are the loss of key leaders, including Robertson, who resigned as president in 2001; alleged mismanagement by his successors; the cyclical nature of politics; and bitter infighting within the organization and with other political players on the religious right.
CHRISTIAN COALITION TIMELINE
1988 After Pat Robertson’s failed bid for the Republican presidential nomination, he turns to Ralph Reed – a shrewd political operative who became a highly visible spokesman for the religious right – for day-to-day operations of the coalition founded in 1989.
1997 Ralph Reed leaves the coalition and later sets up a political consulting business in Georgia, where he is now seeking the 2006 Republican nomination for lieutenant governor.
2000 The coalition, which had been based in Chesapeake through the 1990s, moves to an office on Capitol Hill in Washington.
2001 Robertson resigns as president, turning over the reins to Roberta Combs, right, who, within a year, closes the Washington office and moves the group to South Carolina. Since its move to South Carolina, the coalition has been pursued by a variety of creditors, including suppliers of services for its 2002 “Road to Victory” rally in Washington.
2004 In a fiscal report to South Carolina, the coalition claims revenue of $1.3 million and expenses of $1.5 million, leaving a $200,000 deficit.
“Their future is really bleak,” said Mark J. Rozell, a professor of public policy at George Mason University who has followed the Christian conservative movement for years. “The Christian Coalition is a shell of its former self.”
In one sense, the group is a victim of its own success, Rozell said. It is widely credited with helping Republicans seize control of Congress in 1994 and the White House in 2000, but with those goals achieved, it has lost much of its reason for being.
“These types of opposition groups tend to do really well when the other party is in power – especially, for a religious right group, when the folks in power are Bill and Hillary Clinton,” Rozell said. “But when Bush is in the White House and the Republicans control Congress, the need for a Christian Coalition as a counterweight to established power just isn’t that great.”
Coalition officials insist everything’s fine. As if to underline the point, last month they announced the hiring of a new executive director, Jason T. Christy, the 34-year-old publisher of The Church Report, a national news and business journal for pastors and Christian leaders.
“The Christian Coalition is going to be around for a long time,” said Roberta Combs, the group’s president. “I really believe that with all my heart.”
The coalition arose from the ashes of a failed 1988 bid for the Republican presidential nomination by Robertson, the Virginia Beach-based founder of the Christian Broadcasting Network.
To run the group’s day-to-day affairs, Robertson brought in Ralph Reed – a shrewd political operative who became a highly visible spokesman for the religious right.
The coalition mobilized millions of conservative Christians with its voter guides – pocket-sized candidate scorecards distributed in churches.
Reed left the coalition in 1997 and set up a political consulting business in Georgia, where he is now seeking the 2006 Republican nomination for lieutenant governor. He has also become a central figure in the American Indian casino gambling scandal surrounding indicted Washington lobbyist Jack Abramoff.
The coalition hit its zenith in 1996, when it pulled in a record $26 million in revenue. By contrast, in its 2004 annual report to the South Carolina secretary of state, the group reported $1.3 million in revenue and $1.5 million in expenses, leaving a $200,000 deficit.
Based in Chesapeake through the 1990s, the coalition moved to an office on Capitol Hill in Washington in 2000. Its Chesapeake landlord sued the group in 2001 for $76,546 in back rent, in a case that is still open in Chesapeake Circuit Court.
Within months of the move to Washington, 10 black employees filed a racial discrimination lawsuit alleging that they were forced to enter the office by the back door and eat in a segregated area. The coalition settled the suit in December 2001 for about $300,000, according to several published reports.
That same month, Robertson announced his resignation as president, saying he wanted to spend more time on his broadcast ministry and Regent University, the Christian school he founded next door in Virginia Beach. He was succeeded as president by Combs, head of the coalition’s South Carolina chapter, who closed the Capitol Hill headquarters in November 2002 and now runs the group from an office in Charleston, S.C.
On its Web site, the coalition still lists a Washington post office box as its mailing address, but it no longer has an office in the capital. It employs a lobbyist who works out of his home.
