In Naples, the furor over "Kick A Jew Day" continues

Maybe you've been paying attention to this growing controversy. Maybe not. Either way, it might be instructive to take a look at what's happening in southwest Florida, in the wealthy retirement enclave of Naples.

On November 19, a few students at North Naples Middle School, inspired by an episode of TV's "South Park," instigated a self-proclaimed "Kick A Jew Day" at the school. The students, two of whom themselves are Jewish, kicked a number of other students; it appears that they did not specifically target Jewish students but, rather, students who were "different."

“What the school found out is that it wasn’t ‘kick a Jew day.’ It was a ‘kick a fill-in-the-blank day,’” [Collier County school superintendent Dennis] Thompson said. “Many of the kids who kicked other students kicked someone they didn’t like or someone who is different. The kid who was kicked the most was new to the school. That, to me, is the tragedy. These kids picked on someone who was new to the school.”

The new student is not Jewish.

Thompson said it is unfortunate that one student was kicked for being Jewish but it seems to be an isolated case. He added that all of the students who were suspended had never been in trouble before.

“This is certainly not about religious intolerance. This is about, do you know who your child is communicating with? Do you know who your child is communicating about? The real lesson is that we need to understand what our kids watch and who they communicate with,” he said.

The students involved were disciplined with in-school suspension for one day, and the superintendent says this isn't about religious intolerance. Before reading articles about the incident, I was inclined to agree, knowing only that non-Jewish students were victims of the bullying as well. But then I read about the "South Park" episode in question --which featured Eric Cartman kicking "gingers," or red-haired kids, and I began to wonder how that morphed into "Kick A Jew Day." It certainly seems to suggest that religious intolerance plays more than a passing role in the genesis of this incident, doesn't it, Mr. Superintendent?

But you really only need go as far as the comments to the latest article about the incident to see that intolerance is a significant issue, at least among observers of the controversy (some of whom, it should be noted, do not live in Naples or even in Florida). Comment after comment suggests that this is just "something kids do" and that since the superintendent said it wasn't about religious, everyone should just shut the hell up:

Sounds like a witch hunt in the making to me! If the issue were anything else than hypersensitivity to the word "Jew",this would not even be newsworthy. How long will this "Holocaust mania" continue to cloud peoples minds that there are other people, other religions and cultures or no religious preferences at all that are just as important as those of the Jewish faith? Would "Kick a Muslim Day" be just as dramatic? As was stated by both the article and a previous poster this had absolutely NOTHING to do with raligion or culture? Get it?

******

Who cares? What a bunch of whiners. Only the rich Jews would get all this attention.

Pack up and move back to New York. This news isn't kosher.

******

Kids don't pay attention to the religion of others unless their parents brain wash them.

Facts: There was 2 Jewish kids kicking others too. If you read all the facts, it looks like some kids were horsing around and kicking each other... no matter if they were Jewish or not.

It was the MEDIA that picked out the phrase "Kick a Jew Day" that would sell newspapers... and the MEDIA made an issue of the ONE PHRASE. It is the Naples News that created this problem!!

What are you going to do? Put the kids in jail for horsing around on the playground?

How come no issue is made by the media when kids single out the FAT kids... or the SHORT kids... or the ITALIAN kids... or the MEXICAN kids... or the WHITE TRASH kids... or the BLACK kids or the NERD kids?

Kids can be mean to each other for no reason other than there is nothing else to do at the moment.

It is the fault of the Naples News that this playground horse play got the worldwide attention it did. Do you feel proud of what you did Naples News by making the residents of Naples look like fools? ... just a question

Well, the simple fact is that this wasn't about fat kids or short kids or Italian kids or Mexican kids ... and it would have been just as newsworthy if it were. Instead, somewhere along the way, this prank evolved from mimicking a cartoon to focusing hatred on a particular ethnic group. The fact that two of the miscreants were members of that faith is completely irrelevant. So, where do you suppose kids (at least the ringleaders) are learning that sort of hate, hmmm?

One Collier County School Board member calls the incident a "hate crime." I don't know whether I'd go that far, but I do believe the district's response has been embarrassingly, even painfully tepid. It's a teachable moment ... but instead they appear to want to sweep it under the rug. And yet, in a town like Naples or an area like southwest Florida, I can't say I'm terribly surprised.

Blast Off! Radio today at 4:00 pm EDT: Is it 2010 yet?

We're still more than a year away from the 2010 election, but things are really beginning to heat up here in America's Wang™ despite the cooler temperatures. While the gubernatorial race between state CFO Alex Sink and state attorney general Bill McCollum hasn't really hit its stride yet, there are plenty of fireworks to keep Florida political junkies interested in the U.S. Senate and state AG races.

On the Republican side, the Senate race finds Gov. Charlie Crist still comfortably out in front, but former state House Speaker Marco Rubio is exploiting a few chinks in the Guv's armor. Crist has been working hard to shore up his conservative credentials, but Rubio continues to win straw polls of party faithful in counties across the state. People have scoffed at me, but I've been saying for months that Rubio has a solid shot at winning the Republican nomination, and it's the disaffected conservatives who still run the state GOP who are flocking to him ... and those very same conservatives are the ones who are most likely to vote in the Republican primary next summer. Rubio has an uphill battle, but once the rank-and-file Republicans know who he is, they seem to like him pretty well -- and that spells trouble with a capital "T" for Empty Chair Charlie.

Meanwhile, on the Democratic side, U.S. Rep. Kendrick Meek has enjoyed near-exclusivity in his drive for the nomination, with only a challenge from the likeable yet heavily outnumbered Kevin Burns realistically standing in his way ... until recently. Suddenly, former Miami mayor Maurice Ferre has thrown his hat into the ring ... but there are serious questions about where Ferre's loyalty really lies. Why is Ferre surrounding himself with Republican operatives and Democrats who have worked for Crist in the past? It's an important question, and it deserves an answer ... and you'll get some answers on this afternoon's edition of Blast Off! Radio.

We'll also point and laugh at the Republicans in the state Attorney General race, where GOP voters have an unenviable choice between a Palinesque quitter and an ethically-challenged lieutenant governor -- Holly Benson and Jeff Kottkamp, respectively -- as their nominee for Florida's chief law enforcement officer. The irony is rich ... and so is the schadenfreude!

Of course, we'll undoubtedly have the usual look at health care reform and what's going on in Washington, but we'll also talk some today about the offshore drilling debate in Florida and why you won't "pay less" if we "drill here" and "drill now." We'll discuss the absolutely idiotic "birther" movement and explore why such an utterly false and discredited allegation keeps getting attention (hint: we don't have a liberal media!), and we'll revisit our old friends in Pace, Fla., to see what's next on the horizon in the Christianist assault on the Constitution.

It's sure to be an hour full of insight, intrigue, and hopefully a little insolence. But, as always, you make the show work with your calls, chats, emails, and tweets. It's unbelievably easy to be a part of the show -- in fact, you're just a click away:

TIME: 4:00 pm Eastern TODAY

Click here to listen

Call in number: (646) 716-7543

E-mail: blastoffradio-at-gmail-dot-com

So, what's stopping you? Please join me today for Florida's best online radio show, Blast Off! Radio, for a unique and entertaining look at the issues facing the state, the country, and you.

