Even as evangelical Christian Rep. Mark Souder, R-Indiana submitted his resignation letters already, his 19 staff members will continue to work as normal.

Mark_Souder

According to FOX news, Souder submitted his resignation letters to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-California, and Indiana Governor Mitch Daniels  on Thursday.

An evangelical Christian, Souder resigned over an extramarital affair he had with a staffer with whom he made a video touting the benefits of abstinence education.

However, even in his absence his 19 staffers will continue to work as they normally do. They will be supervised by the clerk of the House until a replacement is selected in a special election this year, according to FortWayne.com.

According to FortWayne.com, at least half a dozen times in a year, a House member may die or resign, sometimes in scandal and other times to run for another office.  However a backup procedure referred to as a caretaker provision exists so the office can continue its normal functions.

Under this provision, no one can cast a vote on the House floor or ask a question in a committee meeting.  Any administrative work that would require an elected official’s signature will be handled by someone from the clerk’s office, FortWayne.com said.

Other functions will include inquiries from constituents which may range from people with sewer system issues who don’t know where to call, or navigating constituents on how to deal with federal agencies.  They may also referee misunderstandings that may arise between a constituent and a federal agency, FortWayne.com said.

Souder, 59, was known for his outspoken views on religion.  In a news conference at his Fort Wayne office, he apologized for his actions, and expressed regret for hurting those he loves and for letting his friends down.

He had an affair with Tracey Jackson, who had been working for Souder since 2004, according to the Associated Press.

After a 2008 hearing on abstinence-only education, Jackson recorded a video interview with Souder in which the congressman said the only fully reliable way young people can protect themselves from pregnancy and STDs is by “abstaining from sex until in a committed, faithful relationship,”  according to the AP.

Potential replacements for Souder include State Sen. Marlin Stutzman, a tea party favorite who finished second in the GOP primary for the U.S. Senate two weeks ago.  Other possibilities are two Republicans Souder defeated in the primary — Bob Thomas and Phil Troyer — as well as state Rep. Randy Borror of Fort Wayne and Fort Wayne City Councilwoman Liz Brown, the AP said.

According to the AP, Souder’s resignation follows that of Democratic Rep. Eric Massa of New York in March amid an investigation into whether he sexually harassed male staffers and admissions of extramarital affairs by South Carolina Gov. Mark Sanford and Nevada Sen. John Ensign — both Republicans who have held onto their offices.

Animated depiction of Jesus in Comedy Central's "South Park." Photo copyright: Comedy Central & Braniff Productions.

A new animated series currently under development for Comedy Central’s 2010-2011 production slate will feature the adventures of a cartoon Jesus Christ as he tries to escape the shadow of his “powerful but apathetic father,” according to “The Washington Post.”

After stirring controversy earlier this year with their depiction of the prophet Muhammad, Comedy Central writers are describing “JC” as, “a playful take on religion and society with a sprinkle of dumb.”

The storyline will follow the animated Jesus as he travels to New York in an attempt to become “a regular guy.”

While depictions of Jesus continue to surface in episodes of the increasingly popular and controversial animated series “South Park,” “JC” will mark the first time the character has received his own show.

The project’s writers and producers hail from Reveille, the production company behind several popular comedy sitcoms, including “The Office” and “Ugly Betty.” According to the original thumbnail sketch, “JC” will depict God as a lazy man who spends his days playing video games and ignoring his son Jesus.

Last Thursday, Catholic League President William Donohue issued a statement concerning the new cartoon and even went so far as to refer to the show’s producers as “deceivers.”

“These are the same executives who delight in bashing Christians while continuing to censor any depiction of Muhammad on ‘South Park,”

Kent Alterman, head of original programming and production at Comedy Central, says the show is just a normal part of producing quality comedy and that “in its purest form [comedy] always makes some people feel uncomfortable.”

Donohue disagrees. “Besides the fact that there is no end to the number of comedians who have made a huge name for themselves without ever offending anyone, what is even more relevant is the fact that Comedy Central has absolutely no interest in making Muslims feel uncomfortable.”

“South Park” producers continue to feature their Muhammad character, but often cover him with a black box, as Muslims believe that any representation of their prophet is blasphemous.

Network spokesman Tony Fox refused several requests from reporters seeking comments both on Donohue’s statements and further details on “JC,” according to “The Huffington Post.”

