Dr Dobson responds to Barbara Walters, Whoopi and The View

Dr. Dobson Sets 'The View' Straight-Here Dobson's response!!! See my report on the Values Voter Summit below. Has nothing to do with racism. Actually many speakers were African American like Michael Steele, Bishop Harry Jackson, Star Parker, Kent Blackwell and probabily many more. I wonder why they didn't mention these reputable African American speakers and why did they make such a point of pointing out only Focus on the Family and not all the other reputable sponsors that had nothing to do with this and actually when found out took that booth away. The point was not to make a racist point but rather to point out how Obama waffles on issues. But either way it was taken down because of the concerns.

You will also, find an email where you can email Barbara Walters your concerns. Here is my Email:

Dear Barbara,

Out of an attempt to maintain good relations amongst the right and the left on the political spectrum I feel "The View" had gone overboard on creating a perception of Focus on the Family Action that was a false perception to your viewers and thus damaging relations amongst many in our politically diverse nation.

I just found out about this today so if your show has made a correction to this perception then great. Please do let me know by emailing me back.

If not then your show is doing just what your show doesn't want to do or at least I don't think so anyways. Maybe "The View" doesn't have good relations amongst conservative in mind and if that is why your show ended up the way it did then fine. What can I do it is your show and not mine and you can do what you like with what is your own?

However, if you are trying to maintain any objectivity and good relations toward conservatives then you may like to have a public correction of this misperception. What should have also been reproted on your show for balance sake and true perception sake is that this Values Voter Summit was in no way racist as evidenced by Bishop Harry Jackson, Star Parker, Michael Steele, Dr Alveda King (Dr Martin Luther King Jr's Niece!!!! at an event sponsored by Focus on the Family Action) and Kent Blackwell and probabily others all of which are African American. I think that is a very important point when one is relating racism to a political event and those sponsoring it.

I bet that if this were a liberal event that none of this would have been reported on your show or at least not without giving another side to the story like simply pointing out the many African American reputable speakers at the event.

Your show only hurts relations when your show did not report this situation fairly. I hope you come to find it within yourself to consider an apology or not even an apology just a simple update to present further facts about the Values Voter Summit.

If I were to watch that episode and that is all I heard of conservatives and the Values Voter Summit and Focus on the Family Action I would come to a very false impressions of these groups and when I found out about the false impression I would then be coming to a very true reality of liberal bias on "The View".

Please do respond to my email in some fashion. Thank you very much, TB
-- http://www.valuesvoternews.com/

Entertainment

New Movie: "An American Carol" and http://www.fireproofthemovie.com/. Click on links to check into them.

Behind the scenes of 'Fireproof'-"Interested in knowing some of the "behind the scenes" stories surrounding the making of Fireproof, the latest movie from Sherwood Pictures? Interviews with Alex and Stephen Kendrick, actors Kirk Cameron and Erin Bethea, even the head makeup artist -- and stories about how God showed up numerous times in the making of the film, which opens in theaters on Friday, September 26.

Behind the scenes of Fireproof, Take 1

Behind the scenes of Fireproof, Take 2

Look for our review of Fireproof on Friday, Sept. 26

Also, you may view September's AFA Journal article written about Fireproof - Review by Rebecca Grace"

State by State Senate races getting tight for Colorado and New Mexico

New Mexico update:-Pearce closest he has ever been according to Rasmussen polls:

Also, Pearce lets TV audience know where Udall stood twice voting to not ban Partial Birth Abortion. A ban that was held up to be constitutional by the Supreme Court. So no constitutional excuses that this may overturn Roe vs Wade on this one.

07/25/2008 Rasmussen poll update-Pearce gains 3 percentage points from June poll but still well behind Udall. 59% to 34%.
08/20/2008 Rasmussen poll update-Pearce gains ground on Rasmussen Poll from last months Rasmussen Poll. 51% to 41% still in favour of Udall.
09/08/2008 Rasmussen poll update-Pearce gains ground now 51% to 44% but Udall still up.

Colorado update-Schaffer closest he has ever been according to Rasmussen polls:

Also, the Colorado personhood amendment gets endorsement by great, great grandson of William Wilberforce who said if William were around today he would be working on abolishing the abortion trade. Click above for more...

07/22/2008 Rasmussen Poll-Schaffer gains ground but still behind 47% to 43%.
08/20/2008 Rasmussen Poll-Schaffer loses some ground Udall up 50% to 42%.
09/23/2008 Rasmussen Poll-Schaffer regains ground but Udall still up 46% to 44%.

Jul 14, 2008 — Watch Schaffer & Udall Debate Part 1 of 4
Jul 14, 2008 — Watch Schaffer & Udall Debate Part 2 of 4
Jul 14, 2008 — Watch Schaffer & Udall Debate Part 3 of 4
Jul 14, 2008 — Watch Schaffer & Udall Debate Part 4 of 4

Arizona update:

There is not Senate race this year for Arizona but there are 3 congressional races and all I have been able to muster up so far is below"

Here is a conservative voter guide from Arizona Catholic Conference-it looks like the democrats running for all 3 position in Arizona failed to answer the survey while all Republicans did. This should tell you that Democrats in the congress in Arizona are not concerned with Values Voter Issues whereas Republicans are. So keep this in mind as you vote for you congressional politician.

McCain vs Obama in the polls

By the way McCain seemed to loose his lead and was down 5 points and then they tied and the last I checked Obama is up by 3 points in the polls and up in the electoral college by the 3 polling groups I know of. http://www.pollster.com/, http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/ and http://www.electoral-vote.com/.

