From Lifenews.com and Alliance Defense Fund:
Letter Has 200 Military Physicians Opposing Abortions on Military Bases
by Steven Ertelt
LifeNews.com Editor
August 3, 2010
Email RSS Print
Washington, DC (LifeNews.com) -- More than 200 physicians who have served U.S. soldiers have signed a letter to members of the Senate protesting a Senate bill amendment that would turn U.S. military base hospitals into abortion centers.
The amendment, sponsored by pro-abortion Sen. Rolland Burris of Illinois, would have the military break with current longstanding policy disallowing abortions.
The 16,000-member Christian Medical Association organized the letter and today sent it to the senators urging them to vote no on the National Defense Authorization Act unless the Burris amendment is removed. The group and the doctors are supporting an amendment on the Senate floor to remove the Burris language.
CMA Senior Vice President Gene Rudd, MD, who received the Gorgas Award for distinguished service in the American military, told LifeNews.com that allowing abortions on military bases is inappropriate.
"If enacted, requiring military physicians to perform abortions threatens military readiness. Morale will suffer among those already serving. Morale is a key component of military effectiveness," he said.
"Furthermore, just as we have seen a marked decrease in young doctors entering OB/Gyn training for fear of being forced to do abortion, this requirement will discourage young doctors from joining the military," Dr. Rudd said.
Rudd said that not only will the Burris amendment promote destroying human lives in abortion, but it would put military doctors in a precarious position.
"In addition to facilitating further destruction of unborn life, the provision will place military physicians with life-honoring convictions in the unenviable position of either disobeying orders, abandoning their conscience, or seeking objector status," he said.
Col. Donald Thompson, a doctor who is the CMA Director of Global Health Outreach and retired from the Air Force, joined in on the opposition to the amendment.
"This provision would put conscientious military medics on the losing side of the Uniformed Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) in key areas crucial to good order and discipline in the military," he said.
"Our military exists to fight our nation's wars, not to be a ideological playground. If this provision stays in the NDAA, it will drive out of the military those who are most likely to serve their nation by going in harm's way," Colonel Thompson added.
Current law in effect since 1996 prohibits the performance of abortion by Department of Defense medical personnel or at DOD medical facilities. A separate provision prohibits the use of DOD funds for abortion except to save the life of the mother.
Abortion advocates have tried for years to force military bases hospitals to do abortions on female service members. In 2006, the House rejected by a vote of 237-191 amendment similar to the Burris amendment.
The Burris amendment is more expansive than a 2006 effort because it allows abortion on both domestic and overseas military bases.
The Senate Armed Services Committee voted 15-12 for the amendment with all Republicans and Democratic Sen. Ben Nelson voting against it and all other Democrats voting for it.
Senator Roger Wicker of Mississippi led the fight in the committee against the amendment and plans an amendment of his own on the Senate floor to strike the language.
The issue of abortions done at military base medical centers has been around for two decades.
When ex-President Clinton allowed abortions in military facilities from 1993 to 1996, all military physicians (as well as many nurses and supporting personnel) refused to perform or assist in elective abortions. In response, the Clinton administration attempted to hire civilians to do abortions.
ACTION: Go to this page to contact your senators and urge opposition to abortions at U.S. military bases. Urge opposition to the Burris amendment and support for the Wicker amendment.
Tuesday, August 3, 2010
On Bashing Muslims
From Town Hall and Alliance Defense Fund:
Frank Gaffney On "Bashing" Muslims
EMAIL FRANK GAFFNEY
COLUMNIST'S ARCHIVE SHARE THIS: Share39 10diggsdiggSign-Up Last week, a tectonic shift took place in the firmament of the War of Ideas. Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich directly and forcefully took on Shariah, the totalitarian theo-political-military program of authoritative Islam that its adherents seek to impose on the entire world. As he noted, the United States is squarely in the cross-hairs of Shariah's devotees.
In response, the usual suspects - the multiculturally sensitive elite that reflexively excuses the Islamists joined by proponents of the latters' stealth jihad, notably elements of the Muslim Brotherhood (MB) - have reflexively responded by accusing the Speaker of "bashing" Muslims. It is, of course, far easier to engage in ad hominem attacks than contend with Newt's characteristically thoughtful and informed critique. It is also expedient to try to portray a focused challenge to the beliefs and practices of a subset of the Islamic faith as an assault on all Muslims.
In fact, it is not "bashing" all Muslims if one points out that the comprehensive doctrine to which some of them adhere is a threat to our liberties, our government and our way of life. Objectively, that is the case; a global theocracy - the end-state commanded by Shariah - administering a severely repressive, even barbaric criminal code aimed at enforcing submission by Muslims and non-Muslims alike is incompatible with the U.S. Constitution.
