Showing posts with label Project Blitz. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Project Blitz. Show all posts

Wednesday, July 1, 2020

Supreme Court Ruling On Funding Religious Schools Was The Absolute Wrong One


"To compel a man to furnish contributions of money for the propagation of opinions which he disbelieves and abhors, is sinful and tyrannical." --Thomas Jefferson: Bill for Religious Freedom, 1779. Papers 2:545

That public funding of religious schools has no place in a secular society ought to be a no-brainer. But it evidently isn't given the conservo justices in the Supreme Court ruling Tuesday that a Montana scholarship program could not preclude its use to attend private religious schools.   According to the opinion of Chief Justice John Roberts:

"A state need not subsidize  private education. But once a state decides to do so it cannot disqualify some private schools solely because they are religious."

What's the problem here? It is violating Jefferson's "Wall of separation" and the First Amendment by enabling public tax payer monies to be used to fund private, religious educations. This doesn't fly, sorry! Worse, it uses money that might have gone to enhancing resources at public schools and puts it in private hands! This is an abomination. 

When one also learns (WSJ, p. A16) that in 2018 the state Supreme Court struck down the program, given Montana's constitution "bans any direct or indirect payments to any schools or institutions controlled by any church, sect or denomination", it makes the 5-4 conservo decision even more appalling.

Of course, the WSJ editorial nabobs, as they are often wont to do, cast the state's constitutional prohibition in terms of "prejudice" i.e. 

"Many states passed such provisions, often called Blaine Amendments, amid the anti-Catholic fervor of the late 1800s."

Evidently forgetting or discounting Jefferson's cornerstone principle of the wall of separation as articulated in his letter to Danbury Baptists (1802), in which he wrote:

“I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their Legislature should 'make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof,' thus building a wall of separation between Church and State."

Thereby providing an abiding, unwritten principle that has been practiced on multiple judicial levels since.   The most famous ruling arising?  The 1962 case brought by Madalyn Murray -O'Hair  which has kept prayer out of the public schools, as it should be.   This is irrespective of the Journal's bloviations that -- never mind the Chief's sometime "missteps"  -  John Roberts "sides with the angels in disputes over religious liberty".  

The truth is he sides with the religious extremists (Christian nationalists, Trump-worshipping evangelicals, Opus Dei Catholics etc.)  still seeking a Theocratic state where none is warranted or justified. So it is not a case of  "protecting" religious liberty but enabling religious transgression and hegemony over the secular state.  For those who believe this is over the top maligning of the religious I invite you to check out Americans United for Separation of Church & State's short video  about the Christian extremist program to take over the country,  "Project Blitz".

Meanwhile,  the court's four liberal justices disagreed with the  conservo majority opinion, but on different grounds.  As a separate opinion written by Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg pointed out (joined by Justice Elena Kagan, WSJ, p. A2)  "no constitutional violation occurred  because the Montana court decision treated religious  and secular schools equally."

Clearly, the Roberts' conservo lapdogs are more invested in pandering to the Religious Right's malcontents and others than they are in respecting the constitution or separation of church and state.

Yes, I myself benefited from a private (Catholic parochial) high school education, however, I paid for it myself. I asked no state or government to take from the taxpayer's till to fund the education I wanted.  I negotiated a contract with the Marist Brothers  who ran the school (Monsignor Edward Pace High in Carol City, FL )  to work after class hours, to clean classrooms, science labs etc. This provided just enough to pay the tuition.($200/month).

My argument is if any of these kids desiring escape from public schools want the same kind of private education, then fine, but find a way to pay for it themselves! (Or let their parents!)   But under no conditions, rob the public schools and taxpayer monies to pay for it.   In the words of Anna Maria Chavez, executive Director of the National School Boards Association (WSJ, ibid.):


"States historically have committed themselves to supporting public education by restricting the use of taxpayer funds for religious schools. State legislatures everywhere should act now to erase the long sought loophole opponents of public schools have gained by rescinding short sighted voucher programs and tax credit schemes aimed at redirecting public to private schools with no accountability."

