The Courts Say Catholic TV Must Comply With Contraception, etc.

The Global Catholic Television Network (EWTN), a Catholic-themed television network founded in 1980 in a garage studio by a nun, has been denied protection from the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) contraception mandate following a decision last week by District Judge Callie V. Granade of Mobile, AL.

 

A statement posted on EWTN’s website and Facebook page by CEO Michael P. Warsaw expressed his disappointment with the decision and said that EWTN will seek an appeal to the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals in Atlanta, GA.  “We are extremely disappointed with the decision reached by the court in this case.  The opinion issued is clearly inconsistent with the decisions reached in nearly all of the cases decided to date.  The fact that the court has dismissed the serious issues of conscience and religious freedom that EWTN has raised is very troubling.  As an organization that was founded by Mother Angelica to uphold the teachings of the Catholic Church, we do not believe that contraception, abortion-inducing drugs and voluntary sterilization should be defined as health care.  We simply cannot facilitate these immoral practices.  We have no other option but to continue our legal challenge of the mandate.  We are making an immediate appeal to the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals in Atlanta.”

 

EWTN is the largest religious media network in the world, and its television schedule includes recordings of Catholic Mass, along with other religion and theological-based shows.  In addition to its television station, EWTN also has publishing, electronic and print media, and radio divisions to further spread the Catholic faith.

 

It’s hard to deny the religious conviction and mission that is behind the work of EWTN.  Contraception, abortion, and sterilization are viewed by faithful Catholics as deeply disordered, and it is absurd that a Catholic media network be forced to provide these items for their employees.  

 

Bottom line: HHS … or any U.S. government agency does not have the right to force a company to go against its deeply-held beliefs.

 

Rev. Dr. Kenneth L. Beale, Jr.

Chaplain (Colonel-Ret), U.S. Army

Pastor, Ft. Snelling Memorial Chapel

SCOTUS Unanimous for Pro-Life 1st Amendment Free Speech Against Obamacare

When is the last time you remember the U.S. Supreme Court (SCOTUS) having an unanimous, 9-0, decision?  It’s been a long time!  Well, it just happened.  SCOTUS rejected a lower court decision preventing Susan B. Anthony List (SBAL), a pro-life organization, from suing a Democratic congressman over a ‘freedom of speech’ claim. The case, involving an SBAL advertisement claiming that the Affordable Care Act (a.k.a. Obamacare) funds abortions, will be allowed to move forward.  [I wrote about this in my May 2, 2014 blog entitled – “Should the Free Speech of Proponents of Pro-Life Positions be Protected?”]

 

“Today’s decision [June 16] by the court is a step toward victory for the freedom of speech and the broad coalition of groups who have supported SBAL throughout this case.  The truth or falsity of political speech should be judged by voters, not government bureaucrats,” SBAL President Marjorie Dannenfelser said.

 

During the 2010 election, SBAL funded a campaign telling voters that Congressman Steve Driehaus (D-Ohio) voted for taxpayer-funded abortion because of his vote for Obamacare.  When SBAL sought to place the message on a billboard, Driehaus threatened to sue under an Ohio law that makes it a crime to publish false statements about a candidate.  Due to the lawsuit threat, the billboard owner declined to let SBAL rent the space.  SBAL sued Driehaus, arguing that the lawsuit threat violated their freedom of speech.  The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 6th Circuit ruled that SBAL did not have standing to sue because the case was dismissed after the election was over. SBAL lawyers argued that the group still suffered harm even though they were never prosecuted.  All nine SCOTUS justices agreed and overturned the Appeals Court’s decision.

 

The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) is a pro-choice legal group, but supported SBAL’s freedom of speech concerns in the case.  “Speech is rarely black and white — oftentimes whether a statement is true or false may be a matter of opinion,” ACLU of Ohio Legal Director James Hardiman said in 2010.  “If the government silences one side of the debate, the public is less informed and others may be fearful of criticizing elected officials.  The answer to unpopular speech is not less, but more speech.”

