Non Fluffy Wicca

Looky! It's LLYSSE!

mikki — 2008-10-28T14:37:56-05:00

People in the Middle for Obama. If you look under the words "debate" and "negative voter" you will see a woman in a yellow top wearing a CUEW pentacle. She is Llysse Lucas, our First Circle Coordinator. GO LLYSSE!

Trial judge finds Florida gay adoption ban unconstitutional

mikki — 2008-09-12T01:12:40-05:00

Trial judge finds Florida gay adoption ban unconstitutional:

[JURIST] A trial judge in Key West has found Florida's law preventing gay and lesbian people from adopting children to be unconstitutional and has issued an order permitting a foster parent to adopt a 13-year-old boy. Judge David J. Audlin Jr. of the Monroe County Circuit Court ruled that the 1977 statute violates both the US Constitution and the Florida Constitution because it acts as a bill of attainder intended "to repress gay Floridians as a group" and violates the separation of powers doctrine by precluding judicial discretion. As part of the 67-page final judgment of adoption, released Thursday, Audlin wrote: The Court finds the foregoing facts to be true: (a) The fact that Petitioner is a gay man is irrelevant to his skills as a parent and his fitness to adopt. Irrespective of Petitioner's sexual orientation, it is in the minor's best interest to be adopted by Petitioner, (b) Floridians who are gay or lesbian are not for that reason inherently incapable of parenting an adopted child, (c) In view of the less restrictive alternative safeguards that exist, there is no need for categorical disqualification of all gays and lesbians in Florida from adoption to ensure that no child is adopted by an inappropriate caregiver, and (d) After having listened to and read the legislative history surrounding the enactment of SB 354, the Court finds that there was no non-punitive purpose for categorically excluding every single gay and lesbian Floridian from adopting children. The adoptive father and his partner have cared for the boy, who has learning disabilities, since 2001. Because they have been the boy's permanent guardians since 2006, the Florida Department of Children & Families has taken no position in the case. The Florida Attorney General's Office has likewise declined to intervene, although Audlin's order allows the state to appeal. The Miami Herald has more. The Key West Citizen has local coverage.

The Florida statute has undergone previous constitutional challenges based on legal theories not at issue in the Key West case. The US Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit upheld it in 2005 as being rationally related to protecting children's interests, and the US Supreme Court declined to review that decision. Florida and Mississippi are the only US states which ban such adoptions, although the Arkansas secretary of state last month certified a ballot measure which would prohibit gays, lesbians and other unmarried cohabiting couples from becoming either foster or adoptive parents.

First Amendment May Be No Shield For Santeria Worshippers

mikki — 2008-09-06T23:25:26-05:00

First Amendment May Be No Shield For Santeria Worshippers:

Animal sacrifice for religious purposes may not be unconstitutional and may be protected by the First Amendment, but that doesn’t mean it’s a practice safe from laws aimed at preventing cruelty to animals. If the animal cruelty laws are not purposefully designed to suppress the religion known as Santeria or other religions where animal sacrifice is a ritual, then practitioners may still find themselves answerable to those laws.

For example, a situation noted on the Religion Clause Blog, Santeria worshippers are facing multiple charges over the improper treatment of animals in New York and New Jersey. Perez-Hernandez and his son Louis were charged with violating animal cruelty statutes because, according to a police investigation, the animals died from malnutrition. The two also face charges for unlawfully transporting more than 100 animals from a New Jersey farm without proper documents, the Lower Hudson Journal News reported. Authorities told the newspaper that the two were not being prosecuted because of their planned sacrifice of the animals in a religious ritual, but for violating Agriculture and Market laws that prohibit denying sustenance to the animals. In addition, the two were charged with subverting a town law against harboring farm animals in residential neighborhoods.

In 1993, the U.S. Supreme Court invalidated a number of animal cruelty and health safety ordinances in a Florida town on First Amendment grounds. Writing for the majority, Justice Anthony Kennedy said the laws were not neutral, but were instead aimed at suppressing the Santeria religion. The faith, originating in the 19th Century, “teaches that every individual has a destiny from God, a destiny fulfilled with the aid and energy of the orishas,” Kennedy wrote. A primary form, the high court noted, of nurturing a personal relationship with the orishas is to sacrifice animals, such as chickens, pigeons, doves, ducks, guinea pigs, goats, sheep and turtles.