Pro-Life

What ABC, CBS, NBC and PBS are sadly missing? Planned Parenthood removes offensive videos after we the people instead of YouTube have censored it!!!-A powerful 5 minute slide video recording Obama's own words in the Illinois Senate over the Born Alive Infant Protection Act. This is a powerful video plus more... Like Planned Parenthood taking down some nasty videos on their web site because of complaints and exposing of these videos to the public by "we the people" as opposed to censorship by YouTube.com (see how YouTube and Google are censoring "we the people" at Story of abortion Dr to Pro-life Doctor that will put you in tears and draws attention to facts that are largely missed in Big Media. and scroll down to You Tube, Google and Obama vs the unborn and The Christian Institute takes on Google and wins over ban on abortion ads!!!. Also, a great 24 minute interview with Dr Alveda King, Dr Martin Luther Kings niece who is a hero fo the unborn and the faith!!! She has great words of wisdom on this issue. Herself being one who had committed abortion but found grace and forgiveness in Christ!!!

Can we trust Factcheck.org on Gianna and Obama ads!!!-Jill Stanek documents how Factcheck.org needs some fact checking itself concerning Gianna Jessen and the http://www.bornalivetruth.org/.

Story of abortion Dr to Pro-life Doctor that will put you in tears and draws attention to facts that are largely missed in Big Media.-This was a very touching post for me!!! I was in tears over this issue but decided to post it though it may be graphic just so others may relate why this issue is so concerning to some. Check a video that was censored by YouTube and then check out a far more graphic video that was not censored by YouTube. The only difference is the one censored had Obama in it. Hmm? Also, check out videos censored by YouTube about Planned Parenthood. Hmm? Is this how YouTube and Google and Big Media want to go down in the history books as opposing efforts that the Great, great grandson of William Wilberforce supports .

Denver Post vs the legacy of William Wilberforce, other christians and the unborn-Great statement from great, great grandson of William Wilberforce as he endorses the Colorado Personhood amendment and the pro-life movement.

BornAliveTruth.org all over the news and Kansas Abortion Timeline as the first ever Attorney General to take on Planned Parenthood and Dr Tiller

http://www.40daysoflife.org/ -You can get on the email list for updates of this event. 7 babies have been saved in the first 3 days!!!

Religious Freedom

What Big Media doesn't want you to know about? Historic Sunday in Churches across the nation and 20 recent First Amendment Case Victories.-"The point of the Pulpit Initiative is very simple: the IRS should not be the one making the decision by threatening to revoke a church’s tax-exempt status. We need to get the government out of the pulpit...Churches were completely free to preach about candidates from the day that the Constitution was ratified in 1788 until 1954. That’s when the unconstitutional rule known as the ‘Johnson Amendment’ was enacted." Also, "20 First Amendment Victories in 4 months and most of those in just the last 2 months.."

I would suggest all if you have opportunity to watch or listen to in the back ground as you are working the Values Voter Summit (Click here to view video archives). You can watch the videos in parts by speaker.

Highlights for me of the summit:

Michael Steele had a great laid out logically and calm inspiring rational speech I was impressed with.

Joe Gibbs (ex Washington Redskin football coach) who also spoke at the Republican National Convention just about gives an altar call.

There was a womens panel discussing Palin.

Newt Gingrich had a great speech concerning Oil and Economy and the more political side but many other good comments.

Stephen Baldwin (actor) was great in his exposing of Hollywood and Entertainment industry. I was awestruck by how the advertisers for TV shows are going after the youth of America with horrible advertisements like one that uses Internet chat slang terms like OMFG in their advertisements. Powerful message!!!

Lila Rose who is the college student who took her hidden cameras into Planned Parenthood to expose deception at Planned Parenthood so much so that YouTube has censored their videos which you can find at http://www.liveactionfilms.org/.

Sean Hannity (who is on Fox and has his own talk radio show) had a great speech. A little slow at first but the second half of the speech was excellent exposing the Big Media explaining why FoxNews and talk radio are so successful.

Jill Stanek (the Christian nurse who testified before Obama concerning the Born Alive Infant Protection Act, Dr Alveda King (Dr Martin Luther Kings Jr's Niece) and Phil Kline (the first Attorney General to go after Planned Parenthood). These all were great speeches. Must hear speeches.

Alan Sears of ADF. They have beat the ACLU better then 3 out of every 4 times in religious liberty cases and are ready to take the IRS to court if they interfere with Pulpit Freedom Sunday (see above). This all inspite of having a fraction of the funding that the ACLU has!!! A very encouraging speech.

And much much more....

Congressional/Senate Races and Ballot Initiatives '08 by State Updates at ValuesVoterNews.com

I have made some updates to Races and Ballot Initiatives in Colorado, New Mexico and Arizona since most of you are in those states, however, I next look forward to working on Texas and then keep these 4 continually updated for you all.

Colorado

New Mexico

Arizona

How valuable is your Values Vote? Obamas' first ad: To Values Voters?-"It almost sounds like a typical Republican campaign commercial -- except this is the first national ad aired by Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama since he effectively secured his party's nomination earlier this month."

Check out The "Goose Bump" and "Race" trap - "Black Pastors for Biblical Values vs Obama and his values". See also Black Pro-Lifers to Protest NAACP Convention.

Liberal Media Bias

Notice what's ignored in the media: Voters most interested in Obamas' Position on Abortion, Obamas' Faith with no Wright, Success in Iraq and Africa

Also, I noticed on http://www.valuesvoternews.com/ that the page on my site called Obama and the Born Alive Infant Protection Act? has been the most accessed page and the most time spent on from people just doing a search on google or elsewhere on that subject (not from google or yahoo advertising or my emails). I got 8 hits in less then 24 hours on 06/26/2008 to the 27th and this is even after the fact that my web site has only been out there with less then a month at a time. Now I have yet to get any further inquires into that page but I moved it up to July to see if it makes any difference. But this was not my first page on the blog either at the time. So this issue of specifically the Born Alive Infant Protection Act may be of some controvesy along with other abortion concerns about Obama.