 

While some have claimed the case is about a “right to lie” in elections, Dannenfelser argued not only for her group’s free speech rights, but that the SBAL claims are true.  “It is beyond dispute that Obamacare contains multiple abortion-funding provisions,” she said.  “This reality will continue to be an issue in the mid-term elections and future election cycles.  As a result of the SCOTUS’s decision, SBAL is now one step closer in its quest to unleash the 1st Amendment from the constraints imposed by Ohio’s unconstitutional false speech statute.  We are optimistic that the district court will rule quickly and will side with the 1st Amendment, so that we may proceed in Ohio — without fear of prosecution — with our ongoing efforts to inform voters that their elected representatives voted for taxpayer funded abortion.”

 

In the oral arguments for the case, SCOTUS Justice Stephen Breyer, one of the court’s liberal members, pointed out that abortion funding in the Affordable Care Act (ACA) is as least a disputed question, noting that the Court had recently heard arguments in a case involving two Christian-owned companies – Hobby Lobby and Conestoga Woods Specialties – that sued over the ACA’s birth control mandate, which, they argue, requires them to cover abortifacients.

 

Rev. Dr. Kenneth L. Beale, Jr.

Chaplain (Colonel-Ret), U.S. Army

Pastor, Ft. Snelling Memorial Chapel

Liberal Progressives Waging War on Christians … with the Weapons of Intimidation and Coercion

Former Congressman Allen West has said, “Liberal progressives like to say there is a ‘War on Women’ but there is a real war in America the Left is waging – which is a ‘War on Christians’ and the Judeo-Christian faith heritage of America.”

 

Many fall upon the phrase “separation of church and state,” yet they cannot refer to that premise as established in any of our founding documents – the Declaration of Independence or U.S. Constitution. It’s not even mentioned in the Federalist Papers … which formed the philosophical basis for our ‘Constitutional Republic.’  The concept of “separation of church and state” was presented in a private letter by Thomas Jefferson to the Danbury (CT) Baptist Convention.  The letter advanced the 1st Amendment right of “freedom of religion” and the “free exercise … thereof.”  However, over time, liberal progressive socialists have used “separation of church and state” to separate America from its faith heritage in their march towards the creation of a secular humanist state.

 

Here is the latest example of such insanity by the Left, coming from Brawley CA.  According to Fox News, the Brawley Union School District said the references to Jesus and prayer in student Brooks Hamby’s graduation speech were “inappropriate” and violated “prevailing legal standards.”  School officials rejected three versions of the young man’s graduation address, and one administrator went so far as to redact every religious reference with a black marker.

 

The response from the school district read, “The first and second draft speeches proposed oppose government case law and are a violation of the Constitution.  The district is advising you that reference to religious content is inappropriate and that the two drafts provided will not be allowed.”  In other words, this young man doesn’t possess the 1st Amendment right to his “free exercise of religion.”

 

What hypocrisy from the liberal progressives!  What is happening in America?

 

This 18-year-old Christian, who is Stanford University bound, did what any red-blooded, Constitution-loving American would do – he defied school officials and thanked God anyway.  “I didn’t want to compromise my faith,” Brooks said.  “I wasn’t interested in removing every trace of God or Jesus.  I wasn’t interested in conforming to those demands.  I did not want to compromise my values.  I didn’t want to water down the message.”

 

The first draft of his speech was written in the form of a prayer. “Heavenly Father, in all times, let us always be kind to one another, tenderhearted, forgiving one another, as God in Christ has forgiven us.” Brooks was called to the front office, where he was advised by a counselor that the speech had been rejected.  So he began writing a second draft that he turned in later that day.  That draft referenced the school’s censorship of his original speech.  “Certain interpretations of the law, school policies and conditions have stifled my ability to speak freely to you this evening and prohibited me from doing otherwise,” he wrote. “However, if I could pray with you this evening, I would say something along these lines.”