According to several reports, “JC” is only a few steps into the preproduction process and network executives will have to okay the script and storyline pitch before the show gets the green light.

The Catholic League aligned recently with several Jewish organizations against a bill which would allow the government a stronger hand on what to do with human organs after a person has died.

Catholics, Jews decry bill to ‘harvest’ human organs

The bill, which is sponsored by Assemblyman Richard Brodsky, would in effect disable the next of kin from challenging decisions of their dead or dying relatives regarding the donation of their organs, the New York Times said.

This becomes contentious when the government has the right to presume that a person is willing to donate their organs unless they specifically state “no” in official documents, most commonly their driver’s license.

Under current law, a donor must indicate permission on their driver’s licenses with two witnesses present.  Or, a donor may fill a donor card.  If the bill is passed, the government may presume the person is willing to donate body organs if the box on the driver’s license indicating “no” is left blank, the Eurasia Review noted.

It is potentially possible under this bill that a person may be dying and incapable of communicating.  If the driver’s license does not indicate otherwise, the government will presume the person’s organs are up for donation, and the next of kin would not be able to challenge this.

Brodsky’s bill is being challenged by Assemblyman Dov Hikind who has launched a campaign against it, with the support of the Rabbinical Alliance of America (with over 800 members nationwide), The National Council of Young Israel (with 146 branches nationwide) and The Catholic League, the nation’s largest Catholic civil rights organization, according to the Brooklyn Daily Eagle.

Under Jewish tradition, people are discouraged from donating their organs except when it is urgently needed.

While Hikind expressed support for voluntary organ donation, he expressly disagrees with the government having the power of presumed consent.  If the bill is passed, New York will be the first state to implement it.

William Donohue wrote, in the Eurasia Review, “It is one thing for someone to exercise informed consent and voluntarily donate his or her organs, quite another for the state to assume it has a right to them unless stipulated otherwise. The state does not have a lien on our bodies. Indeed, to assume it does is morally obscene.

“Have we not seen enough evidence in the past one hundred years of what happens when agents of government assume a mantle of authority over the life and limbs of innocent persons? This kind of utilitarian calculus always winds up punishing the least among us while rewarding the stronger.”

Two bombs were set off within minutes of each other in a Christian populated area in Iraq recently, killing one and injuring 80 others, the Associated Press reported.

The explosions took place in the northern city of Mosul, where a large Christian community resides.

There have been attacks by Sunni Muslim insurgents against the Christian minority in Iraq, especially in Mosul.

Some extremist Sunnis view Christians as nonbelievers and believe that Christians support the Shiite-led government, which they oppose.

The New York-based Human Rights Watch warned that minorities including Christians could be caught in the crossfire of longstanding feuds between Arabs and minority Kurds for the area’s oil-rich resources and land, Radio Free Europe reported..

Wisam Jarji, a student who was wounded in the blast said, “I could see blood stains and hear screams all over the place.”

The U.S.-based National Council of Churches sent a letter last week to U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton asking her to lobby for more protection for Iraq’s Christian community from the government.

They were particularly worried in the aftermath of the March 7 parliamentary elections as various political forces still vie for power, the AP said.

Church leaders complained about Arizona’s newest immigration law recently, which grants greater power to local police to question and arrest suspected illegal immigrants, saying it is ineffective and will promote discrimination.

Because of the passage of Arizona's new "immigration" policy, people who look Hispanic may be subject to racial profiling/Credit: Garrison Photography

Rev. James Flaaten, executive director of Arizona Ecumenical council, issued a statement saying, this law “will demonize anyone who looks suspiciously like an undocumented person, leading to inevitable racial profiling,” according to The Christian Post.

Flaaten added, “Our religious traditions ask us to treat people with dignity and respect, and we look for a more enlightened and hopeful way of working with the undocumented people who live alongside us.”

The law, which was signed by Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer, requires immigrants to carry their alien registration documents with them at all times, and gives police the power to question someone’s legal residency and arrest anyone who cannot prove that they are legal residents.

The law also cracks down on those who hire illegal residents or knowingly transport them.

Penalties for illegal immigrants under the law include arrest, jail for up to six months and a $2,500 fine. It includes other provisions for lawsuits against government agencies that hinder enforcement of immigration laws.

Religious leaders are urging federal lawmakers to pass comprehensive immigration reform, denouncing the current federal system as broken and the new Arizona law as “mean-spirited.”

