Category Archives: news

‘Powerful New Film’ The Greatest Miracle

The Greatest Miracle, rated PG, opened on December 9 in 63 cities across the country. A list of opening cities and theaters is available now at the movie’s website. The Most Rev. Donald Ricken, Bishop of the Diocese of Green Bay, Wisc., calls it a “powerful new film,” noting that the 3D animated feature “helps us better grasp the spiritual forces at play in our daily lives.”

The Greatest Miracle tells a story of hope and faith set against the backdrop of mysterious spirits and a religious service many have come to take for granted. In the movie, three people find themselves at the same Catholic Mass because of crises they are struggling to endure. Going to Mass is not new to any of them – but they need assistance to embrace its true meaning. What they experience during that Mass changes all of their lives forever.

“The Greatest Miracle draws the viewer into the Mass by artistically portraying what we as Catholics believe to be taking place, but what we as humans are incapable of perceiving with our earthly senses,” Bishop Ricken said. “May we take from The Greatest Miracle an exhortation to participate more fully and more regularly in the Mass — a tremendous gift to the Church and indeed, to all humanity.”

The Greatest Miracle is directed by Bruce M. Morris. He is the visual writer of the animated hits Pocahontas and Hercules, and earned an Academy Award® nomination for his work on 2009’s The Princess and the Frog.

Oscar®-nominee Mark McKenzie, who orchestrated the score for Dances with Wolves, wrote the score for the film, which earned the 2011 Hollywood Music in Media Award for Best Original Score — Independent Film/Short/Documentary. McKenzie’s work also includes Men in Black, Spiderman and Ice Age: The Meltdown.

Strong themes of evil make the PG film unsuitable for all ages. Parental discretion is advised.

The RAVE is only theater where the The Greatest Miracle is showing. The Rave is located at 9415 Civic Center Blvd. in West Chester, Ohio.

Bills of Rights Day: Are Our Freedoms in Jeopardy?

By John W. Whitehead
December 15, 2011

“A Bill of Rights is what the people are entitled to against every government, and what no just government should refuse, or rest on inference.”
—Thomas Jefferson

The Bill of Rights officially became part of the U.S. Constitution on December 15, 1791. Unfortunately, 220 years later, the freedoms enshrined in those first ten amendments are in dire jeopardy. Those responsible for its demise are none other than the schools, which have failed to educate students about its principles; the courts, which have failed to uphold the rights enshrined within it; the politicians, who long ago sold out to corporations and special interests; and “we the people” who, in our ignorance and greed, have valued materialism over freedom.

A quick review of the Bill of Rights shows how dismal things have become.

The First Amendment is supposed to protect the freedom to speak your mind and protest in peace without being bridled by the government. It also protects the freedom of the media, as well as the right to worship and pray without interference. Yet despite the clear protections found in the First Amendment, the freedoms described therein are under constant assault. Students are often stripped of their rights for such things as wearing a t-shirt that school officials find offensive. Likewise, local governments and police often oppose citizens who express unpopular views in public. Peace activists who speak out against the government are being arrested and subjected to investigation by the FBI, while members of the press are threatened with jail time for reporting on possible government wrongdoing and refusing to reveal their sources.

The Second Amendment was intended to guarantee “the right of the people to keep and bear arms.” Yet while gun ownership has been recognized by the U.S. Supreme Court as an individual citizen right, Americans remain powerless to defend themselves against the government. In fact, in 2011, the Indiana Supreme Court broadly ruled that citizens don’t have the right to resist police officers who enter their homes illegally, which is the law in most states.

The Third Amendment reinforces the principle that civilian-elected officials are superior to the military by prohibiting the military from entering any citizen’s home without “the consent of the owner.” Unfortunately, the Congress is in the process of passing a Defense Authorization Bill which will finally tear down the wall between civilian and military policing, allowing soldiers to arrive at your front door and arrest you. With domestic police increasingly posing as military forces—complete with weapons, uniforms, assault vehicles, etc.—a good case could be made for the fact that SWAT team raids, which break down the barrier between public and private property, have done away with this critical safeguard.

