Right-wing sightings

What they're up to out there

August 7, 2005

"Destroying our smallest children"

The big buzz in Wingnutville this week has been Senator Frist's about-face on medical research using embryonic stem cells.

Christian Coalition's press release on Frist takes a low-key approach. They don't even mention the bill Frist is supporting -- or even Frist himself.

The Christian Coalition of America supports President Bush’s policy on successful adult stem cell research. We look forward to working with the President and other members of the U.S. Senate on this issue. Our policy has always been that these embryos are human lives and continuing this research will destroy life.

Slightly more direct, the Susan B. Anthony List calls on its members to "[w]rite your Senators today and urge them to oppose any legislation that permits embryo-destructive stem cell research like The Stem Cell Research Enhancement Act. So far, research methods used to extract embryonic stem cells from embryos have not successfully treated any diseases or medical conditions." (Since we should only research things when we already know how they work.) Members are also encouraged to specifically scold Senator Frist for his betrayal -- ahh, shunning! Always a crowd-pleaser.

John Horvat II, writing for the American Society for the Defense of Tradition, Family, and Property, blames the media (natch):

Most have already seen the stem cell news stories. A handicapped person is shown in a wheelchair suffering from his malady. The picture changes to a laboratory where research is taking place. The message: embryonic stem cell research will cure the poor suffering person. The screen then focuses on a conservative politician who raises cruel moral objections to the procedures.

It must be noted right from the start that even if embryonic stem cell research did help treatment and even cure diseases, it would be totally unacceptable since it kills human embryos.

However, the tragedy of such media portrayals lays not in the “cruelty” of such moral positions but the falsity of the conclusion. Embryonic stem cell simply will not cure the poor handicapped person. There is no scientific evidence to support this conclusion. However, the viewer is deliberately left with that impression.

Such tactics are symptoms of what might be called an embryonic stem cell (ESC) delirium – a syndrome that causes patients to cling obstinately to such false conclusions and compulsively black out any other opinion.

Never mind that human life is destroyed! Never mind the fact that such research is not yielding results! Never mind that the conclusion is unscientific! Don’t even think about the possibility of sin. All these are minor considerations. ...

No, ESC delirium is not a biological or even psychological malady. It is the sad byproduct of our culture of death. It is a moral illness that deadens the sensitivity to a moral law inside the soul. It causes society to lose its bearings and overturns all moral barriers that stand in its way.

As for the medical perspective, Dr. Al Weir of the "Christian Medical and Dental Association" did a brief radio interview with Concerned Women for America, outlining his concerns over Frist's conversion. Weir said he was "disappointed in Sen Frist's new stand" but he could understand Frist's confusion. "It appears to many scientists that there's conflict between saving our young children, which we call embryos, and saving human life in the future." On the other hand, "It's certainly -- in my perspective as a father, an oncologist, and a hematologist, who knows all about stem cells -- it's certainly difficult to, in my situation, to see how it is ever right, destroying our children to save adults in the future, but I can understand how he would be conflicted in that." He repeatedly referred to "destroying our children," or "our smallest children" or "these small children."

Paul Chaim Schenck of the National Pro-Life Action Center, on the other hand, believes the medical ethics are unambiguous.

As Nuremberg demonstrated, humanity has no right to benefit from the indignity, suffering and illicit research conducted under the guise of medical progress. As a physician, Sen. Frist swore to uphold the Hippocratic Oath, whose first directive is to 'do no harm.' Clearly, the senator's intentions are in direct conflict with that oath. We must question whether this is merely a compromise offered to placate Democrats in the name of political expediency, or yet another example of the Republican's apparent strategy of preemptive capitulation. As we know from past experience, no one wins from this type of compromise, particularly the innocent children killed through this illicit research.

The name Schenck may be familiar to regular readers -- it has appeared most recently in our blog's account of a rally in front of the Supreme Court. But don't be confused -- that was Rev. Rob Schenck of the National Clergy Council. This is Rev. Paul Schenck.

Yes, they are brothers. Yes, they are twins.

(Paul) Schenck continues:

In saying that he believes life begins at conception but that he supports embryonic stem cell research, Senator Frist's position not only contradicts itself, it flies in the face of biblical and historical Christian moral teaching. It's the same as saying that we should use condemned criminals for medical experimentation because they're going to die anyway. It is morally incoherent.

Actually, what is incoherent is Schenck's logic that embryonic stem cells can suffer the way a living breathing person (like a condemned criminal) can. Where does he get these ideas?

Maybe from Gary Bauer ...

I am saddened by the news that Senator Frist has abandoned the President by supporting embryonic stem cell research. The senator seems to have bought into the notion that some life can be sacrificed without its consent to benefit other life, and that is a slippery slope with deadly consequences, as history has shown repeatedly.

That's an interesting idea. So Bauer is always against taking one life to save another. Does that mean he opposes testing medicines on animals as well? Considering that a lab rat is actually more sentient than a stem cell, by his logic he should. And if that means we don't cure deadly diseases as a result so be it, right? And then presumably Bauer would also oppose the death penalty and any war? How strange that Bauer failed to mention any of that when he ran for president as a Republican.

