Tag Archives: humanist vs natural values

Hungary Defies Critics With New Family Law

By Susan Yoshihara, Ph.D.

(New York – C-FAM) Hungarian leaders have passed a law protecting the traditional family, defying ongoing criticism that their new constitution would curtail abortion and homosexuality.

The new law says the family, based upon marriage of a man and a woman whose mission is fulfilled by raising children, is an “autonomous community…established before the emergence of law and the State” and that the State must respect it as a matter of national survival. It says “Embryonic and foetal life shall be entitled to protection and respect from the moment of conception,” and the state should encourage “homely circumstances” for child care. It obliges the media to respect marriage and parenting and assigns parents, rather than the State, primary responsibility for protecting the rights of the child. The law enumerates responsibilities for minors, including respect and care for elderly parents.

The purpose of the law is “to create a predictable and safe regulatory environment for family protection and the promotion of family welfare, and to enforce the Fundamental Law,” the nation’s new constitution, which came into force on January 1st and was passed by a vote of 262-44 last April.

The Fundamental Law nullified Hungary’s communist-era constitution and dates its democracy from the revolution against the Soviet Union in 1956 and Soviet collapse in 1990. Hungary is the last Central European nation to pass a post-communist constitution.

The constitution calls for the protection of life from conception and bans torture, human trafficking, eugenics, and human cloning. It recognizes marriage as the “conjugal union of a man and a woman.”

Amnesty International said the article protecting life from conception could “undermine the rights of women and girls” that are “enshrined in several treaties signed and ratified by the Republic of Hungary such as the Convention on the Elimination of all Forms of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW), the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR) and the Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC).” The group said the article defining marriage “may pave the way to the introduction of an explicit ban on same-sex marriages which contravenes international and European anti-discrimination standards…enshrined by Article 23 of the ICCPR [the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights].”

Human Rights Watch likewise invoked UN human rights treaties in a letter urging Hungary’s president to “amend the constitution to ensure respect for women’s reproductive rights.” The human rights goliath expressed concern that the non-discrimination clause for “race, color, sex, disability, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, wealth, birth or any other circumstance whatsoever” excludes reference to sexual orientation or gender identity which they said was guaranteed in the ICCPR.

International legal experts have dismissed the claims of the human rights groups saying Hungary has the right to pass a constitution without interference. They point out that no UN treaty even mentions abortion, sexual orientation, or gender identity and that the UN General Assembly has never accepted such redefinitions.

European legal expert Roger Kiska sees the new Hungarian laws as part of a growing trend among European states to push back at such interpretations and protect human life and the family. Former US ambassador to Hungary Mark Palmer said the expulsion of Hungary from the EU is “now no longer unthinkable,” but Hungarian analyst Julia Lakatos downplayed the controversy, telling CSMonitor, “Much of the criticism from abroad is exaggerated.”

Susan Yoshihara is Senior Vice President for Research at the Catholic Family & Human Rights Institute (C-FAM). 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.

Student Sues School District and Teacher After Being Punished for Expressing His Religious Beliefs

The Thomas More Law Center filed a federal lawsuit yesterday afternoon against the Howell Public School District located in Howell, Michigan, and teacher, Johnson (“Jay”) McDowell, for punishment and humiliation heaped on a student after he expressed his religious belief opposing homosexuality when asked by the teacher during class.

The student, Daniel Glowacki, a junior at Howell High at the time of the incident, was specifically asked by McDowell about his feelings on homosexuals. Daniel responded that as a Catholic he was offended by the gay and lesbian lifestyle. Because of his answer, Daniel was ordered to leave the classroom under threat of suspension.

As news of the incident spread, homosexual activists across the country hailed McDowell as a hero and vilified Daniel and his family, as “bigots”, referring to Daniel’s religious objections to the homosexual agenda as “hate” speech. McDowell is head of the school’s teachers union. The Michigan Education Association, the state teachers’ union, supported McDowell’s actions.

National lesbian TV host, Ellen DeGeneres got in on the anti-Glowacki campaign. Daniel even became the subject of a school assembly.

