••۞₣ĄŦĦΣŔ'§◦۩◦}{ØûڴΣ۞••

A leading health economist says President Obama delivered a subtle and unpleasant message to the American Medical Association yesterday, implying that doctors are the main problem behind rising healthcare costs.

Barack Obama cited in his AMA speech what he argues are radical differences in the practice of medicine across the country -- some doctors are practicing medicine conservatively, while others are ordering unnecessary tests and prescribing "treatments that, in some cases, can actually do people harm by raising the risk of infection or medical error." (Full text of speech)
 
Dr. John Goodman, president of the National Center for Policy Analysis, believes President Obama wants the federal government to force doctors to change the way they practice medicine.
 
"They are talking about a system parallel to the employer-based health insurance system," he explains. "So if you don't get insurance from an employer, you go into this artificial market that would be regulated and controlled by the government.
 
"You would have choices in this market," he continues, "and the left-wing of the Democratic Party wants one of the choices to be a government-run health insurance plan -- by which they generally mean Medicare for young people."
 
Goodman says Obama's plan would push doctor and hospital fees and premiums so low that an estimated 120 million Americans would drop their private health insurance plan for the government program.
 
As to the president's implication that physicians themselves are part of the problem, Goodman argues that both doctors and patients are victims of the system.
 
"Doctors are not the problem," he states. "It's a lack of a competitive marketplace that's the problem. Doctors are just as much a victim as patients. We are all trapped in a dysfunctional healthcare system [that is] shaped and molded by bad government policy." Goodman's blog on health policy encourages individuals to sign an online "Free Our Health Care NOW!" petition.
 
Many in the AMA audience booed President Obama when he said is against limiting malpractice awards, which is the group's highest legislative priority.

http://www.onenewsnow.com/Politics/Default.aspx?id=568898

NEW YORK - Donald Trump says Carrie Prejean can retain her crown as Miss California USA.

Trump, who owns the Miss USA pageant, made the announcement Tuesday at Trump Tower in New York City.

Prejean failed to reveal before last month's Miss USA pageant that she had posed in her underwear as a teenager. She said her friend took the controversial photos when she first entered the modeling industry. They were "intended for application rather than publication," she explained. Trump says the pageant has determined the photos are "fine."

The 21-year-old San Diego native created controversy during the Miss USA pageant when she said she believes marriage should only be between a man and a woman.

Prejean spoke today following Trump's announcement.

"On April 19, on that stage, I exercised my freedom of speech -- and I was punished for doing so," she said. "This should not happen in America. It undermines the constitutional rights for which my grandfather fought for [sic]."

"My faith commands us to forgive one another. This means anyone who has made malicious, slanderous, or untrue allegations about me," she added. "And I willingly forgive them before all of you today."

With Prejean at his side, Trump also defended the answer she gave at last month's Miss USA pageant when asked for her views on same-sex "marriage." Prejean said she believes marriage should be between a man and a woman. Trump says that's "the same answer the president of the United States gave" and reflects the views of "many people." He says Prejean "gave an honorable answer" that came "from her heart."

For her part, Prejean accused judge and celebrity blogger Perez Hilton of asking a "politically charged question with a hidden personal agenda." She says she stated her "honest belief."

Video: Carrie Prejean speaks

http://www.onenewsnow.com/Culture/Default.aspx?id=526394

© Mark Humphrey/AP

Carrie Prejean

LOS ANGELES (AP) -- Miss California USA Carrie Prejean, who stirred up trouble for herself when she said gays shouldn't be allowed to marry, got the word from pageant poobah Donald Trump on Wednesday: "You're fired."

Trump and other pageant leaders said Prejean was being sacked not because of the remarks but because she hadn't been holding up her end of the agreement she signed when she entered the pageant.

"This was a decision based solely on contract violations, including Ms. Prejean's unwillingness to make appearances on behalf of the Miss California USA organization," the California pageant's executive director, Keith Lewis, said in a statement.

He had complained at a news conference last month that Prejean was skipping Miss California USA events while speaking out against gay marriage at unsanctioned appearances.

After the complaints reached Trump, who owns Miss California USA's parent organization, the mogul decided to give her a second chance and keep her on. On Thursday, he changed his mind.

"I told Carrie she needed to get back to work and honor her contract with the Miss California USA Organization and I gave her the opportunity to do so," Trump said in a statement. "Unfortunately it just doesn't look like it is going to happen."

Pageant officials said Prejean would be replaced by the Miss California pageant's first runner-up, Tami Farrell, 24.