“It is not only mean-spirited – it will be ineffective and will only serve to further divide communities in Arizona, making everyone more fearful and less safe,” said the Rev. Jim Wallis, president and CEO of Sojourners.

“Enforcement without reform of the system is merely cruel. Enforcement without compassion is immoral. Enforcement that breaks up families is unacceptable.”

“This law will make it illegal to love your neighbor in Arizona, and will force us to disobey Jesus and his gospel,” the progressive evangelical leader contended. “We will not comply.”

Critics say the bill fails to address border security concerns and called the bill divisive as it encourages racial profiling.

They note police officers may more frequently suspect Hispanics to be illegal immigrants.

Some support the bill but worry that it may hurt Arizona’s economy which has an estimated 460,000 illegal immigrants.  Should they leave the state, they would no longer be spending money there.

Prior to the bill’s passage President Obama, said it was misguided and directed the Justice Department to see if it is legal.

Rep. Luis Gutierrez, D-Ill. appealed for Obama’s continued support against the bill and called instead for reform.

Gutierrez has loudly called for comprehensive immigration reform creating citizenship for millions of illegal immigrants now in the United States.

Rev. Al Sharpton in New York said he would organize “freedom walkers” to challenge the Arizona bill.

“We will go to Arizona when this bill goes into effect and walk the streets with people who refuse to give identification and force arrest,” Sharpton said, according to the Associated Press.

“It divides our whole community,” said Mary Hoffmann, 54, a landscape architect in Phoenix. “If people are divided they make decisions on fear and anger,” she was quoted as saying by the Associated Press.

Arizona congressman Raul Grijalva, a Democrat, urged the Obama administration not to cooperate when illegal immigrants are picked up by local police.

Under the new law, Arizona officers who arrest undocumented people will turn them over to federal immigration officers.  Opponents said the federal government can block the law by refusing to accept them.

Brewer, in defense of the law, said she wouldn’t tolerate racial profiling.  She called on the state’s law enforcement licensing agency to create a training course so that police can enforce the law without discriminating against any race, color or ethnicity.

Brewer also ordered a reallocation of state National Guard and law enforcement resources, and called on the federal government to deploy National Guard troops.

Brewer, who signed the new law, is facing re-election amid growing anger in the state over illegal immigrants.  She blamed federal lawmakers’ inaction and misguided policy for forcing Arizona to pass the new bill.

The bill, sponsored by state Republican Rep. Russell Pearce of Mesa, passed the House 35-21 and the Senate 17-11.

Arizona’s border with Mexico is the nation’s busiest stretch for illegal border crossings.

Supporters of the bill blame illegal immigrants as partly responsible for the state’s high crime rate.

The producers of “South Park” complained recently that Comedy Central censored a portion of their popular cartoon after they had received threats from a radical Muslim group.

Producers Trey Parker and Matt Stone expressed disapproval after their bosses bleeped out a portion of the usual wrap-up speech of South Park character Kyle.  The speech didn’t mention Muhammad.

The censorship was done in response to threats from Revolution Muslim, a fringe group which complained that `South Park’ insulted their prophet by depicting him in a bear costume in last week’s episode.

Many Muslims believe that Islamic teachings forbid showing images of Muhammad.

The Muslim group didn’t explicitly threaten the producers.  However, they warned that Parker and Stone could end up as Dutch filmmaker Theo van Gogh did, who was slain six years ago for making a film that criticized Islamic society.

Their Web site, revolutionmuslim.com also published Stone and Parker’s work address.

The Web site said, “We have to warn Matt and Trey that what they are doing is stupid and they will probably wind up like Theo Van Gogh for airing this show.”

A photo of Van Gogh’s body lying in the street was included with the original posting, which has been unavailable to some Web users since news of the item broke earlier this week.

The extremist group is relatively small with about a dozen members.  It was formed in 2007 and is based out of New York.

It is mostly known for posting inflammatory and often threatening comments on its Web site, including a poem last October during the Jewish High Holy Days asking God to kill all the Jews.

Its members also stage protests in front of New York mosques, advocating a more fundamentalist form of Islam, said Oren Segal, director of the Anti-Defamation League’s Center on Extremism.

South Park, in its 200 shows, has satirized Christianity, Buddhism, Scientology, the blind and disabled, gay people, Hollywood celebrities and politicians of all persuasions.