(cross-posted at FPC Blog)

Pace: the final frontier, chapter 14 — Windfall for the wingnuts

When last we visited the constitutional clusterfuck that is the Pace (Fla.) school prayer issue, we learned that after securing a remarkably undeserved victory in federal district court, the crazed fundies who populate Santa Rosa County next planned to go after the consent decree itself -- the very agreement the county school district signed wherein they vowed to, you know, obey the U.S. Constitution and not have organized prayer in public schools. Leading this fight, as they did for the three Pace High School administrators cleared of wrongdoing, would be Orlando-based Liberty Counsel, a legal organization (in the loosest sense of the term) made up of fundamentalist whackjobs who actually want nothing whatsoever to do with liberty. Instead, according to their website, they are focused on "restoring the culture one case at a time by advancing religious freedom, the sanctity of human life and the traditional family," which naturally means intruding into our bedrooms, our classrooms, our bodies, and our very lives to push their special brand of Christianist uniformity. (Obviously their definition of "culture" differs from that of normal people.)

Well, thanks to all those good folks in Pace and elsewhere who ponied up over $73,000 for the administrators' defense, which cost barely more than $8,500*, Liberty Counsel will get the difference:

The Lay-Freeman Defense Fund, headed by Milton insurance agent Robert Smith, raised $73,388 for Lay and Freeman's defense against charges that they violated a court order to discontinue the practice of faculty-led religious activities at school events and on school property.

"From the outset, we told people who contributed that any money left over from the legal defense fund would be donated to Liberty Counsel," Smith said.

[...]

"We're certainly pleased with the donation," Mathew Staver, founder and chairman of Liberty Counsel, said on Thursday.

[...]

"There's a lot more activity we will do on this case," he said. "We expect to spend more to prepare for this trial that is coming up."

Liberty Counsel is representing Christian Educators Association International, which is seeking to change the agreement between the ACLU and the School District. A hearing is set for Dec. 2 at the federal courthouse in Pensacola.

Yeah, I'm sure you're pleased with the donation, Mat. Just in time to do more of your nefarious, freedom-hating work, like trying to push Christianist prayer back into public schools or encouraging your deluded followers to pray for a liberal (see logo at right). What a bunch of sick fucks.

But you've definitely got one thing going for you on December 2, Mat: home-court advantage. It's clear the political and personal pressure your followers put on the federal court in Pensacola -- not the law -- won you the earlier decision ... and you're probably going to turn the screws again. So much for freedom.

---

* Curiously, the article says $8,908 went to Pensacola attorney Barry Beroset, but according to the same article, $73,388 was raised and $64,840 was donated to Liberty Counsel -- a difference of $8,548. Not sure where the discrepancy comes from ... or whether it really matters. Just an observation ...

Pace: the final frontier, chapter 11 — Trial

As I write this, the criminal contempt trial of Pace High School principal Frank Lay and athletic director Robert Freeman is taking place in federal district court in downtown Pensacola. I went down there this morning to try to get into the courtroom, but as Miss July suggested, I should have gotten there much earlier. (Yes, MJ, I should have listened to you ...) I wasn't able to get in, but it was interesting enough being outside for a short time, eavesdropping on conversations and observing the protestors across the street. Also, I did some livetweeting while I was there.

When I first arrived, I struck up a brief conversation with Benjamin Stevenson, the ACLU attorney who handled the Michelle Winkler case, also a Pace school prayer case, last month. I thanked him for what he and his colleagues were doing and added that it must be difficult in a community like Pensacola to work to defend the Constitution. Had I known at the time who he was, I certainly would have asked him to compare the Winkler case to the Lay/Freeman case; as I understand it, Winkler was not held in contempt because her actions took place at a private event, outside school hours and off school grounds. On the other hand, Lay and Freeman prayed at a luncheon during school hours at the high school (despite U.S. Rep. Jeff Miller's outrageous lies suggesting the opposite), and so I suspect the outcome will be different on that basis alone. Moreover, according to the Pensacola News Journal, the attorneys for the ACLU and for Lay and Freeman have stipulated that the constitutionality of the temporary injunction the men are accused of violating is not to be at issue; therefore, the only issue today is whether or not Lay and Freeman actually violated the order ... and that seems to be pretty clear.

Nevertheless, one attorney who spoke to the group awaiting entry -- to tell us the courtroom was completely full -- indicated that the trial was likely to stretch into the evening. If it goes on until tomorrow -- which would surprise me, since I don't see what really is in controversy from a legal standpoint -- I may try again to attend ... and get there earlier than I did today. Stay tuned.

Again, specific observations from the morning are available on my Twitter feed if you'd like to see them. Meanwhile, here are some pictures from this morning's protest (click for larger versions and captions):



UPDATE (9/17/09 11:20 am): Almost forgot to note the almost inconceivable irony of this trial taking place on Constitution Day. Too bad the Christianists apparently have forgotten what the Constitution is ... if they ever knew at all.

UPDATE (9/17/09 11:43 am): I meant to add that there were dozens of students, mostly from Pace High School but presumably others as well, in attendance today. More than likely, they skipped school, as one girl says she did, although I can see parents excusing their kids from school for something like this. I also understand that at least one child as young as sixth grade was missing school today to attend the protest.

I guess being at the protest was more important than school -- which is just sad.

Christianist Wingnuts Gone Wild ... again

Contrary to what you might conclude from this blog sometimes, Christianist wingnuts are not confined to northwest Florida. No, indeed -- they're all over the place, and they're trying to make American government all their own (never mind the people of other faiths, or no faith at all). Sure, we have an especially virulent breed of them in America's Taint™, but one need only venture to Kissimmee, in the shadow of Walt Disney World, to see that all of Florida is crawling with anti-Constitution Christianists.

Kissimmee officials have blocked an effort to add "In God We Trust" to the city logo, saying the campaign brought too much negative attention.

Commissioner Art Otero proposed the idea because he feels the country is becoming too liberal on things like homosexuality, abortion and marijuana.

The City Commission withdrew the possible change last week. Mayor Jim Swan said Otero's campaign brought "ridicule" on Kissimmee, and officials has received threats of boycotting local businesses and "future businesses looking elsewhere." Swan also said public employees have been deluged with distracting calls and comment on the issue.

Otero says he has plenty of support, and some residents may start a petition for a voter referendum.

What is it with these people?! What do they not understand about practicing one's faith personally and privately? Look, I'm not anti-Christian -- I've even been known to darken the door of a church or two over the years myself -- but I am anti-Christianist, meaning the people who feel this incessant need to bash everyone over the head with their particular brand of fundamentalist Christianity ... never mind that their neighbors and colleagues and, yes, friends might be Jewish or Muslim or atheist or whatever ...