Obama on Abortion

Obama denies protection for infants of botched abortions-"Pro-life blogger Jill Stanek recently wrote a column for WorldNetDaily.com titled "Obama's biggest lie about supporting infanticide." She points out Obama actively opposed the Born Alive Infants Protection Act for three years in the Illinois senate. "He voted against it. He was the sole senator speaking against it on the [Illinois] senate floor [for] two years. And the third year, he held the bill from being considered altogether in committee and killed the bill," Stanek contends. She says Obama's explanation for opposing the Illinois bill does not pass the straight-face test because, as a committee chairman, he blocked the measure's sponsor from adding the federal language protecting Roe vs. Wade. That federal provision says the bill does not deny or add rights to the species Homo sapiens before birth. Stanek fought to stop "live-birth abortion" after holding a live aborted baby at a Chicago-area hospital where she worked as a registered nurse...."Barack Obama is now saying that, had that provision been in the Illinois bill he would have voted for it, which is absolutely false – because in 2003, the senate sponsor tried to add that provision and Barack Obama, as the chairman of the committee where the bill was being held, disallowed him from adding that provision, disallowed me from testifying, disallowed the committee from even voting on it. So, it sat in committee for 22 months," Stanek explains. She reveals it was not until Obama left the Illinois Senate that the Illinois Born Alive Infants Protection Act passed in August of 2005."

Vote in an online poll: Do you find inconsistency in Barack Obama's professed Christian faith and his support for abortion on demand?- Yes or no. I bet you this will be one of the most lop sided and most voted on poll to date on this conservative news source web site!!!!

Christian Group Launches "Abortion President" Campaign against Barack Obama-"Senator Obama's views on abortion are so radical that he even wants American citizens to pay for them. This would include Catholics, Evangelicals and all people of faith. He would also expand abortion rights through his passionate support of The Freedom of Choice Act....Obama campaign spokesman Hari Sevugan sent out the following statement: "Barack Obama understands that the best way to reduce the need for abortions is to reduce the number of unintended pregnancies. He is committed to commonsense solutions to achieve that objective and to changing the tone of the discourse which for too long has devolved into false and negative attacks such as this that do nothing to accomplish that goal"- It would be nice to point out the falsity of the attack please see Edwards, Obama Pledge Abortion Support (At the Planned Parenthood Action Fund presidential candidate forum earlier this week, the John Edwards and Barack Obama campaigns promised to include abortion coverage in their universal health care plans!!!). Obama would have us as most all democrats pay for abortion here and overseas. Secondly, it is negative as it should be. Thirdly, it is a partial birth abortion really the result of an unwanted pregnancy in the sense that he is speaking due to sexual promiscuity (see below).

Obama's Abortion Kerfuffle-"My only point is that in an area like partial-birth abortion having a mental, having a health exception can be defined rigorously. It can be defined through physical health, It can be defined by serious clinical mental-health diseases. It is not just a matter of feeling blue."- Obama. Oh yes the compassion of Obama and women during a PARTIAL BIRTH ABORTION which is banned by the Supreme Court of the US and all other countries in this world!!! Are we not forever and always forgetting about the compassion that is forever and always missing toward the unborn human beings in these discussions???? There is no way Obama will get my faith based vote. No way. Unless he changes his view on this subject and others and make it public before all without dispute. I have actually prayed for that!!! Who knows!!!! He also says "historically I have been a strong believer in a women's right to choose with her doctor, her pastor and her family". Again how family of Obama!!! What advice to her daughters would Obama give in supporting his own daughters right to choose if "they make a mistake" that results in a pregnancy if we only took a speech he made some time ago into consideration.

Would he advise a) not to have an abortion thus reducing one abortion, b) to have the abortion if she chooses so because after all he is "a stong believer in a women's right to choose with her doctor, her pastor and" himself or c) MIT Pro-Life students vs Obamas' "moral" concern for his once unborn daughters and hearty empathetic Judges (scroll down to 2nd video). If the video doesn't work cause the last I checked it doesn't then just you tube "punished with a baby". You may also click here: Obama Says He Doesn't Want His Daughters Punished with a Baby for the answer which is c) "But if they make a mistake, I don't want them punished with a baby." Now I hope that Obama wouldn't give that advice or give such a view of the situation to his daughters. In one sense it is a consequence of a sexually promiscous action but never at the expense of that unborn babies life (TALK ABOUT AN UNJUST PUNISHMENT!!! What did he or she ever do???). If one concieve of a baby as a punishment for bad actions an individual makes how much more should that same one understand the punishment of the innocent, period. Let us turn the tables, flip the coin, butter the otherside of the pancake and throw syrup all over it and respond to Obama and throw the comments that he threw at the unborn child right back at him and say if "they make a mistake I don't want the innocent unborn child punished either"!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! What did he/she ever do? Talk about social uncompassionate injustice to its lowest stooping degree to the most innocent/voiceless/poorest/helpless members of all in our societies and yet today we violated their most basic right of all rights the RIGHT TO LIFE. And then to hear Obama speak as he does attempting to belittle the concerns of those for the unborn by claiming he wants to only reduce abortions with no talk about the unborn at all, to some of us it makes us not fee so well (PC for sick)....But I will still pray for him no matter what!!!

Canada

Canadian Abortionist Receives Nation's Top Civilian Award

McCain and Bush for sharp contrast

McCain and Bush speak to National Right to Life-"National Right to Life has published the text of the comments by the President and Sen. McCain along with other information about the speeches. See the archive links dated between July 4-8."

Does the Vice President matter?

VP Pick Could Decide Swing States, Polls Show

Same Sex Marriages

Scottish Schools Ban Father's Day Cards

How Fathers Matter for Healthy Child Development

--http://www.valuesvoternews.com/

McDonalds's Boycott

http://www.boycottmcdonalds.com/

"This boycott is not about hiring homosexuals, or homosexuals eating at McDonald's, or how homosexual employees are treated. It is about McDonald's, as a corporation, choosing to put the full weight of their corporation behind promoting the homosexual agenda, including homosexual marriage."

Many of you probabily already know about this but just in case. I have already stopped eating there since I heard of this in the first place. I think if these companies are going to be active in supporting whatever they choose to support in the name of diversity then they need to be equally diverse in including the religious, also. Hey it's their business and they can do what they want with it but if it's hypocritical then it is.

Update on the NM photography case:

ADF files suit disputing N.M. commission's ruling against Christian photographer -A copy of the appeal filed with the 2nd Judicial District Court, County of Bernalillo, in Elane Photography v. Willock is available at www.telladf.org/UserDocs/ElanePhotoAppeal.pdf.