Those Florida ordinances were invalidated, because the Court concluded they weren’t really aimed at protecting animals or addressing safety concerns, but were all about suppressing Santeria animal sacrifices. “We conclude, in sum, that each of Hialeah’s ordinances pursues the city’s governmental interests only against conduct motivated by religious belief,” Kennedy wrote for the majority in Church of Lukumi Babalu Aye v. City of Hialeah. “The ordinances ‘have every appearance of a prohibition that society is prepared to impose upon [Santeria worshippers], but not upon itself.”

Whether the Santeria worshippers in New York are exempt because of the First Amendment from the multiple animal cruelty and health ordinances has yet to be addressed. The Westchester Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals told the Journal News that religion was not the issue here. “Provide them [the animals] with the basics, even if you are to sacrifice them, is the proper way to do it,” Ken Ross, chief of the group’s law enforcement unit, said.

God Hates Phelps

mikki — 2008-09-06T23:08:41-05:00

God Hates Phelps:

United States: Westboro Baptist Church suffered a small fire, which destroyed a garage and a fence. Members of the church think it was deliberate, though we at Prattle Towers are of the opinion that it's because God hates them.

Small fire strikes Westboro Baptist—The Wichita Eagle, 2nd August 2008.

Psychic’s Donation Not Accepted

mikki — 2008-09-06T23:03:12-05:00

Psychic’s Donation Not Accepted:

By Jesse Froehling

Last year, when Alexandra Chauran sought to teach her students at the Kent Phoenix Academy about the benefits of composting, she turned to the King County Solid Waste Division for help. Chauran ended up using the agency's curriculum to help her students start a vegetable garden and donate the fruit—or in this case veggies—of their labors to a local food bank.

After that experience, Chauran says, she wanted to get involved with KCSWD's Waste Free Holiday program, which solicits small businesses to donate their services at a reduced rate to be distributed as gifts during the holidays, in the hope that grandmothers and other gift-givers will replace ugly sweaters with experiences that generate less trash. Chauran, who left the Kent School District after last year, sought to donate her skills as a tarot-card reader, a crystal-ball diviner, and a tea-leaf reader to the program. She was turned down.

"Thank you for your application," Megan Sety of the division's Recycling and Environmental Services department wrote to Chauran on Aug. 11. "However, we are not able to include offers of this type because of their controversial nature."

After Bibles seized, U.S. group won't leave Chinese airport - CNN.com

mikki — 2008-08-18T11:51:58-05:00

Try that in Iran.

After Bibles seized, U.S. group won't leave Chinese airport - CNN.com:

BEIJING, China (CNN) -- Four members of a Christian group from the United States are refusing to leave an airport in China after authorities confiscated their 300 Bibles, the group's director said Monday.

The four members of Vision Beyond Borders -- based in Sheridan, Wyoming -- arrived in the southwestern Chinese city of Kunming on Sunday. Customs officials discovered the Bibles during an X-ray scan of their luggage, said Pat Klein, director of the group, which supplies Bibles and other Christian material to people in China and other countries.

Under Chinese law, it is illegal to bring printed religious material into the country if it exceeds the amount for personal use. The group distributes the Bibles through a local shop owner in Kunming, according to Klein.

Klein said he's been bringing Bibles into China for 21 years and had no idea he was breaking Chinese law.

The group spent the night at the airport, and Chinese customs officials told them they had broken the law and repeatedly asked them to leave the airport, Klein said. He said the customs agents have not been antagonistic.

Don't Miss
China to deport five activists
Protesters, journalist detained in Beijing
China says Christians are free to worship in China -- as long as they worship in a church that registers with the government.

People in China can buy Bibles, but some members of underground or unregistered churches in China say Bibles are in short supply in some locations, especially rural areas, according to a 2007 report from the U.S. State Department.

The Report on International Religious Freedom warned that the distribution of religious publications in China is closely watched. All publication in China is controlled by the government, whether religious or otherwise.

"Customs officials continued to monitor for the 'smuggling' of Bibles and other religious material into the country," the report said. "Religious texts published without authorization, including Bibles and Qurans, may be confiscated."

President Bush criticized China's record on human rights and religious freedom in a speech he made before going to China for the opening ceremony of the Summer Olympics.

