Lobdell

Over the past three months I was a student in Professor Lobdell’s class on Politics, Religion and Media. It is an undergraduate course that is designed to investigate the intersection of religion, politics and the media and the influences they have on each other. Lobdell takes a variety of current events that display politicians or public policy being influenced through means of religion. As a born and raised Catholic, I knew this class would be a great test for my faith as well as an experience to learn more both sides of the political spectrum. The class covered the history of religion and media in the United States. It was very interesting to learn that some of our founding fathers were not as religious as one might think. We then discussed the Catholic Church and had a guest speaker who spoke of her life after being molested by a priest. Her speech was quite unpleasant to sit through as she compared the church to “Nazis” and expressed her distaste in the church. As a Catholic, I am saddened to hear her story but I still have not lost faith or trust in my Church because others have sinned. We are taught to hate the sin and not sinner, and most importantly forgive. Our class also covered the Muslims religion and the radicals that have acted violently. The violent Muslim acts have helped emphasize my understanding of how dangerous and serious the culture is. This class was an overall great experience and I hope to take more classes with Professor Lobdell in the future.

https://eee.uci.edu/09f/67280

Mikulski Amendment

On Thursday, December 03, 2009, the United States Senate approved the Mikulski amendment by a vote of 61 to 39. Every Republican except Vitter, Snowe and Collins voted against the amendment. All Democrats and Independents except Nelson and Feingold voted for it. The amendment states that anything classified as preventative care or screenings for women by the ealth Resource and Services Administartions would become a mandated covered service. This would result in insurance plans covering abortion. Pro-life leaders opposed the amendment because of their strong stance against abortion. The National Right to Life Committee states, "If Congress were to grant any Executive Branch entity sweeping authority to define services that private health plans must cover, merely by declaring a given service to constitute 'preventive care,' then that authority could be employed in the future to require all health plans to cover abortions.” Supporters of the prolife movement from all over must fight against the bill so they do not have to give their hard earn tax money to a cause that they do not believe in.

Prop 71

Back in 2004, California voters passed Proposition 71 which allows scientists in California to experiment with stem cell research with human embryos. Furthermore, it pumps $3 billion taxpayer dollars into the funding of this research. Since then $700 million has been spent and even more than that has been raised with private money. Of this $53 million has been given to UC Irvine’s Sue and Bill Gross Stem Cell Research Center which is on campus. However, the California Institute of Regenerative Medicine (CIRM) has not been protecting taxpayers’ interest or its own lofty goals. Some members of the CIRM board are people who stand to benefit from the funding. “[This] fuels concerns that the committee never can be entirely free of conflict of interest or self-dealing,” says the Little Hoover Commission Report. The board is too large, consisting of 29 members, it lacks cohesiveness, and board member terms are too long so they don’t allow fresh new perspectives that could help further the advancement of stem cell science. However, what is important is to restructure the CIRM governing board around principles of efficiency and transparency. This way oversight becomes more efficient and it allows the CIRM to focus on finding new ways of helping cure diseases instead of playing God. In times like these, where we are in a serious financial crisis, it would be irresponsible for scientist to be wasting BILLIONS of taxpayer dollars trying to anything but finding medical cures.

http://taxdollars.freedomblogging.com/2009/06/30/californias-3-billion-stem-cell-effort-suffers-from-appearance-of-self-dealing/24381/

Bob Casey

Senator Bob Casey of Pennsylvania is one of the countries most prominent pro life democrats in the nation. His father is famous for being one of the most public pro life governors and challenged Roe v. Wade all the way to the Supreme Court. Bob Casey is the only Senator that wants to remake the health care system and oppose abortion. The Senate is expected to debate an amendment that would not allow the use of federal subsidies for any health plan cover abortion. Casey can not currently support the bill Democrats are trying to pass because its possible tax payers money could be used for abortion under that bill. Casey is trying to persuade Democrats to change the bill a little bit so it would make it easier for pro life Senators to vote for the bill. Casey is stuck in a rare situation by supporting the health care reform and being pro life. The author of this article David Kirkpatrick leaves you with the impression that Senator Bob Casey has his work cut out for him and that is going to be extremely hard for Senator Casey to succeed at reforming health care and preventing tax payer’s money from helping abortion.

The Final Sentence

Anthony Sowell is a registered sex offender and he is on trial for killing eleven women and burying their remains near his house in Cleveland. On Thursday morning Mr. Sowell pleaded not guilty by reason of insanity. The charges against him include eleven counts of murder, attempted murder, kidnapping, rape, assault and corpse abuse. Bill Mason is the prosecutor on the case and he is expected to seek for the death penalty. In recent years it has been common for serial killers to use the insanity plea, but it is an extremely hard plea to defend. Other serial killers such as the D.C. sniper and Jeffrey Dalmer have pleaded for insanity, but they ultimately received the death penalty. Lee B. Malvo the D.C. sniper was just recently put to death for the murders he committed.

I do not think Anthony Sowell should be sentenced to death. I think he needs to go under intense psychiatric review and figure out if he has a serious mental illness. After this I believe he should spend the rest of his life in prison and not be able to enjoy any of his rights. I do not agree with the death penalty because I don’t think humans should play the role of god.


http://thelede.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/12/03/cleveland-man-pleads-insanity-in-killings-of-11-women/?scp=3&sq=death%20penalty&st=cse

Death Penalty

Bobby Wayne Woods is supposed to be executed on Thursday in Texas, unless the United States Supreme Court agrees to hear his case. Mr. Wood’s lawyer claims that he has an extremely low I.Q. and he is mentally retarded. In 1997 Bobby Wayne Woods was convicted of brutally killing an 11 year old girl and was sentenced to death. In 2002 the Supreme Court ruled that mentally impaired people are not allowed to be executed, but they state courts rule on who qualifies as mentally retarded. Mr. Woods struggled in school as a child because of his low I.Q. and had to drop out while he was in the seventh grade. Mr. Woods brutally raped and killed an 11 year old girl and molested her brother Cody as well. He left Cody in a cemetery basically dead, but somehow someone found him and he survived. Cody testified in court that Mr. Woods is the man who killed his sister and molested him. Wood’s confessed his crimes and there was clear physical evidence against him.