 

Just hours before graduation, Brooks and his parents were summoned to a meeting with the principal.  The Hambys were given a notice from the district advising them that if their son “interjects religious content, the sound will be cut off, and a disclaimer to the entire audience must be made explaining the district’s position.”  The District Superintendent rejected Brooks’ third draft, time was running down — and so what did the young man do?  Here are his words:

 

“In simply coming before you today, I presented three drafts of my speech – all of them denied on account of my desire to share my personal thoughts and inspiration to you in my Christian faith,” he told his fellow graduates in the fourth version of his speech.  “In life, you will be told no.  In life, you will be asked to do things that you have no desire to do.  In life, you will be asked to do things that violate your conscience and your desire to do what is right.” “May the God of the Bible bless each and every one of you every day in the rest of your lives,” he said.

 

In a day when Brooks’ faith was challenged, he stood.  He set an example for others to follow.  The question is, will you?  Or will you allow the intimidation and coercion of liberal progressives to rule the day, as opposed to the liberty and freedom granted to us by the rule of law?

 

Rev. Dr. Kenneth L. Beale, Jr.

Chaplain (Colonel-Ret), U.S. Army

Pastor, Ft. Snelling Memorial Chapel

A Black-robed Tyrant Back-peddles in Wisconsin

One week after overturning Wisconsin’s same-sex marriage ban, Federal Judge Barbara Crabb has issued (June 14) a stay on her initial ruling (June 7), ending (for now) same-sex marriages in the state.  Crabb cited the Herbert decision by the US Supreme Court wherein the court ordered a stay in a similar case in Utah.  “[A] federal district court is required to follow the guidance provided by the Supreme Court,” she wrote. “Because I see no way to distinguish this case from Herbert, I conclude that I must stay any injunctive relief pending appeal.”  She also cited the confusion among county clerks as to the legitimacy of issuing same-sex licenses as a further reason to issue a full stay.

 

Milwaukee and Dane counties immediately began issuing licenses June on 7th.  Many county clerks initially refused to do so, but then caved to pressure from homosexual activists.  Eventually, only 12 of the 72 counties stood their ground, following the directives of Attorney General J.B. Van Hollen, stating that, “County clerks do not have authority under Wisconsin law to issue same-sex marriage licenses.”

 

Van Hollen issued a statement after Judge Crabb’s decision to stay her ruling expressing gratefulness.  “I am very pleased that Judge Crabb has … fully stayed her ruling,” he said.  “She has confirmed that Wisconsin’s law regarding same-sex marriage remains in full force and effect … ”

 

Van Hollen is appealing the ruling to the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals in Chicago.  While the appeals process could potentially take years to decide, many expect that the U.S. Supreme Court will ultimately render a decision on the issue much sooner from a state that is further along in the appeals process than Wisconsin.

 

Wisconsin is the 15th consecutive state in the last year to watch its homosexual marriage ban struck down by a federal judge’s pen.  The state’s constitutional amendment, solidifying that marriage is between one man and one woman, passed overwhelmingly (59-41%) by Wisconsin voters in 2006.

 

“It’s very sad that something approved by voters and represented as the law in every state for the first 200-years of the Republic is all of a sudden declared unconstitutional,” lamented Wisconsin State Senator Glenn Grothman following Crabb’s initial ruling.  “This will further the complete lack of respect that the public has for the judiciary.”

 

Tony Perkins, president of the Family Research Council, a national policy advocacy group based in Washington D.C., likewise issued a public statement on Crabb’s ruling.  “The courts, for all their power, can’t overturn natural law,” he said.  “What they can do is incite a movement of indignant Americans, who are tired of seeing the foundations of a free and just society destroyed by a handful of black-robed tyrants.”

 

Judge Crabb has received criticism in the past for what many perceive as judicial activism.  She was reprimanded by a higher court in 2010 for unsuccessfully trying to strike down the National Day of Prayer as unconstitutional.

 

Governor Scott Walker has largely been silent following Crabb’s latest ruling.

 

Some in the state are calling for Walker to respond, contrasting Walker’s silence with responses like that from Texas Governor Rick Perry after their marriage amendment was attacked by a federal judge in February, “[I]t is not the role of the federal government to overturn the will of our citizens. The 10th Amendment guarantees Texas voters the freedom to make these decisions, and this is yet another attempt to achieve via the courts what couldn’t be achieved via the ballot box,” Perry wrote in an official statement.  “We will continue to fight for the rights of Texans to self-determine the laws of our state.”