See Also:


Tuesday, April 2, 2019

"Project Blitz" - What You Ought To Know (Or - What You Don't Know Can Hurt You)



Forget the Mueller report and the inevitable fallout of Barr's "summary" for now. While we've all been distracted by Barr's stunt the Trump cabal is under the radar to impose even more feral objectives on us.  While we've been focused on Mueller and  Trump's racism and white nationalist agenda,  we've missed the threat of his pseudo-religionist allies in trying to foist "Project Blitz" upon us to remake America as a Christian Right bastion.  Never heard of it? Here's an early (June last year) account from The UK Guardian:

"The emboldened religious right has unleashed a wave of legislation across the United States since Donald Trump became president, as part of an organised bid to impose hardline Christian values across American society. A playbook known as Project Blitz, developed by a collection of Christian groups, has provided state politicians with a set of off-the-shelf pro-Christian “model bills”.


Some legislation uses verbatim language from the “model bills” created by a group called the Congressional Prayer Caucus Foundation (CPCF), set up by a former Republican congressman which has a stated aim to “protect religious freedom, preserve America’s Judeo-Christian heritage and promote prayer”.
At least 75 bills have been brought forward in more than 20 states during 2017 and 2018 which appear to be modelled on or have similar objectives to the playbook, according to Americans United for Separation of Church and State, a campaign group which tracks legislation that undermines the principle of separation of church and state.
Opponents warn that the CPCF (which claims more than 600 politicians as members across state legislatures ) is using the banner of “religious freedom” to impose Christianity on American public, political and cultural life.
In Alabama, Arizona, Florida, Louisiana and Tennessee, so-called “In God We Trust” bills have become law since 2017, which will see the phrase emblazoned on public buildings, hung in schools and displayed on the side of public vehicles including police cars.

But the Project Blitz 148-page playbook sees those largely symbolic bills as just the first stage on the way to more hardline laws."
In fact, as AU noted, these laws re presented as measures to preserve religious liberty, but are intended to give businesses, pastors and childcare providers the right to discriminate against anyone of the "wrong" religion (or none at all) and especially prospective parents of the LGBTQ and transgender populations.    An AU Bulletin I received two days ago, also warns the Blitz buffoons plan to target women seeking health care, for access to birth control as well as abortion services.   Their basic shtick is to "allow state employees, corporations, health care providers and nonprofit organizations to use religion as a justification to discriminate against nearly everyone.
Here's a brief rundown of events from last year to this, from the same AU Bulletin:
- In 2018, 76 Project Blitz bills were introduced in 26 states with 9 bills passing. AU expcts even more to pass in the other states in their legislative sessions.
- On January 31, this year, AU and a broad coalition of 42 other prominent religious, civil rights, secular, LGBTQ and reproductive freedom organizations issued a joint national statement urging state lawmakers nationwide to oppose Project Blitz and related legislation that uses religion as the basis for discrimination.
- January and February, 2019 - Rachel Laser spoke out against multiple newspapers, magazines and online news outlets on the threats posed by Project Blitz and how AU is fighting back.
- February 5, 2019-  AU released  a a short video  on Project Blitz  to create public awareness. Watch it and learn more!
We have to thank Frederick Clarkson, senior research analyst at Political Research Associates, (a thinktank which studies the political right), who was first to write about Project Blitz, which had up to then been hiding in plain sight.  As Clarkson noted last year:
It’s very rare that you come across a major primary source document that changes the way you view everything, and this is one of those times. This is a 116-page strategy manual hidden away on a website explaining at least what a section of the religious right are doing in the United States. To me that’s astounding.”  
The Blitz playbook came to wider attention in April  last year after Clarkson was tipped off to its existence. He also highlighted recordings of conference calls where leading figures in the CPCF set out their plans to flood state legislatures with bills.

One of the steering team behind Project Blitz is David Barton, the Texas-based founder of an organisation called WallBuilders, which takes its inspiration from the Old Testament in describing a a mission of “rebuilding our nation’s foundations”.