As it happens, one man who has expressly said he seeks to "bring Shariah to America" is Feisal Abdul Rauf, the imam currently promoting construction of a 13-story, $100 million mosque once dubbed "Cordoba House" in proximity to Ground Zero. Speaker Gingrich has properly and powerfully opposed that idea: In an op.ed. in Human Events last week, he wrote: "It is simply grotesque to erect a mosque at the site of the most visible and powerful symbol of the horrible consequences of radical Islamist ideology.... For radical Islamists, the mosque would become an icon of triumph, encouraging them in their challenge to our civilization."
Unfortunately, the problem is not merely the location of the mosque. Rather, it lies with those like Imam Rauf who are advancing the Muslim Brotherhood agenda that Mr. Gingrich calls "creeping Shariah" and the MB itself says is "to destroy Western civilization from within."
Rauf has myriad connections to the Muslim Brotherhood. His father was a prominent figure in the organization back in Egypt in the 1940s. After Gamal Nasser cracked down on the organization, the elder Rauf fled first to Kuwait, where Feisal was born, then made his way to Malaysia and ultimately America. Once in New York, he bought up a third of a city block on the Upper East Side and built a large, Shariah adherent mosque and Islamic Center on 96th Street. The younger Rauf serves on the board of that mosque.
Feisal Abdul Rauf also published in 2004 a book entitled What's Right About Islam is What's Right about America. It is in English, but intended for Muslim audiences. Interestingly, this book appeared under a different title in Malaysia (and in the local language, not in English). The title has been changed, in an instructive way: A Call to Prayer from the WTC Rubble: Islamic Dawa in the Heart of America Post 9/11.
Now, dawa is the essence of creeping Shariah. Dawa is all about proselytizing, recruiting and indoctrinating in the ways of Shariah and the jihad it demands. And, as the acknowledgements page of the American version indicates, "a special non-commercial edition [of the book was published] to promote a proper understanding of Islam and common ground between Islam and the West." The organizations that made that possible were two that the U.S. government has identified as Brotherhood fronts: the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA) and the International Institute for Islamic Thought (IIIT).
As Debra Burlingame, sister of the pilot of the aircraft that was flown into the Pentagon on 9/11, observes: "No Muslim cleric who believes in ‘religious tolerance' and who purports to be a U.S. Constitution-embracing American, would ever, ever give his book, his work, to these two organizations for dissemination. This would be akin to someone who makes racial equality their sole cause in life, donating their book to the KKK to recruit members."
Then, there is another book by Feisal Rauf: Islam: A Sacred Law - What Every Muslim Should Know About Shariah. It makes clear the imam's affinity for the Wahhabi and Salafi doctrines. As the New York Police Department documented in a major analysis released two years ago and entitled Radicalization in the West: The Homegrown Threat, there is an ominous connection between indoctrination in Wahhabi mosques and Islamist "radicalization" here.
In short, Imam Rauf is clear, particularly with Muslim audiences, that he seeks to impose Shariah here in America. He is no moderate. To the contrary, he has myriad ties to the Muslim Brotherhood and its seditious, Shariah program. As a result, it seems all-too-predictable that the megamosque he seeks to build at Ground Zero would be a beachhead for Shariah and a new, dangerous incubator of jihadism in the heart of New York.
It is not "bashing" any Muslim to point out these facts. To the contrary, it would be the height of irresponsibility not to take note of, and act upon, them - first by stopping the Ground Zero Mosque, then by ensuring that America remains Shariah-free.
Frank Gaffney's Biography Frank Gaffney Jr. is the founder and president of the Center for Security Policy and author of War Footing: 10 Steps America Must Take to Prevail in the War for the Free World .
Frank Gaffney On "Bashing" Muslims
EMAIL FRANK GAFFNEY
COLUMNIST'S ARCHIVE SHARE THIS: Share39 10diggsdiggSign-Up Last week, a tectonic shift took place in the firmament of the War of Ideas. Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich directly and forcefully took on Shariah, the totalitarian theo-political-military program of authoritative Islam that its adherents seek to impose on the entire world. As he noted, the United States is squarely in the cross-hairs of Shariah's devotees.
In response, the usual suspects - the multiculturally sensitive elite that reflexively excuses the Islamists joined by proponents of the latters' stealth jihad, notably elements of the Muslim Brotherhood (MB) - have reflexively responded by accusing the Speaker of "bashing" Muslims. It is, of course, far easier to engage in ad hominem attacks than contend with Newt's characteristically thoughtful and informed critique. It is also expedient to try to portray a focused challenge to the beliefs and practices of a subset of the Islamic faith as an assault on all Muslims.
In fact, it is not "bashing" all Muslims if one points out that the comprehensive doctrine to which some of them adhere is a threat to our liberties, our government and our way of life. Objectively, that is the case; a global theocracy - the end-state commanded by Shariah - administering a severely repressive, even barbaric criminal code aimed at enforcing submission by Muslims and non-Muslims alike is incompatible with the U.S. Constitution.