But returning to the slippery slope upon which we make our liberal home, no one can top the master, Dr. James Dobson of Focus on the Family. From Media Matters:

DOBSON: You know, the thing that means so much to me here on this this issue [embryonic stem cell research] is that people talk about the potential for good that can come from destroying these little embryos and how we might be able to solve the problem of juvenile diabetes. There's no indication yet that they're gonna do that, but people say that, or spinal cord injuries or such things. But I have to ask this question: In World War II, the Nazis experimented on human beings in horrible ways in the concentration camps, and I imagine, if you wanted to take the time to read about it, there would have been some discoveries there that benefited mankind. You know, if you take a utilitarian approach, that if something results in good, then it is good. But that's obviously not true. We condemn what the Nazis did because there are some things that we always could do but we haven't done, because science always has to be guided by ethics and by morality. And you remove ethics and morality, and you get what happened in Nazi Germany. That's why to Senator [Senate Majority Leader Bill] Frist [R-TN] and the others who are saying, "Look what may be accomplished." Yeah, but there's another issue, there's a higher order of ethics here.

Thank you, Dr. Dobson. Thank you for comparing your ally Bill Frist to the physicians at Auschwitz. We applaud your "higher order of ethics."

In case fetuses are feeling left out ...

But stem-cell research isn't the only thing on the minds of the religious right this week. Unwilling to wait for a Supreme Court that is completely dominated by social conservatives, the right wing has enlisted Rep. Jo Ann Emerson to propose a constitutional amendment that would qualify an unborn fetus as a “"person,”with all of the rights inherent." The bill stipulates that "the word 'person'… applies to all human beings irrespective of age, health, function, or condition of dependency, including their unborn offspring at every state of their biological development. No unborn person shall be deprived of life by any person."

Does that include contraception?

”Yet again, the Susan B. Anthony List is on the case, asking members: “"Urge your Representative to support proposition H.J. RES. 4, a Right to Life Amendment to the Constitution of the United States."

Roberts Catholic Catholic Roberts Catholic stop talking about his devout faith!

The religious right, which was until recently loudly rejoicing the "devout" Roman Catholic faith of Supreme Court nominee John Roberts, has decided that it's not OK to mention anymore.

Tony Perkins, president of the Family Research Council, is circulating a petition to his members: "Tell Sen. Durbin: Don't Discriminate Against People of Faith."

They are at it again - Senate Democrats are using religious faith to attack a federal court nominee. This time the target is Judge John Roberts, the man President Bush nominated to the U.S. Supreme Court. Sen. Dick Durbin, D-Ill., announced to a reporter last week that he "needs to look at everything" regarding Supreme Court nominee Judge John Roberts, including Roberts' faith. Durbin has emerged as the Senate attack dog on faith. To him, it is inappropriate to let your faith inform your conscience if you are a believing, practicing Christian. But if you are willing to support Constitutional "mandates" on abortion, homosexual "marriage," and other pillars of liberal orthodoxy, it's fine to be a "Christian." In other words, only Christians who are a blank slate are eligible to serve in public life.

Durbin would not even have thought about grilling Justice Ruth Bader Ginsberg, who is Jewish, on her faith, and rightly so! Whether one is a Christian, a Jew, or even of no religion, all are welcome to serve in American public life. That's not just my opinion; it is written into the U.S. Constitution, Article VI, which states that "...no religious test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States. Sen. Durbin is the same person who recently compared American soldiers in Guantanamo to "Nazis, Soviets in their gulags, or Pol Pot." For this he was roundly criticized and he backed down, apologizing on the Senate floor. He needs to be challenged again now. FRC has taken the leading role in stopping the several-year campaign of some Senate Democrats to cleanse the federal judiciary of people of strong religious faith. We will not give up on this effort until we win, and we must win this fight! I want to present Sen. Durbin with a petition from thousands of Americans from across the land telling him that religious faith is not a disqualification for public office.

We dealt with this in last week's debunker, but let's pause and revisit the logic here. First you misquote a senator (usually it's Schumer, but Durbin will do for now). Then you equate "faith" with particular policy or legal positions (always Republican). Then you make sure to point out that the senator is not a "good Christian." Then it's simple: the senator must be interested in the fact of the nominees "faith" -- not merely the judicial views. Thus, the senator is trying to "cleanse the federal judiciary of people of strong religious faith."

Perkins, of course, is the master of this, having organized "Justice Sunday: Stopping the filibuster against people of faith" back in April. He's set to follow it up this week with the more patriotically-themed "Justice Sunday II: God save the United States and this honorable Court!" Mark your calendars: August 14, 7pm eastern.

Rev. Lou Sheldon of the Traditional Values Coalition follows up along the same lines with his warning about the "growing anti-religious bigotry" on the "Hard Left" and "anti-religious zealots in the U.S. Senate."