 

Rev. Dr. Kenneth L. Beale, Jr.

Chaplain (Colonel-Ret), U.S. Army

Pastor, Ft. Snelling Memorial Chapel

‘Big Brother’s’ Brainwashing (a.k.a. sensitivity training) of American Christians … Coming to a Town Near You!

I wrote about the case in my December 23, 2013 blog entitled – “Going to Jail for Not ‘Frosting the Cake’” [consider going back and reading the posting]

 

Now Colorado’s Civil Rights Commission has ordered this local Christian baker (Jack Phillips, owner of Masterpiece Cakeshop in Lakewood, CO) to undergo sensitivity training.  The Commission ruled that he could not refuse to bake cakes for gay weddings … citing his Christian faith.

 

In an interview with The Christian Post, Jack’s pro bono lawyer, Nicolle Martin (of Alliance Defending Freedom), said the sensitivity training was pointless, because her client does not discriminate against gays, and the order for sensitivity training, which became effective on June 2, cannot be seriously implemented because it is “vague” and “lousy.”  “The [sensitivity] training is really for the entire staff and it’s for him to conduct training for his staff.  It’s kind of vague.  He just has to report that he’s done it.  It’s very vague,” said Martin, who lamented that the haphazard order was as a result of unqualified people sitting on the commission.  “This is the problem where a bunch of lay people are making decisions about someone’s livelihood and other people’s jobs where the state has decided, has told Mr. Phillips, you don’t have any 1st Amendment rights,” explained Martin.  “You must express our message, we are the investigator; we are the prosecutor; we are the judge; we are the jury.  And this is what you end up with.  A lousy order that is vague and lacking specificity,” she added.

 

When asked why she did not seek clarification from the Commission, Martin said she and her client were not allowed to speak.

 

According to Martin, Phillips is also required to keep a log of every person he refuses service and document the reason why, and present that log to the Commission on a quarterly basis.  “The order says he must report on any orders — whether it be a cake or a brownie or cookies — turned away and the reason for doing so,” said Martin, who explained that the commissioners had, at one point, suggested that Phillips provide a log of every single transaction highlighting the sexual orientation of the customer.

 

“Even though the Commission [had] suggested that he report on every single transaction and whether the customer was gay, the Attorney General reminded the Commission that that would be illegal for Jack to ascertain a customer’s sexual orientation,” said Martin. “Thankfully, the order was clarified to say report quarterly on any celebrations or orders turned away and the basis for doing so.”

 

The Christian Post reached out to the Commission for comment, but did not receive a reply at the time of publication.

 

According to the Commission’s website, the bipartisan 7-member group of commissioners are citizens of Colorado appointed by Democratic Gov. John Hickenlooper and confirmed by the state’s Senate to serve voluntary four-year terms.  “They are selected from across the state to represent both political parties.  Two represent business (one of whom represents small business); two represent government; and three represent the community-at-large.  At least four of the members are members of groups of people who have been or who might be discriminated against because of disability, race, creed, color, sex, national origin, ancestry, sexual orientation, marital status, religion or age,” the website noted.

 

As defense attorney Martin said last December – “American citizens should not have to live in fear of a prison sentence [or sensitivity training] merely for disagreeing with the government’s opinion.  All Americans should remain free to honor God in our lives and in our work.  The government has no business threatening Americans with jail time [or ‘brainwashing’] for simply exercising their constitutionally-protected freedoms of religion and speech.  Every American, whatever you think about this issue, should fear a government that ignores the 1st Amendment in order to exercise this kind of power over its citizens.”

 

Rev. Dr. Kenneth L. Beale, Jr.

Chaplain (Colonel-Ret), U.S. Army

Pastor, Ft. Snelling Memorial Chapel

A Couple of Liberals Call-Out Their Own for Muzzling Conservative Voices

Silencing and marginalization of conservative voices have become commonplace in the United States, as amazingly highlighted by former New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg.