McCain vs Obama on Bushs' Faith Based Initiative

Obamas' Divisive Faith Based Initiative? Click on African Wisdom vs NEA and UN/Obama supports a divisive faith based initiative. Scroll down to bottom video for a criticism.

Now you may have heard about whether or not Obama is for tax funded religious organizations religious liberties and conscious' or not. It may be confusing due to a recent AP article. Hopefully this may clear it up.

I will be emailing you 2 email updates I get everyday if you wish to read them in there entirety. I couldn't find a way to put them into this email so I will email the first one label One and the Second one labeled Two.

The first one says, "It's an axiom in politics that what a politician says in public is meant to please, but what he says in private is meant to pledge. Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.) is rhapsodizing in public on the nation's hunger for a leader who shares their homegrown priorities--a love of country, faith in God, and loyalty to family. To prove his sincerity on the issues, Obama says that if elected he'll overhaul President Bush's faith-based initiative and expand it. In a speech today in Zanesville, Ohio, he said that church and religious organizations should play a bigger role in meeting our country's social needs. He would even support the right of federally-funded programs "to hire and fire based on faith." Notice assumed skepticism from this source as you read further. Apparently the skepticism turned out to be a ligitimate skepticism for the AP made a bad report on what Obama actually said.

The Second email labeled Two says, "It appears that in yesterday's Update we gave Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.) faith-based policy too much credit. Working from an Associated Press story released before the candidate made his Zanesville speech, FRC included the quote that Obama intended to "support the ability [of religious groups] to hire and fire based on faith." We regret the error. But we also regret what Sen. Obama actually said, which is that his administration would not protect the religious rights of faith-based groups to make employment decisions based on their moral convictions when they are using tax dollars. In his talk, Obama put his "Council for Faith-Based and Neighborhood Partnerships" in stark contrast to President Bush's current program. "First, if you get a federal grant, you can't use that grant money to proselytize to the people you help and you can't discriminate against them--or against the people you hire--based on your religion," he said. Despite the clear and present danger this would pose to church-based outreach programs, Rev. Jim Wallis, President of the liberal Sojourners, wasted no time announcing his support for the plan, even implying that "Obama's proposals also contain necessary protections for religious liberty..." The reality is that Obama's interpretation would be a body blow to religious groups that apply for federal funds. In contrast, Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) released a statement today supporting the rights of religious organizations that apply for government funding to "hire people who share their faith."

Arizona Marriage Amendment

Arizonans to vote on the Marriage Amendment in November-"The long-anticipated vote came just before adjournment and followed hours of angry, raucous debate in which the legislative rule book was used as a weapon to both stall the vote (Democrats) and cut short debate (Republicans). Senators on both sides of the aisle and of the issue lamented a meltdown in the higher chamber, as most of the day's work was scrapped so that the marriage amendment could be voted upon while key senators were present."

McCain vs Obama on state Marriage Amendments

In the first email labeled One that I am sending to you Obama is reported of saying at "the LGBT Democratic Club in San Francisco, he scorned man-woman marriage, saying , "...I oppose the divisive and discriminatory efforts to amend the California Constitution [to protect marriage], and similar efforts to amend the U.S. Constitution or those of any other states." While telling the world he will up hold the faith-based initiative as the cornerstone of his administration, Obama says that a cornerstone of society - heterosexual marriage -- is "divisive and discriminatory." Doesn't this mean that faith-based organizations that support marriage will be disqualified from federal funding under an Obama presidency? It would be next to impossible for ministries that promote traditional marriage to participate in a Healthy Marriage project funded through an Obama faith-based initiative."

For McCain see, McCain vs Obama on Marriage Amendment in California which I posted in the last email.

Good News on McCain

McCain seems to be meeting with evangelical conservatives to make a point with us. I find it interesting that there are ample reports in the news on Obamas' reaching out to the religious whereas McCains' reach has very little air. So, just in case you didn't know. McCain has made supporting statements on California Marriage Act which was in your last email. He has supported Bushs' Faith Based Initiatives to ALL Faiths not just to compromising faiths. He has met privately with Billy and Franklin Graham and with Frank Pavone a strong Catholic Pro-Life conservative scroll down to the second article under the subheading of Pro-Life. And recently he appeared before 90 conservatives in Denver evangelical leaders which include Matthew Staver who formely supported Huckabee of the Liberty Counsel (which offensively sues and defensively protects pro-life cases and religious liberty cases like this recent one against Hallmark)..."According to Staver, those in attendance included Phyllis Schlafly, head of the Eagle Forum; pastor and "Left Behind" co-author Tim LaHaye and his wife, Beverly, founder of Concerned Women for America; David Barton, founder of WallBuilders; Rick Scarborough of Vision America; and Don Hodel, a former interior secretary and former president of Colorado Springs-based Focus on the Family. "Our shared core values compel us to unite and choose the presidential candidate that best advances those values," said Staver...."That obvious choice is Sen. John McCain. I think people left the meeting in unity the likes of which have not been evident through the primaries."...Staver said enthusiasm is building for McCain, in part because of the Republican senator's recent meetings with movement leaders like Phil Burress, who also attended the Denver summit. Burress helped pass an anti-gay marriage measure in Ohio that was credited with helping President Bush win the state in 2004. Asked whether it was opposition to Obama or enthusiasm for McCain that motivated the group, Staver said: "Obama is a considerable threat to our values. At the same time, Sen. McCain recently has been reaching out to evangelicals and conservative voters that we represent."

I am waiting to see who he chooses as VP before I am persuaded. But he is doing a good job reaching out at this moment for my values vote without contradictions.