As it happens, one man who has expressly said he seeks to "bring Shariah to America" is Feisal Abdul Rauf, the imam currently promoting construction of a 13-story, $100 million mosque once dubbed "Cordoba House" in proximity to Ground Zero. Speaker Gingrich has properly and powerfully opposed that idea: In an op.ed. in Human Events last week, he wrote: "It is simply grotesque to erect a mosque at the site of the most visible and powerful symbol of the horrible consequences of radical Islamist ideology.... For radical Islamists, the mosque would become an icon of triumph, encouraging them in their challenge to our civilization."
Unfortunately, the problem is not merely the location of the mosque. Rather, it lies with those like Imam Rauf who are advancing the Muslim Brotherhood agenda that Mr. Gingrich calls "creeping Shariah" and the MB itself says is "to destroy Western civilization from within."
Rauf has myriad connections to the Muslim Brotherhood. His father was a prominent figure in the organization back in Egypt in the 1940s. After Gamal Nasser cracked down on the organization, the elder Rauf fled first to Kuwait, where Feisal was born, then made his way to Malaysia and ultimately America. Once in New York, he bought up a third of a city block on the Upper East Side and built a large, Shariah adherent mosque and Islamic Center on 96th Street. The younger Rauf serves on the board of that mosque.
Feisal Abdul Rauf also published in 2004 a book entitled What's Right About Islam is What's Right about America. It is in English, but intended for Muslim audiences. Interestingly, this book appeared under a different title in Malaysia (and in the local language, not in English). The title has been changed, in an instructive way: A Call to Prayer from the WTC Rubble: Islamic Dawa in the Heart of America Post 9/11.
Now, dawa is the essence of creeping Shariah. Dawa is all about proselytizing, recruiting and indoctrinating in the ways of Shariah and the jihad it demands. And, as the acknowledgements page of the American version indicates, "a special non-commercial edition [of the book was published] to promote a proper understanding of Islam and common ground between Islam and the West." The organizations that made that possible were two that the U.S. government has identified as Brotherhood fronts: the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA) and the International Institute for Islamic Thought (IIIT).
As Debra Burlingame, sister of the pilot of the aircraft that was flown into the Pentagon on 9/11, observes: "No Muslim cleric who believes in ‘religious tolerance' and who purports to be a U.S. Constitution-embracing American, would ever, ever give his book, his work, to these two organizations for dissemination. This would be akin to someone who makes racial equality their sole cause in life, donating their book to the KKK to recruit members."
Then, there is another book by Feisal Rauf: Islam: A Sacred Law - What Every Muslim Should Know About Shariah. It makes clear the imam's affinity for the Wahhabi and Salafi doctrines. As the New York Police Department documented in a major analysis released two years ago and entitled Radicalization in the West: The Homegrown Threat, there is an ominous connection between indoctrination in Wahhabi mosques and Islamist "radicalization" here.
In short, Imam Rauf is clear, particularly with Muslim audiences, that he seeks to impose Shariah here in America. He is no moderate. To the contrary, he has myriad ties to the Muslim Brotherhood and its seditious, Shariah program. As a result, it seems all-too-predictable that the megamosque he seeks to build at Ground Zero would be a beachhead for Shariah and a new, dangerous incubator of jihadism in the heart of New York.
It is not "bashing" any Muslim to point out these facts. To the contrary, it would be the height of irresponsibility not to take note of, and act upon, them - first by stopping the Ground Zero Mosque, then by ensuring that America remains Shariah-free.
Frank Gaffney's Biography Frank Gaffney Jr. is the founder and president of the Center for Security Policy and author of War Footing: 10 Steps America Must Take to Prevail in the War for the Free World .
None Dare Call It...What?
From Town Hall and Alliance Defense Fund:
Cal Thomas None Dare Call It... What?
EMAIL CAL THOMAS
COLUMNIST'S ARCHIVE SHARE THIS: Share37 1110diggsdiggSign-Up Former Speaker Newt Gingrich may be the most notable public figure in some time to state the obvious: radical Islam is a clear and present danger to America.
In a speech last week at The American Enterprise Institute in Washington, Gingrich said, "this is not a war on terrorism ... this is a struggle with radical Islamists." The problem, he said, is that too many leaders are "sleepwalking" and won't face the threat.
Ask yourself: if you wanted to infiltrate a country, wouldn't a grand strategy be to rapidly build mosques from Ground Zero in New York, to Temecula, Calif., and establish beachheads so fanatics could plan and advance their strategies under the cover of religious freedom and that great American virtue known as "tolerance," which is being used against us?
The best people to consult on such matters are those with the life experiences and knowledge to credibly comment on the subject. After all, we can't expect those who wish to destroy us to tell the truth, can we? Except that they do tell it by their words and deeds throughout much of the world. The problem isn't that they're not telling. The problem is that too many are imprisoned in denial.