In a recording of a call with state legislators, Barton described in detail the strategy behind Project Blitz, which he said packages together about two dozen bills in separate categories based on the type of opposition they are likely to receive. Three categories of bills dominate  Project Blitz:

-  "In God We Trust” bills designed to trigger opposition by saying the bills are a waste of time, or the sponsor of the bill “just wants to fight culture wars and divide people”.  The strategy is to pave the way for later political attacks, painting an election opponent as “anti-faith”.

- Specious religious proclamation or resolution bills – declaring a religious freedom day or Christian heritage week that can then be used to get religious teaching into schools. The playbook adds: “If any legislator opposes this, it will be helpful to get him or her on the record against this heritage and freedom.

- Bills with  resolutions in favor of “biblical values concerning marriage and sexuality”, such as “establishing public policy favoring adoption by intact heterosexual, marriage-based families” and “establishing public policy favoring intimate sexual relations only between married, heterosexual couples”.
We're on to these slimy bastards now and if we keep our eyes open, heads screwed on straight - especially in states where Barton and his ilk are trying to foist Blitz on an us - we will beat these vermin back.. Again, citizens need to grasp and repeat the famous line from abolitionist Wendell Phillips in 1952: : "The price of liberty is eternal vigilance".
If you're not prepared to be vigilant and attend to all nascent or active threats in the Trump era, you are not prepared to enjoy any liberty, period.  In that case you probably don't deserve it.

See also:

by John Feffer | April 4, 2019 - 6:29am | permalink

Tuesday, June 5, 2018

Supreme Court Blows It On Wedding Cake Case- Caves To White Christian Nationalist Nazis


Image may contain: one or more people and people sitting
Pawn of White Christian Nationalists, Jack Phillips, who convinced a dumb Supreme Court that his wedding cakes are "religious expressions" and baking one for a gay couple would violate his "religious beliefs and freedoms".

Well, we've now seen the legal rathole that the Hobby Lobby case has opened up with the Supreme Court actually voting in the 7-to-2 decision in favor of  delusional Christian cake maker Jack Phillips. This was in respect to his case brought against the Colorado  Civil Rights Commission . The Commission  had declared Phillips’ religious beliefs about marriage to be discriminatory when he refused to bake a wedding cake for a gay couple.   

At the time the case first drew media prominence in December, supporters of Phillips argued that if he lost his legal fight then like-minded "entrepreneurs", i.e.  with a religious objection to LGBT or same-sex marriage,  effectively would be "barred" from doing wedding work. (In fact,  it would be their choice not to do such work, i.e. opt out.)  The claim was that a loss would also “provide a road map for litigation against Christian photographers who are bound by religious conviction not to offer their artistic talents to photograph a same-sex wedding ceremony or celebration,” according to the International Christian Photographers in a brief filed to the high court.

Evidently, the Supremes bought this malarkey hook, line and sinker, thus conveying further proof the whole country is undergoing a mental meltdown - and no longer able to process rational thought.   Writing for the majority, Justice Anthony Kennedy said the Colorado Civil Rights Commission  showed:

 “hostility to Phillips’ religious beliefs in ordering him to undergo anti-discrimination training."

This is absolute poppycock and twaddle. In fact, the CCRC showed mercy in not dispatching him to a psych hutch to undergo electro-convulsive  therapy - which is what he really needed. As I noted in an earlier December post on the case, the SC judgment should have been  essentially a no brainer. I even cited  the words of one of the lawyers for the Denver Metro Chamber of Commerce:


"It is not hard to imagine the claims that will follow this case: A jeweler may argue that his religion forbids him from selling wedding rings to an interfaith couple; a shop owner may refuse service to women customers to avoid contact prohibited by his religion,” 


What would there be to stop it? Well, nothing, if each little special "private business"  decided to whom it will sell and who will be rejected as miscreants. Here's the bottom line truth: The restaurateur, cake maker, photographer is afforded certain privileges (via a licensing) to trade or provide services (such as food) in the public domain. However, their so called "freedom" (e.g. to trade)  is limited. Hence,  that can't include refusal of service unless there are extenuating circumstances, i.e.  customers entering drunk and disorderly.  

