Legal profession made up of ideologues, demands legal ideologue
Mat Staver is a conservative activist. That's not my allegation; it's just what he is. He doesn't really deny it, which is good, since it's not up for discussion. As the head of the Liberty Counsel, regular conservative pundit and speaker, and author of books like Same-Sex Marriage: Putting Every Family At Risk, it would be pretty much impossible for him to deny his advocacy for socially conservative causes.
Mat Staver is also a dean an professor at Liberty University School of Law. When it comes to point-of-view teaching, you would be hard pressed to find anyone who'd put any other law school above Liberty. That school, again by its own admission, operates from a theologically-driven, right-of-center ideology.
Which is why I find this quote truly stunning:
"The legal profession, particularly in the legal academy and the law schools, has long ago lost the concept of the rule of law," [Mat Staver] laments. "It's just driven by ideology. In fact, most law schools have left-leaning ideologues as professors and faculty. And so I take every one of their opinions with a grain of salt."
The truth, of course, is that the legal profession, writ large, does not have a "left-leaning" bias. Most of what Mat Staver perceives to be a bias, particularly when it comes to LGBT people, is simply basic fairness. Which is why many of the judges who have sided with equality were themselves appointed by Republicans: fairness is a bipartisan affair.
But what is stunning to me is not Mat's insistence that LGBT support and the like makes up a "left-leaning ideology," which was a given. Instead, it's his condemnation of what he sees as ideology-driven legal training/practice when he himself is someone who teaches, advocates for, collects a paycheck from, and forcefully pushes an ideologically-driven version of law and legal training! What nerve of him to knock the overall legal body as being some sort of skewed wheel when he is in the driver's seat of one of the most forcefully spun houses of point-of-view lawyering in the nation! Even if there were the problem that he states, he is someone who is trying to do exactly what he claims to hate, just from another perspective.
I swear, the lack of self-awareness and/or shame that sustains the "values" movement is something that must be experienced to be believed!
FRC's senior fellow for exporting/criminalizing gay people bemoan's discrimination's dwindling acceptance
Peter Sprigg, Family Research Council's Senior Fellow for Policy Studies, released the following statement:
"President Obama has ordered employers to put aside their principles, and practices in the name of political correctness. This level of coercion is nothing less than viewpoint blackmail that bullies into silence every contractor and subcontractor who has moral objections to homosexual behavior. This order gives activists a license to challenge their employers and, expose those employers to threats of costly legal proceedings and the potential of jeopardizing future contracts.
"Religious faith is not simply a matter of intellectual affirmation but of active practice. A religious organization which is denied the power to require its employees to conduct their lives in a way consistent with the teachings of their faith is an organization which is being denied the right to exercise its religion, period. People with deeply held convictions regarding the morality of certain types of sexual behavior should not be bound by the dictates of President Obama's agenda.
"The President's policies are keeping the economy in the tank. He strangled the financial and health sectors by passing a health care law that's trampling employers' freedom and crushing their bottom lines. Now, as if those burdens weren't enough, the President's party wants to tell companies how they should run their businesses, and how they can and cannot practice their moral convictions and religious faith.
"President Obama is legislating without Congress. Now, the American people will be left to sort out the costs to religious and constitutional liberties resulting from this rule by decree," concluded Sprigg.
[Family Research Council]
Our tax dollars are not going to subsidize your desire to discrimination, Peter. Sorry, not sorry.
(ARCHIVED): President signs executive order protecting LGBT workers
SEE ALSO: The Draft Text Of Obama’s LGBT Worker Executive Order [Buzzfeed]
That discriminatory Colorado baker won't make Halloween cakes either
The Alliance Defending Freedom is appealing a recent order from the Colorado Civil Rights Commission saying that baker Jack Phillips can't deny customers based on their sexual orientation. A tipster noted this interesting snippet from that appeal:
First off, I'm pretty sure that a whole lot of people of any faith celebrate Halloween. But more than that, I'm also pretty sure that its practitioners consider Paganism to be a religion. So while I know Phillips and the ADF are including this line to make his discrimination against same-sex couples seems less targeted, some would argue that he is opening himself up to more scrutiny (if not legal action) by holding this public position.
Catholic Bishops again go after basic workplace protections for LGBT people
I'm fairly certain that when most LGBT people are fired from or passed over for a job, they are not actively engaging in sex when that employment decision is made. Obviously the person who made the unfair decision is acting on biases, suspicions, stereotypes, and all of the other reasons that people use to stigmatize and marginalize LGBT people.