One such expert is Yoram Ettinger a former Israeli diplomat and current commentator. In a posting on the website ynetnews.com in which he comments on Iran's pursuit of nuclear weapons and the West's feckless response through meaningless sanctions and empty rhetoric, Ettinger writes: "Western policy-makers grow increasingly reconciled to co-existence with a nuclear Iran. They assume that, notwithstanding the radical rhetoric, the Iranian leadership is pragmatic, cognizant of its limitations, unwilling to expose its people to devastating Western retaliation and considering nuclear capabilities as a tool of deterrence -- and not as an offensive weapon -- against the U.S., NATO and Israel.
"However, a nuclear Iran would constitute a clear and present danger to global security and peace, which must not be tolerated. In order to avert such peril, it is incumbent to disengage from illusions and engage with realism."
Realism is a quality clearly lacking in much of the rhetoric from this and previous administrations.
Ettinger continues: "Unlike Western leaders, the Iranian revolutionary leadership is driven by ideological and religious conviction, bolstered by ancient imperialist ethos:
"1. Jihad is the permanent state of relations between Moslems and non-Moslems, while peace and ceasefire accords are tenuous.
2. The Shihada commits every Shiite to kill and be killed, in order to advance Shiite Moslem strategy
3.The strategic goal of Shiite Islam -- which replaced illegitimate Judaism and Christianity -- is to convert humanity to Islam."
That seems pretty straightforward. Is there anyone who can credibly doubt these stated goals? If not, why are we pretending radical Islamists don't mean it when they repeatedly prove they do?
Some of the zeal directed toward illegal aliens crossing our southern border might better be focused on securing America from radical Islamists. Instead, they build their mosques with minimal opposition from the squishy politicians and elites who could stand against them if they had any backbone. And so those radical Islamists who would dominate America move forward with plans to subjugate us all to their religion and way of life. If the Nazis or Soviets had been this good at infiltration and neutralizing criticism, we, not they, would be on "the ash heap of history."
If at that critical moment in our history, Paul Revere had not devised the plan to light signal lanterns in the belfry of Old North Church for fear of being called an "Anglophobe," Queen Elizabeth's picture might be on our money today.
Radical Islamists are here. Who else besides Newt Gingrich and too few others will sound the call? Who else has the power to do something while they still can?
Cal Thomas's Biography Cal Thomas is co-author (with Bob Beckel) of the book, "Common Ground: How to Stop the Partisan War That is Destroying America".
Cal Thomas None Dare Call It... What?
EMAIL CAL THOMAS
COLUMNIST'S ARCHIVE SHARE THIS: Share37 1110diggsdiggSign-Up Former Speaker Newt Gingrich may be the most notable public figure in some time to state the obvious: radical Islam is a clear and present danger to America.
In a speech last week at The American Enterprise Institute in Washington, Gingrich said, "this is not a war on terrorism ... this is a struggle with radical Islamists." The problem, he said, is that too many leaders are "sleepwalking" and won't face the threat.
Ask yourself: if you wanted to infiltrate a country, wouldn't a grand strategy be to rapidly build mosques from Ground Zero in New York, to Temecula, Calif., and establish beachheads so fanatics could plan and advance their strategies under the cover of religious freedom and that great American virtue known as "tolerance," which is being used against us?
The best people to consult on such matters are those with the life experiences and knowledge to credibly comment on the subject. After all, we can't expect those who wish to destroy us to tell the truth, can we? Except that they do tell it by their words and deeds throughout much of the world. The problem isn't that they're not telling. The problem is that too many are imprisoned in denial.
One such expert is Yoram Ettinger a former Israeli diplomat and current commentator. In a posting on the website ynetnews.com in which he comments on Iran's pursuit of nuclear weapons and the West's feckless response through meaningless sanctions and empty rhetoric, Ettinger writes: "Western policy-makers grow increasingly reconciled to co-existence with a nuclear Iran. They assume that, notwithstanding the radical rhetoric, the Iranian leadership is pragmatic, cognizant of its limitations, unwilling to expose its people to devastating Western retaliation and considering nuclear capabilities as a tool of deterrence -- and not as an offensive weapon -- against the U.S., NATO and Israel.
"However, a nuclear Iran would constitute a clear and present danger to global security and peace, which must not be tolerated. In order to avert such peril, it is incumbent to disengage from illusions and engage with realism."
Realism is a quality clearly lacking in much of the rhetoric from this and previous administrations.
Ettinger continues: "Unlike Western leaders, the Iranian revolutionary leadership is driven by ideological and religious conviction, bolstered by ancient imperialist ethos:
"1. Jihad is the permanent state of relations between Moslems and non-Moslems, while peace and ceasefire accords are tenuous.
2. The Shihada commits every Shiite to kill and be killed, in order to advance Shiite Moslem strategy
3.The strategic goal of Shiite Islam -- which replaced illegitimate Judaism and Christianity -- is to convert humanity to Islam."
That seems pretty straightforward. Is there anyone who can credibly doubt these stated goals? If not, why are we pretending radical Islamists don't mean it when they repeatedly prove they do?