"Carrie is a beautiful young woman and I wish her well as she pursues her other interests," Trump said.

A representative for Prejean, 22, did not immediately return a call for comment.

During the Miss USA competition, Prejean was first runner-up after answering a judge's question about gay marriage by saying wedding vows should be reserved for men and women.

"No offense to anybody out there, but that's how I was raised," she said.

After the response drew heavy criticism she began speaking to crowds opposed to gay marriage, violating a section of her contract that required she clear unsanctioned appearances with pageant officials. About the same time, seminude photos of her began to surface on the Internet.

Although the photos were mild, pageant officials said she also violated her contract by not disclosing their existence to them.

When Trump initially decided to keep Prejean on, Lewis' co-executive director, former Miss USA Shanna Moakler resigned in protest.

http://tv.msn.com/tv/article.aspx?news=413756&GT1=28103

Donald E. Wildmon Founder and Chairman

A vote is looming this week in Congress on a bill that one conservative activist warns would not only silence Christian opposition to homosexuality, but also would legitimize deviant forms of "sexual orientation."

A markup vote is expected Wednesday in the House Judiciary Committee on the Local Law Enforcement and Hate Crimes Prevention Act of 2009.  House Democrats only have to give 24 hours' notice before the vote.  The measure (H.R. 1913) sponsored by Representatives John Conyers (D-Michigan) and Mark Kirk (R-Illinois) would add homosexuals and transgender people to the list of classes federally protected from so-called "hate crimes."

Story continues below ...

What do you think is the primary motive of those who

push for 'hate crimes' laws?

Vote in our poll

Andrea Lafferty, executive director of the Traditional Values Coalition, says the bill is a serious threat to religious freedom.
 
"Your pastor could be prosecuted for conspiracy to commit a hate crime if it passes and become law," she warns. "This so-called 'hate crimes' bill will be used to lay the legal foundation and framework to investigate, prosecute, and persecute pastors, business owners, Bible teachers, Sunday School teachers, youth pastors -- you name it -- or anyone else whose actions are based upon and reflect the truth found in the Bible."
 
TVC says H.R. 1913 broadly defines "intimidation" -- and offers up this example: "A pastor's sermon could be considered 'hate speech' under this legislation if heard by an individual who then acts aggressively against persons based on 'sexual orientation.'" Under those circumstances, says the group, the pastor could be prosecuted for "conspiracy to commit a hate crime."
 
The legislation has another "serious problem," the pro-family group says, because Congress has failed to define the term "sexual orientation." Consequently, says TVC, 30 sexual orientations (as defined by the American Psychiatric Association) will "arguably be protected" under the legislation. "Those 30 sexual orientations include behaviors that are felonies or misdemeanors in most states or can result in death," notes the group's website.
 
In addition, TVC argues the bill is based on a fraudulent premise: that there is an epidemic of so-called "hate crimes" against "lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender" persons that needs federal involvement for local law enforcement officials.
 
Lafferty says unless Christians in America act, the hate crimes bill could be on President Obama's desk in three to four weeks at the most.

‘I won’t’ before ‘I do’
Unique programs make critical connection between abstinence and healthy marriages

 By Rebecca Grace - AFA Journal, April 2009

   Whoever thought of teaching abstinence as the positive means to a desired end? Scott Phelps, executive director of the Abstinence and Marriage Education Partnership (A&M Partnership) did.
  That’s why he leads an organization that “exists to ensure that every teenager in the country has the opportunity to hear a clearly reasoned, positive presentation on the benefits of abstinence until marriage and practical instruction on preparing for a healthy future marriage.”
  Research concludes that 9 in 10 high school students believe it’s important to have a good marriage and family life, but they are skeptical of marriage due to the culture’s negative view of this sacred institution and the absence of healthy marriage models.
  According to a study by Dr. W. Bradford Wilcox titled “A Scientific Review of Abstinence and Abstinence Programs,” “ … the erosion of the norm of premarital sexual abstinence, both in belief and behavior, appears to have played an important role in the weakening of American family life and, in turn, some of the nation’s most pressing social problems.”  
  Therefore, A&M Partnership functions to teach abstinence in tandem with marriage.
  “Restoring the institution of marriage begins by intentionally teaching teens that abstinence is one of the best ways to prepare for a healthy future marriage,” as stated in the partnership’s brochure.
  Below, Phelps talks more about A&M Partnership.