Obama vs Dobson

Commentary: In Defense of Dr. Dobson-by Patrick Buchanan. A must read article for those interested. "Folks haven't been reading their Bibles....whose Christianity would we teach in the schools? Would we go with James Dobson's or with Al Sharpton's?...translate some of our concerns in a universal language so that we can have an open and vigorous debate rather than have religion divide us."-Thus saith Obama. But when confronted with skepticism from Dobson namely that Obama "is dragging biblical understanding through the gutter.." and "Am I required in a democracy to conform my efforts in the political arena to his bloody notion of what is right with regard to the life of tiny babies?". Obamas' "open" and "vigorous debate" is that Dobson is "making stuff up". Well maybe he is and maybe he isn't but when it comes to what matters at the end of the day on biblical issues like the lives of the unborn, marriage and religous liberties Dobson understanding of the Bible wins hands down!!!! Obama should practice his claimed truth and have an "open and vigorous debate". I think we need an "open and vigorous debate rather than having" Obamas view of the Bible "divide" up the truth of the scriptures into whatever he wants it to say all in the name of non divisiveness. How undivisive is that???!!!! Talk about an unbiblical point of view of what a christian is see: Obama Reaches Out to Young Evangelicals?. Don't forget about his pastor for 20 years!!! I mean if Obama wants to reach out to evangelicals he must expect criticism from evangelicals!!!! For more evidence of Obamas' reach out to evangelicals check out: How valuable is your Values Vote? Obamas' first ad: To Values Voters?.

"Is it not that, in the chain of human events, the birthday of the nation is indissolubly linked with the birthday of the Savior? That it forms a leading event in the progress of the gospel dispensation? Is it not that the Declaration of Independence first organized the social compact on the foundation of the Redeemer's mission upon earth?"-John Quincy Adams July 4th 1937

http://www.valuesvoternews.com/

Thank you for using American Family Association Mail System

Message sent to the following recipients:Representative Udall

May 30, 2008

[recipient address was inserted here]

Dear [recipient name was inserted here],

I strongly support the Military Honor and Decency Act (H.R.5821)introduced by Representative Paul Broun. I respectfully urge you to signon as a co-sponsor today.

The sale of por-ogr-phic materials on military bases targets men, butfamilies and society as a whole cannot escape its destructive impact. It leads men to adopt unrealistic expectations of their wives and demeaning views of women in general. It rips apart marriages and destroys families.

Our soldiers are already encountering the unfortunate but necessary imagesof war as they honorably fight to preserve our liberty and extend itsreach abroad. It's time for Congress to revisit the law and clean out por-ogr-phic material on all military premises.

Please co-sponsor this bill to show your support for a stronger, morefocused military.

Sincerely,

Disclaimer for context/purpose: I understand that there are many more issues besides values issues and below is a reason as to why the focus on values issues....

Here is Heather Wilson and Steve Pearce voting record on values issues.-By Focus on the Family and the Family Research Center. The race between Wilson and Pearce for the Republican Nominee for Senate is very close so every vote will count. The house of representatives probably won't even be close so I didn't bother posting anything about it here mainly because I don't know enough about the 2 candidates and there is no history of voting records with them either. A recent poll has Pearce 3 percent ahead of Wilson with a 4.8 percent of error. So its that close. It will be interesting cause Pearce is running on a true conservative ticket whereas Wilson is running on a "common sense" conservative meaning more moderate. So we will see who New Mexican Republicans choose...

Also, enclosed as an attachment for areas that you can vote at and you can vote now as an early voter at some locations but the last day to vote is June 3rd.

For those living in other states this includes the values voting record of all senators and congressman in all 50 states.

Heather Wilson receives a 75% approval rating and Pearce 100%. The most telling one that divides the 2 for me is Heather voted against Restricting funds to Planned Parenthood whereas Steve voted for Restricting funds to Planned Parenthood. That is the main reason why I am voting for Pearce although there are others that are not the most prevalent issues with me...

Of course the Democrat Tom Udall scored a miserable 6%.

My argument for taking values issues first into consideration when voting is: how can we expect the blessings of God (good economy/good national health(care)/national security(war)/etcetcetc) without voting with His values in mind above His blessings? So can we expect to obtain God's blessings if we ignore His values in the voting booth or in our personal lives?

As I have been reviewing the quotations of Americas' founding fathers it seems they were not just concerned about abuse of governmental power and religious freedom issues but also quite concerned about the state of the people of the nation. It seems that they saw that just because much power is given to the democratic process that we should not expect this to guarantee our freedoms for if the people were corrupt then the inevitable outcome would be a corrupt government and not only that but that it is impossible to govern a corrupt people despite the most perfect government. So you find many many quotes from our forefathers admonishing the people of the US like the ones below from Samuel and John Adams about one major cause of corrupt government that being the people themselves (its as if they saw no one immune to sin and corruption (not just governments but the people under governments) and assumed a bentness toward sin in all areas of national life both personal and governmental as an enemy to ourselves as a people. Namely that ourselves are a possible enemy to ourselves.)...

I find this admonition from Thomas Jefferson most applicable in this context: "Give up money, give up fame, give up science, give the earth itself and all it contains rather than do an immoral act"-Thomas Jefferson. And I can't help to wonder what Mr Jefferson or any of our founding fathers/early supreme court justices/early American voters would think of Planned Parenthood and what they promote.

And that sums up my argument for a values first vote for but also, remembering the admonitions of our forefathers that we should always be examining our own walk before the Lord and our motives in both our views of government and self and not at all the least God Himself... If all these other issues are of such great importance how much more should the issue of God and our relationship with Him be... For more quotes from our founding fathers and a great resource site in this area check out http://www.wallbuilders.com/.

One last argument (sorry) could be made when voting is: If Jesus were to vote who would He most likely vote for? If Jesus had a kid would He not die to let him/her live. The obvious answer is yes. Jesus would not choose death for His kid even if the his child was a result of a rape or even if it meant His life were at stake. The obvious answer is Jesus would freely die to let another live. Would Jesus encourage promiscuity in His sex education and hand out condoms or would He not stick to the ten commandments? Would Jesus support bills that have been used to suppress the speech of His own Word which is that message by which people are saved from their sins? Would Jesus vote as if the economy/national security/health care/big government vs big business etc etc is of greater importance then the above? I believe the answer is probably not...