Mr. Otero, like the school personnel in Pace and so many others, just can't seem to resist that urge to foist their faith on others. Not only is it unseemly, but it's illegal in many instances, at least when (as here and in Pace) it involves the excessive entanglement of government with religion. I seem to remember from having read the Bible a number of times in my younger years that one's faith was supposed to be a private matter, not flagrantly displayed by a bunch of hypocritical wingnuts dislocating their shoulders by patting themselves on the back so much for being "real Christians" or whatever.

If you think America is "too liberal," that's your prerogative. Hell, if you somehow think that adding God to a municipal motto is going to save the world, fine. But it most certainly is not your prerogative to try to turn American government into an unconstitutional Christianist theocracy.

Besides, it's usually the ones who are preaching the loudest who have the most to hide.

Pace: the final frontier, chapter 5 — NOW I get it ... but the high school doesn't

When last we checked in on the whackjob Christianists in Pace, Fla., their battle to ignore the U.S. Constitution had evolved from one purely about organized prayer in public schools to something more abstract but still related, namely, the Santa Rosa County School Board's decision to restrict student speakers at graduation to those selected "on a neutral basis," such as grades. Many of Pace High School's students and others in the community were --and are -- up in arms about the fact that elected student leaders would be barred from speaking, apparently because of the school board's concern that they might offer an organized prayer in violation of a federal consent decree.* Despite my status as a godless DFH, I even allowed that perhaps the Board's restrictions might be a bit "draconian," that is, they might go too far because there was no reason to presume that, say, the student body president would pray in her speech; moreover, if the school instructed the "non-neutral-basis" speakers not to pray, that may be enough to show compliance with the consent decree (PDF).

Boy, was I wrong.

Last evening there was a rally, deceptively titled a "Students' Rights Rally," at Pace Assembly of God, where two of the key players in this drama -- Pace High's student body president and its principal -- spoke. And they left no doubt whatsoever that if other students were allowed to speak at graduation, they would lead organized prayers, and they gladly would violate the consent decree and the Constitution if given the chance.

It may cost him his job, but Pace High School Principal Frank Lay says he won't sit back and watch student leaders be denied a chance to speak at their own graduation — despite worries they may violate a federal consent decree.

"No way are we going to back down, back off, lay down or roll over," he said to the applause of more than 700 people who attended a Students' Rights Rally at Pace Assembly of God on Tuesday night.

A federal judge issued an order in January prohibiting district employees from promoting or endorsing prayers at school functions and organizing school-sponsored religious services.

[...]

Mary Allen, Pace High student body president, thanked those who attended. She will not be allowed to speak at graduation.

"Praise God for students who are not afraid to step out on faith," she said.

Many active and retired teachers were present, as were several Pace High staff members. No district officials or board members were at the rally, organizers said.

Removing student leaders from speaking at graduation is unfortunate and unnecessary, said the Rev. Joey Rogers, pastor of Pace Assembly of God.

"The consent decree signed by the School Board has given away much of our freedoms," he said. "It has been over and above what needed to be done. It is time we stand up because the next generation is counting on that."

Lay said it is time the community takes responsibility.

"The blame game is the devil's game," he said. "It is the devil's distraction for what we need to do, and we need to get busy as Christian people."

Wow. Let's take these one at a time, because I don't think there could have been three quotes that damaged their argument more profoundly than these.

First, Mary Allen: you just guaranteed that you won't get to speak at graduation. If you'd said, "Prayer is a private matter, and while I would pray on my own before speaking, I would comply with the consent decree, follow the Constitution, and refrain from offering a prayer from the lectern," you'd be fine. Instead, you showed exactly why the school board had to make the decision they did -- because you proved that you won't be able to resist praying in public. The board rightfully can't take that chance.

Rev. Rogers, other than grandstanding, I still don't see why you're involved in this at all. (Okay, it was your church hosting the rally, but still ...) No one's freedoms are "given away" by the consent decree; to the contrary, everyone's right to be free from unnecessary intrusion of a specific religious belief has been preserved. You know, the Constitution doesn't exist to guarantee the rights of the majority -- it exists to protect the rights of a minority, even a minority of one, against the forced imposition of majority rule. While white evangelical Christians surely are the overwhelming majority in Pace, Rev. Rogers, that's all the more reason to ensure that your majority doesn't trample the rights of those who are not white evangelical Christians. That's why the Constitution exists, Reverend -- not to push some erroneous and historically inaccurate notion of a "Christian" nation.

Finally, Principal Lay: you of all people should recognize that while you may disagree personally with a particular policy, it is your duty to implement it. It's disgraceful that you forsook a tremendous "teachable moment," an opportunity to explain how the consent decree upholds the Constitution, and instead you chimed in with everyone else to advance your personal beliefs at the expense of knowledge, reason, and true American values. I don't begrudge you your faith, nor would I ever say that you can't pray on your own, even in a public school. But you should know full well that it's disingenuous at best, and hypocritical at worst, to don the mantle of "Christian people" to justify ramming your faith down the collective throats of a community whose members all shouldn't have to be subjected to it. Not everyone believes as you do, Principal Lay, even in Pace. It would do you good to bear that in mind.

As I've explained before, this is not a free speech issue; it is an issue of whether or not the state can "establish" a particular religion. The Constitution cannot be invoked to protect the (Christian majority) students' rights, as the title of the rally sought to convey, but to protect the rights of those students and others who do not necessarily believe in the Christian faith.

It is unfortunate that the federal courts and the ACLU are being characterized as the "bad guys" in all of this, for all they have done is ensure that the Constitution -- the law of the land -- is followed. It is also unfortunate that the principal and others face potential professional discipline or worse because they refuse to obey the consent decree. But unless and until they recognize that they cannot force their faith on others in public schools, they only have themselves to blame for the consequences of their actions.

---

* To my knowledge, no one yet has raised the question of whether the "neutral basis" speakers, the valedictorian and salutatorian, might offer prayers and, if so, what might result therefrom.

Pace: the final frontier, chapter 4 — Pastors continue to grandstand over prayer in school

Earlier today, I promised you posts about two news items regarding the intersection of religion and free speech. The first was about Liberty University forcing its College Democrats chapter to disband because it purportedly does not fit within the university's mission. Locally, though, there's another controversy that, in a way, approaches a similar issue from a completely different angle.

As mentioned previously in Blast Off!'s exclusive series "Pace: the final frontier," the Santa Rosa County School Board entered into a consent decree -- essentially, the settlement of a lawsuit that was not for monetary damages -- in which they promised to discontinue the practice of organizing Christian activities or prayers, such as for Pace High School's baccalaureate service, in response to a lawsuit by the ACLU. But with Pace's graduation approaching, two local pastors have made it their own personal crusade ... and they're only making things worse for everyone.

Rev. Joey Rogers of Pace Assembly of God, who previously had stepped up to help organize a perfectly legal private baccalaureate in compliance with the consent decree, just can't leave well enough alone. In response to a decision by the school board that only the school's valedictorian and salutatorian can speak at graduation, he's planned a "Students' Rights Rally" Tuesday to protest the board's action.

“The School Board has decided no one other than the valedictorian or salutatorian can speak at graduation at all high schools,” said the Rev. Joey Rogers, pastor of Pace Assembly of God. “Pressure from the ACLU has brought them to this place.”