AFA Journal: Tell me about Project Reality and A&M Partnership.
Scott Phelps: Project Reality started in 1985 and was one of the first national abstinence movements to start providing abstinence education programs for public schools. I worked for Project Reality for five years, from 1999 to 2004. Then in 2004, I started A&M Partnership. In January 2009, Project Reality merged with A&M Partnership. Now we provide curricula to schools all around the country in all 50 states, and we’re one of the leading providers of abstinence education program materials.

AFAJ: Tell me about the curricula.
SP: The first curriculum project I worked on was authoring the book titled A.C. Green’s Game Plan. Then I followed with another book called Navigator; then we did the Excel program, the Aspire program, and now coming out in March is the Quest program. Excel is for churches and Christian schools. The others are for public schools.

AFAJ: So most of your work is in public schools?
SP: Yes. A lot of public schools are teaching kids things that are contrary to many parents’ values and beliefs. We offer schools an alternative program to teaching contraception. We teach kids the benefits of waiting until they’re married to have sex. Teaching kids about abstinence and marriage needs to be taught in tandem. It’s not enough just to talk to them about abstinence. So our goal is to give them good scientific objective information on the tangible benefits of marriage.

AFAJ: Is your message welcomed in public schools?
SP: There are some schools that don’t want us in, and they don’t have us. The schools that we are in are schools that want to have us. There are schools all over the country that are very eager to teach programs like this. But because we’re in public schools, we can’t go in with a Christian message. We can go in with a clear health message that abstinence from all sexual activity outside of marriage is the safest, healthiest choice they can make and the best way to reach their future goals and dreams. But all truth is God’s truth.

AFAJ: Highlight some of the main points from the curricula.
SP: We start off with goal setting. Then we talk about media influences, relationship skills and marriage.

AFAJ: What makes up the curricula?
SP: An 88-page workbook with different classroom activities, illustrations and role plays. Some have some PowerPoints, and some video material. They vary, but the whole point of each curriculum is to engage the kids and give teachers a tool that will allow for a really healthy interactive discussion that’s objectively based.

AFAJ: What is the target age?
SP:  Middle school and high school.

AFAJ: About how long does it take to complete a program?
SP: A typical abstinence course is going to be delivered as part of a health education curriculum. A 9th- or 10th-grader is going to have a health class for one semester, and part of that health class might be 5, 10, or 15 class periods dedicated to the subject of abstinence. All of our curricula are eight chapters long, so our programs are designed to be 8 to 16 days – one or two classes per chapter.

AFAJ: What is your response to studies that claim abstinence programs don’t work and should not be funded?
SP: If something isn’t working well, you don’t stop doing it; you do more of it, and you try to do it better. For example, if students aren’t getting good reading scores, you don’t stop teaching reading in schools. You do more. So when people say that abstinence programs don’t work – even if it were true, which it is not – the conclusion wouldn’t be to stop teaching abstinence. You need to teach more of it, and you need to do it better.

AFAJ: Do you see more genuine commitments to abstinence the longer students are exposed to the material?
SP:  What we do see is the more access we have to the kids, the more time we have to communicate the message to them, the more likely they are to embrace it. But I’m not taking anything away from one-time abstinence events because those are valuable in and of themselves. Our kids are living in a world filled with lies. When they hear a good speaker who gives a very clear, crisp message on the benefits of waiting until marriage it can really make a difference in their lives because it’s such a sharp contrast to what they’re normally hearing. But if you’re going to give me 8 or 10 more weeks to help them understand not only the “why” but the “how” behind it, that can only improve their receptivity to the message.

AFAJ: So how do you teach abstinence?
SP: Abstinence needs to be communicated as the positive message that it is. Abstinence tends to have a negative connotation, but it’s not a negative message. It’s a positive message about protecting your future goals and dreams. So if it’s presented in that way, kids will embrace it.

AFAJ: How can someone be trained to use your material?
SP:  We provide one- and two-day training seminars all over the country on what the abstinence message is and how to teach it effectively by walking participants through the materials and giving them ways to actively engage the students. We also have a series of “Restoring the Dream” conferences led by speakers such as Glenn Stanton, Maggie Gallagher and Rozario Slack. We’ve done these day-long seminars in nine different large cities on the importance of teaching marriage to teenagers

AFAJ: Who attends training seminars?
SP:  Schoolteachers – we have a lot of health teachers, physical education teachers, family and consumer sciences teachers. We have representatives from pregnancy care centers who come to learn how to counsel toward abstinence in their center as well as how to go into their local public middle schools and high schools and teach it. Then sometimes we’ll have youth pastors and parents come. But mainly our audience is schoolteachers and speakers who go into schools.