And for a little perspective and argument against my own argument to put it all in proper context of priority: Would Jesus vote as if His vote would change the world more/better than the message that He died on the cross for our sins? Of course not...So with our voting power in the right context I encourage all to get out and vote...

The June 3 2008 Primary election for NM is going on now. I believe there are locations available for those registered as Democrat or Republican to vote at now. I just got a letter in the mail with different locations that I attached in this email. So get out and vote even if you disagree with me (I am sure for decent enough reasons) but good luck in convincing me...:) Love yah all no matter what your persuasion...

Here is another throw in of a great resource site for measuring which polls have been the most accurate polls thus far in the election process and who is ahead in the polls for the President of the US. Obama and McCain are neck and neck McCain would win if election were today according to a combination of all these polls.

Take care...

"[N]either the wisest constitution nor the wisest laws will secure the liberty and happiness of a people whose manners are universally corrupt."-Samuel Adams (Signer of the Declaration of Independence) "[W]e have no government armed with power capable of contending with human passions unbridled by morality and religion. . . . Our constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other." "[I]t is religion and morality alone which can establish the principles upon which freedom can securely stand. The only foundation of a free constitution is pure virtue."-John Adams (Signer of Declaration of Independence and 2nd President of the United States of America).

Another Update on NM Photographer case:

I hope this is the last update until it goes up further in the appeal process. I have been praying for this women and her partner that they would come to the Lord thru all this in some way and that in some way God would be glorified in this. I say this just to encourage you all to not only get a little upset but to handle this with passionate prayer for the lost and that God uses this for good like He did the cross and that we act like Christ did when He was persecuted for His religious beliefs!!!!

Quick update concerning my complaint of KOAT and KOBTV report from the 04-11-2008 AP report on there web sites on my prior email on this subject which you can find here. Check out the NEW MORE ACCURATE AP release on 04-14-2008 www.CBNnews.com entitled: "Human Rights Commission: Christian Discriminated against Lesbians"-"The Alliance Defense Fund, a Christian organization that defends religious liberty"-04-14-2008. Much better!!!

Now, the facts:

The official 35 page briefing in defense of NM Photographer-Check out the Statement of Facts starting on page 3-7, And here is a key argument concerning motivation and quite enlightening..."At best, Willock has introduced direct evidence that Elane Photography does "not photograph same-sex weddings," Resp. Ex. B. at 5, but that does not inform the "ultimate issue" of the Company's motivation....Once a complainant establishes her prima facie case, that prima facie showing "may then be rebutted by evidence that the [complainant] was [refused service] based on a nondiscriminatory motivation."...Id. Here, both Jonathan and Elaine testified that they declined to photograph Willock's wedding-like, same-sex commitment ceremony because they refuse to use, and company policy prevents them from using, their talents and resources to promote a message with which they earnestly disagree, namely, that marriage can exist between anyone other than one man and one woman. Tr. at . Both Jonathan and Elaine testified that they did not refuse their Company's services because of Willock's "sexual orientation." Tr. at . In fact, they both acknowledged that they would offer their photography services to Willock or any other individual regardless of their sexual orientation, but they could not do so in the requested context of a wedding-like, same-sex commitment ceremony because of the message conveyed by that event. Tr. at . On the other hand, if Willock had asked Elane Photography to take pictures of her as part of, for example, individual portraits for a modeling portfolio, the Company would have been happy to provide its services in that context. In sum, then, Elane Photography's refusal to photograph Willock's ceremony was motivated by Jonathan's and Elaine's desire to refrain from furthering, promoting, or endorsing a same-sex "marital" relationship, and not from any soft of unlawful discriminatory animus. This is not some irrational, arbitrary, post-hoc justification for the Company's actions. Context and message are important to artists, and the legitimacy of Elane Photography's nondiscriminatory reason is demonstrated by a simple illustration. Suppose, for example, that a Ku Klux Klan..."-pg 16,17.

The Commission Opinion and Final Order-Documented Email conversation,
"17. On September 21, 2006, Ms. Willock contacted the website of Elane Photography to obtain information about its photographic services and pricing. Ms. Willock sent Elane Photography the following email inquiry: We are researching potential photographers for our commitment ceremony on September 15, 2007 in Taos, NM. This is a same-gender ceremony. If you are open to helping us celebrate our day we'd like to receive pricing information. Thanks [Testimony of Willock; Exhibit E at 1-2.] 18. Later on the same day, Ms. Elaine Huguenin gave the following response to Ms. Willock: Hello Vanessa, As a company, we photograph traditional weddings, engagements, seniors, and several other things such as political photographs and singer's portfolios. -Elaine— [Testimony of Willock and Elaine Huguenin; Exhibit 1; Exhibit E at 1, 3 & 43 19. Ms. Willock was not sure whether Ms. Elaine Huguenin's response meant that Elane Photography did or did not offer its services to same-gender couples arid sought clarification on November 28, 2006, as follows: Hi Elaine, Thanks for your response below of September 21, 2006. I'm a bit confused, however, by the wording of your response. Are you saying that your company does not offer your photography services to same-sex couples? Thanks, Vanessa [Testimony of Willock; Exhibit I; Exhibit E at 4.] 20. On November 28, Ms. Elaine Huguenin clarified her previous response to Ms. Willock in the following way: Hello Vanessa, Sorry if our last response was a confusing one. Yes, you are correct in saying we do not photograph same-sex weddings, but again, thanks for checking out our site! Have a great day. -Elaine"
Notice that she needed clarification 3 months later!!! Just a little odd...