Although Bobby Wayne Woods clearly committed a heinous crime, I do not think he should be executed. I am not saying that just because he is mentally impaired, but because I am completely against the death penalty. I do not believe humans should play the role of god and decide when other people should die or not. I think we should let Mr. Woods live the rest of his life in prison and take away all of his freedoms.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/12/04/us/04execute.html?_r=1&hp

Choosing Your Battles

Leland Traiman helped pass the nation’s first domestic partnership law a quarter of a century ago in Berkeley. After seeing gay rights activists lose the battle of same-sex marriage in California and Maine, he is wondering if they should spend their time fighting for legal domestic partnerships instead. Gay rights leaders have insisted that anything less than full marriage equality is not ok. Major activists believe the best way to reach their goal is to attack marriage with all rights and benefits head on and any other strategy would be a betrayal of their goals. Some activists are wondering if they should go far smaller steps at a time, like fighting for domestic partnerships. This way same-sex couples could visit each other in one of them goes to the hospital and cover their children with health insurance. Colorado and Nevada are perfect examples of states that band same-sex marriage but they give rights to domestic partnerships.

I think same-sex couples would be better off fighting for domestic partnerships instead of marriage. A lot of people who are against same-sex marriage believe in the sanctity of a traditional marriage between a man and a woman. I think same-sex couples would have a better chance of gaining rights they need through a domestic partnership.

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/n/a/2009/11/28/national/a070105S52.DTL

Extremist

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/washington/2009/11/carl-levin-fort-hood-terrorism.html

Carl Levin is a Michigan Democrat who is the head of the Senate Armed Services Committee believes the Fort Hood military base shootings was an act of terror by a Muslim extremist. Carl Levin is not the only person who believes Nidal Malik Hasan committed an act of terrorism. Fox News poll shows that 49% of people believe it was a killing spree and 44% of people believed it was an act of terrorism. Another poll by Fox News shows that 45% of people think Hasan mentally snapped and 38% believe he is a Muslim extremist protesting American foreign policy.

I think Nidal Malik Hasan was a Muslim extremist who committed a terrorist act by murdering thirteen U.S. soldiers, who were about to deploy to Afghanistan. Hasan had direct contact with a Muslim extremist in Yemen through emails back and forth before he committed this heinous act. I do not think it is a coincidence that Hasan communicated with a Muslim extremist through email and than went on to commit this crime. Muslim extremist believe they must kill and destroy everyone who is not Muslim. I believe Hasan’s religion as a devout Muslim persuaded and pushed him to commit this crime.

Terrorist?

Many people are questioning if the Fort Hood attacks were terrorist related. The New York Times writer David Johnston reports the massacre was driven by terrorism according to the legislation in his article, “Lawmakers call Fort Hood Shootings, ‘Terrorism.’” Johnston reports that the Pentagon will further investigate the shootings and the motives behind it. Senator Joseph Lieberman states, “The purpose of our investigation is to determine whether that attack could have been prevented, whether the federal agencies and employees involved missed signals or failed to connect the dots in a way that enabled Hasan to carry out his deadly plan.” The United States Military needs to improve the background checks that are made on the soldiers. Especially as a soldier increases in ranks, the background must go further into their past looking for any conspicuous activity. I believe that if you have not done anything wrong you have nothing to hide. We must be able to give up a little bit of privacy in order to have the freedoms that we have in America.

Whatever It Takes

We must send as many troops as possible to win the war in the Middle East!

The brutal attack on the American homeland on September 11, gave pause to people around the world and at home; but that pause soon was overcome by the radical left and radical Islamic regimes that see American culture, American power and American freedom as threats to their control of their peoples. The propaganda machines of leftist and anti-democratic forces, around the world and in the US never cease. There may have been a pause in anti-American sentiment as a consequence of 9/11, but the reality is that the enemies of the United States and of our values and culture have not disappeared. What some might perceive as a rise in anti-American sentiment is really just a coming to grips with the reality that America and her national security have long suffered at the hands of totalitarian and anti- democratic regimes around the world. America is a democracy which means it has a large amount of legitimacy and equality. The people of the democracy are educated and have many freedoms. This type of government is looked down upon by autocratic leaders. They try to oppress their people with little equality and little democracy. Countries in the Middle East, and communism in North Korea, Cuba and other hot spots in Latin America, add fuel to the fire of anti-Americanism of nationalist regimes like Russia and China. All these sources on the left and in radical Islamic nations threaten US security and world peace. We can not let these radicals oppress the American people and take away the rights that our ancestors have fought for. We must do whatever it takes to win in the Middle East.

Congressman Murphy Supports Kennedy

Rep. Patrick Murphy, a democrat and advocate for abortion supports Congressman Patrick Kennedy in his legislation. Murphy states, "We don't legislate at the orders of the Vatican, we legislate what is in our conscience and what we think is good for our country.” Congressman Murphy is a Catholic pro-abortion democrat who feels sorrow for Rep. Kennedy. Murphy continues to state, "It's been disheartening for millions of (Catholics) across the country to see one of our own be banished," Murphy said. "I'm reaching out to Patrick Kennedy and also to my local priests and bishops to make sure they know that we agree on 99 percent of the issues."

Being born and raised as a Catholic I question Rep Murphy’s quote when he states that they agree on “99 percent of the issue.” Catholics across the world will confirm that a true Catholic is 100 percent Catholic. Perhaps the Congressman thinks that he only needs to be 99 percent committed to being a good American. Should he be able to break one percent of the laws because he may disagree with them?

http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5gQORJ9uOKY_klcRSKHBm5t8UM-kgD9C5KNJ00

Marriage in California

In 2008 California voters outlawed same-sex marriage in the state. California legislation had voted to make same-sex legal in the state of California, but than the people of California voted to make it illegal. Californian’s voted this way because they felt marriage is a sacred and legal union that is supposed to be between a man and a woman. From the Los Angeles times there is an opinion piece suggesting that California try to ban divorce and put that on a ballot and see what the people vote for. The author of this piece proclaims banning divorce would protect the traditional sanctity of marriage. The author is being satirical when he proposes this idea and he is not actually being serious. He is making fun of the people who want to keep the sanctity of traditional marriage between a man and a woman. I am sure everyone in the United States would like to see less divorces, but making divorce illegal is impractical and not a realistic goal in terms of keeping the traditional marriage.