The Fourth Amendment prohibits the government from searching your home without a warrant approved by a judge. Unfortunately, the Fourth Amendment has been all but eviscerated by the passage of the USA Patriot Act, which opened the door to unwarranted electronic intrusions by government agents into your most personal and private transactions, including phone, mail, computer and medical records.

The Fifth Amendment is supposed to ensure that you are innocent until proven guilty, and government authorities cannot deprive you of your life, your liberty or your property without following strict legal codes of conduct. Unfortunately, those protections—especially as they apply to Muslim-Americans—have been largely extinguished in the wake of 9/11.

The Sixth Amendment was intended not only to ensure a “speedy and public trial,” but to prevent the government from keeping someone in jail for unspecified offenses. That too has been a casualty of the war on terror. Non-citizens suspected of connections to terrorists or terrorism can now be labeled as “enemy combatants” and be held indefinitely without charge, without a court hearing and without access to a lawyer. Not only have non-citizens been held in such a manner but so, too, were American citizens who were captured on American soil.

The Seventh Amendment guarantees citizens the right to a jury trial. However, when the populace has no idea of what’s in the Constitution, that inevitably translates to an ignorant jury incapable of distinguishing justice and the law from their own preconceived notions and fears.

The Eighth Amendment is supposed to protect the rights of the accused and forbid the use of cruel and unusual punishment. However, by sanctioning torture, including the use of waterboarding as a benign form of legalized torture, the Bush administration not only violated U.S. laws and virtually every international treaty against torture but raised the bar on what constitutes cruel and unusual punishment.

The Ninth Amendment provides that other rights not enumerated in the Constitution are nonetheless retained by the people. Popular sovereignty—the belief that the power to govern flows upward from the people rather than downward from the rulers—is clearly evident in this amendment. However, it has since been turned on its head by a centralized federal government that sees itself as supreme and which continues to pass more and more laws that restrict our freedoms under the pretext that it has an “important government interest” in doing so.

As for the Tenth Amendment’s reminder that the people and the states retain every authority that is not otherwise mentioned in the Constitution, that assurance of a system of government in which power is divided among local, state and national entities has long since been rendered moot by the centralized Washington, DC power elite—the president, Congress and the courts.

Sadly, when all the glibly patriotic gestures and jargon are stripped away, I’m not even sure Americans really want freedom. What they really want is to be left in peace with their shopping malls, flat-screen TVs, cell phones and mindless entertainment. After all, how many Americans during the course of a day—even when they see fellow citizens under attack—ever think about their rights? If they did, surely there would be more resistance.

Constitutional attorney and author John W. Whitehead is founder and president of The Rutherford Institute. He can be contacted at johnw@rutherford.org. Information about the Institute is available at www.rutherford.org.

Ohio Commerce Employees Repair Stuffed Toys for the Holidays

Manger Scene Toys Employees from the Ohio Department of Commerce’s Division of Industrial Compliance & Labor and other Commerce employees donated their lunch hour today to carefully repair more than 300 stuffed toys to be donated to children this holiday season.

“This is a wonderful tradition that gives us the opportunity to help brighten the holidays for children throughout Central Ohio,” said Commerce Director David Goodman.

The Division’s Bedding and Upholstered Furniture laboratory inspects filler material inside representative samples of stuffed toys to ensure they are safe and accurately labeled. Manufacturers send hundreds of items to the lab in Reynoldsburg each year where they are cut open by technicians to examine their contents. The technicians perform chemical and microscopic tests on hundreds of different types of fillers used in toys produced by manufacturers from around the world.

After inspection, the toys are set aside until the holidays when they are repaired by state employees who sew the incisions closed making them good as new. This is the 26th year of the event, named the “Norman DeHaas Annual Holiday Sewing Project” in memory of long-time Bedding Section supervisor Norman DeHaas, who was an advocate of the project and active in local charities.

The stuffed toys will be donated to several local charitable organizations, who will give them to needy children this holiday season.

[Note from the editor: One would think the above could be improved by replacing holiday(s) season with Christmas. Yet, there are three different holidays celebrated between Thankgiving and the New Year. They are Chanukah (Dec. 20-28; Christmas (Dec. 25), and Kwanzaa (Dec. 26-Jan.1). Gift giving is characteristic of all three tradistions. The term “holidays” may be religiously neutral language but this editor previous the founding American tradition of celebrating the birth of Christianity.]