Some of the zeal directed toward illegal aliens crossing our southern border might better be focused on securing America from radical Islamists. Instead, they build their mosques with minimal opposition from the squishy politicians and elites who could stand against them if they had any backbone. And so those radical Islamists who would dominate America move forward with plans to subjugate us all to their religion and way of life. If the Nazis or Soviets had been this good at infiltration and neutralizing criticism, we, not they, would be on "the ash heap of history."
If at that critical moment in our history, Paul Revere had not devised the plan to light signal lanterns in the belfry of Old North Church for fear of being called an "Anglophobe," Queen Elizabeth's picture might be on our money today.
Radical Islamists are here. Who else besides Newt Gingrich and too few others will sound the call? Who else has the power to do something while they still can?
Cal Thomas's Biography Cal Thomas is co-author (with Bob Beckel) of the book, "Common Ground: How to Stop the Partisan War That is Destroying America".
ACLJ Poised To File Court Challenge To Proposed Ground Zero Mosque After NYC Declines To Protect Hitoric Building
From ACLJ and Alliance Defense Fund:
ACLJ Poised to File Court Challenge to Proposed Ground Zero Mosque After NYC Declines to Landmark Historic Building
August 3, 2010
(Washington, DC) – The American Center for Law and Justice (ACLJ), which is representing a New York City firefighter who survived the 9-11 terrorist attacks, said today's vote by the New York City Landmarks Preservation Commission is deeply offensive to many of the victims and families of the 9-11 tragedy. By a vote of 9-to-0, the Commission, appointed by New York Mayor Bloomberg, failed to landmark a historic site near Ground Zero - a site where the landing gear of one of the hijacked planes from 9-11 crashed through the roof of the building. The vote bolsters plans to build a $100-million, 13-story Islamic mosque on what many consider to be sacred ground.
"The actions taken by the City of New York represent a blatant disregard for the city's own procedures, while ignoring the fact that this is a historic and hallowed site that should not be destroyed to build an Islamic mosque," said Jay Sekulow, Chief Counsel of the ACLJ. "It has been clear from the beginning that the city has engaged in a rush to push this project through - ignoring proper procedure and ignoring a growing number of New Yorkers and Americans who don't believe this site is the place to build a mosque. We're poised to file legal action on behalf of our client to challenge this flawed decision and put a stop to this project."
The ACLJ has presented New York officials with oral and written testimony urging city officials to landmark the site. "The building links two distinct periods in American history," the ACLJ argued. "It reflects the growth and rise of American free enterprise and stands as a symbol of America’s strength and survival in the face of brutal, sadistic terrorism."
You can read the ACLJ's letter submitted to the city here.
The ACLJ is planning to file an Article 78 petition in state court to challenge the city's actions. The ACLJ will allege that there's been an abuse of discretion in the Commission's decision and that filing is expected to occur tomorrow.
The ACLJ represents Tim Brown, a decorated firefighter and first responder, who survived the Twin Towers’ collapse and lost nearly 100 friends. The ACLJ also represents thousands of Americans who have signed on to the Committee to Stop the Ground Zero Mosque - Americans who oppose building an Islamic mosque on this site which should be used to honor and preserve the memory of 9-11 and its victims.
Led by Chief Counsel Jay Sekulow, the American Center for Law and Justice focuses on constitutional law and is based in Washington, D.C.
ACLJ Poised to File Court Challenge to Proposed Ground Zero Mosque After NYC Declines to Landmark Historic Building
August 3, 2010
(Washington, DC) – The American Center for Law and Justice (ACLJ), which is representing a New York City firefighter who survived the 9-11 terrorist attacks, said today's vote by the New York City Landmarks Preservation Commission is deeply offensive to many of the victims and families of the 9-11 tragedy. By a vote of 9-to-0, the Commission, appointed by New York Mayor Bloomberg, failed to landmark a historic site near Ground Zero - a site where the landing gear of one of the hijacked planes from 9-11 crashed through the roof of the building. The vote bolsters plans to build a $100-million, 13-story Islamic mosque on what many consider to be sacred ground.
"The actions taken by the City of New York represent a blatant disregard for the city's own procedures, while ignoring the fact that this is a historic and hallowed site that should not be destroyed to build an Islamic mosque," said Jay Sekulow, Chief Counsel of the ACLJ. "It has been clear from the beginning that the city has engaged in a rush to push this project through - ignoring proper procedure and ignoring a growing number of New Yorkers and Americans who don't believe this site is the place to build a mosque. We're poised to file legal action on behalf of our client to challenge this flawed decision and put a stop to this project."
The ACLJ has presented New York officials with oral and written testimony urging city officials to landmark the site. "The building links two distinct periods in American history," the ACLJ argued. "It reflects the growth and rise of American free enterprise and stands as a symbol of America’s strength and survival in the face of brutal, sadistic terrorism."
You can read the ACLJ's letter submitted to the city here.
The ACLJ is planning to file an Article 78 petition in state court to challenge the city's actions. The ACLJ will allege that there's been an abuse of discretion in the Commission's decision and that filing is expected to occur tomorrow.