http://opinion.latimes.com/opinionla/2009/12/protect-marriage-but-ban-divorce.html

http://www.csmonitor.com/2009/0306/p25s22-ussc.html

Huckabee's Heart

Mike Huckabee, an outspoken conservative Republican is considered one of the favorites to be nominated by the Republican Party for President in 2012. Before Huckabee became a Fox News Analyst, he was the Governor of Arkansas. Governor Huckabee was known from giving out clemency for inmates who were in jail for heinous crimes. His reasoning for pardoning so many prisoners and shortening their jail length was because he was a religious man. Huckabee often spoke on his belief in redemption and that even criminals care capable of changing their lives and often deserve a second chance. Maurice Clemmons is one of the inmates from Arkansas that Governor Huckabee shortened his sentence, so he could get out on parole. Maurice Clemmons eventually got out on parole and now Clemmons is the main suspect of killing four uniformed police officers on Sunday as they sat in a coffee shop in Tacoma, Washington. During Huckabee’s tenure as Governor he granted more than 1,000 clemency’s or pardons. Inmates in Arkansas knew of Governors leniency, so they would write to him asking for forgiveness and Huckabee would pardon them from their crimes. Governor Huckabee shortened the prison sentence of so many men because of his religious views. In some cases for clemency Huckabee followed recommendations from Baptist preachers. Mike Huckabee should not have let his religious views construe very important decisions that came with the responsibility of being Governor of Arkansas. Governor Huckabee shortened the sentence of Maurice Clemmons because of his religious views and now Clemmons has murdered four cops in Tacoma, Washington.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/12/01/us/politics/01huckabee.html?ref=politics

Overseas Contingency Operation?

On September 11, 2001 our nation was blindsided and brutally attacked by Islamic extremist. These radicals filled with hatred and envy of the American way hijacked four planes in a desperate attempt to murder the lives of hundreds of Americans. In recent times, our media and President Obama has failed to call this jihad as it is. President Obama called the war an “overseas contingency operation,” disconnected from the religion-based motivations of the terrorists. Obama is wrong to not recognize that this war is an expression of Jihad and is therefore a religious cause for which the Islamic radicals are happy to die for. One month after the attacks on September 11, Osama Bin Laden made sure the world understood that the United States was not simply up against a determined enemy, but an enemy whose determination was rooted in their religious convictions. It was November 2001 when he praised the 9/11 hijackers then said: “The nature of…this war is fundamentally religious.” When a leader like Osama Bin Laden is pronouncing this war as a religious based to the Americans and all its followers, our media is responsible to portray just that. The media and our President Obama must explain to the Americans that our enemy believes they are fighting for a better good, which is telling them to destroy our culture. We cannot take them lightly and must do whatever it takes to disarm and defeat them.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KiKyWJRRjnU

Invocation In Local Community

Invocations at public events represent a tradition that goes back to and before the founding of the country and continues into the present. You may recall the invocations, for example, at President Obama's inauguration earlier this year. As Obama was being introduced to the world as the President of the United States of America, Pastor Rick Warren took time in his inauguration to recognize that “everything we see and everything we can’t see, exist because you alone.” Our nation brings in our Commander and Chief with words of prayer and hope for the future. The South Orange County Community College District performs the tradition of a invocation before many of its ceremonies, including graduation and before all of its board of Trustee meetings. The District wants to continue this time-honored practice by offering invocations and the Pledge of Allegiance at significant District and college events in order to call attention to the solemnity of these occasions in the lives of students, their families and our educational institutions, to invoke divine guidance and blessing, to show respect for beliefs widely held among members of the community, to promote patriotism, to honor America's heritage, and to reflect on the meaning that service and sacrifice give to every human life.

The District recognizes that church and state must remain separate, but this should not require an attitude of hostility toward religion or exclude recognition of religious beliefs in public life while neither promoting nor disparaging anyone's religious faith or nonbelief.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WeYy9qfSCJU

Atheist and Agnostic Professors Sue Community College Board

A small group of six ultra liberal community college teachers, some of them, self proclaimed atheist and agnostic have filed suit in federal court to stop invocations at graduation exercises and other campus ceremonies in the South Orange County Community College District. The small group has targeted the board of Trustees, the chancellor and the Saddleback Valley college president. For several years the plantiffs have complained about the inclusion of formal invocations at campus events. The case has focused on board President Donald P. Wagner who is also a Republican candidate for the California State Assembly. Wagner has been strongly supportive of the long standing protocol. The board also begins its monthly board of trustee meetings with the invocation and the pledge of allegiance.

Prayer is a vital and essential part of American life. It is wrong to take away the opportunity to take a moment of time before each meeting and give thanks to our God that has given so much to everyone. The board of Trustees, the chancellor, and the Saddleback Valley College president must fight against this small group of leftist.

http://cbs2.com/local/Saddleback.College.Sued.2.1332785.html

New York Says No

On Wednesday December 2, 2009 the New York Senate finally voted on the same-sex marriage bill. The New York Senate Voted down the bill with a decisive 38-24 count. This means same-sex marriage will not be legal in the state of New York and the bill is dead for the rest of the year. Democrats knew they would need support for the bill from a few Republicans for the bill to pass, but not once single Republican voted yes for the bill. Gay rights activists have been waiting for a long time for the New York Senate to vote on this bill. Advocates of gay rights keep getting close for their wishes to come true, but they keep their hopes diminished when they are so close to legalizing same-sex marriage. Maine and California are two other states where same-sex marriage almost became legal, before voters or legislation ruled it illegal.