 

Just the other week, Bloomberg spoke about universities becoming bastions of intolerance.  “This spring, it has been disturbing to see a number of college commencement speakers withdraw - or have their invitations rescinded - after protests from students and - to me, shockingly - from senior faculty and administrators who should know better,” Bloomberg said at a commencement speech at Harvard University, according to CNN.

 

Bloomberg referred to an October speech by former police commissioner, Ray Kelly, at Brown University, which canceled the speech after a protest by those who were opposed to the police department’s stop-and-frisk policy.  The former mayor had several other incidents to cite, including at Rutgers.  “In each case, liberals silenced a voice - and denied an honorary degree - to individuals they deemed politically objectionable.  This is an outrage,” added Bloomberg.  “We cannot deny others the rights and privileges that we demand for ourselves.  And that is true in cities and it is no less true in universities where the forces of repression appear to be stronger now, I think, than at any time since the 1950s,” he told graduates.  “There is an idea floating around college campuses, including here at Harvard, I think, that scholar should be funded only if they’re work conforms to a particular view of justice.  There’s a word for that idea - censorship - and it is just a modern form of McCarthyism.”  Bloomberg called conservative academicians “endangered species.”  “Today, on many college campuses, it is liberals trying to repress conservative ideas, even as conservative faculty members are at risk of becoming an endangered species,” he said.

 

Bloomberg also criticized Republicans and Democrats in Washington, where, he said, decisions are reached “not by engaging with one another, but by trying to shout each other down.”

 

In an op-ed for USA Today, Kristen Powers, an American political pundit, analyst and media personality on Fox News, blasted what she called the “virtual manhunt” of Mozilla chief Brendan Eich.  “His heresy was a private donation in support of an anti-gay marriage initiative six years ago.  Mob rule enforcing groupthink is as illiberal as it gets, and yet it was liberals demanding uniformity of thought - or else,” she wrote in April.

 

It’s refreshing to hear a couple of liberals speak the truth about the intolerance of those who cry the loudest for tolerance.

 

Rev. Dr. Kenneth L. Beale, Jr.

Chaplain (Colonel-Ret), U.S. Army

Pastor, Ft. Snelling Memorial Chapel

Where is the Righteous Indignation for Christian Persecution?

If a million deaths are a statistic (i.e., abortion in America), while a suicidal death is a tragedy (i.e. drug overdosing actors), then what is the genocide of Christians by militant Muslims all over the world?  Not even news worthy among mainstream news outlets.  And where is the U.S. government in protecting the religious liberty of U.S. citizens as provided by our U.S. Constitution?  The Obama Administration … who has the responsibility of enforcing our laws … is AWOL!  Let me sight a few examples.

 

Just last week (6 Jun), I posted an extensive blog on the plight of Meriam Ibrahim, a Christian woman, who was sentenced by a Sudanese court (under Shariah Law) to 100-lashes prior to her being hanged. Her crimes? – “apostasy” (for being a Christian) and “adultery” (for marrying a Christian man). [read the 6 Jun blog posting for more information]

 

Stop!  Listen!  Can you hear the outrage from American feminists. No!  But poor Sandra Fluke can be heard defending ObamaCare for her birth control pills? Meriam Ibrahim’s situation is a “war on women” that feminists and politicians should get behind!

 

Since President Obama famously told us that America is no more exceptional than any other country, thus placing all nations on the same moral plain, U.S. diplomats might be reluctant to make a big push here for fear of appearing culturally judgmental. Yet, Obama’s bombing Libya without congressional approval … resulting in Muslim rebels that brought down Egypt’s Mubarak regime or aiding rebels trying to overthrow Syria’s government are okay.

 

What’s this administration doing in response to Muslims in the Central African Republic who stormed a Catholic church in the capital city of Bangui last week and massacred at least 30-people?  A Washington Times article notes that “members of the Seleka rebel coalition looted, raped and killed Christians upon seizing control of Bangui last year.”