Some Pace High School student leaders were scheduled to speak at graduation on May 30, the Rev. Rogers said.

“I’m sure the word got out that they are very strong Christians and were going to speak,” he said. “So, the School Board took action and cleared the roster because they may say ‘God’ or ‘prayer’ or ‘Jesus’.”

I am so sick of this misstating of the law. No wonder students and others are so confused! Rev. Rogers, have you even read the consent decree? Well, I have, and now you can, too (PDF). It reads in part:

School Officials are permanently enjoined from promoting, advancing, endorsing, participating in, or causing Prayers during or in conjunction with School Events for any school within the School District:

(a) School Officials shall neither offer nor participate in a Prayer during or in conjunction with a School Event.

(b) School Officials shall prohibit non-student third-parties (including clergy or other religious leaders) from offering a Prayer, invocation, benediction, or other religious remarks during or in conjunction with a School Event.

(c) School Officials shall not include Prayer, whether or not it is noted in a printed program, during or in conjunction with a School Event. School Officials shall not authorize students, student groups, a student body (e.g., through an election), or third parties to include Prayer, whether or not it is noted in a printed program, during or in conjunction with a School Event.

(d) School Officials shall not encourage, solicit, or invite any person, either implicitly or explicitly, to deliver or offer a Prayer during or in conjunction with a School Event. School Officials shall not set aside a time for Prayer during or in conjunction with a School Event.

(e) If a School Official elects to review or may by policy review the content of a student's or any other person's planned address during or in conjunction with a School Event, then School Officials shall prohibit the person making the address from offering a Prayer.

[...]

(g) If School Officials select persons to make an address during or in conjunction with [a] School Event, they shall do so by a selection process that is neutral to religion and in compliance with a written policy.

(h) To the extent that School Officials permit a person during or in conjunction with School Events to give an address that a School Official can or does shape, review, or edit for content, substance, message, style, or theme, then School Officials shall instruct the person that the person's address must exclude Prayer.

(Ed. -- capitalized terms are defined elsewhere in the consent decree.)

Apparently, Santa Rosa County school officials determined that if they permitted students other than the valedictorian or salutatorian to speak, they just might offer prayers. Based on my reading of the consent decree, that is a reasonable -- if somewhat draconian -- response. Besides, who's to say that the valedictorian or salutatorian won't offer a prayer? I mean, obviously they'll be told not to do so ... but when has that ever stopped a headstrong teenager?

My biggest problem with Rev. Rogers' diatribe is that nowhere does the consent decree state that a student cannot "say 'God' or 'prayer' or 'Jesus.' " Indeed, there is language in it that specifically forbids school officials from "discourag[ing] students to engage in religious activity." If a teacher, for example, wants to pray privately or in a small group before eating his or her lunch, or if a student says a private prayer before taking a big exam, that's fine. Rev. Rogers and those like him are deliberately muddying the waters to make it seem that no prayer is permissible, when the reality is simply that no organized prayer is permissible ... which, I might add, was what the law allowed even before the consent decree, notwithstanding Pace High's failure to abide by the law.

Meanwhile, speaking of grandstanding, another local pastor who has graced this blog's pixels before, Rev. Matt Cotten, is stirring the pot as well. He spoke yesterday (although he wasn't quoted in the article) at a rally protesting the school board's graduation speaker decision.

"We were not going to promote Christianity at our graduation," said Mary Allen, Pace High's student body president. "The School Board is prohibiting us from speaking because they are afraid we are going to pray, and by doing so, they are taking away our First Amendment rights."

[...]

If a student did pray, officials would have to stop it, Green said. To avoid a disruption to graduation, they decided to allow only student speakers selected on a neutral basis like grade-point average.

[...]

But Milton High senior Christine Mayeaux feels her rights have been violated.

"Rather than protect my rights, the ACLU has taken them away from me," she said. "Now, I won't be able to speak for my classmates as they voted for me to do when they elected me student body president."

While I feel for the respective student body presidents, and perhaps the school board's policy went too far, the fact remains that the policy exists to ensure that the consent decree is followed. I personally would be fine with having the other students speak, with the knowledge that they might face legal sanctions if they attempted to offer a prayer, but if the school board wants to be overly cautious, that is their prerogative.

Above all, though, this is not a freedom of speech issue. I've said it before and I'll say it again: even constitutional rights are not absolute. Your right to free speech may be restricted, as in the classic example of yelling "Fire!" in a crowded theater. It's also restricted when it may infringe on another right that is deemed to take precedence: in this case, the right of one or a handful of student speakers to say their piece as compared with the rights of all attendees, Christian and non-Christian alike, not to have Christianity (to be blunt) shoved in their faces.

The statements of activists like Rev. Rogers and Rev. Cotten inflame the controversy. A better course would be to explain, patiently and thoroughly, to their parishioners that the consent decree only forbids organized prayer, and that individual, private prayer remains, as it always has been, perfectly legal. But when there's a chance to demonize the ACLU and "liberal thinking," I guess some folks just can't resist a shot at media stardom.

UPDATE (4:25 pm 5/23/09): By the way, there's a legal and valid way for the pastors and their supporters to get their way on this. Just get a constitutional amendment passed. I promise not to argue with you anymore if you do it.

More license plate madness

Hey, remember the "I BELIEVE" license plate about which I rather vehemently ranted a year ago? It didn't make it through the Legislature last year ... but it's back, sponsored once again by none other than state Sen. Ronda Storms (R-Batshit Crazy Land).

Only this time, it has a companion plate that might be -- if possible -- even more objectionable:

Jesus H. Christ on a Florida license plate, it's Jesus H. Christ on a Florida license plate! Just in case "I BELIEVE" (see below) wasn't unconstitutionally insipid enough, now we've got this one to, um, hammer the last nail into the separation of church and state ... so to speak ...

The Florida Senate preliminarily approved these plates, among others, on Friday, but final authorization has a few hoops left through which to jump. There still needs to be a vote by the full Senate, which is pretty much the only hope of preventing this travesty since the overwhelmingly wingnut state House is almost certain to jump on the Christianist bandwagon for this one; likewise Republican Gov. Charlie Crist.

The floor debate on the Jesus plate got a little interesting:

Boca Raton lawyer Ted Deutch repeatedly asked [plate sponsor Sen. Gary] Siplin, a fellow Democrat, to describe the image on the license plate.

“The Trinity license plate has the picture of my lord and savior Jesus Christ on it,” Siplin, D-Orlando, said.

Proceeds from the tag will go to the Toomey Foundation, a natural sciences organization.

The chamber also approved the “I Believe” license plate that features a cross on a stained-glass background.

Deutch, who is Jewish, argued that religious symbols of any type don’t belong on license plates produced by the state.

Well, that's not just an argument, as Sen. Deutch well knows -- that's constitutional law, specifically the First Amendment, which forbids laws "respecting the establishment of a [state] religion." In other words, Sen. Siplin, regardless of whether or not you think He ought to be, Jesus is not everyone's "lord and savior." Ergo, ixnay on the ateplay with the ucifixioncray, you dig? (And are you sure you don't want to reconsider that "D" after your name?)