I think the New York State Senate made the correct decision in making same-sex marriage illegal in New York. I believe that marriage is a legal union between a man and a woman. Allowing same-sex couples to marry is going against gods intentions and undermines people’s religious views. I also think by allowing same-sex couples to marry would encourage them to adopt and raise children. I think children should be raised by a man and a woman in a structured family setting.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/12/03/nyregion/03marriage.html?hp

http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/05/29/sotu.same.sex/index.html#cnnSTCVideo

Stem Cell Research

The National Institutes of Health has approved thirteen new human embryonic stem cell lines for use by federally financed researchers, while another ninety six lines are under review. When President Obama came to office he overturned President Bush’s policy on stem cell research. President George W. Bush only allowed research to begin with lines that were available by August 9, 2001. While Bush was in office the National Institutes of Health had to raise money privately in order to keep doing their research. They would raise money privately to do research on cells which were obtained from fertilized embryos leftover from fertility clinics. Dr. Daley is happy President Obama overturned the law because private financing for stem cell research was starting to dry up. This is big news for researchers and for people who support using federal money to research embryonic stem cells. This is a very important time for scientists to make a break through with stem cell research. They now have support of President Obama and the Federal government, which will give them the opportunity to have a major breakthrough with stem cell research. I don’t think we should be using Federal government’s money for stem cell research because I think it is unethical. I believe in pro life and that is why I disagree with doing research on embryos.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/12/03/science/03stem.html?hp

Europes Opinion on Afghanistan

European Allies had a mixed response to President Obama’s announcement that the United States is going to send thirty thousand more troops to Afghanistan in the early part of 2010. In President Obama’s speech he reiterated that this is not just America’s war, and he asked for his European Allies to send more troops as well. In some European nations the war is extremely unpopular and it is questioned why the war is even being fought in the first place. In response to Obama’s speech France and Germany ruled out an immediate commitment to sending more troops. They say they are going to wait until an Afghanistan conference in London in late January before the make a decision. Other European nations have only offered to send a limited number of troops. The director of the European Union Institute for Security Studies in Paris said, “The war is badly perceived in Europe, contaminated by the Iraq war, the killing of civilians, the collateral damage, all of which has contributed to a widespread opposition to the Afghan war among Europeans.”

The support of the European Union is instrumental for the success of the war in Afghanistan. The United States needs support from European countries in order to succeed in Afghanistan. President Obama needs to keep reaching out to our European Allies asking them for support. Although the war in Afghanistan is unpopular among European civilians, they should know the Taliban has attacked Europe in the past and they will continue to do so while they have the resources to. President Obama understands the United States cannot and will not fight this war alone, so he is doing the right thing by asking for additional support

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/12/03/world/03reax.html?hp

Muslim Threats Increasing

With the threat of radical Muslims increasing, President Obama announced yesterday that he intends on sending thirty thousand more troops to Afghanistan in the early part of 2010. Also in President Obama’s speech he said that he plans on withdrawing troops in July of 2011. Immediately after this announcement Senators of both parties had questions and objections about President Obama’s plan. Senator John McCain supports Obama’s decision in sending more troops to Afghanistan, but he does not understand why Obama made a time frame on when to start sending the troops home. McCain doesn’t think it makes sense to dramatically increase the number of troops with a time frame to bring them home. Mr. McCain called the quick build-up and draw-down logically incoherent and he pressed Obama’s advisors about whether the president would withdraw the troops unconditionally.

I support President Obama in the decision he made to send more troops to Afghanistan. The war in Afghanistan was coming to a point where he either needed to withdraw troops or send more troops to that region to stop in the insurgency of the Taliban. I also agree with Senator John McCain’s view of why President Obama set a time table for the troops to come home. I think by doing this it shows the American people, our allies and our enemies that we are only willing to sacrifice for the next year for our safety and freedom. The Taliban realize if they can fight off these troops for the next year and half then they will have won the war. This gives the Taliban more incentive because they know the U.S. is getting extremely tired of the war. I agree with Obama’s decision to send more troops to Afghanistan, but I don’t agree on setting a time table for them to come. I think in a year from now, President Obama should look at the progress we have made with this increase of troops and make a rationale decision from there. The threat of Muslim radicals and Muslim culture is something to fear. Americans must continue to stay strong and show no side of weakness on the fight in the Middle East in order to keep America free and safe!

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/12/03/world/asia/03policy.html?hp

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o2v5LZLc8U4

Marriage in NYC

The New York Senate is set to vote on the same-sex marriage bill today in New York. The Senate has been trying to delay the vote on this bill for the last few months, but today is the day the bill will be debated and voted on. Democrats have a one seat majority in the New York Senate which means they need some Republican support for the bill to pass. On Wednesday morning Senate Republicans believed that a few Republicans may vote to pass the bill, but they were unsure on exactly how many would vote yet. It seems the attitude of the entire Senate is to vote on the bill and get it over with because the bill has been delayed and postponed so many times. If the Senate votes to pass the bill, New York will be the sixth state to legalize or recognize same-sex marriage. Last month Maine became the 31st state to block same-sex marriage through a referendum. Maine’s legislature voted to legalize same-sex marriage earlier this year, but gay rights opponents gathered enough signatures to put the measure on the ballot. Last year in California the State Supreme Court authorized same-sex marriage, but voters eventually overturned the law. At the moment it appears that the bill is going to pass, but we will have to wait until later in the day to see the outcome. If the bill does pass it will be a huge victory for gay rights activists.

It is essential for the morality of our nation to keep the sacred tradition of marriage between a man and a woman. I hope both sides will understand that they can compromise by giving civil partners better benefits to appease the gays while keeping marriage a heterosexual act to appease those who oppose.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/12/03/nyregion/03marriage.html?_r=1&hp

http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/05/29/sotu.same.sex/index.html#cnnSTCVideo

Pastor Warren in the Spotlight

Pastor Rick Warren has been extremely popular throughout the month of November. He was interviewed in a Thanksgiving Special on the television show “Meet The Press.” When asked what is testing the Americans faith during the holiday season, Warren responds, “the economy, the war in Afghanistan, and the political divisions.” He is then asked on how Americans are suppose to give as it asks in the Bible during such times of economic crisis. Pastor Warren explains how Americans can give their time if they do not have money to give. He then discusses how donations for religious organization has been at an all time high during these times. He credits the Christian culture of raising its followers the blessings of giving. In a time of uncertainty, Pastor Warren helps Americans in the Orange County area and all over the nation stay positive. Warren uses his own experiences of struggling financially in his younger years as proof that times will prevail.

Warren was also quoted in an article from the Orange County Register, “Warren Says He Wasn’t Prop 8 Leader.” Warren is clearing up all rumors that he was involved in the campaign for or against prop 8. Warren states, “People on both sides tried to make me the campaign leader.’’ Warren wants people to understand that he sides with the Bible and has never altered his opinion on the matter. The article goes on to discuss Warrens relationship with the President of the United States and what actions he believes must be done to improve our current situation. The pastor says, “I personally believe that the number one thing we need to do is get people back to work – before health care or anything else.”