The ACLJ represents Tim Brown, a decorated firefighter and first responder, who survived the Twin Towers’ collapse and lost nearly 100 friends. The ACLJ also represents thousands of Americans who have signed on to the Committee to Stop the Ground Zero Mosque - Americans who oppose building an Islamic mosque on this site which should be used to honor and preserve the memory of 9-11 and its victims.
Led by Chief Counsel Jay Sekulow, the American Center for Law and Justice focuses on constitutional law and is based in Washington, D.C.
Christian And Jewish Groups Condemn Evangelical Group's Koran-Burning Day
from CBN News and Alliance Defense Fund:
Christian, Jewish Group Condemn 'Koran Burning' DayCBNNews.com Tuesday, August 03, 2010RSS
Podcasts
Ad Feedback Evangelical and Jewish groups are calling plans by a Gainsville, Fla., church to burn the Islamic holy book on 9/11 both destructive and 'morally repugnant.'
Florida Pastor Terry Jones said members of his Dove World Outreach Center believe "Islam is of the devil." He invited those who feel the same to gather at his church for what he is calling "International Burn a Koran Day."
"Islam and Sharia law was responsible for 9/11," Jones said. "We will burn Korans because we think it's time for Christians, for churches, for politicians to stand up and say 'no. Islam and Sharia law is not welcome in the U.S.'"
Jones added that the organized Koran burnings are to commemorate the victims of the 9/11 terrorist attacks. However many Christians are deeply opposed to the idea.
"It sounds like the proposed Koran burning is rooted in revenge," said Leith Anderson, president of the National Association of Evangelicals. "Yet the Bible says that Christians should 'make sure that nobody pays back wrong for wrong, but always try to be kind to each other and to everyone else' (1 Thess. 5:15)."
The Simon Wiesenthal Center -- an international Jewish human rights group -- joined the Christian community in condemning the proposal.
"Sept. 11 should be a day for prayers for the 9/11 victims and their families and redoubling our resolve to defeat al Qaeda and all other terrorists bent on our nation's destruction," the center's associate dean Rabbi Abraham Cooper, and Interfaith Director Rabbi Yitzchok Adlerstein, said in a statement.
"The burning of the book holy to the world's Muslims is morally repugnant," they continued. "We urge leaders of this church to cancel this despicable act, which will certainly spawn a wave of new recruits for Islamist extremism and terrorism."
The Florida church has launched a YouTube channel to spread its message. A Facebook group for the event also had nearly 3,000 fans on Aug. 2.
However another Facebook group that protests the "Burn a Koran Day" has more than 6,500 fans. The page is devoted "against the disrespect and intolerance that these people have for the Muslim people."
"As a Christian myself, I am totally embarrassed to have this event affiliated with my beliefs," one member wrote.
So far, the Florida church has not been influenced by the condemnations and still plans to carry out the event.
Christian, Jewish Group Condemn 'Koran Burning' DayCBNNews.com Tuesday, August 03, 2010RSS
Podcasts
Ad Feedback Evangelical and Jewish groups are calling plans by a Gainsville, Fla., church to burn the Islamic holy book on 9/11 both destructive and 'morally repugnant.'
Florida Pastor Terry Jones said members of his Dove World Outreach Center believe "Islam is of the devil." He invited those who feel the same to gather at his church for what he is calling "International Burn a Koran Day."
"Islam and Sharia law was responsible for 9/11," Jones said. "We will burn Korans because we think it's time for Christians, for churches, for politicians to stand up and say 'no. Islam and Sharia law is not welcome in the U.S.'"
Jones added that the organized Koran burnings are to commemorate the victims of the 9/11 terrorist attacks. However many Christians are deeply opposed to the idea.
"It sounds like the proposed Koran burning is rooted in revenge," said Leith Anderson, president of the National Association of Evangelicals. "Yet the Bible says that Christians should 'make sure that nobody pays back wrong for wrong, but always try to be kind to each other and to everyone else' (1 Thess. 5:15)."
The Simon Wiesenthal Center -- an international Jewish human rights group -- joined the Christian community in condemning the proposal.
"Sept. 11 should be a day for prayers for the 9/11 victims and their families and redoubling our resolve to defeat al Qaeda and all other terrorists bent on our nation's destruction," the center's associate dean Rabbi Abraham Cooper, and Interfaith Director Rabbi Yitzchok Adlerstein, said in a statement.
"The burning of the book holy to the world's Muslims is morally repugnant," they continued. "We urge leaders of this church to cancel this despicable act, which will certainly spawn a wave of new recruits for Islamist extremism and terrorism."
The Florida church has launched a YouTube channel to spread its message. A Facebook group for the event also had nearly 3,000 fans on Aug. 2.
However another Facebook group that protests the "Burn a Koran Day" has more than 6,500 fans. The page is devoted "against the disrespect and intolerance that these people have for the Muslim people."
"As a Christian myself, I am totally embarrassed to have this event affiliated with my beliefs," one member wrote.