The "I BELIEVE" plate (right) ultimately failed to get to the governor's desk last year, and both of these heinously Christianist plates deserve the same fate this year. If not, I'm sure some lawyers will be getting phone calls very soon ... and I'd love to write some pleadings and briefs for that one!

UPDATE (1:30 pm 4/27/09): Some of my blogfriends are taking the plate and running with it, so to speak.

First, this gem from Firefox, with the obligatory fashion accessory:

Meanwhile, Blue Gal already has personalized the plate in a special -- and appropriate -- way.

Remember, I don't make 'em up ... I just share 'em. ;)

Pensacola Tea Party: video #3

Here's the first of several videos I'll be posting tonight from the Pensacola Tea Party last Wednesday. Sorry it's taken me so long to get them uploaded and onto Blast Off!, but I was with my kids this weekend and, well, they're my top priority. You understand, I'm sure.

Anyway, this third video (following the "overview" one and, of course, the vid that made Pensacola famous) features two speakers as well as Pensacola Republican Club president and Blast Off! fan Troy Schoonover. Our first speaker [in this video (happy now, Ms. Hodge?) -- ed.] suggests that we return as a nation to Almighty God because we're under tyranny. Yes, tyranny. Remember that election last November? Evidently we elected either a dictator or a monarch, I guess. Anyway, the second speaker (after Schoonover's Reagan-teabagging interlude) reminds us (by alluding to World War II?) that education is fundamental to the freedom of a civilized nation and, obviously, she managed to avoid it altogether.

Transcript below the video ...

TRANSCRIPT:

Speaker 1 (joined in progress: ... is only suitable for a moral people. We have sinned and left our first love, the Almighty God who gave us the liberties that were articulated by our awesome Founding Fathers. And because of that, we are under tyranny! It is time to turn back to God Almighty, confess our sin, and beg for His forgiveness and for His mercy, because our land is in sore trouble. We are under the judgment of people who claim to be our governors and our rulers and oppressors. They claim to speak for us when in fact they are the instruments of our judgment. In God we trust ... WE TRUST! [raises sign reading “GIVE US BACK OUR CONSTITUTION”]

Schoonover: This guy over here has a sign with a quote from Ronald Reagan that I love: “Conservatives think” -- it says “Republicans,” but just say “Conservatives think every day is July 4th; Democrats or liberals think every day is April 15th!” [cheers]

Speaker 2: I don't ... I can talk a lot usually, but when I get up in front of people I can't. But what worries me: we don't have a whole America. The young people don't know where they came from and why they're here. When I ask them about the Battle of Midway, they don't know what the Battle of Midway, when it was or what it was about. [shout from audience: “Put it back in the schools!”] And not teaching them, and the liberal press and all that. We got to get the word to the young people so they know what America, where they came from and what America's about, so they can learn to vote right [laughter] and teach 'em. I don't know, I'm, I'm going on and I'm probably saying too many words. So we gotta get our country back and teach the young people so they can understand ... and not let them have all these liberal professors or whatever they got nowadays. Thank you. God bless America, God bless America, God bless our kids.

Blog Against Theocracy 2009: An introduction

Once again this year, I am pleased to join with a multitude of other bloggers from across the United States and around the world in the "Blog Against Theocracy" blogswarm. This is my third opportunity to participate in BAT, having done so each of the last two years, but it's going to be a different experience this year, I think. Not only have my personal circumstances changed, as I will share with you briefly on Sunday, but of course there is a new president and with that, some different viewpoints on the role of religion in American government and society.

Naturally, even though the Bush crime syndicate and its overt strides towards an American theocracy are in the past, things haven't changed nearly as much as I would like. As I said in last year's BAT introduction, "I have no particular problem with people practicing their faith, but I am vehemently, unalterably, inexorably opposed to its infiltration of and influence on American government today." Unfortunately, the Obama administration seems unwilling at this time to cut the unconstitutional ties between government and religion completely, for example, retaining Bush's Office of Faith-Based Initiatives, which I believe has absolutely no place in our federal bureaucracy. On the other hand, Obama has signaled some movement away from theocracy with his enlightened stem cell research policies, his recognition of the GLBT community, and other such positions that would have been anathema to his predecessor's theocratic administration.

My point is that the change in the White House doesn't mean we can let down our guard against efforts to create an American theocracy. Indeed, as we've seen just this week with the new Christian-based hate groups emerging, those who would foist a particular set of religious beliefs on the nation as a whole are if anything growing louder and more insistent. And of course, despite some positive changes on the federal level, we here in Florida still struggle with a hyperfundamentalist, über-Christianist faction that wants nothing more than to turn our state -- and our country, if they could -- into a frothing-at-the-mouth radical theocracy.

So our work as progressives, and as defenders of the Constitution, is not done -- not by a long shot. Perhaps with this blogswarm and the combined voices of some of the best writers and thinkers the blogosphere has to offer, we can encourage those at all levels of government who want to obey the Constitution by enforcing a clearly delineated separation of church and state.

Please visit Blast Off! and of course the main BAT site, which is collecting and linking to all participants' posts, regularly throughout the weekend for all the Blog Against Theocracy goodness.

---

Blast Off!'s BAT posts from 2007 and 2008 are available at this link, although you will have to scroll down past the 2009 posts; sorry for the inconvenience. But if you'd like a retrospective of sorts, well, there it is.

One personal note: special thanks to Blue Gal, who is kind of the chief organizer and bottle-washer of this effort, and to Tengrain of Mock, Paper, Scissors for yet another kick-ass BAT logo (above).

Four years later, still exploiting Terri Schiavo

It's interesting how those on the Right, especially the so-called "Religious Right," will trumpet their devotion to "life" at every turn. I guess that includes the exploitation of life, too.

Today marks the fourth anniversary of the death of Terri Schiavo, a cause célèbre for the "right to life" movement, sparking controversy from Tampa to Washington and beyond. (Remember, for example, then-Sen. Bill Frist's long-distance dedication ... I mean, diagnosis?) But the folks who claimed that Schiavo's persistent vegetative state was reversible and that her desire to be removed from life support (according to her husband) was, well, just not relevant? Well, they'd rather exploit her than treasure her memory.

A Catholic university in southwest Florida plans a mass on Tuesday to recognize the fourth anniversary of Terri Schiavo's death.

A new $24 million oratory on the campus of Ave Maria University near Naples will be the site of the mass for Schiavo, the Tampa-area woman who was at the center of an end-of-life case that captivated the nation.

Schiavo's brother, Bobby Schindler, said he was seeking a higher profile for the annual mass when he approached Ave Maria University founder Thomas Monaghan, the Dominos Pizza magnate who built the 2-year-old college and surrounding community in farm fields east of Naples.

"It's a prestigious university," Schindler told the Naples Daily News. "Mr. Monaghan is a leader in the pro-life movement and has been very supportive of us."