The incident occurred on October 20, 2010, the day that Daniel’s Economics class teacher, Jay McDowell, wore a purple “Tyler’s Army” t-shirt, as part of a national campaign promoted by the Gay and Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation to highlight alleged “bullying” of homosexuals.

Rather than teach academic courses that day, McDowell decided to spend the entire day promoting this national pro-homosexual agenda, which included showing his classes a video concerning such “bullying.”

Richard Thompson, President and Chief Counsel of TMLC, commented: “Rather than teach the required Economics curriculum for which he is paid, McDowell, with the full knowledge of school officials, used his position of authority to promote his homosexual agenda at taxpayer’s expense. This case points out the outrageous way in which homosexual activists have turned our public schools into indoctrination centers, and are seeking to eradicate all religious and moral opposition to their agenda.”

Thompson added, “It defies common sense for schools to ban all sorts of unhealthy foods while at the same time promoting the homosexual lifestyle, which hard statistics show increases drug abuse, suicides and reduces the life expectancies by several years. Schools that promote such lifestyles are engaging in a form of child abuse.”

The incident all started when McDowell ordered a student in his classroom to remove her confederate flag belt buckle because he was offended by it. Daniel pointed out the teacher’s obvious hypocrisy: the teacher can promote a message that might be offensive to students, but students can’t wear clothing that expresses a message that is offensive to the teacher.

In total disregard of his professional responsibilities as a teacher and the constitutional rights of his students, after ordering Daniel to leave the classroom, McDowell asked the remainder of the class whether anyone else did not accept homosexuality. A student raised his hand, and McDowell ordered him out of the classroom as well.

In this case, the teacher became the bully, and the students who opposed his homosexual agenda became his victims.

A 14-year old openly gay student who supported McDowell at subsequent school board meeting appeared on the “The Ellen DeGeneres Show” to discuss his speech. The student was rewarded with a $10,000 academic scholarship by a digital media company.

The Thomas More Law Center (TMLC), a national public interest law firm based in Ann Arbor, Michigan filed the lawsuit on behalf Sandra Glowacki and her son Daniel in the federal District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan. TMLC is representing the family at no charge.

The lawsuit claims that Daniel Glowacki’s constitutional rights to freedom of speech and equal protection have been violated by the policies and actions of the school district and McDowell. Among other things, the lawsuit seeks nominal damages, a declaration that the school policies and actions violate the Constitution, and injunction to prohibit further constitutional violations.

In cooperation with the NEA, the MEA, and the HEA, and in furtherance of the national agenda of the Gay & Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation (“GLAAD”), the School District permitted the celebration of “Spirit Day” at Howell High School on October 20, 2010. On Spirit Day, people who support the acceptance of homosexuality wear the color purple.

In fact, the School District permitted its teachers to sell purple t-shirts with the slogan “Tyler’s Army” to students and teachers to promote the 2010 Spirit Day. “Tyler’s Army” is a reference to Tyler Clementi who committed suicide after a video of him having sex with another male student in his dorm room was posted on the Internet.

Senior Trial Counsel, Robert Muise, handling the case, stated: “Homosexual activists, with the willing and complicit support of public school districts and teachers’ unions throughout the country, are using our public schools to foist their destructive agenda on our children, thereby creating a hostile learning environment for those students who oppose this agenda on religious and moral grounds. This case is just one example of the pernicious effect these activists are having on our students and in our community. We intend to stop it.”

The Howell School District and the Michigan Education Association (“MEA”), which is a subsidiary of the National Education Association (“NEA”), along with the Howell Education Association (“HEA”), which is a chapter of the MEA, have forged a symbiotic relationship and have worked with one another to adopt policies, that promote homosexuality as an acceptable lifestyle and to prohibit religious opposition to homosexuality. The school district has promoted the concept that religious opposition to homosexuality is equivalent to bullying, hate speech, and homophobia in order to eradicate such opposition.

Obama Elevates LGBT as U.S. Foreign Policy Priority

By Wendy Wright

(GENEVA – C-FAM)   All federal agencies dealing with U.S. diplomacy and foreign assistance must now promote lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) rights. This new priority puts U.S. foreign policy on a collision course with religious freedom.