New US “Right” to Family Planning Policy Hurts Trafficked Women

By Lisa Correnti and Wendy Wright

WASHINGTON, DC (C-FAM)   The same week U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton told a conference in Senegal that family planning is a “basic right,” the U. S. Congress was investigating the Obama administration’s rejection of a highly qualified group to receive a grant to help trafficking victims because it does not offer contraception and abortion. The grant was awarded instead to a group that “had no plan on how objectives would be met.”

The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) has established new criteria for anti-trafficking grants mandating that applicants offer full reproductive health services to victims, equating contraception and abortion with basic rights like food and shelter. HHS then denied a grant to an experienced, previously approved applicant, the U.S. Catholic Conference of Bishops (USCCB), because it did not provide contraception and abortion. The program has rescued more than 3,000 men, women and children trafficked to the U.S. for sex and labor trade in the past five years.

An HHS internal document obtained by Congressman Darrell Issa, Chairman of the Oversight Committee, revealed that the USCCB was recommended by objective evaluators to receive $2.5 million but was passed over by HHS in favor of two sub-standard applicants that would refer for abortion. Evaluators said one of the chosen programs lacked “detail on key program areas, had no plan on how objectives will be met and even lacked resumes for key staff, including the program director.”

In the same week, Secretary Clinton told a conference in Senegal that family planning is a “basic right.” Addressing the 2nd International Family Planning Conference, Clinton called for accelerating efforts “to ensure that all women have access to family planning and reproductive health care and services.” Dr. Babatunde Osotimehin, head of the United Nations Population Fund told attendees, “Family planning is oxygen—it is a right to get it.”

Beth Englander, who oversees the USCCB Anti-Trafficking Program, told the Friday Fax the vast majority of foreign-born victims in their program were labor-trafficked. “The program was intended to be a supplemental support for victims seeking help finding housing, food, clothing, and legal aid. In addition, female victims received treatment for routine OB-GYN care, to include STDs and physical injury.” Englander believes most sex-trafficked victims had access to contraception through various resources. “These arrangements would have been in existence prior to their rescue and entry into USCCB’s program and in the traffickers’ interests.”

Dr. Jeffrey Barrows, who works with recovered trafficked victims, says the new HHS policy could hurt trafficked women: “possible harm could occur if a very pro-abortion counseling approach were to be taken with a victim just out of a trafficking scenario who has not had adequate time to re-establish her autonomy.” Many trafficked victims experience traumatic dependency upon their abuser, known as Stockholm Syndrome.

“This dependence on others could be carried over into the aftercare stage where they almost prefer to have others tell them what they should do in certain situations without having adequately formed an opinion themselves,” Barrows told the Friday Fax.

Congressman Chris Smith, author of the Trafficking Victims Protection Act of 2000, expressed disgust with HHS’s actions. “Pernicious pro-abortion favoritism, embedded in this egregiously flawed process, does a grave disservice to the victims of trafficking.”

This article first appeared in the Friday Fax, an internet report published weekly by C-FAM (Catholic Family & Human Rights Institute), a New York and Washington DC-based research institute (http://www.c-fam.org/). This article appears with permission.

Post Office Manager Throws Christmas Carolers Out into the Cold

by JP Duffy
December 12, 2011

This Christmas season has been very memorable for me and my wife especially now that Audrey, our 2-year-old, is old enough to participate in festivities such as decorating the Christmas tree. Since Thanksgiving, Audrey has danced around the house singing “Jingle Bells” and humming the tunes of Christmas carols that she hears throughout the day. Last Saturday, Audrey almost had the opportunity to experience another Christmas tradition for the first time — caroling. The three of us stood in line along with dozens of other customers at the U.S. Post Office located in the Aspen Hill Shopping Center in Silver Spring, Maryland. We were preparing our packages when Audrey tugged on my sleeve, saying “Daddy, Daddy, look.” I turned to see a bright smile on her face as she pointed to a trio of Christmas carolers entering the post office who looked like they had stepped off the theatre stage of “A Christmas Carol.” The gentleman of the group wore a top hat and the ladies were arrayed with shawls and bonnets. Dickens would be proud. Everyone turned their attention to the carolers in anticipation of that annual tradition that we’ve all experienced.