Mr. Schindler, I don't think "prestigious" means what you think it means. Harvard is prestigious. William and Mary is prestigious. Yale, Princeton, the universities of Michigan and Virginia, Stanford? All prestigious. Ave Maria? Two. Years. Old. Usually, Bobby, an institution needs to exist for more than a couple of years before it's considered prestigious.

Apparently you also don't understand the plain meaning of "pro-life." Based solely on the words, "pro-life" should mean "in favor of life," right? But what it really means to these people is in favor of exploiting life for ideological or political gain ... and when that "life" is "unborn," it means "supporting" it vociferously until birth -- at which time, of course, you're on your own, pal.

There are few more hypocritical assholes on the ideological spectrum than those who comprise the grossly misnamed "pro-life movement." So go ahead and parade your sister's memory around for political gain, Mr. Schindler. If I were you, I'd spend today quietly reflecting on the goodness of her vibrant life, rather than her unnecessarily drawn-out, ghoulish death. But, hey, that's just me.

Taking God out of prayer?

As you may know, I'm usually one of the first to decry inappropriate or unconstitutional religious (read: Christian, generally) intrusions into public settings. But to the surprise of many -- or at least some (hi, Miss July! *waves*) -- I've finally found an example that just goes too far.

A chaplain for Hospice by the Sea in Boca Raton has resigned after being asked to excise specific references to "God" or the "Lord" from her public prayers.

Chaplains still speak freely of the Almighty in private sessions with patients or families but, the Rev. Mirta Signorelli said: "I can't do chaplain's work if I can't say 'God' — if I'm scripted."

Hospice CEO Paula Alderson said the ban on religious references applies only to the inspirational messages that chaplains deliver in staff meetings. The hospice remains fully comfortable with ministers, priests and rabbis offering religious counsel to the dying and grieving.

"I was sensitive to the fact that we don't impose religion on our staff, and that it is not appropriate in the context of a staff meeting to use certain phrases or 'God' or 'Holy Father,' because some of our staff don't believe at all," Alderson said.

I could almost understand this if it were a public, i.e., governmentally-affiliated, organization. But as a private group, the constitutional proscription on establishment of religion just doesn't apply.

According to the article, the chaplain "would have to watch her language, she said, when leading a prayer in the hospice chapel, when meeting patients in the public setting of a nursing home and in weekly patient conferences with doctors, nurses and social workers." Well, I agree that she shouldn't be leading prayers in weekly patient conferences; at the very least, she could pray with the patient privately before meeting with the other personnel. However, asking her to remove God from prayers in the chapel ... well, that's just ludicrous. Bottom line: this is an unnecessarily burdensome restriction on Rev. Signorelli's free speech, and there certainly are less burdensome alternatives.

I doubt we've seen the end of this story. While I'm all for Alderson's sentiment and her intentions probably are good, well, you know what they say about good intentions ...

The fundamentalist threat, writ large

Contrary to what you readers (both of you) might think of me, I honestly don't have a problem with religion per sé. However, I strongly feel that the fundamentalist Christian movement, both as it pertains to politics and otherwise, is a threat to American ideals and values, by perverting the positive aspects of Christianity and demonizing everything that doesn't fit within its incredibly narrow worldview.

If you need proof of this, you need go no further than Quiverfull: Inside the Christian Patriarchy Movement, by Kathryn Joyce. Even in this brief excerpt, which I will distill even more below, you can see some really disturbing facts about the Quiverfull movement, which seeks to produce large families of painfully obedient -- even subservient -- children steeped in fundamentalist doctrine. Actually, "disturbing" might be too weak a word -- maybe "creepy" is more appropriate.

[C]hildren of the movement should have “little to no association with peers outside of family and relatives” as insulation from a corrupting society. Daughters shouldn’t forgo education but should consider to what ends their education is intended and should place their efforts in “advanced homemaking” skills.

Concretely, Geoffrey Botkin explains, this means evaluating all materials and media that daughters receive from childhood on as it pertains to their future role. The Botkin sisters received no Barbie dolls — idols that inspire girls to lead selfish lives — but rather a “doll estate” that could help them learn to manage a household of assets, furniture, and servants in the aristocratic vision of Quiverfull life which Botkin paints for the families around the room. The toys the girls played with were “tools for dominion,” such as kitchen utensils and other “tools for their laboratory”: the kitchen.

Isolation from the outside world ... a woman's place is in the kitchen ... toys as idolatry. Sounds like a recipe for psychological disaster to me. (Servants? Really? Does this mean "Slave Auction Barbie" is a bad idea?)

But you ain't seen nothin' yet. Later on, it's a veritable Freudian field day:

The extent to which Botkin views his daughters as his ambassadors, or extensions of himself, is perplexingly hinted at when both he and Doug Phillips slip during the conference and refer to So Much More as Geoffrey Botkin’s book. This could seem either an indication of his daughters’ total identification with their father, or else, perhaps, indication of the heavy paternal hand guiding the virtuous daughters’ movement—as present in the writing of the book as it feels in every frame of the film and every still photograph taken of the two sisters.

Such lessons are repeated wide-scale at the father-daughter retreats, where daughters are given object lessons alongside the sermons through a series of ideological games, including a blindfolded obstacle course, where chains of blinded daughters were guided solely by relying on their fathers’ verbal commands; contests for fathers “wooing and winning the hearts of their daughters”; and intimacy-building “unity games” that teach daughters to serve their fathers by shaving their faces, grooming their hair, and knotting their shoes and ties. As three of Phillips’s young daughters, Jubilee, Liberty, and Faith, explained on a video posted on Vision Forum’s Web site, “Each of the games was designed to teach us a principle about our relationship with our fathers.”

Or as Doug Phillips explained to the fathers in attendance, he who “tells the story controls the culture,” and storytelling—setting up the basic architecture of your children’s worldview—is “one of the most significant patriarchal duties that God gives us.” So, he tells fathers, it’s imperative to start teaching your daughter now all “the stories she needs to know” because—in an alarming revelation about the young marriages patriarchs support—the nine-year-old before you now may, in six years’ time, be not just older, but married as well.

It’s a short window of opportunity for a father to guide his daughter where he wants her to go, and a short time for him to experience what Phillips calls “the greatest privilege of the ages: to have someone look at you and say, ‘Father, I love you. Father, shepherd me.’ Father, father. The very words we call our God and savior. God has given you fathers the opportunity to look at these girls and say, ‘You are mine. You are mine.’”

Before I go any further, I must point out that I went to college with Doug Phillips, and that he was just as batshit crazy back then ... except more in the political realm than religious. (I mean, "Jubilee," "Liberty," and "Faith?" Jesus H. Christ in a horse-drawn carriage, that's bizarre.) His father, Howard Phillips, is (or was) a leading anti-taxation and Ayn Rand type (don't get me started ...), and as I recall, Doug was quite active in my college's Federalist Society. Obviously, somewhere along the way he found Jesus ... only it was the vengeful, weird, batshit crazy Jesus who wants His followers to have a thousand great-grandchildren, not the compassionate, loving, DFH Jesus that, you know, is described in the Bible. But I digress ...