 

Or how about in Nigeria, where the Muslim group Boko Haram has kidnapped 275-schoolgirls targeted for their Christian faith and threatening to sell them as slaves?  [read the details in my 12 May blog posting]  At least a Tweet from First Lady Michelle Obama asked – “#Bring Back Our Girls.” Over the last 2-years, Boko Haram, which means, “western education is evil,” has burned churches and schools and raped, tortured and killed thousands of Christians; yet, former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton would not declare Boko Haram as a terrorist group.

 

Or how about in Iran, pastor Saeed Abedini, a 33-year old Idaho resident, serving 8-years in prison for the crime of trying to convert Muslims to Christianity. [read my blog posting of 24 Feb]  His wife Naghmeh and their two children still reside in Idaho. She has been to Washington and to the United Nations, lobbying for his release.  Hospitalized (recently) for “treatment of life-threatening injuries, including internal bleeding sustained from frequent beatings by prison guards,” according to Fox News, Mr. Abedini managed on April 20 to get out an Easter message, which read in part: “Jesus said to His Disciples: ‘Whoever wants to be my disciple must deny themselves and take up their cross and follow me’. (Matthew 16:24)” The courageous Mr. Abedini is bearing a cross that few would carry.

 

Over the last decade, about 1-million of that war-scarred nation’s 1.5 million Christians have fled Iraq to other countries. Some of them settled in Syria, where they have become targets of al-Qaeda-allied rebel factions. Open Doors, which documents religious persecution, reports that 14 of the 15 most oppressive countries persecuting Christians are Muslim majority nations. The 15th is communist North Korea.  [read my 18 Nov blog about 80-people being executed for possessing a Bible]

 

As Christians are massacred daily across the world by Muslim terrorists, we have heard very little from a White House that badgers us almost daily about “tolerance.”

 

Clearly, it’s up to us as fellow Christians to make sure that people like Meriam Ibrahim, Saaed Abedini, and the growing list of victims are not forgotten and that many prayers are lifted on their behalf.  Why?  Because Christians … like the American soldier … leaves no one behind.  It’s a shame this administration will rescue a deserter and do nothing for persecuted U.S. citizens whose civil right to freely exercise their religion is denied them.

 

Rev. Dr. Kenneth L. Beale, Jr.

Chaplain (Colonel-Ret), U.S. Army

Pastor, Ft. Snelling Memorial Chapel

Obama Exchanges Top Taliban Leaders for a Deserter, and Does Nothing for Imprisoned Family of U.S. Citizen … Persecuted for Being Christian

As of the posting of this blog, all the media is talking about is the Obama Administration’s deal to free an U.S. armed forces service member in exchange with five Taliban prisoners.  Putting aside the assortment of controversy surround it, I’d like to know what this administration is doing to free the family of an American citizen imprisoned because they are Christians.

 

As of this writing, Meriam Ibrahim, who is 27 – raised as a Christian in Sudan by her Ethiopian Orthodox mother and reportedly abandoned at age 6 by her Muslim father – sits shackled in a cell of the Omdurman Federal Women’s Prison in Sudan … along with her two children (Martin and Maya).  This is the family of an American citizen … being persecuted for their Christian faith by a foreign government.

 

Meriam’s husband is Daniel Wani, a naturalized U.S. citizen, who, according to the Manchester Union Leader, moved from Sudan to New Hampshire in 1998.  He was naturalized in 2005.  In December 2011, according to the Daily Mail, he and Meriam were married in a Christian church in Sudan.  Their son, Martin, was born 20-months ago in Sudan.  Their daughter, Maya, was just born in the Omdurman prison.

 

So how did they end up in a Sudanese prison?  What’s the crime?  In Sudan, the children of Muslim fathers are not allowed to be Christians … no matter what their hearts, minds and souls tell them.  Freedom of conscience does not exist.

 

On May 15, a Sudanese court convicted Meriam of “apostasy” because she refused to renounce her Christianity and become a Muslim.  For this ‘crime’ the Sudanese court sentenced her to death.  The court also convicted Meriam of “adultery” – for her relationship with her own husband – because Sudan refuses to recognize the marriage of a Christian man to a Muslim woman.  For this ‘crime,’ the court sentenced her to be flogged before she is hanged.