Rick Warren is right to worry about or job instability in America. With the unemployment rate increasing day by day, Warren makes an excellent point that we must “get people back to work.” I also think that Warren does a good responding to the question on Prop. 8. Pastor Warren has many gay friends and has done a great job letting people know that the sin is wrong, but you cannot hate the sinner.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RbxarOGDqOE

http://totalbuzz.freedomblogging.com/2009/11/29/warren-says-he-wasnt-prop-8-leader/26307/

The OC Register Reports

The Orange County Register reports the death of Dr. George Tiller in the article, “Anti-abortion crusaders jailed in Kansas doctor’s killing.” Dr. Tiller was killed by Scott Roeder, a man who justified his actions because of the late term abortions that Tiller committed throughout his life. Reporter, Roxana Hegeman is sensitive to the fact that a man has been killed however, she often quotes anti-abortionist who do not condemn the murder of Dr. Tiller. She begins the article by discussing Scott Roeder personal background and his pessimistic views on Dr. Tiller. She states how Roeder and others associated “Dr. George Tiller to the Nazi death-camp doctor Josef Mengele.” She then goes on to quote Regina Dinwiddle who proclaims about Dr. Tiller’s death, “I wouldn’t cry for him no more than I would if somebody dropped a rat and killed it.” Hegeman continues to quote another anti-abortionist source Dave Leach, who reports, “Definitely, he will be the hero to thousands of babies who will not be slain because Scott sacrificed everything for them.” Hegeman’s negative coverage in the article through means of anti-abortionist sources and a clever assortment of vocabulary expresses her own views on the death of Geroge Tiller.

Hegeman is right to give both sides of the story and explain to the public how this man who has been publicized as a hero being shot, did indeed commit murder to hundreds of unborn children. It is the media’s role to give both sides of a story and let audience make their opinion form hearing the facts. Hegeman does a great job reporting the tragedy of Dr. Tillers Death.

http://www.ocregister.com/search/?q=Dr.+George+Tiller&fistype=site

Where Do We Draw The Line?

President Obama announced he is going to use an executive order to advance research on stem cell research. When President Bush was in office he imposed strict limits on embryonic stem cell research. Obama says he is making his decision based on scientific facts and not ideology. President Obama is hoping that Congress will follow with a bipartisan legislation that would ease the existing legislations even more. Although President Obama is in favor of stem cell research, he is against human cloning and that is where he draws the line. In the article he says, “his administration will never open the door to cloning for human reproduction, it is dangerous, profoundly wrong and has no place in our society.”

I believe President Obama made the wrong decision by making an executive order to support stem cell research. Although he supports stem cell research I am glad to hear him say that he is completely against cloning humans. I do not support stem cell research because I believe it is unethical and it devalues human life. I believe that the embryo is already a human life and it deserves to be protected and not used for science. There is a fine line between stem cell research and cloning humans. I believe that once scientist can successfully use stem cell research to cure diseases that they wouldn’t stop there and would want to see if they could start cloning people. Also, I think scientist and researchers would never be satisfied with the amount of leftover embryos they could get to use and they would always want more.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/03/10/us/politics/10stem.html?scp=3&sq=stem%20cell%20research&st=Search

More Troops?

President Obama announced that he intends on sending thirty thousand more troops to Afghanistan in the early part of 2010. Obama also said that he plans on withdrawing troops out of Afghanistan in July of 2011. In his speech President Obama recognizes that the war in Afghanistan is not lost but it has gone backward the last couple of years. The mission in Afghanistan is to go after insurgents and gain control of key regions and population centers. In his speech he said, “We need to deny Al Qaeda a safe- haven, we must reverse the Taliban’s momentum and deny it the ability to overthrow the government.” President Obama is sending 30,000 more troops in Afghanistan to protect America of Muslim extremists. Afghanistan and Pakistan is the epicenter of where Muslim extremists exist.

I believe President Obama made the correct decision in sending more troops into Afghanistan. We are currently losing the war in Afghanistan and more troops are necessary to ensure the safety of the American people. Although it is not an ideal situation because of all of the casualties in Afghanistan, I believe it is necessary. If the United States pulls troops out of Afghanistan it will make the U.S. extremely vulnerable to another attack similar to 9/11. The United States did not ask for this war, but it was brought upon us by the attacks of 9/11. President Obama is doing exactly what he needs to do to ensure the safety of the American people.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/12/02/world/asia/02prexy.html?hp

Christianity Won't Back Down!

Evangelical, Roman Catholic and Orthodox Christian leaders signed a declaration in New York saying they will not cooperate with laws that they say could be used to compel their institutions to participate in abortions or to bless same-sex marriages. In the document it says, “We pledge to each other, and to our fellow believers that no power on earth, be it cultural or political, will intimidate us into silence or acquiescence.” This group of religious leaders is standing by their beliefs no matter what laws the United States government may put into affect the future. They want to show the Obama administration that they will not back down on their beliefs, no matter what law President Obama may put in place. This group of religious leaders will not compromise their views on same-sex marriage, abortion or stem cell research. The 4,700 word document that they all signed is called the Manhattan Declaration: A Call of Christian Conscience. These 147 religious leaders want to be inspiration to the younger generation and show them that these are the most important issues to religious institutions. They say younger Christians are more concerned with issues such as climate change, global poverty and they are more accepting of homosexuals than their elders.
These religious leaders are doing exactly what they are supposed to do. They are standing up for what they believe in and letting everyone know including the government that they will not back down from their religious beliefs no matter what the circumstances are. Also, they are trying to inspire the younger Christian generation to be as passionate about abortion and stem cell research as they are. Lets hope that the future leaders of our nation can have the same type of "no backing down" menatlity when it comes to standing up for what the believe in!