They were only a few notes into their carol when suddenly, out of the corner of my eye I saw a scowling postal manager rushing to confront the carolers. He angrily told them that they had to leave immediately because they were “violating the post office’s policy against solicitation.” Everyone was momentarily frozen in astonishment before customers began booing the manager. Even in the face of protests from his customers, the manager wouldn’t back down.

The carolers explained that they were going to each business within the shopping center to sing a couple of carols — as they have done for many years. However, this was the first time that they had been turned away. The manager said he didn’t care and that they could take it up with the postmaster if they had a problem. “You can’t do this on government property,” he said. “You can’t go into Congress and sing” and so “you can’t do it here either,” he said smugly as the carolers turned sadly to leave. I encouraged them to file a complaint but they had little hope that a complaint would resolve anything and felt they had no choice but to acquiesce.

I later described the incident to a friend of mine who had worked for the post office for 26 years. He couldn’t imagine that there would be any policy that would prevent Christmas caroling at post offices. Indeed, a Google search will show examples of post office caroling during past Christmas seasons.

Over the last several years, we have watched militant secularists team up with federal bureaucrats in the effort to sterilize the public square of anything remotely connected to anything religious. This postal manager has clearly received the memo which has led him to stamp out Christmas caroling. But I have my own memo to all the Christmas carolers out there. Let’s not surrender to the secularist version of Christmas future. Let’s hold onto Christmases of past and do our part to pass that on to our children. As for me, I am taking at least one piece of advice from the postal manager and will send my own comment to the General Postmaster. The U.S. Constitution in no way prevents the government from accommodating Christmas caroling. I invite you to send your own memo (or email in this case) to pmgceo@usps.gov or call 1-800-275-8777.

Ben Franklin, the founder of the U.S. Post Office once said, “So shalt thou always live jollily; for a good conscience is a continual Christmas.” The U.S. Post Office and all of us would do well to heed Franklin’s advice.

Orginally published in the blog of the Family Research Council (FRCBlog.com) on December 12, 2011.

Ohio Heart Beat Bill Again Before the Senate

Ohio’s pro-life Heartbeat Bill (H.B.125) passed the Ohio House in June 2011. It is now in the Ohio Senate with the second hearing scheduled for Tuesday. Opponents of the bill want the part that legally would protect babies with detectable heartbeats removeed from the bill. They want to cut the heart out of the Heartbeat Bill–and make it an “informed consent” bill only–without any legal protection for the baby. Ohio is just a “heartbeat” away from saving 90% – 95% of babies from abortion, but the next two weeks are crucial to th passage of the bill.

That is why Citizens for Community Values asks all Ohio citizens to urge the Ohio Senate not only to pass the Heartbeat Bill by Christmas but also without “gutting” the bill before the coming floor vote.

For a directory of your senators, go here: http://www.ohiosenate.gov/directory.html

Key Senate leaders are:

+ Senate President Tom Niehaus (614) 466-8082
+ Senator Scott Oelslager (614) 466-0626
+ Senator Shannon Jones (614) 466-9737
+ Senator Keith Faber (614) 466-7584
+ Senator Peggy Lehner (614) 466-4538
+ Senator Troy Balderson (614) 466-8076
+ Senator Dave Burke (614) 466-8049
+ Senator Tom Patton (614) 466-8056
+ Senator Kris Jordan (614) 466-8086

The Right to Occupy–Making a Difference

The Rutherford Institute has come to the defense of several churches whose efforts to provide temporary thermal shelters for the homeless have allegedly been hindered by the Waynesboro Zoning Board. The Institute was asked to intervene in the matter after being alerted to the fact that the Zoning Board is erroneously interpreting its ordinances to require churches to apply for conditional use permits to provide temporary shelter to the homeless this winter, and is even excluding some churches from applying for permits at all. Institute attorneys have warned city officials that their actions are unconstitutional, in violation of the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act, and the Virginia Religious Freedom Restoration Act.

“Churches have a biblical mandate to care for the needy and downtrodden, and should be supported—not hindered—in their efforts to do so,” said John W. Whitehead, president of The Rutherford Institute. “With government budgets currently stressed beyond capacity, it is difficult to comprehend any logical reason that would justify the City of Waynesboro’s imposition of barriers for churches wishing to provide shelter for the homeless in their community.”