So far, the Florida church has not been influenced by the condemnations and still plans to carry out the event.
After Dispute, Mormon Temple To Be Built In Philadelphia
From the Philadelphia Inquirer and Alliance Defense Fund:
After dispute, Mormon Temple will be built in Philly
By David O'Reilly
Inquirer Staff Writer
After months of uncertainty as the city threatened to seize the land, construction of a $70 million Mormon temple near Logan Square will not only proceed but will help make the Parkway "one of the most incredible boulevards anywhere in the world," Mayor Nutter said Monday.
The 68,000-square-foot Philadelphia Temple at 17th and Vine Streets will create 300 building jobs and 50 permanent jobs, and attract 400,000 visitors a year, bringing "tens of millions of dollars of additional spending" to the city, Nutter said at a news conference.
Groundbreaking is expected late this year or early next year, according to officials of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.
The site is close to the Free Library, the Roman Catholic Cathedral Basilica of SS. Peter and Paul, and the future Barnes Collection. It will include a visitor center and a genealogical research facility as well as the temple, which is open to Mormons only for religious rites.
The prospect of an LDS temple in Philadelphia had seemed increasingly remote during the last two years.
In 2008, the church acquired land for a temple in the 400 block of North Broad Street, but had to abandon that site when the ground was found to be polluted.
In 2009, church officials negotiated with developer Stephen Klein to buy a parcel between 17th and 18th Streets.
Klein acquired the tract in 1987 for $3.7 million from the Franklin Town Corp., according to Klein's spokesman Kirk Dorn. The city's Redevelopment Authority (RDA) had oversight of the deal and Klein agreed to build on it within five years. He used it as a parking lot while he searched for a suitable project, a process that lasted more than two decades.
Soon after the Mormon deal was conceived, the RDA informed him it would seize the site because he had taken too long to develop it. Early this year, the agency sued Klein to regain the land.
In June, the RDA offered to drop its lawsuit if Klein agreed to pay the agency 25 percent, or $1.9 million, of the Mormons' $7.5 million purchase price.
Klein balked, and several City Council members berated the agency for jeopardizing the project. Church officials said they had begun looking outside the city.
On Monday, Nutter and RDA Executive Director Terry Gillen declined to discuss what arrangement the city made with Klein to resolve the dispute. "Both sides are satisfied," the mayor said.
Dorn said Klein offered $100,000 to cover administrative fees and the city ultimately accepted that offer.
A site plan and architectural drawings likely will be available in September, Elder Robert B. Smith, a local LDS official, said at the news conference.
The design must first be approved by leaders of the denomination in Salt Lake City.
Philadelphia is among the last major cities on the East Coast to get an LDS temple. Distinct from the churches or meetinghouses where Mormons worship on Sundays, temples typically are massive and built of white marble. The 173,000-square-foot temple in Kensington, Md., outside Washington, a prominent sight on the Beltway, is topped by six golden spires that rise 288 feet.
One of the fastest growing denominations in the United States, and the fourth largest, the LDS Church claims 5.5 million members nationwide and 13 million worldwide. Officials estimate that 40,000 will use the Philadelphia temple.
Ahmed Corbett, a Mormon elder in South Jersey, said at the news conference that the church regarded the neighborhood around Logan Square as a "venerable and sacred place" because of William Penn's and James Logan's history of religious tolerance. Logan, Philadelphia mayor in the early 18th century, allowed the city's first public Catholic Masses.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Contact staff writer David O'Reilly at 215-854-5723 or doreilly@phillynews.com.
Read more: http://www.philly.com/inquirer/local/pa/20100803_After_dispute__Mormon_Temple_will_be_built_in_Philly.html#ixzz0vbTg8kXa
Watch sports videos you won't find anywhere else
After dispute, Mormon Temple will be built in Philly
By David O'Reilly
Inquirer Staff Writer
After months of uncertainty as the city threatened to seize the land, construction of a $70 million Mormon temple near Logan Square will not only proceed but will help make the Parkway "one of the most incredible boulevards anywhere in the world," Mayor Nutter said Monday.
The 68,000-square-foot Philadelphia Temple at 17th and Vine Streets will create 300 building jobs and 50 permanent jobs, and attract 400,000 visitors a year, bringing "tens of millions of dollars of additional spending" to the city, Nutter said at a news conference.
Groundbreaking is expected late this year or early next year, according to officials of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.
The site is close to the Free Library, the Roman Catholic Cathedral Basilica of SS. Peter and Paul, and the future Barnes Collection. It will include a visitor center and a genealogical research facility as well as the temple, which is open to Mormons only for religious rites.
The prospect of an LDS temple in Philadelphia had seemed increasingly remote during the last two years.
In 2008, the church acquired land for a temple in the 400 block of North Broad Street, but had to abandon that site when the ground was found to be polluted.
In 2009, church officials negotiated with developer Stephen Klein to buy a parcel between 17th and 18th Streets.