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/20/us/politics/20alliance.html?scp=16&sq=same-sex%20marriage&st=cse

The New York times describes the tragedy at Fort Hood, Texas. Nidal Malik Hasan is the suspect who shot and killed thirteen soldiers at the Fort Hood Military Base. All of the soldiers that Hasan killed were about to be deployed to Afghanistan. Hasan was a military psychiatrist that had a Muslim upbringing and background. Before the shootings he reached out and sent twenty messages to Anwar al-Awlaki, who use to be a spiritual leader at a mosque in suburban Virginia. Anwar al-Awlaki has extreme Muslim views where he believes in killing all infidels which are people who are not Muslim. The Federal Bureau of Investigation had knowledge of Hasan reaching out Muslim extremists before the shootings occurred. The Federal Bureau of Investigation dropped its case against Hasan because he had a good excuse on why he was reaching out to Awlaki. Hasan said that he was conducting a research project at the Walter Reed Army Medical Center. On Monday following the attack Mr. Awlaki praised Nidal Malik Hasan on his website by saying, “Hasan did the right thing in attacking soldiers preparing to deploy for Afghanistan and Iraq.”
The Authors David Johnston and Scott Shane are portraying this article as a terrible thing that happened. In the article they focus a lot on how the Federal Bureau of Investigation handled everything before and after the shootings. The authors seem confused on how the FBI knew Hasan had contact with a radical Muslim overseas, but they did not do anything about it. Hopefully the FBI will learn from this mistake and do more investigation in the future to prevent future radical Muslims from attacking innocent Americans.

http://cnn.mv/2009/US/11/05/fort.hood.suspect/index.html

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/10/us/10inquire.html?scp=5&sq=muslim%20violence&st=cse

Obama @ Notre Dame?

President Obama was invited to the University of Notre Dame on May 17, to give a commencement speech and receive an honorary doctor of law degree. When this news reached Notre Dame Students and the rest of the nation, it caused great controversy. The University of Notre Dame has been a Catholic institution since it was founded by Father Edward Sorin in 1842. President Obama does not agree with the Catholic Church on some of the main principles that the Catholic Church teaches. President Obama supports abortion rights and he supports embryonic stem cell research. He just recently lifted a ban on federal financing for both of these issues. There has been a debate in the United States on whether or not Catholic Universities should honor someone who does not follow everything the Catholic Church believes in. The United States Conference of Catholic Bishops said, “That Catholic institutions should not honor those who act in defiance of our fundamental moral principles.” More then 210,000 people signed a petition online supporting for the invitation for President Obama to speak at graduation to be revoked. Professors on campus hope President Obama uses the visit to Notre Dame as a way to open up more dialogue about these life issues.
I do not think President Obama should have been invited to speak at the University of Notre Dame. I would be upset if I was a student at Notre Dame because President Obama believes in abortion and embryonic cell research, which are both opposed by the Catholic Church. Students who go to Notre Dame pay lots of money to get an education that is also affiliated with their Catholic religious views. I believe Notre Dame could have picked someone to speak at graduation that openly supports the fundamental morals of the Catholic Church.

http://thelede.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/03/30/obama-visit-to-notre-dame-provokes-debate/

Sonia Sotomayor's Views

When President Obama appointed Sonia Sotomayor to the Supreme Court, everyone assumed she is in favor of pro choice in regards to abortion. President Obama believes women should have abortion rights, so it was just assumed Sonia Sotomayor had the same views when she was appointed. After people started looking into her history and outcomes of past cases, they are starting to worry they do not know exactly where she stands on the issue. In eleven years as a federal appeals court judge she never directly ruled whether or not the constitution protects women’s rights to an abortion. If Sotomayor does not believe in abortion rights, this would not be the first time a President has elected a Supreme Court Justice with different views. The first President Bush elected David H. Souter to the Supreme Court in 1990. Bush assumed he was against abortion, but when it came time to vote on the topic, Souter voted to uphold abortion rights. The same thing could happen with Sonia Sotomayor and President Obama. Abortion rights activists are concerned because they don’t know exactly where Sotomayor stands on the issue.

Abortion is an extremely big politically divisive in the United States. I would think President Obama would make sure Sotomayor is in favor of Abortion rights before he nominated her because it is such a divisive, religious and moral issue. Days after Obama was elected, he choose to give millions of dollars to other others countries in support of abortions when the United States was deeply in debt. The Catholic Church teaches that abortion is killing and is against the Catholic Religion to do so. Sonia Sotomayor was raised as a Roman Catholic (then again...so w was Nancy Pelosi), so it will be interesting to see what she votes for on the issue of abortion when the time comes.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/28/us/politics/28abortion.html?_r=1&scp=5&sq=abortion&st=Search

Republicans Unite

Same-sex marriage has been a highly debated issue in the United States for a long time and it will remain this way in the future. Same-sex marriage is politically divisive in the United States. Conservative and religious people believe marriage is a legal union between a man and a woman. The federal government does not recognize same-sex marriages, but there are currently five states that allow and recognize same-sex marriage. On November 10th, the New York State Senate delayed a vote on a bill that would allow gay and lesbian couples to marry in New York. Although the Senate did not vote for the bill on this day, they agreed to vote on the bill before the end of the year. The delay on this vote will give proponents and opponents time to lobby for their cause. New York Senators believe it is going to be an extremely close vote and they are not sure what the outcome of the bill is going to be. In the New York Senate, there are five democratic Senators who have not committed to voting for the bill. This means for the bill to pass around five Republican Senators would have to vote in favor of same-sex marriage. Democrats do not think they can persuade that many Republicans to vote yes for same-sex marriage. Supporters of the bill would like to have 29 votes from Democrats, so they would only need three votes from Republicans in order for the bill to pass. When the New York Senate finally tackles this bill it will be interesting to see the outcome and how everybody reacts to it.

The Republicans must unite in order to put a stop to the destruction of marraige. The traditions and values that marriage stands for must be upheld with the Republicans joining together voting to keep this tradition sacred.
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/11/nyregion/11albany.html?_r=1&hp

Hitchens Is Not Great

Chris Hitchens, a atheist activist, famous for his hatred towards all types of religion appears on Sean Hannity TV show to discuss his new book, “God is Great.” Hitchens has for a long time criticized many religious public figures and religious views. He is known for his harsh and hateful attitude on life that has helped to become quite the controversial figure in the public. Hitchen begins to explain his view on religions is that he is not an atheist because some atheist will say they “wish there is a God.” The interview continues with Hitchens constantly interrupting Hannity and not allowing him to rebuttal while making the same point over and over again that God is not real. Hitchens is interviews again about his book on a much more liberal TV show, “The Hour.” Hitchen explains that his book is about how religion is going to bring the end civilization. He goes on to say civilization does not need religion to make the grounds of what is right or wrong. He proclaims that Christians do what is right because they are being “blackmailed” to do so.

