Rut like rabbits? Backtrack like crazy!

First Bryan Fischer said:

Welfare has destroyed the African-American family by telling young black women that husbands and fathers are unnecessary and obsolete. Welfare has subsidized illegitimacy by offering financial rewards to women who have more children out of wedlock. We have incentivized fornication rather than marriage, and it’s no wonder we are now awash in the disastrous social consequences of people who rut like rabbits.

“Rut like rabbits?” Backtrack like crazy! Then he changed it to:

Welfare has destroyed the African-American family by telling young black women that husbands and fathers are unnecessary and obsolete. Welfare has subsidized illegitimacy by offering financial rewards to women who have more children out of wedlock. We have incentivized fornication rather than marriage, and it’s no wonder we are now awash in the disastrous social consequences of those who engage in random and reckless promiscuity, whether they are Caucasian, Hispanic, or African-American.

All that because the Left Went Wiggy!
Fischer’s observations about poverty and rutting came in a column where Fischer said Jesus groomed the Apostles for political office (now edited to remove the rut).  We don’t have much information about the later lives of the Apostles but I don’t think they went on to stellar political careers.

Did the First Amendment make America a Christian nation?

Of course not.
However, as I have been examining, Bryan Fischer seems to think so. Fischer says that the First Amendment only protects the religious expression of Christianity. According to Fischer non-Christian religions have no Constitutional protect but may be tolerated.
Today, the Christian Post and Crosswalk published a more detailed treatment of the topic where I address the claims that the author of the First Amendment, James Madison, and the members of Congress only meant to protect Christianity. Although the dominant religion was indeed Christianity, the words of Madison and Jefferson make clear that the right envisioned was an individual right of conscience and not tied to a particular religion.
In the article today, I mention a book by William Lee Miller, titled The First Liberty. I highly recommend this book. In it, Miller examines the influence Rhode Island’s Roger Williams had on John Locke, who in turn influenced James Madison. Even more direct was the intellectual line from Williams to Baptists Isaac Backus and John Leland. Leland had direct influence on Madison.
Miller provides ample evidence of Williams commitment to religious freedom. For instance, according to Stephen Hopkins, a signer of the Declaration of Independence, Williams was “the first legislator in the world…that fully and effectively provided for and established free, full and absolute liberty of conscience.”
Connecting the dots, Miller adds:

Williams name and conviction were carried into the period of the American Revolution and founding by John Leland in Virginia and by Isaac Backus in New England. Leland, as noted, was the most important leader with whom James Madison made his moral understanding at the time in 1787-1788 that the issue of ratification of the Constitution was being debated in the states — most significantly in Virginia. Leland gave voice to the complaint against the Constitution that it had no bill of rights, and in particular no explicit protection of religious liberty. Madison made with Leland his consequential moral agreement: You support the Consitution now; I will introduce a bill of rights as amendments in the first Congress. So that was one way the ghost of Roger Williams made its way into the founding documents.

Williams “free, full and absolute liberty of conscience” is much closer to what we have in the First Amendment than Fischer’s limited vision. The Constitution then, and now via the 14th Amendment and numerous Supreme Court decisions, provide protection for adherents of all religions and none.
The article after the break: Continue reading “Did the First Amendment make America a Christian nation?”

Report from Uganda: Police evict anti-gay protesters

UG Pulse is on the scene:

There was drama at Parliament this afternoon when police officers threw out anti-homosexuality activists for failure to seek permission to hold a press conference.
The fracas ensued after one of the activists; Derick Waiswa addressed the media, shortly after meeting the chairman of the Legal and Parliamentary Affairs committee, Stephen Tashobya, whose committee is scrutinizing the controversial Anti Homosexuality bill.
Waiswa, who claims to be a Makerere University student, earlier told the media that Parliament should fast track the passing of the bill before the 8th Parliament closes to protect the citizens from what he describes as inhumane acts of homosexuals.
The Officer in charge of the Parliament Police Station, Erias Kasirabo, together with other police officers then arrested Waiswa and held him for trespass before he was released shortly after.
A few weeks ago, Tashobya revealed that the Anti Homosexuality bill would be passed before the 8th Parliament closes.

 Hon. Tashobya has not been answering his phone or emails since last week so it hard to tell what the plan is. However, as I noted yesterday, the Marriage and Divorce Bill has not yet been considered, which is supposed to be next up from the Legal and Parliamentary Affairs Committee.

Bahati says there is still a chance for Uganda's antigay bill

On Saturday, David Bahati called up his new best friend Melanie Nathan and told her that the Anti-Homosexuality Bill would be heard before the end of the 8th Parliament in May.

Today I immediately mentioned the confusion surrounding the status of the AHB in this eighth parliament.  I asked Mr. Bahati if it was true that the Bill has been scrapped and he asserted – “absolutely not” and that it is a matter still in the hands of the Parliament and that it can be passed at anytime.
The best update preceding this call can be found on the site of Warren Throckmorton, posted the following series of updates on his Blog Post: In Sum: On March 24, 2011 Throckmorton notes: “This afternoon I have heard from two sources in Uganda that the Anti-Homosexuality Bill (AHB) has been shelved…” Then on March 25th NTV Uganda provided a report noting that the Anti-Homosexuality Bill had yet to be decided, it was not shelved but that the Museveni administration spokesperson indicated that the criminalization of homosexuality in Uganda is sufficiently covered by other legislation.
David Bahati, as prime defender of the AHB spoke in the report that appeared on Throckmorton’s site , clearly noting his dissatisfaction with the idea that the law should remain as is for lack of clarity on certain issues that he believes ought to be specifically dealt with.
Today Mr. Bahati informed me categorically that the AHB has not been shelved and that he still hopes it will be “decided” by the 8th Parliament.  He informed me that the 8th Parliament will continue until the President is sworn in again in MAY 2011 to herald the new 9th Parliament, and that the AHB can be decided upon anytime up until then. He insisted it is still being considered by Committee.

I made several calls to Legal and Parliamentary Affairs Committee Stephen Tashobya, including one this morning. However, he did not answer, nor has he replied to emails. I know he was traveling some last week out of the country, so that may be some of the absence. However, I also wonder if the matter has been buttoned up by the Museveni administration. If so, Bahati may be placing himself at some risk by continuing to promote his bill.
My guess is that the bill is not going to get out of committee. We have yet to see the Marriage and Divorce Bill which is slated to take place before anything else from that committee. It seems highly unlikely that the AHB would be considered before the Marriage and Divorce Bill, given the promises made by the Speaker of the Parliament and Hon. Tashobya – the committee chair.