How fucked up is it that these daughters are shaving and grooming their fathers? You don't suppose there are other things going on behind closed doors, do you? It would be irresponsible not to speculate ... I mean, purity balls are bad enough, but this is fucking insane. Scary, even. How long before one of those daughters goes all Sweeney Todd on dear old Dad, anyway?

Look, worship however your little batshit crazy heart desires. But, for God's sake (literally), don't screw up your children for life by dragging them through this bullshit.

Pace: the final frontier

Just when I think northwest Florida can't possibly get wingnuttier, I encounter something else that proves me wrong.

The small community of Pace sits in Santa Rosa County about 10 miles north of Pensacola, right beside the county seat of Milton. Actually, drivers heading east along US 90 would be hard-pressed to tell where Pace ends and where Milton begins, so seamless is the succession of big-box stores, fast food eateries, strip malls, and, of course, churches. Yes, Pace is smack dab in the middle of the Bible Belt of America's Taint™, and some of its residents apparently feel that religion somehow trumps federal law ... despite, oh, a freaking Constitution to the contrary.

The biggest news in Pace recently, other than the Pace High boys' basketball district title and the start of high school baseball season, has been the ruling by U.S. District Judge Casey Rodgers, in a lawsuit by the ACLU, that a Christian baccalaureate service for Pace High School graduating seniors could not be organized by school officials, as it has been in the past. (The service traditionally was organized by the school but conducted "at a variety of local churches" over the years, according to the linked article.) Naturally, this has sent the heavily Christian community there into a tizzy, since they clearly can't imagine how anyone could be offended by such a practice ... or they don't care.

Pace-area pastors, led by Rev. Joey Rogers of Pace Assembly of God Church, have banded together to plan and provide the baccalaureate service this year, but despite the nearly unnoticeable transition from a school-organized to a church-organized activity, some Paceans (Paceites? Pacers? Pace cars?) aren't satisfied. Exhibit A in the wingnut whinefest is local resident Russell Tafuri, whose letter to the editor appeared in yesterday's Pensacola News Journal. And the cognitive dissonance is jarring:

Thank you, Rev. Rogers, for standing up and doing what's right for our Pace High School seniors! ("ACLU suit spurs change," Feb. 3.)

The question of Pace High School administrators blurring the separation of church and state is ludicrous. Pace has come to be known as a small-town, family-values oriented and religious community. According to Wikipedia, a baccalaureate "is a celebration which honors a graduating senior class from a college or high school. The event is often, but not necessarily, of a religious nature."

"Often, but not necessarily!" The ACLU suit, albeit absurd, has created much ado, brought many emotions to life, and bound the community stronger. The result? An increase in support for the baccalaureate and other community functions for what they are — exhibits of good moral character and fundamental decency in a God-worshipping community, all of which have been either lost or diluted in today's society.

Preservation of these as a way of life in the Pace community is being threatened by the "big city" ideals and numerous litigious parties. This New York City native settled in Pace to get back to what this country was based on — small-town values, one nation, under God. So sue me!

Well, Mr. Tafuri, your ignorance must truly be bliss. Never mind the fact that you cite Wikipedia -- fuckin' Wikipedia* -- to back up your point. (I can go on there right now and change the definition of "baccalaureate" to read "a celebration which honors Satan and his minions" if I want, and it would be just about as reliable.) If you want to live in a "small-town, family-values oriented and religious community" (syntax error!), of course that's fine. But you see, Russ (may I call you Russ?), under federal law, state entities -- like the public schools -- are forbidden from establishing a religion. And having a school-sponsored religious service is about as "establishing" as you can get, pal. Oh, and read your American history, please: this country was not founded on "one nation, under God" -- a phrase that didn't appear in the Pledge of Allegiance until the 1950s, I might add ...

Anyway, your screed against "often, but not necessarily" fails miserably as well (and I don't mean just because it's from fuckin' Wikipedia). First of all, if a service is "often" religious, it still can't be organized by the school. Secondly, this particular service for Pace High School isn't just "often" religious -- it's completely religious, and completely Christian to boot.

Look, Russ, I've no complaints if you want to worship your God or sacrifice goats or have the laying on of tongues or whatever it is that you do. But you need to keep that in your churches and homes, not in the public schools. As the ACLU's Florida staff attorney said, "Parents and religious leaders properly teach our children religion and faith. Religion is too precious to be left in the hands of school officials."

Similarly, Russ, education is too precious to be left in the hands of ignorant tools like you. But please enjoy the baccalaureate service this May ... handled by the churches, not the schools, as the Constitution requires.

---

* I just thought I'd throw a few F-bombs in here for you, Russ ... since you're from NYC, it should make you feel right at home.

T-shirt wisdom

There are certain sentiments that really ought to be kept to one's self. Unfortunately, and especially in the case of the most rabid fundies, some people can't resist foisting their narrow-minded and logically ludicrous opinions on others via that ubiquitous message board, the T-shirt.

Here's one I saw tonight in Deerfield Beach, Florida:

Dear God,
Why do you allow so much violence in our schools?
Signed, Concerned Student

Dear Concerned Student,
I'm not allowed in the schools.
Signed, God

Setting aside for the moment my first thought -- of all people/deities, wouldn't God be the one you definitely could count on to sign off with "Love?" -- I don't think it would be possible to obscure the issue much more.

The U.S. Constitution says (or at least it did, before the Bush crime syndicate used it to wipe their collective asses) that there will be no law "respecting the establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof." Look, folks, God is present in the schools. Ever been around a group of students before a big test? Seriously, the issue is not barring God or religion from schools altogether -- rather, the law prohibits organized religious activity in schools.

Besides, how does God "allow" violence in schools? I never understood that whole concept: did God "allow" the Holocaust, or 9/11, or Katrina? If this God is so wonderful, wouldn't He or She find a way to prevent harm to people?

That's probably a deeper issue than I intended to address from a mere T-shirt. But we in the reality-based community never can forget what we're up against.

Laughable letters to the editor

There were a couple of doozies today in the Palm Beach Post, my local fishwrap.

For example, enjoy this gem from Dr. Donald W. McKinnon, who hastens to remind us that although he's from Riviera Beach, he's from the Singer Island (i.e., the wealthy and predominately white) part of Riviera Beach. Thanks for emphasizing that for us, Doc ...

When did this become a godless country? Why did the "In God We Trust" disappear from the new dollar coin, and now the new one-cent coin? Why are we doing nothing about this?

Is there no accountability left in our government? Regardless of the religion, be it Protestant, Catholic, Jewish, Muslim, or any other of the numerous faiths in our country, they all acknowledge a god. This country was founded on the principles of religion. Who had the authority to change the coinage to eliminate the "In God We Trust?" The time has come to pinpoint accountability, and stand up for what we hold precious.

DR. DONALD W. McKINNON
Riviera Beach (Singer Island)

When did this become a godless country, you ask? Oh, around 1788, I'd say.

Don't scoff, Dr. McKinnon! It's common knowledge that the vast majority of the Founders were not Christians, and indeed, several were deists or just didn't believe in a "higher power" of any kind. Ever heard of Thomas Jefferson? Yep -- not a Christian.