It was the move from Capitol Hill that left an unpaid bill resulting in the claim against the coalition Friday in Henrico County. The coalition is contesting the claim.
Since its move to South Carolina, the coalition has been pursued by a variety of creditors, including the mailing companies Pitney-Bowes and Federal Express. The group has also been sued by suppliers of audio, lighting, exhibit construction and other services for its 2002 “Road to Victory” rally in Washington, which featured a star-studded lineup of speakers, including Robertson and now-indicted House leader Tom DeLay.
Even the coalition’s longtime Virginia Beach law firm, Huff, Poole & Mahoney, has joined the chase. The firm secured a $63,958 judgment for back legal bills in 2003 that resulted in a garnishment of the group’s bank account and a partial payment of $21,136. The firm has retained a South Carolina attorney to try to collect the rest.
One of the coalition’s most costly legal battles was a 2002 blowup with Focus Direct Inc., a San Antonio direct-mail company that sued the group over a major fundraising campaign that went sour. The case dragged on for two years. Combs said it was settled for $200,000.
One of the coalition’s co-defendants, Northern Virginia fundraiser William G. Sidebottom, declared bankruptcy as a result. His attorney, Kevin M. Young of San Antonio, said it was a messy case.
“My father was a preacher, and I became aware of an old saying: 'There’s no politics like church politics,’” Young said. “This is an example of that. On the outside, everybody’s making a happy face, but behind the curtain, it was pretty unseemly.”
And then there’s family politics.
Combs hired her daughter Michele as communications director and Michele’s husband, Tracy Ammons, as a Capitol Hill lobbyist. When their marriage dissolved into a nasty divorce and child-custody battle, Ammons was fired.
He then sued the coalition for $130,000 in unpaid salary, accusing his mother-in-law of “personal animosity and malice” arising out of a desire to break up the marriage.
Explaining in an affidavit how he went months without a paycheck, Ammons said: “I believed that … I could trust my own mother-in-law.”
In another affidavit filed in the Ammons case, Tammy Farmer, who worked at the coalition as a bookkeeper in 2001, said she found the group’s financial affairs in disarray.
“I witnessed a very consistent and chronic pattern of Roberta Combs intentionally refusing to pay valid debts, salaries and accounts for no discernible reason,” Farmer said.
As the overdue bills piled up, Farmer said, telephone service would be cut off occasionally and vendors would refuse to do further business with the coalition.
Farmer said Combs frequently told her, “Don’t pay … they’ll never sue.”
Debt is nothing new for the coalition, Combs said Friday.
“In 1999, when I came into the national organization, it had debt,” she said. “I had to do a lot of creative things. It has less debt now than it had then.”
The Ammons case is in arbitration, but fallout from it continues. Arlington County Circuit Judge Joanne F. Alper imposed $83,141 in sanctions against Ammons and his attorney, Jonathon Moseley, for improper and frivolous pleadings. Both declared bankruptcy as a result.
The coalition’s attorney, Brad D. Weiss, moved last month to withdraw from the Ammons case, citing an “irreconcilable conflict” among himself, the coalition leadership and its board.
Meanwhile, two other attorneys, H. Jason Gold and Alexander M. Laughlin, who had been representing the coalition in the Ammons bankruptcy proceedings, moved to withdraw as well. Their reason: The coalition had failed to pay them.
News researcher Jakon Hays contributed to this story.
Oregon Christian Coalition Head Resigns - Family Sexual Abuse
If these are *family values* then the right is RIGHT. I'm proud to say I
don't have 'em!
These people get scarier and scarier every day, and I'm keeping my children
away from them!
Christian Coalition head to withdraw from political life
10/10/2005, 5:50 p.m. PT
By RUKMINI CALLIMACHI The Associated Press
PORTLAND, Ore. (AP) — The longtime head of the Christian Coalition of Oregon
said Monday that he is withdrawing from public life, a day after news reports
detailed accusations of sexual abuse against him by three female relatives.