U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton announced President Obama’s sweeping directive to UN diplomats in Geneva last week. Along with the full-force of the U.S. government, a Global Equality Fund will equip foreign LGBT groups to agitate within countries.

Every federal agency engaged overseas, and “other agencies as the President may designate,” is directed to “combat the criminalization of LGBT status or conduct abroad,” assist LGBT refugees and asylum seekers, leverage aid to advance LGBT nondiscrimination, respond swiftly to abuses of LGBT persons abroad, enlist international organizations “in the fight,” and report on progress.

A State Department official said, “We are not just having people . . . whose full-time job it is to occupy ourselves with concerns of human rights, but also people whose daily grind is, most of the time, spent on different things.”

This elevates LGBT above every other people group, including those persecuted for religious beliefs, promoting democracy and human rights, ethnic minorities, and women.

Asked by the Friday Fax if any other minority has this status, the State Department did not respond.

By one account, only nine countries do not discriminate in some way against LGBT individuals, such as donating blood or “higher age of consent laws.”

Obama’s directive comes as Nigeria debates a bill to protect marriage. The Catholic Medical Association of Nigeria denounced “the coordinated ferocity” by foreign governments and international groups “browbeating” legislators to adopt laws that are premised on “dubious science and ethical mischief.”

Reacting to Obama’s order, Oliver Kisaka with the National Council of Churches of Kenya told the CS Monitor, “God did not make a mistake; being gay is that person’s own perspective. Those who live as gays need help to live right and we should not be supporting them to live in a wrong reality.

“Society should reach out to gays and transgender people to help them out of their situation. They have not ceased to be God’s children and no one is a gone case.”

Clinton equated religious and cultural views on sexuality and gender identity with “violent practices toward women like honor killings, widow burning or female genital mutilation.”

Tina Ramirez of the Washington DC–based Becket Fund for Religious Liberty told the Friday Fax, “The Administration is sticking its head in the sand when it comes to the conflict between gay rights and religious freedom. The failure of either the President or the Secretary of State to articulate how the international LGBT rights initiative will interact with religious conscientious objection is a recipe for conflict between the two. No one disagrees with Secretary Clinton’s truism that religious freedom doesn’t protect religiously-motivated violence against anyone. But the real issue, that neither the President nor Secretary Clinton talked about, is what happens when the LGBT initiative conflicts with sincere conscientious objection. Religious liberty is a fundamental human right protected in the United States Constitution, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, and countless other human rights instruments; the Administration seems to be treating it as an afterthought.”

Wendy Wright is Managing Editor of FridayFax, 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.”

Men Using Women’s Fitting Rooms Appears to be a Common problem at Macy’s

(Orlando, FL) – Another Macy’s employee has contacted Liberty Counsel and shared about repeated issues with men using the women’s fitting rooms. This individual asked to remain anonymous out of fear of losing her job. The employee said she constantly has to ask men to leave the women’s fitting rooms. In addition, she has been asked numerous times by mothers who have daughters in the fitting rooms to please ask the men to leave the women’s dressing rooms.

With the Christmas shopping season in full swing, customers around the country are sending Macy’s a message that such a bizarre policy is not acceptable. One woman posted on Macy’s Facebook page that her family normally spends $2,000 at Macy’s and she is planning to boycott the store. Others are shredding their Macy’s credit cards and closing their accounts. The chorus of voices opposing Macy’s disturbing dressing room policy is growing louder as more troubling incidents are coming to light. The message will become increasingly clear that the majority of the American people are not in line with the radical Lesbian Gay Bisexual Transgender (“LGBT”) agenda.

This story of Macy’s LGBT policy which allows men to use the women’s fitting rooms came to light when Macy’s fired Natalie Johnson from its San Antonio store after she politely told a clearly identified man that he could not re-enter the women’s fitting rooms.

Mathew Staver, Founder and Chairman of Liberty Counsel said, “Macy’s policy that allows men to use the women’s fitting rooms makes no sense. This policy has put at risk every woman shopper who enters one of these rooms. While attempting to cater to a radical LGBT agenda, Macy’s has alienated almost the entirety of its customer base.”