 

Martin is in jail with his mother because Sudan considers him to be a Muslim, too, and will not release him to his Christian father.  Sudan will allow Meriam to nurse the infant Maya in prison for 2-years … then they will hang Meriam.

 

Meriam has demonstrated a saintly courage.  Husband, Daniel, recounted for the Daily Mail a conversation she had with him when he was allowed to visit her in prison.  “If they want to execute me then they should go ahead and do it because I’m not going to change my faith,” she told her husband.  “I refuse to change.  I am not giving up Christianity just so that I can live.  I know I could stay alive by becoming a Muslim and I would be able to look after our family, but I need to be true to myself.”

 

British Prime Minister David Cameron has personally spoken out in defense of this wife of a U.S. citizen.  “The way she is being treated is barbaric and has no place in today’s world,” Cameroon told the Times of London.  “Religious freedom is an absolute, fundamental human right.  I urge the government of Sudan to overturn the sentence and immediately provide appropriate support and medical care for her and her children. The U.K. will continue to press the government of Sudan to act.”

 

So what has President Barack Obama personally said about the plight of this U.S. citizen’s family?  So far, nothing.  What has Secretary of State John Kerry personally said?  So far, nothing.  Spokespersons at the White House and the State Department have made statements, but not the president or the secretary of state.

 

Daniel Wani told the Daily Mail that the U.S. Embassy in Khartoum has not been helpful to him.  “They said, ‘Well your wife isn’t American, so we can’t help,’”  Wani said. “I felt disgusted.  My home is in America, and still they won’t help.  It’s getting uglier, and it’s not going in the right direction.”  “I have provided wedding documents and the baby’s birth certificate, but this is clearly not enough,” he said.  “It’s very upsetting that they don’t believe me.”  Wani said the embassy wanted DNA evidence to prove his son was his son.  “They want me to take a DNA sample in Khartoum, then send it to the U.S. for testing,” Wani told the Mail.  “It’s as if they don’t believe a word I say.”  Citing the Privacy Act, State Department Spokesperson Jen Psaki initially declined to concede that Daniel Wani was a U.S. citizen.  Then Wani signed a Privacy Act waiver and Psaki stated that he was a citizen, but would not concede that his children Martin and Maya are also citizens.  “We don’t have all the information we would need in this case,” she said.

 

The administration appears to be playing hardball with Daniel Wani when it comes to establishing the citizenship of his children; but softball with the Sudanese government when it comes to protecting those children and their mother.

 

Perhaps the administration has been working intensely behind the scenes to free this family and is wary of saying something publicly that would hurt rather than help the cause.  That would be understandable.  Or perhaps working out the deal to free five Taliban prisoners was more important to this administration than working to free the family of an American citizen imprisoned because they are Christians.  You be the judge!

 

Rev. Dr. Kenneth L. Beale, Jr.

Chaplain (Colonel-Ret), U.S. Army

Pastor, Ft. Snelling Memorial Chapel

Ethics is Trumped by Politics in Obama Administration

It seems to be endless –

 

• The former Secretary of Veteran Affairs Eric Shinseki of the past 5+ years oversees the scandalous treatment of veterans in VA hospitals where veterans where left to die without proper follow-up treatment.

 

• The former Secretary of Health and Human Services Kathleen Sebelius of the false promises and ill-started Affordable Care Act was cited by the U.S. Office of Special Counsel for violating the Hatch Act, as she improperly campaigned for Obama’s re-election while serving as a Cabinet secretary.

 

• Former IRS official Lois Lerner used the federal tax-collection agency to go after groups deemed too conservative.  She invoked the 5th Amendment to avoid telling Congress the whole truth.

 

• Susan Rice, the former U.N. Ambassador (now National Security Advisor) flat out deceived the public on 5-television appearances about the Benghazi catastrophe.  She insisted that the deaths of 4-Americans were due to a spontaneous riot induced by a video even though she had access to intelligence fingering al-Qaeda-affiliated terrorists as the culprits.