"25. On November 29, 2006, Ms. Willock's partner, Ms. Collinswortb, formerly known as Ms. Pascottini, sought to verify Ms. Elaine Huguenin's refusal to photograph a same-sex ceremony by making a similar email inquiry about packages and rates to photograph a wedding, without any mention of same-sex. Ms. Collinsworth sent the following email to Elane Photography: Hi Elaine, I really like your photographs. I was wondering if you would be willing to travel to Ruidoso for my wedding? Can you send me a list of your packages and rates? Thanks!! [Testimony of Collinsworth; Exhibit E at 6.) 26. On November 29, 2006, Ms. Elaine Huguenin responded affirmatively by email to Ms. Collinsworth's inquiry and, at the same time, forwarded Ms. Collinsworth information about the company's photography pricing (base package, $1,450; deluxe package, $1,850; and royal package, $2,250), as well as information about the company's procedure for online proofing credits. The text of Ms. Elaine Huguenin's response to Ms. Collinsworth's inquiry was as follows: Hello Misty, Thanks so much for contacting us. I would definately [sic) be willing to travel to Ruidoso for your wedding. I have attached some information that should be helpful as far as prices and packages. There is also another attachment concerning "print credits" — it explains what online proofing is, because it's something that is a bit newer and not everyone may know what it is yet. Hopefully these items will help you sort some things out. Also, I would love to meet up with you sometime, if you are interested, to show you more of my recent book, along with an example of the "coffee table book" that included in all ofourpacicages. My place of choice is Satellite... Good luck with your planning, and I hope to talk with you soon -Elaine [Testimony of Collinsworth and Elaine Huguenin; Exhibit E at 7; Exhibit C & Exhibit E at 9; Exhibit D & Exhibit E at 10.] 27. On December 19, 2006, having not heard again from Ms. Collinsworth (then known as Misty Pascottini), Ms. Elaine Huguenin sent the following email to Ms. Collinsworth:
Hello Misty, I just wanted to check and see if you had any questions about the prices or packages that I could help answer. I hope that planning is going well for you. Have a great day! -Elaine [Testimony of Elaine Huguenin; Exhibit F at 8.]"

That's all the conversation that took place!!! Some how Vanessa Willock and her partner believed that Elaine had no other reason to not do photographs of there same-gender ceremony except for sexual orientation. It seems to me that if there is any discrimination going on here it would be: religious discrimination on the part of the Human Rights Commission (arbitrarily favouring one right over another)!!!!...This is a case of Religious Discrimination in the name of Sexual Orientation..."Gay rights have trumped religious rights in a New Mexico case."-04/14/2008 AP. I can understand maybe the confusion between Elaine and Vanessa in the email conversations but I have yet to agree with the Human Rights Commission Final Order and Opinion...

Here is an interesting commentary on this case:

The New Mexico Human Rights Commission Refuses to Consider Religious Freedom Objection:

The Breadth of the New Mexico Human Rights Commission's Rationale:

Photographers Denied the Freedom To Choose What They Photograph:
What does Bush have to do with all this:

Fighting religious discrimination: Bush administration's quiet campaign-"In education, for example, the DOJ reviewed 82 cases and conducted 40 investigations from 2001 to 2006. Compare this with the 1995-2000 time period, when the DOJ reviewed one case and made no investigations...As Judge Judy would say, these are real cases about real people. From attacks on houses of worship to incidents of discrimination at school and work, the DOJ over the past five years has investigated scores of cases involving the religious rights of Christians, Jews, Muslims, Sikhs, Native Americans and others."-When I read this I was reasoned, yep here is another one. I am hardly getting the whole story from ABC, CBS, NBC or PBS. Justifying the slogan below....

Yanking Back the Balance and Filling in the Gaps

P.S.-Concerning the media lack of coverage on these issues I wanted to submit a suggestion concerning motive of lack of coverage. And I do believe I have presented evidence of this unlike Vanessa and her partner. Not only is money and ratings a motive but may I submit that maybe just maybe liberal politics rooted in a liberal worldview is a big part of the pie, also, which highly favours one political party over another....

I always intend just to send a quick email but then I just can't help but to add a little and a little and a little until it is a little to much!!! :)

Take care all.

"When I watched him [former President Bill Clinton] at Mrs. King's funeral, I just have never seen anything like it....There are times when he sounds like Jesus in the temple. I mean, amazing ability to transcend ethnicity -- race, we call it, it's really ethnicity -- in this country and, and speak to us all in this amazingly primordial way."-MSNBC's Chris Matthews (Awarded "Quote of the year" at the 2008 Dishonors Awards)

Third Update on NM Photographer case:

Finally KOB and KOAT did a report on the christian photographer case. Here it is...

N.M. Human Rights Commission: Photographer Discriminated- It is a rather quick AP report. I think a fair AP report except on the discription of the attorneys handling the case for the photographer. The description reads, "The group handles legal cases aimed at defending the Bible." You'd get the impression that these attorney handle cases aimed at defending the Bible, right. Which makes the attorneys defending the photographer rather strange which then makes the legitimacy of the defense of her position rather strange and doubtful. Let me quote a quote from the attorneys group web site, "ADF was founded for a unique purpose: to aggressively defend religious liberty by empowering our allies, recognizing that together, we can accomplish far more than we can alone." Not to mention that "ADF and its allies has defeated the ACLU and its allies 3 out of every 4 of the hundreds of cases funded and litigated to conclusion- including 33 wins before the US Supreme Court recorded for the past 13 years" as of 2007. And they do it for their clients for free in many situations!!! So let us put the two discriptions of ADF side by side and see how you think this may effect the unknowing readers of the article and thus the credibility of the photographers side of the issue:

AP description of ADF: "The group handles legal cases aimed at defending the Bible."

ADFs' description of ADF: "ADF was founded for a unique purpose: to aggressively defend religious liberty by empowering our allies, recognizing that together, we can accomplish far more than we can alone."

One may wonder why a Bible defender is defending a religious liberty case here. Even in the words of the APs' own writing, "The photographer contends the ruling violates her right to freedom of religion."

And feel free to check out the facts as to whether or not ADF handles legal cases aimed at defending the Bible. Just look on the ACLU's and ADF's web site and see the many many cases they are involved in that are not aimed at defending the Bible.

It is very possible that this is evidence of bias to be so misinforming from a journalist organization that should be held to higher standards then the average me....