See, the Constitution they drafted (yes, I understand you right-wing idiots don't follow the Constitution anymore, but just bear with me for the sake of argument) expressly states that "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion ...." In other words ... we've always been godless, at least as a nation. Thanks to the rest of that clause, "... or prohibiting the free exercise thereof," you can worship as you wish. But it's true -- America is godless. Suck. On. That.

Oh, and "this country was founded on principles of religion?" Where did you read that? Guideposts? There's not a shred of truth in that. Yes, there are ethical principles in our form of government (or were, before your heroes in the Bush crime syndicate took office) that are derived from or have cognates in Judeo-Christian beliefs, but to say the United States of America was "founded on principles of religion" is to ignore all responsible and respectable scholarship -- including first-hand accounts -- of the creation of our nation.

Thank you, Dr. McKinnon ... please drive through.

The next nugget comes from Charles Lyday of Boca Raton, who criticizes Rep. Tim Mahoney (D-Fla.) for some recent discrepancies concerning his residence:

U.S. Rep. Tim Mahoney's residency issues sound like another politician's recent sorry story. Did Rep. Mahoney, D-Palm Beach Gardens, learn the same dignity, ethics, honor and values as Rep. Robert Wexler, D-Delray Beach?

Mr. Lyday, for the sake of our country and the 16th District of Florida, I hope the answer to your question is a resounding yes. If Mahoney and others learned from the example of Robert Wexler, one of the most forceful, vigilant, and honorable liberals in Congress*, then I'd be delighted.

Where do they find these morons to write such drivel?

---

* Rep. Wexler's disappointing vote for the massive government bailout of big business notwithstanding ...

Random thought

Clearly, the remarkable and unexpected success of the 2008 American League East champion Tampa Bay Rays is directly attributable to the team's inspirational decision to drop the word "Devil" from their name.

Another casualty of the Bush economy: charitable giving

As a professional fundraiser, I'm often asked whether the economic woes caused by the Bush crime syndicate have an adverse effect on donations. My general answer is that people tend to give out of a sense of commitment to a particular program or charity, regardless of the economic situation; for the same reason, tax incentives ultimately have little bearing on one's decision to make a charitable gift. Indeed, the biggest gifts -- those of $100,000 or more, for example, which is my responsibility in my position -- continue to come in at more or less the same pace, in my experience.

However, this time, unlike the last downturn in 2000-2001, I think we are seeing a real negative impact on charitable giving at lower levels. There appears to be a much more direct effect on people this time around, as more jobs are being lost, everyday expenses like gas and groceries are placing a greater strain on household budgets, and people therefore are less likely to write the $50 and $100 checks that are the lifeblood of smaller, local charities and religious institutions.

At the Miami Archdiocese, collection-plate revenues are steady, but assessments that individual parishes pay are slow in coming or are down, and needs are up sharply, resulting in the layoff of 49 of the 182 staffers at its Pastoral Center on Biscayne Boulevard, says spokeswoman Mary Ross Agosta.

In a letter to parishioners, Archbishop John C. Favalora says: "Each year a greater number of parishes and programs are seeking our financial help, and, therefore, we must prioritize. We can only work with what we have."

South Florida's Jewish, Methodist, Episcopal and other faithful face similar problems.

At the Greater Miami Jewish Federation, pledges for 2008 are running close to the $24 million raised in 2007, but actual cash receipts are about 10 percent behind, says executive vice president Jacob Solomon.

"It relates to stock market fluctuations," he said. "People hope to recoup their market losses before they redeem their pledges. At the same time, demands for our programs have gone up sharply."

So the $20 bills evidently still are going into collection plates, but it's very difficult to find the disposable income that allows giving at an intermediate level.

You safely can assume that the Republican response to this kind of problem will be the standard "we've got ours, so screw you." Needless to say, Huggy Bear isn't exactly running on a platform of helping the less fortunate among us ... and once again we are reminded that a vote for Huggy is a vote for a third term of miserable failure, Drunky McStagger style.

"I BELIEVE" license plate works its way through Florida's legislature

Last week, I told you about the effort to add an openly Christianist license plate to Florida's already overflowing collection of plates commemorating (and financially supporting) sports teams, universities, environmental and artistic endeavors, and even anti-abortion zealotry. Well, the Legislature, in all its wingnutty wisdom, continues to give credence to this blatantly unconstitutional activity, as a House committee passed the license plate bill by an 8-2 vote.

Okay, here's the problem, and I'll say it in bold lettering so even you stupid fucking wingnuts can understand it: the state cannot support one religion over another. Period. Yet that's clearly the intent of the bill's sponsor, Rep. Edward Bullard.

Bullard, the plate's sponsor, said people who "believe in their college or university" or "believe in their football team" already have license plates they can buy. The new design is a chance for others to put a tag on their cars with "something they believe in," he said.

If the plate is approved, Florida would become the first state to have a license plate featuring a religious symbol that's not part of a college logo. Approval would almost certainly face a court challenge.

The problem with the state manufacturing the plate is that it "sends a message that Florida is essentially a Christian state" and, second, gives the "appearance that the state is endorsing a particular religious preference," said Howard Simon, executive director of the American Civil Liberties Union of Florida.

But here's the real stunner: I thought Bullard would be from the Panhandle or somewhere similarly wingnutty, like the racist moron who's pushing the Confederate Heritage license plate.

Nope.

Rep. Bullard is an African-American Democrat from Miami-Dade County. He's not even a pastor, at least not by profession -- he's an educator. You'd think an educator would know that his proposal is antithetical to every tenet of American constitutional law and scholarship since the inception of the nation. Is it possible that the Bush crime syndicate's everpresent War on the Constitution has jaded even this man, who certainly should know better?

What's even worse is that Rep. Bullard apparently is an advocate of viewpoint discrimination. That is, he's for a Christian license plate, but not, say, an atheist plate (or, one presumes, an FSM plate):

Approving the plate could open the state to legal challenges, according to Josie Brown, who teaches constitutional law at the University of South Carolina. And it's not certain who would win.

"It would be an interesting close call," Brown said.

Simon, of the ACLU, said approval of the plate could prompt many other groups to seek their own designs, and they could claim discrimination if their plans were rejected. That could even allow the Ku Klux Klan to get a plate, Simon said.

Bullard, the plate's sponsor, isn't sure all groups should be able to express their preference. If atheists came up with an "I Don't Believe" plate, for example, he would probably oppose it.

Nope. Can't do that, Rep. Bullard. You can't pick and choose which religious plates are okay. You get a Christianist plate through, just get ready for the onslaught.

And you'll have only yourself to blame.

UPDATE (6:42 pm 4/24/08): Brian at Incertus examines the issue in a different light, but comes to basically the same conclusion: this license plate is a fucking joke. (And next time I'll try to remember to check there before ranting ...)

Ask and ye shall receive

Downstairs a couple of posts, I noted earlier this morning how cool it would be to have a Flying Spaghetti Monster license plate to counter the hyperChristianist version some Florida legislators are pushing.

Lo and behold, my Canadian friend Interrobang comes through, bringing us a goodie from Pharyngula:


RAmen, indeed.