Hitchen continues to pollute the minds of Americans with his anti-religious views. He uses his snobbish attitude and different facts to put down others and give Americans a false belief that religion is corrupting our nation. Our nation was founded upon the right to pursue any religion and people like Hitchens should not be given any credibility.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0Sq-aMXHeCg&feature=related

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0YPmt8TUoX4&feature=fvw

On Fox News, Glen Beck discusses the topic of same sex marriage and how it can lead to polygamy. He says that changing “traditional marriage” can cause a snowball effect which will eventually allow men and women to have multiple partners at a time. Beck proclaims that once you tear down the rules of traditional marriage and allow a man and a man to marry or a woman and a woman to marry, which results in ultimately no rule for marriage.
During the show, Beck interviews Jenny Block, the author of the book, “Open.” Block gives her views on how marriage should not be constrained to only a man and a woman. She is currently in a relationship where she is married to her husband but has a girlfriend on the side. Beck explains how that should not be allowed. He insists that if we do not make a law on what is acceptable and unacceptable in marriage, there will be no constraints.
I was raised that marriage is between a man and a woman. Because, I have no way of ever knowing if a gay man or woman chooses their sexual orientation, I cannot take away their rights. That is why I believe we should give everyone the rights to become civil partners. The concept of marriage however, is sacred and should be left for a man and a woman.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xq2kLf1NXt8

Darwish's Speech Canceled

Nonie Darwish, the executive director of Former Muslims and author of Cruel and Usual Punishment: The Terrifying Global Implications of Islamic Law was supposed to be the guest speaker at Columbia and Princeton. However, both events were canceled due to pressure from Muslim groups on campus. Darwish is an Egyptian-American human rights activist, scholar of Islam, and founder of Arabs For Israel. Darwish has been speaking out against the Muslim ever since her father, an Egyptian Lieutenant General was killed in an Israeli Raid.

Nonie is outspoken on how the Muslim culture is threatening lives throughout America. Arab Society president Sami Yabroudi and former president Sarah Mousa issued a joint statement, claiming: “Nonie Darwish is to Arabs and Muslims what Ku Klux Klan members, skinheads and neo-Nazis are to other minorities, and we decided that the role of her talk in the logical, intellectual discourse espoused by Princeton University needed to be questioned.” To compare a courageous woman standing up for human rights for Muslim women and ex-Muslims with the KKK or neo-Nazis is wrong! Taking away the opportunity for the students at Columbia and Princeton University to hear the true threats that the Muslim culture brings to America is also wrong!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hyuKN-7o6VQ
http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=34558

Fort Hood Shootings

On November 5, 2009, at Fort Hood Army base in Texas, a tragedy occurred. Nidal Malik Hasan, a U.S. Army major, psychiatrist, and American-born Muslim of Palestinian descent shot and killed 13 people while wounding 31. Hasan was shot and incapacitated by civilian police officers where he was put on a ventilator until he became conscious on November 9. Hasan is currently under heavy guard and treated in an undisclosed area of Brooke Army Medical Center at Fort Sam Houston in San Antonio, Texas. He has been charged with 13 counts of premeditated murder and may face additional charges at court-martial.

Due to his Muslim background and Palestinian descent, the Huffington Post reports in an article, “Muslim, Arab Groups Condemn Fort Hood Shooting, Brace For Backlash” that Arab and Muslim political groups have had to brace themselves for a wave of anger and attacks. The director of government relations for the organization Leigh O'Neill states, “But there is a lot of hate out there and hate is hate. It is bipartisan and doesn't have geographic balance. We feel terrible for the victims today. And I wish people will understand when crime is crime and terrorism is terrorism."

Even though the shootings have shown no signs of correlation between Hasan’s religion or Palestinian descent, it is hard for the public to look past. The Muslim religion praises those who kill infidels by proclaiming in the Koran, “If you catch them, slay them.” No religion or group should ever advocate killing of others because they differ in views. Perhaps if the Arab and Muslim political groups need to change their platform if they do not want to deal with such harsh backlashes!

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/11/05/muslim-arab-groups-condem_n_347777.html

Marriage in D.C.

The debate over same sex marriage has been a hot topic that has heated American minds throughout the decade. The Situation Room on CNN covers the political standoff between the Catholic Charity Groups vs Gay Rights supporters and the DC City Council. In the month of December, the city of Washington D.C. will allow same sex marriage if the bill passes. The Catholic Charity Groups are in an uproar because the bill will force them to sever social service contracts with the city that provides help to over sixty-eight thousand people a year. They would cut contracts because, the bill will force the Catholic Church to allow same sex couples to adopt through them and receive benefits if they work for them. The church argues that they cannot allow this because it goes against their very own fundamentals and teachings. Both the City Council and the Catholic Church do not want each other to separate ways, but the Catholic Church cannot stand behind something that goes against its core beliefs.

I believe the bill should be looked at and rewritten to appease both sides. If same sex marriage is inevitable, then the City Council should allow it in a way that will not take away ones religious rights. The Catholic Charity groups are vital to the D.C. area and the city should do whatever it takes to appease both sides.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J05WusqTmrY

Should Kennedy Receive Communion?

Bishop Thomas Tobin of Province happens to think that Rep. Patrick Kennedy should not be able to participate in one of the Catholics biggest traditions. Tobin questions Kennedy’s Catholic faith due to his support for abortion in America. Rep. Kennedy has responded by saying that Tobin is not allowing him to take community at his church. Tobin proclaims he did write to Kennedy questioning his views on abortion and asking him not to receive communion but has never ordered him or instructed anyone else to not give him communion. Tobin says that Kennedy is held to a higher standard than an ordinary parishioner because of his position as a legislature which allows him to shape abortion laws and policy.

