Family Research Council

Is it too wrong to wish someone a “Merry Christmas?”

by Krystle Gabele

December 12, 2008

It seems like America has been plagued by the notions of being politically correct lately. Too often, you walk into a retail store and they are offering holiday sales, not “Christmas” sales.In today’s society, you are persecuted if you say, “Merry Christmas,” because the powers that be deem it too controversial.

If your child is in school, they do not throw Christmas parties complete with Santa Claus and the goodies. Instead, they throw Holiday parties with no such entertainment (except for a controversial movie or two). If you buy a Christmas tree, the man who puts the tree on top of your car wishes you, “Happy Holidays.” I believe you bought a Christmas tree, so where is the customary “Merry Christmas?”

Now, it seems like there is an assault by the leftists and religious separatists to remove Christianity from Christmas. According to the Stop the ACLU blog, there is a community threatening to stop Christmas carols from being sung in public places. Why? Because the organizers do not want to risk alienating the Muslims or Atheists due to Christ, and this is especially odd considering that the community is 75% Christian and 1% Muslim.

Enough is enough, right? Christmas is about celebrating the birth of our Lord Jesus Christ and giving to others in his name. There is nothing politically wrong about doing this, and it is time we return to our faith, especially in the times we are facing ahead. It will be our faith in God that will sustain us.

Daily Buzz

by Krystle Gabele

December 12, 2008

Here’s what we’ve been looking at today.

“More than “Mutual Joy”: Lisa Miller of Newsweek against Scripture and Jesus” by, Dr. Robert A. J. Gagnon (RobGagnon.net)

New Poll Warns Daschle, Obama: Mandatory Health Insurance Big Loser With Public; Voters Want Return on Stem Cell Research (PR Newswire)

Beliefs in God, UFOs prevail by Jennifer Miller (The Washington Times

Pro-aborts lose another round to Phill Kline by Jill Stanek (WorldNetDaily)

The U.N. Fails To Protect Human Rights In China, Huffington Post Still A Blind Apologist (Political Vindication)

Evangelical Spokesman Resigns After Telling NPR Gay Marriage, Abortion are Negotiable(Newsbusters)

Iowa Justices Hear Same-Sex Marriage Case by Kirk Johnson (New York Times)

If FOCA is passed, then Catholic Hospitals are in Danger of Closing

by Krystle Gabele

December 9, 2008

This morning, I read an article in The Washington Examiner about how the Freedom of Choice Act (FOCA) would be a huge threat to Catholic health care systems, not just in Maryland, but around the nation. 

Barack Obama has pledged the very first thing he would sign into law would be legislation aimed towards making abortion legal throughout the pregnancy and place the burden on taxpayers to cover this horrific procedure.

With this type of legislation being possibly enacted, many bishops are considering closing Catholic hospitals.  At a recent general meeting of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, Chicago Auxiliary Bishop Thomas Paprocki said, “We may need to consider taking the drastic step of closing our Catholic hospitals entirely.”  In Maryland, there are eight hospitals that would be threatened, including St. Joseph Medical Center in Towson, which is nationally renowned for their cardiac care center.

According to our own government affairs department here at FRC, Maryland, along with six other states has legislation similar to FOCA.

“In Maryland , FOCA-type legislation has been on the books since 1991.   According to Planned Parenthood’s Alan Guttmacher Institute, the abortion rate in the United States DECREASED nine percent since 2000 to 19.4 abortions per 1,000 women of reproductive age in 2005.  By contrast, the state of Maryland in 2005 produced a rate of 31.5 abortions per 1,000 women of reproductive age, an INCREASE of eight percent since 1991.”

Hopefully, Congress will use common sense and not pass such a detrimental piece of legislation that would threaten quality medical care straight across the board.

The True Motivations behind the Passage of Proposition 8

by Krystle Gabele

December 5, 2008

In The Mercury News (San Jose), there was an article that mentioned the strong factors in the vote for Proposition 8. These two factors were education and income. While these two factors may have had some impact in the passage, there is reasonable indication that voters still respect the institution of family.

According to a recent Public Policy Institute of California study quoted in The Mercury News, the measure drew strong support from evangelical Christians.

As other polls had shown, the measure drew overwhelming support from evangelical Christians (85 percent in favor), robust backing from political conservatives and strong opposition from liberals. Baldassare said it’s difficult to say from the polling why people with higher incomes and a college degree tend to support same-sex marriage.

Today, we often read in publications that the family is declining in America. After the recent passage of Proposition 8 by Californians, we realize the institution of family is still in tact and respected by many in our society. While socioeconomic factors and education have a significant impact in how someone will vote, it is ultimately the values that were instilled at home that guide us in our actions at the polls.

Update on the Washington Metro Bus Ad

by Krystle Gabele

December 4, 2008

As mentioned in the November 12, 2008 Daily Buzz, the Washington, DC Metro Transit system has been in some deep heat from riders and onlookers alike for their recent advertisements on the back of buses. The advertisements are a part of the American Humanist Association campaign that says: “Why believe in a God? Be good for goodness sake.”

According to a recent article from The Washington Examiner, the Metro Transit Agency has received such complaints like, “May all your atheist buses break down.” Metro spokeswoman Candace Smith responded to these complaints by saying,

“As a public agency, Metro must observe the First Amendment with respect to the acceptance of commercial advertising,” Smith said. “Although we understand that feelings and perceptions will vary among individuals within the community, we cannot reject advertising because an individual, or group, finds it inappropriate or offensive.

Metro spokeswoman Smith said the number of complaints represents a small fraction of its ridership, which averages more than a million trips on buses and trains daily.

“Do we think we’re losing customers over this?” Smith said. “I doubt it.”

She said Metro responds to each complaint, urging those who complain to contact the advertiser directly. Or, she said, “They can pony up money for counter advertising.”

It is an attitude like this that sends a clear sign that the Metro does not take note or consider how offensive an advertising campaign can be to their patrons.