AFAJ: What immediate goals does A&M Partnership have?
SP:  Our greatest challenge right now is to get our programs to be more widely used in churches and Christian schools. We have more acceptance and much wider distribution in public schools than we do in Christian schools. Part of it is they don’t know about us. But part of it is they feel, in some cases, they are already covering abstinence. And a lot of abstinence programs that have been designed for public school use aren’t always appropriate for a church or Christian school. So what we’ve tried to do with our Excel program is specifically tailor a program to the church and Christian school. It’s a Bible study based on the life of Joseph.

AFAJ: How can our readers help?
SP: We’re a non-profit organization, so donations are very much a need of ours. But having your readers become aware of our programs and telling their local Christian schools, public schools and churches about our programs would be really helpful. For more information, they can go to our Web site, www.ampartnership.org, or call 877-290-9248.  

HELPFUL RESOURCES
• www.parentsfortruth.org

• www.abstinenceassociation.org


   202-248-5420

Updated 4/3/2009 12:45 PM

DES MOINES, Iowa - The Iowa Supreme Court says the state's same-sex "marriage" ban violates the constitutional rights of homosexual couples, making it the third state where same-sex marriage is legal.

In a unanimous ruling issued Friday, the court upheld a 2007 Polk County District Court judge's ruling that the law was unconstitutional.

The case stems from a 2005 lawsuit filed by Lambda Legal, a New York-based homosexula rights organization. The group filed a lawsuit on behalf of six homosexual Iowa couples who were denied marriage licenses. The suit named then-Polk County recorder and registrar Timothy Brien.

The Polk County attorney's office claimed that Hanson's ruling violated the separation of powers and the issue should be left to the Legislature.

Story continues below ...

Are you surprised that a state in America's heartland

has now legalized homosexual 'marriage'?

Vote in our poll

Douglas Napier, senior counsel with the Alliance Defense Fund, explains to OneNewsNow that the court overturned the state's Defense of Marriage Act. "The Iowa marriage law was simple, settled, and overwhelming supported by Iowans for 170 years in the history of Iowa," he notes. "There was simply no legitimate reason for this court to redefine marriage."

Napier asserts that the justices stepped out of their proper role of interpreting the law and have instead created new law. A recent poll, which compares to others, indicates 62 percent of Iowans are against homosexual marriage.

"And it's astounding the Supreme Court would usurp the role of the legislature, put a choke hold on the democratic process, and take that from the people of Iowa and claim to know better," the attorney exclaims. "They don't know better -- and the people of Iowa need to vote on a marriage amendment and put it in place and let the Supreme Court know that they can't speak for them."

Mat Staver, founder of Liberty Counsel and dean of Liberty University's Law School, had this reaction. "These activist judges are no more than proselytizing engines of social change," he offers. "That's not the role of a judge. They are to be umpires merely calling the balls or strikes. They don't rewrite the definition of marriage." And they do not go against the will of the people, he adds. (Listen to audio report)

Staver believes the legislature ought to vote to put the issue on a future ballot. "There is no question in my mind [they wil do that]," he states. "They will move forward with a constitutional amendment to overrule this ridiculous decision -- which frankly, in my view, is no law at all," the Christian attorney comments. "The judges in this case crossed the line. This is an example of the kind of judge that should never be on the bench."

At present, the staff of the Iowa Family Policy Council is lobbying state lawmakers to put the issue on a future ballot.