Klein acquired the tract in 1987 for $3.7 million from the Franklin Town Corp., according to Klein's spokesman Kirk Dorn. The city's Redevelopment Authority (RDA) had oversight of the deal and Klein agreed to build on it within five years. He used it as a parking lot while he searched for a suitable project, a process that lasted more than two decades.
Soon after the Mormon deal was conceived, the RDA informed him it would seize the site because he had taken too long to develop it. Early this year, the agency sued Klein to regain the land.
In June, the RDA offered to drop its lawsuit if Klein agreed to pay the agency 25 percent, or $1.9 million, of the Mormons' $7.5 million purchase price.
Klein balked, and several City Council members berated the agency for jeopardizing the project. Church officials said they had begun looking outside the city.
On Monday, Nutter and RDA Executive Director Terry Gillen declined to discuss what arrangement the city made with Klein to resolve the dispute. "Both sides are satisfied," the mayor said.
Dorn said Klein offered $100,000 to cover administrative fees and the city ultimately accepted that offer.
A site plan and architectural drawings likely will be available in September, Elder Robert B. Smith, a local LDS official, said at the news conference.
The design must first be approved by leaders of the denomination in Salt Lake City.
Philadelphia is among the last major cities on the East Coast to get an LDS temple. Distinct from the churches or meetinghouses where Mormons worship on Sundays, temples typically are massive and built of white marble. The 173,000-square-foot temple in Kensington, Md., outside Washington, a prominent sight on the Beltway, is topped by six golden spires that rise 288 feet.
One of the fastest growing denominations in the United States, and the fourth largest, the LDS Church claims 5.5 million members nationwide and 13 million worldwide. Officials estimate that 40,000 will use the Philadelphia temple.
Ahmed Corbett, a Mormon elder in South Jersey, said at the news conference that the church regarded the neighborhood around Logan Square as a "venerable and sacred place" because of William Penn's and James Logan's history of religious tolerance. Logan, Philadelphia mayor in the early 18th century, allowed the city's first public Catholic Masses.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Contact staff writer David O'Reilly at 215-854-5723 or doreilly@phillynews.com.
Read more: http://www.philly.com/inquirer/local/pa/20100803_After_dispute__Mormon_Temple_will_be_built_in_Philly.html#ixzz0vbTg8kXa
Watch sports videos you won't find anywhere else
ACLU Praises Ground Zero Mega-Mosque
From The Hill and Alliance Defense Fund:
ACLU praises Muslim center near Ground Zero
By Jordy Yager - 08/03/10 12:08 PM ET
One of the country's largest civil rights organizations lauded the next step forward in the development of an Islamic cultural center near Ground Zero in Manhattan.
The New York City Landmarks Preservation Commission on Tuesday voted to deny "landmark" status to the building currently at the site, paving the way for its demolition and, eventually, for development of the Muslim center.
Those opposed to the project say the building’s proximity to the site of the 2001 terrorist attacks — led by al Qaeda-affiliated Muslims — is insensitive to the families of the dead. Supporters defend it on the grounds of religious freedom.
On Tuesday, the New York Civil Liberties Union and the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) praised the center’s progress, saying that it represents the core of American values.
“The free exercise of religion is one of America’s most fundamental freedoms,” said the ACLU in a statement. “For hundreds of years, our pluralism and tolerance have sustained and strengthened our nation. On 9/11, religious extremists opposed to that very pluralism killed 3,000 Americans. Those fanatics would want nothing more than for our nation to turn its back on the very ideals that make this country so great.
“For those who have sought to ban the construction of the cultural center, we must remember that our precious ideals extend to all Americans, regardless of creed or color. We see the center as a monument to pluralism, symbolic of America’s commitment to religious freedom.”
ACLU praises Muslim center near Ground Zero
By Jordy Yager - 08/03/10 12:08 PM ET
One of the country's largest civil rights organizations lauded the next step forward in the development of an Islamic cultural center near Ground Zero in Manhattan.
The New York City Landmarks Preservation Commission on Tuesday voted to deny "landmark" status to the building currently at the site, paving the way for its demolition and, eventually, for development of the Muslim center.
Those opposed to the project say the building’s proximity to the site of the 2001 terrorist attacks — led by al Qaeda-affiliated Muslims — is insensitive to the families of the dead. Supporters defend it on the grounds of religious freedom.
On Tuesday, the New York Civil Liberties Union and the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) praised the center’s progress, saying that it represents the core of American values.
“The free exercise of religion is one of America’s most fundamental freedoms,” said the ACLU in a statement. “For hundreds of years, our pluralism and tolerance have sustained and strengthened our nation. On 9/11, religious extremists opposed to that very pluralism killed 3,000 Americans. Those fanatics would want nothing more than for our nation to turn its back on the very ideals that make this country so great.
“For those who have sought to ban the construction of the cultural center, we must remember that our precious ideals extend to all Americans, regardless of creed or color. We see the center as a monument to pluralism, symbolic of America’s commitment to religious freedom.”
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)