Other bishops and clergyman in the Church have been split on Tobin’s views about Kennedy. Rev. Thomas Reese discusses how the pope has given communion to multiple leaders of countries who support abortion in their country. I believe that Tobin has the right as Kennedy’s Bishop to approach him away from the public eye and help him grow in his faith. It was wrong of the Congressman to publicize Tobin’s views and thoughts.

http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/11/23/kennedy.abortion/index.html

http://www.latimes.com/news/nation-and-world/la-na-kennedy-communion23-2009nov23,0,6964165.story

Speaker Pelosi on "When Life Begins"

The Present Speaker, Nancy Pelosi, was interviewed on CBS about her thoughts on when babies should receive human rights. On August 16, 2008 President Obama responded that he cannot completely answer that question because it is “above his pay grade.” Pelosi however, proclaims herself as a “ardent practicing Catholic” and that the doctors of the church have not been able to make that definition. She then goes on to say that at is a choice for a women to make because “no one can say when life begins.”

It does not take “long study” to discover that the Catholic Church has consistently taught for twenty centuries that abortion is gravely wrong. The Catechism of the Catholic Church cites two of the oldest Christian texts outside of the New Testament, the Didache and the Epistle of Barnabas, both of which condemn abortion explicitly. For all of us, regardless of our religious or political affiliation, the evil of abortion challenges the fundamental principles upon which our nation was founded. The Declaration of Independence speaks of certain inalienable rights: life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. These are not three stand-alone rights; each right presumes the one before it, with the right to life as the most basic. Our right to happiness is limited by another’s right to liberty. And our right to liberty is limited by another’s right to life. Nancy Pelosi has done little to find an honest national resolution to the question of abortion.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nM2VqqNLWxQ

An Eye For An Eye?

On May 31, 2009, Scott Roeder purportedly took the words of the bible literally, “an eye for an eye” when he murdered Dr. Geroge Tiller. Tiller, the former executive director of one of three clinics in the United States who provide late term abortions was shot and killed in his church the morning of May 31st. The article New York Post article, “Abortion Doctor Tiller Gunned Down at Church,” recaps this tragic event and the effects it has had on Tillers family. Tiller’s wife proclaims this heinous action committed by Roeder as “a loss for the city of Wichita and women across America.” The writer described Tiller as a “courageous provider” and a man who was “making a change.”
In 1973 the United States Supreme Court decided in the landmark case Roe v. Wade to make abortion legal in the United States. The Court held that a woman may abort her pregnancy for any reason, up until the "point at which the fetus becomes viable.” This controversial decision has been a heated debate for decades. Christianity will argue that Dr. Tiller has committed murder for years on the babies who he “aborted.” The death of Dr. Tiller is truly a tragic loss for his family. Yet, is it right to call a man who in many people’s eyes committed murder throughout the majority of his life on innocent babies who never had the gift of taking their first breathe. Was he really “courageous” and making a “change”?

http://www.nypost.com/p/news/national/abortion_doctor_tiller_gunned_down_Qvr8I7zphKh8Kf8pnfSTMK

Speaker Pelosi’s “Long Studies”

Just before the Democratic Convention, Nancy Pelosi was asked how she squared her pro-abortion position with her Catholic faith. The Speaker affirmed that she is an ardent, practicing Catholic, and that she has studied this question for a long time. The results of her study are a source of amazement to us, both fellow practicing Catholics, as they are to the bishops of our Church. Apparently Mrs. Pelosi’s research shows her that the Catholic condemnation of abortion is of recent vintage.
The Speaker referred to St. Augustine, and it seems that her long studies have been centered on medieval debates about when an unborn child receives a soul. These philosophical speculations never called into question the fact that abortion is seriously wrong; they concerned the nature of the sin involved. It is intriguing that Mrs. Pelosi appeals to a fourth-century understanding of biology to defend her pro-abortion stance. Secular liberals often deride Christians as simplistic in their approach to science – the condemnation of Galileo, resistance to the theory of evolution, and so on – and yet the Speaker defends her position on abortion by primitive views of science.
It was only with the invention of the microscope that scientists were able to understand what the process of conception entails. Nor can science answer the question of whether a soul exists, much less when an unborn child receives it. What science does demonstrate is that from the moment of conception we are dealing with a developing human with its own unique DNA. It is nonsense, biologically, to argue about when human life begins: it begins when a human sperm and ovum unite and bring into existence a new, unique and unrepeatable human being.
But then Mrs. Pelosi sweeps aside the speculations prompted by her long study: “The point is, is that it shouldn’t have an impact on the woman’s right to choose.” There is the great mantra of the pro-abortion movement: “a right to choose”. It is a sentence purposely left unfinished, begging the question, “Choose what?” To deliberately end the life of another human being? It is deeply disturbing that Nancy Pelosi could give the impression on national television that such a position is consistent with Catholic teaching. To make such a claim demonstrates either appalling ignorance or a willful misrepresentation of the facts.
Many Roman Catholic bishops have stated that the Speaker has seriously misrepresented Catholic teaching. To date, Mrs. Pelosi has refused to retract what she said. The bishops should press for a public retraction. Integrity demands nothing less: the debate over abortion will no doubt go on for some time, but Americans on both sides of the debate deserve a dialogue based on fact, not fiction.

http://www.catholicnewsagency.com/new.php?n=13638

God before country

Wednesday last, September 30, more that two hundred Orange County Republican activist gathered at the prestigious Balboa Bay Club to launch the campaign of conservative Republican candidate for the state assembly Don Wagner, the attorney president of the South Orange County Community College District. The broad base and enthusiastic gathering of local GOP donors and activists was opened with prayer. Long time GOP former chairman Tom Fuentes said, "As we gather to launch this campaign, we do as Republicans always do in the Orange County Community when they gather. We begin our time together with prayer."
With that, the state wide newly elected chairman of the California young republicans, Shawn Fago delivered a profound invocation to the Deity with all heads bowed. The striking moment led by the youngest generation of the local GOP demonstrated the ingrained traditional values of the South Orange County community, which includes the 70th district. Millionaires and precinct walking volunteers prayerfully and equally stood shoulder to shoulder with yachts and the bay as their backdrop. As with the Pledge of allegiance to the flag of the United States, which followed the invocation, the moment told the seriousness with which local republicans view the election process. Ask any of them, and the protocol of God before Country is their tradition!