Pastor Howard Miller of the Waynesboro Mennonite Church and a collection of other Waynesboro area churches are working toward instituting a rotating thermal shelter for the homeless, called the Waynesboro Area Refuge Ministry, so that those in need of shelter this winter may take refuge inside existing church buildings. However, it appears that the City of Waynesboro’s Zoning Board has been erroneously interpreting its ordinances in such a way as to require churches to apply for conditional use permits to establish the temporary shelters, and has even excluded some churches from applying for permits at all.

Under Waynesboro’s city code, a church must apply for a permit if it wishes to perform some activity that would be considered a primary use, if the church has not already been permitted to do that activity. However, as Rutherford Institute attorneys point out, the city’s zoning ordinances do not prohibit mission work of the type Pastor Miller and his colleagues wish to undertake. In fact, as constitutional attorney John W. Whitehead notes, sheltering the homeless—particularly during the cold winter months—is an important historical function of Christian churches. Moreover, because this mission work to protect families and individuals from the elements is purely a function of religious exercise by devout individuals and groups in Waynesboro, any restriction on that work should be examined in light of the First Amendment’s Free Exercise Clause, and other federal and state laws that protect religious organizations.

Mitten Tree Provides Warmth for Those in Need This Winter

(XENIA, OH) — The Greene County Combined Health District has already put up a tree this year in hopes of getting a head start on the holiday season and the cold winter months to come. You see, this is no ordinary tree. It is the annual Mitten Tree decorated with mittens, hats, scarves and gloves for Greene County families in need.

The Mitten Tree project, now in its 26th year, was developed in 1985 by Elaine Hughes, Pediatric Nurse Practitioner with the Health District’s Well Child Clinic. Hughes had heard about the idea and recognized a need in Greene County for this service. The very first tree was a full size artificial one decorated with small, homemade felt mittens that clients could pick out and trade in for the real pair.

Over the years, thousands of mittens, gloves, hats and scarves have been donated to the tree from churches, schools, individuals, businesses, knitting guilds and other service organizations. To this day, monetary donations or actual items are still welcomed annually to decorate the now wooden tree that hangs on the wall just inside the main doors to the Health District. The Greene Community Health Foundation, the philanthropic arm of the Health District, manages all donations for this project.

If you are interested in supporting this project either monetarily or with a donation of hats, mittens, gloves or scarves, please contact Carol Sue Knox or Laurie Fox at 937-374-5600.

Rogue UN Officials Reprimanded by UN Member States

By Timothy Herrmann

NEW YORK (C-FAM) Delegations fought back again last week against the lack of accountability and transparency of independent experts at the United Nations. Pakistan led the charge, proposing an amendment that called for experts to “exercise their functions independently and in full observance of their respective mandates.” Forty-eight countries supported the amendment, all of them increasingly frustrated by the tendency of many of the appointed independent experts to overstep the boundaries of their mandates.

The most recent example of an independent expert going beyond their mandate is Anand Grover, the Special Rapporteur on the Right to Health who claimed in his report last month that abortion is an international right. Individuals like Grover are appointed for their expertise in a particular area of human rights, but when they show significant bias in their reporting or claim that their opinions have international legal force, that expertise is called into question.

Independent experts are appointed, not elected, and receive minimal oversight at the UN. As a result, the incentive for many to go rogue is becoming commonplace and notoriously difficult to moderate. In October of 2009, the Special Rapporteur on Counter Terrorism Martin Scheinin left the scope of his mandate on terrorism to define gender as a “social construction.” In November of 2010 (A/65/162) the former Special Rapporteur on the Right to Education, Vernor Muñoz, called into question the inviolable role of parents in the sexual education of their children. Given the frequency and controversial nature of these cases, Pakistan determined it as necessary to propose an amendment to remind delegations of the importance of independent experts remaining within their mandate.

For many countries, like Jamaica, the proposed amendment afforded a unique opportunity to speak out against the way their country in particular had been bullied by special rapporteurs in the past. The Jamaican delegate said a special rapporteur “publically accused” her of misrepresenting the views of her own country when reading a statement that was in fact prepared by her government. The Russian delegate also expressed support for the amendment, calling it an improvement to the resolution’s text.