Here is a story from the Washington Times that reported on this case way back 02-25-2008 that did a far better job describing ADF. "Jordan Lorence of the Alliance Defense Fund, a "legal ministry" that is representing the Huguenins and defends religious freedom and traditional values.."-Much better. I've noticed that the Washington Times picks up stories like this earlier on then most other media outlets. I don't know if they are conservative or not but I do remember them reporting a very fair report on the Promise Keepers that my dad and I attended in Washington DC many years ago when most other reports were very unfair. So if they aren't conservative at least they have some fairness...

Maybe I am being picky.....you decide.....

Check out the comments made by New Mexicans on this report on KOB. So far there is 76. Now I only read thru the first 20 and it seems alot of New Mexicans are not happy about this as compared to thsoe that are. At least out of those who made a comment to the story.

I have a feeling that KRQE will do a more in depth story on this then the above stations. I sent an email to Dick Knipfing about this story. I don't think it will be a better story casue I sent the email but I do think it will be better because I think that is why they have yet to air a story on this case. My hope is that they are gathering more info to make a more in depth report on the case and actually have a video of it on their web site. KRQE is the only local news channel that reported on the Planned Parenthood situation so maybe they will actually do a little better job on this story then the other stations who didn't report the Planned Parenthood story. This story did also make the Abq Journal finally. I don't know if it made the headlines or if it was stuck somewhere else. This story has made the headlines in every conservative news media outlet that I am aware of and is a hot topic on many national conservative media outlets ever since January. It will be interesting to see if the national non conservative media picks up on it!!!!!!

Some other very interesting information concerning this case I found not even on conservative news sources but on blog sites with the following citations as documented proof...

Background info on lesbian to give revealing info and a face to pray for:

Vanessa Willock has been with UNM since 1997 and is currently an EEO Compliance Representative with the Office of Equal Opportunity where she investigates claims of discrimination and sexual harassment."

She is a committe Member at UNM under Strategic Directions Committe and found under one of the sections titled "Value and benefit from the creativity, innovation, insight, and excitement generated by the many dimensions of diversity that are the essence of the University and the State. (Diversity)."-If one claims diversity then live it!!! Diversity for all except this christian photographers conscience???!!! In the name of diversity must we force those of opposing view points to not only promote ours but be actively involved in the promotion???!!! This discrimination law needs reinterpretation to uphold principles of diversity. Unless diversity doesn't include men and women of conscience/principle. And if it doesn't then is diversity itself a principle of conscience and if so then diversity refutes itself. And if it is not then why so much energy being put into diversity training. Thus to be truely diversified you must include in your diversity training men and women of differing principle and conscience then yourself!!!!

Here are actual official documents:

Original Charge of Discrimination and Notice of Charge of Discrimination sent to photograph company. Plaintiffs own words, "I contacted Elane Photography to inquire about...commitment ceremony. I received an email back which stated that the company only photographs traditional weddings....I wrote back to ask for clarification...and I received an email back....which state "we do not photograph same sex weddings"....I believe I have been discriminated against because of my secual orientation..."

Determination of Probable Cause-06/05/2007. "The evidence reflects the emails where Respondent denies you service. The evidence shows that your partner requested services without telling Respondent that it was a same sex cermony and Respondent agreed to photograph....Respondent also told the Human Rights investigator that she does not perform same sex cermonies...I find there is sufficient evidence to believe that discrimination has occurred."

Just another letter of no added consequence except for realism sent from The State of New Mexico Department of Workforce Solutions to attorney handling cas for photographer.

My first reaction is to get frustrated about all this but when I saw this photo of the accuser I thought that this is a lost sinner as much as I am and I should also pray for her that she comes to know Christ as her saviour. So to give you a face to pray for click here. She is on 2nd picture. And a close up here.

Let's pray for her!!!

Yanking back the balance and filling in the gaps

"The last time the Senate waited this long in a presidential election year to confirm federal judges, James Polk, the 11th president, was in the White House." -Sen Orrin G. Hatch (R)-Utah

Update on NM Photographer case:

Some time ago I sent an email about a local Albuquerque, NM photographer who would not photographs of a same sex ceremony since she believed it was wrong and was taken to the NM Human Rights Commission and not one report anywhere in any local media outlet that I am aware of here in NM. I could be wrong but I can't find anything but on conservative media outlets everywhere!!! Either NM doesn't care about these issues or either they don't care cause they don't know!!! But either way some do and here is the breaking bad news....

04/09/2008 order of the NM Human Rights Commission-"IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that the respondent, Elane Photography, LLC, shall pay to the Complainant, Vanessa Willock, an award of attroney's fees and costs, in the amount of $6,637.94." Attorney fees and costs sure are expensive for ONE day before a COMMISSION that issued a ONE page finding. I wonder how much ONE day would cost be before a Court and Judge and the 20 plus pages they usually issue there. Thank the Lord and ADF that this company doesn't have to pay on top of that for their own attorney's fees.

ADF to appeal N.M. commission's ruling against Christian photographer-"Could the government force a vegetarian videographer to create a commercial for the new butcher shop in town? American business owners do not surrender their constitutional rights at the marketplace gate."

Fact sheet that I emailed you all in the past in case you missed it.

Other NM related news from ADF since January of 2008 mostly about this case: but some interesting bills going thru the House and Senate like domestic partnership.

04/05/2008 Racism alleged against Planned Parenthood: Have to give credit to Channel 13 for covering some controversial issues concerning Planned Parenthood as of late. Irene Gray of Planned Parenthood in Albuquerque, NM was recorded by a pro-life investigator to see if they would take donations specifically for black babies so that whites would not be disadvantaged because of affirmative action and she did. You can click here for that story and then click on Racism alleged against Planned Parenthood. And it made the 04-05-2008 edition of the Albuquerque Journal but I have no link cause you have to subscribe.

Yanking back the balance and filling in the gaps

"I would agree with St. Augustine that an 'unjust law is no law at all,'" wrote King. "Now what is the difference between the two? A just law is a man-made code that squares with the moral law or the law of God. An unjust law is a code that is out of harmony with the moral law. To put it in terms of St. Thomas Aquinas: An unjust law is a human law that is not rooted in eternal law and natural law."-Rev Martin Luther King Jr. (From his famous "Letter from Birmingham Jail" 1963)