Some of those who were satirized protested, or threatened to boycott.

Regarding Comedy Central’s self censorship, experts call it a dangerous precedent which also stirs up a free-speech issue that, while dormant for years, has now opened again.

UCLA law professor Eugene Volokh said to the Los Angeles Times that the network has potentially empowered other extremists by how it has chosen to handle the situation.  “The consequence of this position is that the thugs win and people have more incentive to be thugs,” said Volokh, who teaches free speech and religious freedom law.

Sources:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100422/ap_en_tv/us_tv_south_park_muslims

http://www.latimes.com/entertainment/news/tv/la-et-south-park-20100423,0,5940860.story

More public schools are abandoning Christmas…and now they’re throwing out Santa Claus, too.

After all, the concept of Santa is based on a real Christian do-gooder named Nicholas.

Ironically, our “tolerant” society simply can’t tolerate this in the name of diversity.

In continued efforts not to offend anyone, numerous public school officials have crossed a new bridge this year.

They’ve decided that not only the religious aspects of Christmas, but anything that may be associated with Christmas, must go.

So Santa is “getting the boot” along with candy canes and red and green wrapping paper.

Christian law firms across the country are once again busy defending parents and students against schools and school districts that continue to be ignorant of religious rights in regards to Christmas.

Here are some examples of new 2009 incidents:

• Byam Elementary School in Chelmsford, Massachusetts has had a long-standing “Gift Room” fundraiser for donating and purchasing gifts. This year, the policy has been changed to ban candy canes, Christmas stockings, Santas and other “religious” items – and in fact have banned anything related to the Jewish Hanukkah as well.
• The Alliance Defense Fund is representing students’ families in this case.Their Press Release states that Byam’s superintendent defended the school’s decision as “taking a conservative approach to separation of church and state.” ADF’s representative, Jordan Lorence responds in the article: “Ignoring the 95 percent of Americans who celebrate Christmas is not tolerance.  It’s also not necessary because the idea that gifts related to Christmas would be unconstitutional at this sale is patently false.”
• In 2006, due to the previous several years’ hailstorm of public school snubs toward Christmas, the ADF contacted over 11,000 schools and 5,500 mayors explaining it is constitutionally sound to allow various activities associated with Christmas at school. Yet, the misunderstandings continue.

• New York’s East Syracuse-Minoa School District school has also banned references to Christmas from any school sponsored event. According to Christian Newswire, a letter was sent to parents stating that no specific holiday shall be recognized in any school event:
  “This is a busy time with many diverse cultural and religious traditions. Our school district honors this diversity…we must balance that commitment with respect for all students’ heritages and beliefs….” (see whole letter here).
• Contrary to this paragraph on valuing diversity, the letter goes on to say that programs involving singular beliefs may not take place at school during school hours or with any school sponsorship; i.e., no school holiday program can involve any regard for God. The Parent Teachers’ Association scheduled Santa to appear one evening at 6:00 pm.
• When approached by parents about this situation, the Deputy Superintendent explained that Santa Claus originated from the story about St. Nicholas. Parents are fighting these restrictions and have started a petition.

• One school bans, then brings back Christmas under pressure:
  In November, Bellview Elementary School in Ashland, Oregon announced it was not allowing any references to Christmas or Santa. The Christmas tree at Bellview had previously been re-named a “holliday tree,” but then Bellview Principal Michelle Zundel removed it completely and replaced it with snowmen.

A report at Accuracy in Academia states Zundel acknowledged to parents that the Christmas tree has even been ruled as a “secular” symbol by the Supreme Court; but albeit, that the tree does also symbolize Christmas, and it feels like a religious symbol to families who don’t celebrate Christmas. So anything that feels like a religious Christmas symbol is taboo.

But Zundel reversed her decision after a community meeting, dozens of communications from around the country and a letter from Liberty Counsel explaining the childrens’ true religious rights in public schools.

There is nothing wrong with Christmas in Public School. Here are some resources for parents:

• Liberty Counsel has a “Help Save Christmas Action Pack” and has joined the Christian Educators Association International in a “Friend or Foe” Christmas Campaign.
• The Christian Law Association offers a CD, “Keeping Christ in Christmas.” And numerous Christian organizations have gotten together at this “Defend Christmas Resources” Web site to offer information that can be brought to school boards and principles.