Schumer, Kennedy, and Durbin are flailing about trying to grasp at anything they can find to be used to smear Judge Roberts and to keep him from being confirmed. Their latest ploy is to go after Judge Roberts’ religious beliefs. Sen. Durbin, for example, recently asked Judge Roberts if his Catholic religious views would conflict with his ability to make hard decisions as a Justice on the Supreme Court. ...

We seemed to have reached a point where any strongly-held religious belief—if it differs from Liberal dogma—will automatically exclude a highly qualified person from holding public office. This is a dangerous path to pursue. The new Liberal litmus test appears to be that no religious person with strongly-held beliefs need apply for a public post. The Liberal Senators seem to prefer atheists, agnostics, pro-abortion zealots, or those with no firmly-held beliefs about anything to become judges.

Do judicial candidates face rejection because they base their beliefs about human rights and morality on the Bible? Apparently so, if Schumer, Kennedy, and Durbin have their way. It seems to me that these Senators would be perfectly happy to approve judicial nominees who base their ideas on the Humanist Manifesto II, or the editorial page of the New York Times. ...

The Senators are wrong to impose a religious test on judicial candidates. When they took their oath of office, they swore to uphold the Constitution of the United States. They are violating their oath and should be rebuked for their venal efforts to vilify a man because he’s a Catholic and has a judicial philosophy that differs from theirs.

Judicial philosophy, "strongly-held religious belief" -- what's the diff? It's all the same in the Party of God.

And of course, somebody has to blame it on the media. This week it fell to Craig von Buseck of Pat Robertson's CBN.

But CBN, oddly enough, is also very concerned about making sure a particular religious perspective is supported by the high court. From their article, "Praying for righteous judges on the Supreme Court":

Some Christian leaders say we may be in the most critical moment of prayer in the history of America.

As we begin this prayer push for the Supreme Court on The 700 Club, we found one group that has been praying for months. They have left jobs, schools, and family to come to the nation's capital and pray - through all kinds of weather, including the recent 100-plus-degree heat wave. ...

“[When] Judge Kennedy became a judge on the court in 1988, they thought he was going to be conservative. But I believe he stepped into a realm that had not been won by prayer, an atmosphere over this court, and he turned and he was the judge that was the swing vote in Casey v. Planned Parenthood that kept abortion alive," [Lou Engle of the Justice House of Prayer] said.

Not that we have any desire to talk about or even hear any more about John Roberts' "faith" -- we do not -- but isn't it a little bit disingenuous to falsely accuse your opponents of prying into it, when it's all you can talk about yourself?

Odds 'n' ends

Just in time for summer vacation!! The Citizens for a Sound Economy and Empower America put together a little be-your-own-activist kit for the month when Congress is in recess! Now is the time to hit the street and convince Americans the Social Security accounts should be created, no new taxes or benefit decreases should be used to fund the accounts. Or you could make sure they let their legislators know that people suffering from job-related asbestos medical conditions should not just be paid for their pain and suffereing -- they should meet rigourous medical criteria just to make sure their case of mesothelioma is real! We don't want any fakers!

What's better than spending your summer with a rapid group of Young Conservatives! At the 27th Annual National Conservative Student Conference, currently being held in Washington, DC, the most conservatives college students from all over our great nation will be gathering to hear the wit and wisdom of Rich Lowry, Ann Coulter, and Robert Novak. Hopefully Novak won't yell and swear at the young tikes like they were James Carville.

The National Taxpayers Union contends that CAFTA will help taxpayers. I wonder what the people who lose their jobs because these jobs will be going to low cost laborers in a Latin American countries will think.…Of course it doesn't matter, because when they lose their source of income, they will cease to be taxpayers. That should help the survey ...

Summer reading

August 4, 2005 -- A new book The Agenda – The Homosexual Plan to Change America, released on August 3 by the book-publishing division of Charisma Magazine, details a new national strategy to restore moral values in our schools, governments and public square.

Rev. Louis P. Sheldon, author of the book and founder of the Traditional Values Coalition, said today that religious conservatives have been “playing too much defense” when it comes to restoring public moral values.

“It is not enough to list the things we as a moral people oppose – so-called homosexual marriage, homosexual adoption, etc. Now is the time to assert what mainstream Americans believe and speak the truth even as we are slandered and maligned by extremists.”

Rev. Sheldon’s plan of action calls for the education and mobilization of churches and people while, at the same time, encouraging individual intervention in a neighbor or relative’s family where a male role model is lacking.

“The Agenda” traces the homosexual movement’s strategy and growth over the past 30 years and reveals how this group of extremist’s agenda has changed the Christian church, the business community, public schools, the Congress and the media.

“The battle can be won, but only if we work together to push back the darkness of ignorance, apathy and compromise,” Rev. Sheldon concludes.

“Now that we have a better understanding of what the agenda is all about, we must continue sounding the alarm until the entire Christian community is awake and fully engaged. We cannot rest until the battle is won, but with God’s help, we shall prevail!”