I am thankful for a family that loves and supports me, and intend to withdraw
from public life until this is resolved, Lou Beres wrote in a statement posted
on the organization's web site, at http://www.coalition.org
Beres has denied any criminal misconduct and wrote that he will pursue the
Biblical response and do all within my power to reconcile with that person.
Multnomah County District Attorney Michael Schrunk told The Oregonian
newspaper that officials are investigating the complaints against Beres.
The three women — now adults — allege they were abused by Beres as preteens.
Their families called the child abuse hot line last month, after the three
openly discussed the alleged abuse for the first time.
I was molested, one of the women, now in her 50s, told The Oregonian. I was
victimized and I've suffered all my life for it. I'm still afraid to be in the
same room with him.
Beres, 70, has blamed personal and political enemies for the complaint.
Only one of the three cases appears to fall under Oregon's statute of
limitations on sex abuse, which expires after six years. Authorities said that
case involves a young woman who was allegedly abused by Beres when she was in elementary school.
A nephew of Beres' is standing up for the three women.
My family has gone through hell, said Richard Galat, 41, of Oakland, Calif.,
who told detectives that his uncle had molested several female relatives over
the years.
Lives have been ruined. Those of us who have come forward have been
ostracized, verbally abused and the victims of character assassination...It must
stop, he said.
In response to Galat's statements, Beres said on the Christian Coalition web
site Monday, I am grieved by the false allegations of my nephew, Richard Galat.
I am attempting to determine the source of each claim.
Beres, who did not immediately return a phone message from The Associated
Press, is the former head of the Republican Party in Multnomah County, the
Democratic stronghold that includes Portland.
Jim Moore, who teaches political science at Pacific University in Forest
Grove, said Monday that Beres has not been particularly influential in Oregon
politics.
In fact, under his leadership, the Christian Coalition in Oregon has gone
downhill.
In state legislative races in 2004, for example, Moore said that, we found
that Christian Coalition candidates basically did not do as well as they did in
the past.
Oregon Republican Chairman Vance Day said Beres hasn't been much of a factor
in state GOP politics since he stepped down as Multnomah County chairman about 10 years ago.
I don't view this as having any major impact on politics here in Oregon; I
don't think the Christian Coalition has a big footprint here at all, he said.
The group did support a constitutional amendment against gay marriage that
passed handily with voters in November of 2004, but support for that cause was
rallied by another conservative-leaning group, the Defense of Marriage
Coalition.
Tim Nashif, the political director of that group, said he has few details
about the allegations, and added that his group is not associated with the
Christian Coalition.
Anytime any family goes through anything like this it's a pretty grievous
situation and our hearts go out to them, he said. The truth has a tendency to
come out.
I don't feel the need to make the choice. It's a child, not a choice. n/t
.
and I'd like to keep my religious freedom sm
without having to answer to the Christian right. If they had their way, we'd all be wearing babuskas and having a kid or two every year, paying homage to them at a tithe of 10% and having to hate all other religious ideologies.
If Coulter is so religious...
...why doesn't anyone know her at the church she says she attends?
No, not a religious board.
I'm referring to posts on the conservative political board under the post about Michelle Malkin.
What is a religious wacko?
Someone who believes that a fetus is a human being? Your label "religious wacko" is very disrespectful and unkind. I am pro-life and I am not mentally unstable.
Like it or not, the fight to protect the unborn will NEVER EVER stop.
A religious wacko is...
Someone who does not understand the separation between church and state, that freedom of relgion also means freedom FROM religion, sees nothing wrong with imposing/ legislating their own religious beliefs and values on everyone else, goes bannas whenever anybody disagrees with them, and would just as soon replace our democratic system with Christian theocracy.
Can we say religious whacko.....
xx
I am not even religious. I like Palin because she is
nm
Religious Right has already messed up too much in this
and the rest of the misguided 'faithful' to step out of the picture so that our leaders can actually do their jobs, without all the holy rollers tripping them up.