THIS is the rational way to interpret the wedding cake case, but which the 7 justices flouted, evidently terrified they will be the targets of the white Christian nationalists backing Phillips - which I will get to shortly.  But did Justice Kennedy do justice to the case? Nooooo....He launched out further in his reckless screed:

The laws and the constitution can, and in some instances must, protect gay persons and gay couples in the exercise of their civil rights, but religious and philosophical objections to gay marriage are protected views and in some instances protected forms of expression.”

Yes, Justice Kennedy, the  objections to LGBT, gay marriage etc. are protected views, which Phillips et al are entitled to exercise in their own home or group.   But they absolutely have NO latitude to do so in the business sphere!  Not because the excluded ones are gay and gay people "deserve a break".  But because the operation of the law  in the commercial trade sphere cannot be a free for all where everyone does what he wants. That is,  selling services to some because they conform to notions of  deserving one's "religious self expression", but rejecting others out of a sense of violating one's religious faith or personal dignity. That is a prescription for economic anarchy.

Thus, Justice Kennedy's words amount to a load of recycled  codswallop which mixes apples and oranges within a civil,  legal framework.  But even Kennedy's  mumbo- jumbo doesn't come close to the drivel spouted by  Clarence Thomas, e.g.:

"Custom baking the wedding cake would have made Mr. Phillips an active participant in the wedding celebration."

Uh, no you deplorable dumbass.  Phillips would have had to actually have gone to the event to be an "active participant."  But this is the sort of inflated rhetoric that discloses how far down the rabbit hole of irrationality we've traveled.

 At issue then, is whether the cake maker - and the assorted Xtian photographers for that matter- have entered into a business or not. If not, if they simply follow their art or self-expression - with NO public sales or commerce- then they are not  obliged to do anyone's bidding. They are not in the commercial marketplace but operating in their own private (e.g. family, neighbor-to-neighbor) domain.If, however, they are businesses and operating in the public, commercial sphere, no such rights apply.  They have to play by the same rules as all other commercial franchises, sellers. That's why this ought to have been a no brainer for the Supreme Court.
 

Meanwhile, deep politics researchers have logically connected the wedding cake case to multiple others being brought, all part of an organized bid to impose hardline Christian values across American society. In other words reduce us to a Theocratic Nazi type fascist state but with crosses replacing swastikas. 

At the point of the spear is "Project Blitz".   Frederick Clarkson, senior research analyst at Political Research Associatesa thinktank which studies the political right, was first to write about Project Blitz, which he said had been hiding in plain sight.  According to Clarkson:


It’s very rare that you come across a major primary source document that changes the way you view everything, and this is one of those times. This is a 116-page strategy manual hidden away on a website explaining at least what a section of the religious right are doing in the United States. To me that’s astounding.”
The Blitz playbook came to wider attention in April after Clarkson was tipped off to its existence. He also highlighted recordings of conference calls where leading figures in the CPCF set out their plans to flood state legislatures with their specious religious bills..


Clarkson, whose research first highlighted Project Blitz, said: 
It’s a Christian supremacist agenda, the idea that God intended and mandates Christians to lead and control the United States for the religious vision that they hold and the policy implications that flow from it.If you are a more liberal Christian, a Jew, or a Muslim, or a non-believer of any sort, or whatever you happen to be, you’re a second class citizen at best.”

Andrew Whitehead, assistant professor of sociology at Clemson University, recently published a study titled Make America Christian Again which  described the so-called quest for “dominion” as the aim of Christian white nationalists who consider that the Christian faith and their particular interpretation should be imposed nation wide.  
Who exactly are these imps taken in by this crap?  Well, the usual suspects. Whitehead also concluded that the more someone believed the United States was and should remain a Christian nation, the more likely they were to vote Trump in 2016- and probably in 2020 if the swine is still hanging around - and hasn't yet been hung as a traitor.
The one saving grace in the wedding cake case?  The ruling left open the question of whether anti-discrimination laws should supersede religious beliefs in future cases.  In other words, just because the religious Right fascists won in this case doesn't necesarily mean they will win in a future one.  But that assumes the court will not be contaminated by the Project Blitz fanatics, their sordid agenda for domination and their grievances.  Especially one justice in particular:  Neil Gorsuch, e.g.