Bible as literature, history expands in public schools

 BY MARY FAULDS - AFA Journal, February 2009

   The United States Supreme Court outlawed devotional Bible reading in public schools in 1963, and in 1980 they barred the Ten Commandments.
  But did the founding fathers really intend for the Bible to be removed from our schools? Likely not, for according to a study done by the American Political Science Review, 94% of all the political documents of the Founding Era of our nation were based on the Bible, and of that, 34% of the contents were direct quotations from the Bible.
  With this inconsistency in mind, in 1993 a group of educators decided to attempt to bring the Bible back as a textbook for North Carolina public high school students. Elizabeth Ridenour, president and founder of the National Council on Bible Curriculum in Public Schools (NCBCPS), said the effort resulted in such a significant response from school districts outside the state that the NCBCPS was formed.
  Today, the NCBCPS Bible curriculum is being used in 475 school districts in 38 states across the country. That amounts to about 1,950 high schools and junior high schools and about 210,000 students have taken the elective Bible course at their school.
  Ridenour said the NCBCPS doesn’t approach school districts, but rather works with interested parents, teachers and others to promote the use of the Bible course for their local schools. Recently, television commercials featuring well-known figures such as actors Chuck Norris, Stephen Baldwin, and the late evangelist D. James Kennedy have resulted in an increase in the number of people visiting the NCBCPS website, www.bibleinschools.net.
  “So when our commercials air on TV or in print media or on radio,” Ridenour said, “the local citizens from their district call, if they’d like to get the curriculum. And we send them a package of information that offers a step-by-step guide on how to do that.” She said NCBCPS then helps with the official processes of bringing the curriculum to their schools. The strategy has been highly successful with 94% of school boards accepting the proposal.
  That’s not to say that obstacles aren’t encountered. Ridenour said occasionally a school board has had a decided bias against the curriculum. She said the ACLU has always been a detractor to putting the Bible course in schools. “The ACLU is always going to say boo,” she said. “They don’t like anything in the public arena that has to do with God, but they have not been able to slow it down at all.”
  Recently, the Alabama State Board of Education accepted the NCBCPS as the state’s official Bible curriculum. That means the state will pay for the materials for any school district that wants to teach an elective Bible course.
  According to Scott Beason, Alabama state senator, “Reports and studies released over the last few years indicate that leading high school English teachers, as well as university level literature professors, believe that students should possess a strong familiarity with the Bible in order to attain a well-rounded education. It is extremely difficult to understand Western thought including history, politics and social interaction without an understanding of the content of the Bible.”
  Ridenour agrees,  saying those who have taken the Bible course often come to realize the previous gap in their education. Parents have been so impressed by what their students are learning from the course, Ridenour said, that they find themselves engaged in the curriculum through homework.
  The course itself is a year-long study of the Bible and its ties to history. The first semester covers the Old Testament, including the patriarchs such as Abraham, Isaac and Jacob; the Levitical law; Moses and the Ten Commandments; the Psalms and Proverbs as literature.
  The second half of the year covers the New Testament. During that segment, the life of Christ is studied as well as the spread of the early church. Then the importance of the Bible in American history is explored along with the Bible’s impact on art.
  Ridenour said the interest in teaching the historical relevance of the Bible in public schools is increasing. Along with Alabama, Georgia has added the Bible curriculum to 46 school districts. To help expedite the availability of the teaching materials, NCBCPS will be offering an online curriculum in early spring.
  Ridenour summed up their goal: “We have seen what has happened since the Bible was removed from our schools in 1963. The Supreme Court and the national secretary of education have said that Bible curriculum in the public schools is legal. We need to move while the door is open.”

 For help with the process of winning the support of your school board for the NCBCPS curriculm, or to order the curriculum, call toll free 1-877-ONBIBLE (1-877-662-4253).

http://www.onenewsnow.com/Journal/editorial.aspx?id=401546

A six-year-old case involving Arizona school officials accused of wrongfully strip-searching a 13-year-old girl goes to the U.S. Supreme Court next month.

The youngster was accused by another student of bringing to school prescription-strength ibuprofen, so two female school employees conducted the strip search and found absolutely nothing. Savannah Redding says the search was both methodical and humiliating, and remains a highly emotional memory for her today. An attorney for the now 19-year-old Redding describes the incident as "the worst nightmare for any parent" who expects their child to be in class, not being forced to expose themselves to school officials.
 
The New York Times says the case will require Supreme Court justices to consider the "thorny question" of just how much leeway school officials should have in policing zero-tolerance policies for drugs and violence. Mat Staver of Liberty Counsel tells OneNewsNow the schools ought to have some degree of leeway.
 
"But the fact is, whenever they do these strip searches -- in this case to a 13-year-old in the eighth grade -- and literally do a very humiliating body-cavity search, or something akin to that, it seems to cross the line to go into areas where school officials should be regulated by the Constitution," he states.
 
A lower court -- the Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals -- ruled school officials had indeed violated the teenager's constitutional protection from unreasonable searches. Judge Kim Wardlaw, writing for the majority, stated: "It does not require a constitutional scholar to conclude that a nude search of a 13-year-old child is an invasion of constitutional rights."
 
Staver points out such rights apply even on the school campus. "You don't lose your constitutional rights when you walk [through] the schoolhouse gate," the attorney explains, "although some of those rights may not have as strong of an application in school because of the realities of having to run and operate a school and the necessity for school discipline."
 
The Liberty Counsel spokesman suggests other approaches be taken. One suggestion he makes is to conduct the search only in the presence of a parent or guardian.
 
The Supreme Court will hear arguments in Safford Unified School District v. Redding on April 21.

 http://www.onenewsnow.com/Legal/Default.aspx?id=466692