Religious freedom.
dd
You don't have to be religious to be hated by
xx
This was not a religious post, but..(sm)
since you mentioned it, it is actually possible to have hope without God. Athiests represent only a small portion of the general public as well as Obama supporters. Your post assumes that everyone who supports Obama must be athiest. You might want to revise that one. LOL.
Religious Right and Gay Marriage
Gay marriage is an important issue for the religious right.
What exactly do they want a president to do about it?
Take this to the religious board
Many of us do not believe that. Many on the religious board do not believe that, but this is a religious statment. Show me the proof of what you just said.
Religious hierarchy...
I wonder what they call the homosexual henchmen who try to browbeat everyone who doesn't love and accept their behavior?
I am not even religious. Take your useless
nm
Sorry you have no religious beliefs....... that is sad!
--
Do you actually believe only religious people think
--
I SAID most religious people...I did NOT say most Christians.
You guys don't rule the world, ya know. Just your little corner...just your own lives, not everyone else's.
Religious Protest from the Left
A Religious Protest Largely From the Left
Conservative Christians Say Fighting Cuts in Poverty Programs Is Not a Priority
By Jonathan Weisman and Alan Cooperman
Washington Post Staff Writers
Wednesday, December 14, 2005; A08
When hundreds of religious activists try to get arrested today to protest cutting programs for the poor, prominent conservatives such as James Dobson, Pat Robertson and Jerry Falwell will not be among them.
That is a great relief to Republican leaders, who have dismissed the burgeoning protests as the work of liberals. But it raises the question: Why in recent years have conservative Christians asserted their influence on efforts to relieve Third World debt, AIDS in Africa, strife in Sudan and international sex trafficking -- but remained on the sidelines while liberal Christians protest domestic spending cuts?
Conservative Christian groups such as Focus on the Family say it is a matter of priorities, and their priorities are abortion, same-sex marriage and seating judges who will back their position against those practices.
It's not a question of the poor not being important or that meeting their needs is not important, said Paul Hetrick, a spokesman for Focus on the Family, Dobson's influential, Colorado-based Christian organization. But whether or not a baby is killed in the seventh or eighth month of pregnancy, that is less important than help for the poor? We would respectfully disagree with that.
Jim Wallis, editor of the liberal Christian journal Sojourners and an organizer of today's protest, was not buying it. Such conservative religious leaders have agreed to support cutting food stamps for poor people if Republicans support them on judicial nominees, he said. They are trading the lives of poor people for their agenda. They're being, and this is the worst insult, unbiblical.
At issue is a House-passed budget-cutting measure that would save $50 billion over five years by trimming food stamp rolls, imposing new fees on Medicaid recipients, squeezing student lenders, cutting child-support enforcement funds and paring agriculture programs. House negotiators are trying to reach accord with senators who passed a more modest $35 billion bill that largely spares programs for the poor.
At the same time, House and Senate negotiators are hashing out their differences on a tax-cutting measure that is likely to include an extension of cuts in the tax rate on dividends and capital gains.
To mainline Protestant groups and some evangelical activists, the twin measures are an affront, especially during the Christmas season. Leaders of five denominations -- the United Methodist Church, Episcopal Church, Evangelical Lutheran Church in America, Presbyterian Church USA and United Church of Christ -- issued a joint statement last week calling on Congress to go back to the drawing board and come up with a budget that brings good news to the poor.
Around 300 religious activists have vowed to kneel in prayer this morning at the Cannon House Office Building and remain there until they are arrested. Wallis said that as they are led off, they will chant a phrase from Isaiah: Woe to you legislators of infamous laws . . . who refuse justice to the unfortunate, who cheat the poor among my people of their rights, who make widows their prey and rob the orphan.
To GOP leaders and their supporters in the Christian community, it is not that simple. Acting House Majority Leader Roy Blunt (R-Mo.) said yesterday that the activists' position is not intellectually right.
The right tax policy, such as keeping tax rates low on business investment, grows the economy, increases federal revenue -- and increased federal revenue makes it easier for us to pursue policies that we all can agree have social benefit, he said.