But leave it to a cadre of our nation's most anti-gay Catholic Bishops to pretend otherwise. In yet another letter in which they overreach their theology into American political life, Archbishop Salvatore J. Cordileone (who is practically a National Organization For Marriage staid member at this point), Archbishop William Lori, Archbishop Thomas Wenski and Bishop Richard J. Malone say the following about federal employment protections:
Instead of protecting persons, [the Employment Non Discrimination Act] uses the force of the law to coerce everyone to accept a deeply problematic understanding of human sexuality and sexual behavior and to condone such behavior. The current proposed ENDA legislation is not about protecting persons, but behavior. Churches, businesses and individuals should not be punished in any way for living by their religious and moral convictions concerning sexual activity.
Eliminating truly unjust discrimination – based on personal characteristics, not sexual behavior – and protecting religious freedom are goals that we all should share. The current political climate makes it very difficult to maintain a reasonable dialogue on these contentious issues, but we must keep trying.
FULL LETTER: Hobby Lobby and ENDA [USCC]
Yeah, Bishops? You all are bemoaning the difficulty of reasonable dialogue? Seriously? You? The ones who feel that your personal choice of faith and lifestyle allows you the freedom to subjugate fair protections for millions? The ones who believe that protecting these millions from the most basic form of animus constitutes "a deeply problematic understanding of human sexuality and sexual behavior and to condone such behavior"? Just checking, so we're all clear: you four bishops are the ones who think that political dialogue is a thing for you to both shape and bemoan?
What gall. Hubris.
FL anti-gay activist, head of anti-gay Boy Scouts group says marriage inequality is 'issue worth dying for'
John Stemberger is a very anti-gay personality. In addition to his years and years of aggressively hostile activism in the Sunshine State, the pro-discrimination advocate is also the visionary behind Trail Life USA, the organization that was started up solely because of the Boy Scouts of America's decision to allow openly gay youth.
Now Stemberger adds even more dedication to his discrimination, telling anyone who will listen that opposing same-sex marriage is "an issue worth dying for":
John Stemberger, who led that 2008 campaign, said he would keep fighting.
“This is an issue worth dying for,” said Stemberger, president and general counsel of the Florida Family Policy Council in Orlando. “Every domestic partnership, every single civil union, every couple that cohabitates, these arrangements dilute and devalue marriage.”
Stemberger said he wasn’t “daunted” by Garcia’s ruling, nor was he surprised.
“The court was very hostile to our position,” he said. “This is a very sad day for Floridians. This is an entirely illegitimate process. The judge had no legal authority in this decision.”
FULL: Keys judge overturns same-sex marriage ban; attorney general to appeal [Miami Herald]
My husband and I move freely through society, yet not one person in our nearly twelve years together has felt compelled to swallow a cyanide caplet because of our public airing of our marriage. In fact, rather than seeing our family as something worthy of self-death, most offer us great praise. Happiness. Good tidings. This is even more so since our little Savannah came along. She's like living Prozac, that kid!
Not sure why Mr. Stemberger feels that the termination of life is something that can, will, or should come into play here. However, if he's tempting the fates or mortality simply because certain kinds of Americans are inching closer to full equality in all fifty states, then I'm thinking he might want to talk to someone about that. In my layman's view of psychiatry, that would seem to be some sort of cry for help.
W. Bush appointee tipped 10th circuit to equality; Tony Perkins blames 'the left' anyway
Of the two 10th Circuit judges who just decided against Oklahoma's discriminatory marriage amendment, one was a Clinton appointee (Lucero) and one was a W. Bush appointee (Holmes). But whatevs. Exceedingly anti-gay activist Tony Perkins will just go ahead an blame "the left" anyway:
"The Left has long believed packing the federal courts with liberal jurists is the means of fulfilling a radical social agenda, as the American people refuse to endorse that agenda at the polls or through their elected representatives. However, by such a radical departure from natural law and human history, these activist judges are undermining the legitimacy of the courts in the eyes of a majority of Americans. These judges may want to take America over the cultural cliff, but don't be surprised when more and more Americans refuse to follow," concluded Perkins. [via FRC press release]
It's getting harder and harder to find an easy scapegoat, eh T-Dog?
Don't worry. You'll always have the devil.
10th Circuit strikes down Oklahoma marriage ban!!
The 2–1 decision is stayed pending appeal.
More to come. Here's the opinion.