 

• Former Secretary of the State Department Hillary Clinton left office with American foreign policy in shambles.  She has been unable to make the argument for a single initiative that was made with success.  Clinton infamously dismissed the lingering mysteries surrounding the Benghazi deaths with, “What difference at this point does it make?”  She also refused to place the now-infamous Nigerian terrorist group Boko Haram on a State Department terrorist watch list.

 

• Eric Holder (who should be former) Attorney General is the first attorney general to have been held in contempt of Congress.  Aside from his divisive language (calling America “a nation of cowards” and referring to African-Americans as “my people”), Holder always seems to find himself at the center of scandals.  He permitted the federal monitoring of the Associated Press journalists.  He green-lighted the Fast and Furious gun-running scam.  He has failed to bring to account rogue IRS officials.

 

• Do we remember former EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson?  She fabricated for herself an alternate identity as a mid-level EPA employee.  In communications, she used a fake e-mail address and name, and then honored her own alter ego as a “scholar of ethical behavior.”

 

• Former Secretary of the Department of Energy Steven Chu left under a cloud of controversy involving crony capitalists getting millions of dollars in green loans that produced nothing but failed companies.

 

• Former Labor Secretary Hilda Solis slipped out of office, battling accusations of Hatch Act violations and freebie rides on private jets from insider union friends.

 

• Former top officials such as Timothy Geithner, Peter Orszag and Larry Summers have given new meaning to the revolving door between Wall Street and the White House.

 

So what’s the common denominator?  In all of these cases, politics trumped ethics.

 

The question is not whether some Obama Administration officials were incompetent or unethical (or both), but whether there are any left who are not.

 

Rev. Dr. Kenneth L. Beale, Jr.

Chaplain (Colonel-Ret), U.S. Army

Pastor, Ft. Snelling Memorial Chapel

A School District Learns a Lesson After Showing a Promo for Same-Sex Marriage

Last month, students at Craig High School in the Janesville School District (WI) were shown a video that promotes same-sex marriage and condemns supporters of traditional marriage between one man and one woman, according to religious freedom advocacy group Alliance Defending Freedom (ADF).  This one-sided video shows students saying it is “insane” and “outrageous” that “only” 14-states (at the time the video was created) allow same-sex marriage.  According to ADF, the video also shows students responding to Christian objections to same-sex marriage.  Responses included, “Cry me a river, build me a bridge and get over it;” “You guys are basic and nobody likes you;” and “No one cares what you think.”  Clearly the video promoted same-sex marriage and attacked religious views to the contrary.

 

Well the school district came to realize the error of their ways, and ceased to show the video.

 

“Schoolchildren should receive an education that is free from ideological or political bias, and that does not disparage any of their beliefs,” said ADF senior legal counsel Jeremy Tedesco.  “Student indoctrination is inappropriate, especially on an issue as important as marriage.  Students and parents deserve better.  The district recognized its mistake and deserves to be commended.”

 

In a letter, ADF explains that Janesville School District “rightly determined that showing the video contravened its Academic Freedom and Controversial Issues in the Classroom policies,” and that the video’s “disparagement of religious beliefs opposing same-sex marriage likely violated the Establishment Clause.”  The letter also notes that the “Board of Education recognizes students’ ‘right to receive competent instruction in an atmosphere free from bias and prejudice.’”  Moreover, the school’s policy “affirms that '[a]lthough teachers have the right to express their own viewpoints and opinions, they do not have the right to indoctrinate students.’”

 

ADF litigation counsel Jonathan Scruggs added, “Schools are wise to take an unbiased and objective approach when teaching about controversial social issues.  We commend the district for recognizing that the one-sided, anti-religious same-sex marriage video shown in class violated its policies and undermined parental authority.  We hope more school districts follow their lead.”

 

Are you aware of what’s being presented at your local school?  Take a lesson from this Wisconsin school district.

 

Rev. Dr. Kenneth L. Beale, Jr.

Chaplain (Colonel-Ret), U.S. Army

Pastor, Ft. Snelling Memorial Chapel