Dobson also has praised what he calls pro-family tax cuts. And Janice Crouse, a senior fellow at the Christian group Concerned Women for America, said religious conservatives know that the government is not really capable of love.
You look to the government for justice, and you look to the church and individuals for mercy. I think Hurricane Katrina is a good example of that. FEMA just failed, and the church and the Salvation Army and corporations stepped in and met the need, she said.
Tony Perkins, president of the conservative Family Research Council, said the government's role should be to encourage charitable giving, perhaps through tax cuts.
There is a [biblical] mandate to take care of the poor. There is no dispute of that fact, he said. But it does not say government should do it. That's a shifting of responsibility.
The Family Research Council is involved in efforts to stop the bloodshed in the Darfur region of Sudan as well as sex trafficking and slavery abroad. But Perkins said those issues are far different from the budget cuts now under protest. The difference there is enforcing laws to keep people from being enslaved, to be sold as sex slaves, he said. We're talking here about massive welfare programs.
The Rev. Richard Cizik, a vice president of the National Association of Evangelicals, returned yesterday from the Montreal conference on global climate change, another issue of interest to evangelicals. Frankly, I don't hear a lot of conversation among evangelicals about budget cuts in anti-poverty programs, he said. What I hear our people asking is, why are we spending $231 million on a bridge to nowhere in Alaska and can't find $50 million for African Union forces to stop genocide in Darfur?
© 2005 The Washington Post Company
We certainly wouldn't want a president whose religious
Or impact how they view society or race relations or even science. We surely would not want religious beliefs to impact political decisions on any level, including voters.
Religious people go to church
Religious people who go to work check their religion at the door. The constitution specifically instructs Congress to do the same. "Congress shall make no law respecting the establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof." This means keep religion out of federal legislative codes. Implied therein is the concept that the nation is not theocratic in nature.
The original poster is well understood in the expressed wish that this not be forgotten and remain unchanged. It is difficult to understand what is meant by the statement that religion will be in the White House under any leadership. Clearly, religious people, some to a greater degree than others, will inhabit the White House and the chambers of Congress. However, religion is constitutionally prohibited from entering the body of our laws and does not provide a foundation for our governmental institutions. The constitution has given indivuals immunity from federally mandates on religion. Wise men of great vision, our forefathers.
BINGO... that's why the rabid Religious Right does
They're as bad as the fundamentalist Islamics...'It's OUR way, or the highway'!
Sheep.
Are you saying only religious people are pro life?
If so, you are wrong.
It's only a "political" issue to religious
Why else would any religious group want you to vote?
Silly girl!
Trying to figure this out. Religious dems....sm
give more than religious repubs, and nonreligious dems give less than nonreligious repubs. Do I have this right? It seems to me the religious dems give the most, yes?
Not trying to start a religious discussion here, but
being on its knees is exactly what this country needs. 
Religious beliefs are not the issue here...
We were discussing the law...the phrase concerning Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness is actually in the Declaration of Independence, and does not mention "citizens" at all. Regardless of your religion or lack thereof, I'm not aware of any nation in which murder or the taking of a human life is not outlawed.
As far as the ultimate decision resting with God, of course all decisions ultimately rest with God. But does that mean we should not govern ourselves or our behavior while we are here on this earth? Of course not. Laws protect the innocent - few are as innocent as an unborn child. It never ceases to amaze me that people can condone the killing of unborn babies, but are horrified if someone kills one that is 3 days old...or leaves one in a dumpster shortly after birth...or on the doorsteps of a church. I think it has been drilled into our heads for so long that this is a choice for women and our RIGHT that we actually never step back and think about the fact that we are talking about killing babies. If someone were to propose a law that men...simply because they were men...had the right to, oh, kill 3 year olds, people would laugh their heads off at the absurdity of it. Yet that is exactly what we are doing - giving women the right to kill their own children, simply because they are women and the child is in their body. Why not give the fathers the right to abort the child? After all, it is half theirs? Again, an absurd notion. But because we are women and the children grow in our bodies, we have the right to kill them? I'm sorry, I can never understand the justification for this. There are alternatives. There are choices. Choosing to kill the child should not be an option. In what other situation is it acceptable to kill another human being as a viable choice? I can think of only one - self-preservation. Self defense. So I supposed under the law, if the unborn child is killing you, you should probably be able to protect yourself. I would have to agree with that argument, but sadly, that is rarely the reason for an abortion.