Though member states can make formal complaints throughout the year about the questionable behavior of independent experts, the “persistent non-compliance of mandate holders” is only considered when their mandate comes up for renewal three years after appointment. Even then, the final decision on whether or not to extend the mandate of the special rapporteur is decided by the President of the Human Rights Council, not member states. In the case of some independent experts, like special representatives, only the Secretary General determines whether or not the expert in question is guilty of exceeding the boundaries of their mandate.

The opinion of these experts is neither binding on international law nor on the countries they criticize. Even when their opinions are referenced in a resolution, they maintain only the force of their personal opinion or of the internationally recognized norms that their opinions support. At the same time, many advocacy groups have attempted to use the independence of these experts in order to push their agenda at the UN. For Pakistan and many other countries, the time has come for this practice to end.

Timothy Herrmann is the UN Representative for the Catholic Family and Human Rights Institute. This article first appeared in the Friday Fax, an internet report published weekly by C-FAM, a New York and Washington DC-based research institute (http://www.c-fam.org/). This article appears with permission.

FBI Accused of Secretly Investigating Christian Street Preacher, Placing Him on Terrorist Watch List

WASHINGTON, D.C. — According to information provided to The Rutherford Institute, the FBI has been conducting a secret investigation into the associations and activities of a Christian street preacher and is believed to have added the preacher to its terrorist watch list. Inclusion on the FBI’s terrorist watch list, which is a secret list maintained by the government, can hamper one’s ability to travel and can result in heightened governmental surveillance. In a letter to FBI Director Robert Mueller, John W. Whitehead, president of The Rutherford Institute, called on the agency head to either cease the FBI’s investigation of Michael Marcavage, a street preacher well known for publicly exercising his First Amendment rights to free speech and religious expression, or make known the charges being made against him.

“Michael Marcavage deserves to know why he is under investigation and whether he has, in fact, been placed on the FBI’s terrorist watch list. However, if, as we suspect, Marcavage is guilty of nothing more than engaging in nonviolent religious speech which government officials perceive as controversial, then the government has clearly overstepped its constitutional bounds,” said John W. Whitehead, president of The Rutherford Institute. “This sort of secret investigation, which is antithetical to the principles of a free society, has a chilling and deleterious effect on the ability of all Americans to exercise their First Amendment right to free speech.”

Christian street preacher Michael Marcavage, the director of an evangelism ministry whose mission is the public proclamation of the Gospel, regularly travels the country preaching in traditional public forums, distributing Christian literature, and engaging passersby in discussions about the Christian faith. Marcavage recently learned that the FBI has been requesting “interviews” with his friends and associates in order to interrogate them about his activities. Subsequently, a reliable source informed Marcavage that he was the object of an FBI investigation and that his name had been added to the FBI’s terror watch list, the Terrorist Screening Database, based on his alleged affiliation with an anti-abortion group known as the “Army of God.” Inclusion on the terrorist watch list, which is a secret list maintained by the government, can hamper one’s ability to travel and can result in heightened governmental surveillance. Concerned that his placement on such a list could have a chilling effect on his expressive activities, Marcavage asked The Rutherford Institute to intervene on his behalf.

In his letter to Mueller, Whitehead points out that under Homeland Security Presidential Directive 6 (HSPD-6), in order to be placed on the terrorist watch list, an individual must be known to be a terrorist or must be reasonably suspected of being a terrorist. Moreover, Marcavage, who has devoted himself to peaceful advocacy and who has never been involved in terrorism nor associated with any terrorist organizations, including the so-called Army of God, does not meet the criteria laid out in Directive 6. Thus, Whitehead insists that the FBI make known the reasons why Marcavage has been placed under investigation, confirm or deny Marcavage’s presence on the FBI’s terrorist watch list, and if the concerns about him prove to be unfounded, as Marcavage insists they must be, or are related solely to Marcavage’s nonviolent speech activities, that his name be removed from the terrorist watch list immediately.

The Rutherford Institute, a nonprofit civil liberties organization, provides legal assistance at no charge to individuals whose constitutional rights have been threatened or violated.