Very true. More religious propaganda..sm
One nation indivisibile, no matter what your religion, with liberty and justice for all was the original intent to pledge that you love your country. No religious affiliation necessary. What ever happend to "Love thy neighbor as thyself"? "As you do unto the least, so you do unto me", "Judge not lest you be judged", and there are many others. My God is a God of love and knows we are all fallible, but he does not judge us. He is there to love us and to try to guide us toward loving and helping our fellow humans, not hate and division and bigotry that people who have a lot to gain by influencing politics are fostering in the name of God/Jesus and religion. This is the reason that there need to be a separation of church and state in this country. Amost every war that has ever been fought has been fought in the name of God/religion. Do you think that it is God's intent that we should be at war in his name? Think about it.
Plays the religious card?
When it suits him? How about trying to set the record straight when others spew baloney about him? If you were running for office, you would do the same thing if people were saying incorrect things about you, what you believe in, have voted or not voted for, etc.
If he didn't people would then say, "See, he didn't dispute it, so it must be true." Either way, the bashers find reason to bash ... cause that's what they do.
If it were so free (of religious bulls#it), then
Right?
Silence. Did everyone go to the religious board?nm
x
We religious wackos in America are
Christian persecution is all about with liberals and atheists in charge of our government. Your little name-calling is not a drop in the bucket. But we will be okay. It takes strength to have faith and believe in someone unseen and that is where our courage comes from.
Yes, this post has touched my heart deeply also. When I get to heaven and see her baby, I will explain why his mom made her decision (so she could sleep nights) and why they will never meet (because his mom refused to believe and stood up for her social issues and rights).
This may sound harsh, but it is just stating what I believe. Just as you have done. I have just as much right for my voice to be heard as the 2 of you.
Stimulus is 'anti-religious'
Former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee warned supporters Tuesday that the $828 billion stimulus package is “anti-religious.”
In an e-mail that was also posted on his blog ahead of the Senate’s passage, Huckabee wrote: “The dust is settling on the ‘bipartisan’ stimulus bill and one thing is clear: It is anti-religious.”
The former Republican presidential candidate pointed to a provision in both the House and Senate versions banning higher education funds in the bill from being used on a “school or department of divinity.”
“You would think the ACLU drafted this bill,” Huckabee said. “For all of the talk about bipartisanship, this Congress is blatantly liberal.”
“Emily’s List, radical environmental groups, etc. all have a seat at the decision making table in Washington these days,” he continued. “Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid are in charge and they are working with an equally ‘progressive’ President Obama (remember his voting record is more liberal than Ted Kennedy!).”
In the e-mail, Huckabee concedes that there is little that conservatives can do in the near term, but advocated mobilization to defeat those “masquerading as ‘conservative Democrats.’”
“This is the opening round of the Democrats’ campaign for big government,” he wrote. “We cannot afford to sit round one out, because if we do, they will only become more emboldened and their grab for power more audacious and damaging to our country and our freedoms.”
If the religious freaks forced me to have it, -
I'd stomp on it the moment it popped out.
Religious freedom....not for long.
A bill regarding control of the Catholic Church has exploded as one of the hottest issues of the session at the state Capitol - prompting charges and countercharges about religious freedom.
Have you guys heard about this. This is just insanity.
The measure, which was raised as a committee bill by the Democratic co-chairs of the influential judiciary committee, would allow the finances of local parishes to be run by lay councils and would essentially remove power from Catholic pastors, who would serve in an advisory role. Opponents say the bill is clearly unconstitutional and would violate the First Amendment regarding the right to freedom of religion.
Polygamy isn't just religious beliefs
There are others, such as "swingers" who engage in group sex. Who's not to say that they wouldn't start to fight for the right to marry, even if only for the massive tax break they would get?
Religious Fanatics are FAR more dangerous
You are absolutely right. You can tell that just by reading 99.9% of the posts on this board.
I repeat...religious fanatics scare me!
I don't care what religion they are. If they are fanatic about their chosen religion, they are not independent thinkers, and I find that frightening.
At the risk of being called one of the religious fanatics....
and lumping everyone together in one pile is not fair may I say...you believe in choice. You are taking choice away from the child. If the child was able to speak I am relatively sure it would not choose to be exterminated like vermin. You want to give all the power to the woman over her body...perhaps she should take some responsibility for that body and not fall back on extermination as a method of birth control. If abortion was stopped for all but rape, incest, and endangering life of the mother hundreds of thousands of babies would be saved every year. What happened to responsibility? Why was that abandoned in the name of choice? If you can speak for the choice of the woman, why can't some of us speak for the right to life of the child? If she has it and drowns in 10 days later, she is tried for murder. What a difference 10 days makes, eh??
As far as jobs going overseas...when our government taxes businesses into oblivion (happens in every Dem admin) jobs go overseas. Because we have the next to highest business taxes in the entire world. That discourages businesses coming here also...and the jobs those businesses would create...as well as sending jobs from here offshore. Or they close completely, and jobs are lost. I have gone up steadily in earnings since the Clinton administration. I am doing much better now than I was then.
Socialism (redistribution of wealth) does not work either. It never has. Cuba, Venezuela...it never works. All that happens in socialism is eventually the middle class disappears, and all you have is the upper crust (govt and cronies) and the rest of the people. And in that case the money stays at the top...it never quite gets to the "people" where it was promised it would go. I imagine the Venezuelan people are still waiting for their oil checks since the government took it over. Socialism doesn't work. It is a myth to get people to give over the power to the power brokers...in our case, the DNC. Be careful what you ask for....
Thoughtful post. What bothers me is that religious
nm
yes, and insulting to religious people, housepainters
nm
No need to ridicule, as most religious groups make
NM
And the radical religious right in America teaches...sm
that no one gets to heaven unless they believe in the "Lord Jesus Christ". I do not agree with either, but they both have the same belief that there is no way but their way. There is no difference.
I am proud to be a gun-toting, religious redneck
and from PA, but we are not any more racist than any other state or person.
The O thinks we are, so why does he keep coming into the state to compaign? You would think he would fear us. His buddy Murtha really blundered on his comment. If the O gets in, he will take our guns away and we will have no protection at all from criminals. It's our constitutional right to own guns.
He's a glib talker but what is he really saying? He definitely can't smile or debate his way through the terrorists.
Rendel-D, our precious governor, ran our state into the ground with giving money away to Philadelphia and Pittsburgh mostly for convention centers and sports centers and now for casinos. Why? He loves sports and gambling. When Rendel was mayor of Philadelphia, he almost bankrupt that city with his shenanigans. I'm so glad his term will be over soon. Maybe then Pennsylvanians will be able to get back to work. Our roads are back to being #1 on the Worst Roads in the U.S. He made sure there would be no money for road construction.
He promised all kinds of tax cuts, property taxes mostly, if the bill passed for the casinos. That was a few years ago. Where's the cut? Our property taxes went up, not down! No rebates as he promised, but we have 20,000 (exaggeration) different ways to play the lotteries between instant tickets and 3 digit, 4 digit, 5 digit, 6 digits, power ball, etc.
Casey-D didn't do a good job for us, either. He made everyone who owned a service business (that was me back then) pay 6% sales tax on our earnings EXCEPT lawyers and doctors. I'm confused. Don't they provide a service? Sure they do. He also upped our taxes.
Sorry, I don't buy the dems making a better life for us. They make it worse.
I will get off my soapbox now. 
|