"I have spoken clearly, candidly and consistently with China's leaders about our deep concerns over religious freedom and human rights," he said. "And I have met repeatedly with Chinese dissidents and religious believers. The United States believes the people of China deserve the fundamental liberty that is the natural right of all human beings."

Qin Gang, a spokesman for the Chinese Foreign Ministry, brushed aside Bush's criticism.

"We firmly oppose any statements or deeds which use human rights, religion and other issues to interfere with the internal affairs of other countries," he said.

He said China "keeps to the concept of putting people's interest first and is devoted to maintaining and promoting basic rights and freedom of its citizens.

"Chinese citizens enjoy freedom of religion in accordance with the law."

While in China, Bush worshipped at a church that operates with government permission. That drew criticism from Amnesty International and other advocates of religious freedom, who said that Bush was endorsing the Chinese government's regulation of churches.

Klein, meanwhile, said his group members won't leave until their Bibles are returned.

"We're being inconvenienced a little, but it's nothing compared to what our brothers and sisters in China experience for their faith in Jesus Christ," Klein said.

Canada tells Phelps to bugger off, too. - Pagan Prattle

mikki — 2008-08-11T12:24:32-05:00

Canada tells Phelps to bugger off, too.:

Canada: Canadian border guards have been told that Westboro Baptist Church members are not welcome, and are to be turned away should they try to enter Canada.

Public Safety Minister Stockwell Day's office sent an alert to border patrol to look out for people with signs and pamphlets consistent with the messages that the church promotes and to keep them out of the country, Winnipeg MP Pat Martin told CBC News on Friday.

Entering Canada by a U.S. citizen isn't an absolute right, and if you're coming here only to disrupt the social order and to promote what we consider to be bordering on hate crimes or hate language, they shouldn't come into Canada, Martin said.

We're not going to allow these people to compound the tragedy of the McLean family loss, and Canadians simply won't tolerate these lunatics disrupting what should be a respectful service.

Border guards to turn away church group aiming to picket bus victim's funeral—CBC News, 8th August 2008.

Equality: you're doing it wrong

mikki — 2008-08-03T12:02:49-05:00

Equality: you're doing it wrong:

England: Birmingham council appear to have failed to have paid any attention to the requirements of the law on religious discrimination when they decided to censor the internet for their employees.

The authority's Bluecoat Software computer system allows staff to look at websites relating to Christianity, Islam, Hinduism and other religions but blocks sites to do with witchcraft or Satanism and occult practices, atheistic views, voodoo rituals or any other form of mysticism.

Under the Employment Equality (Religion or Belief) Regulations 2003, it is unlawful to discriminate against workers because of their religion or belief, which includes atheism.

One also wonders what Birmingham's social workers are expected to do if they have, for example, a Wiccan client, and they need to learn more about that faith in order to deal with them fairly? Perhaps they are expected to dig out those fundie dossiers from the late 80s' Satanic panic?

Council ban on atheist websites—BBC News, 29th July 2008.

Is this inciting terrorism?

mikki — 2008-08-03T12:02:07-05:00

Is this inciting terrorism?:

Cheryl has noticed an interesting OpEd piece in the Mormon Times, in which science fiction writer Orson Scott Card calls for terrorism against any government which allows same-sex marriage.

I will act to destroy that government and bring it down, so it can be replaced with a government that will respect and support marriage, and help me raise my children in a society where they will expect to marry in their turn.

As Cheryl comments, [p]resumably the Department of Homeland Security will be taking note, but it brings two questions to mind. Firstly, how is ensuring his children can marry regardless of the sex of their beloved stopping them from doing so? And doesn't Mormonism historically have a definition of marriage which is ever so slightly different from the one which inspires Card's violent thoughts?

A Call for Revolution—Cheryl's Mewsings, 29th July 2008, citing State job is not to redefine marriage—Mormon Times, 24th July 2008.

Unclear on the concept.

mikki — 2008-08-03T12:01:25-05:00

Unclear on the concept.:

England: A festival promoting religious tolerance has been cancelled because members of one religion objected to the presence of members of others. The Laxfield Festival of Tolerance honoured the life of a local Protestant executed during the reign of Queen Mary, and the legendary reaction of the villagers.

John Noyes, a Laxfield shoemaker, was burnt to death on 22 September 1557, one of 34 executed in the county for his religious beliefs.

Legend has it that almost all the villagers disagreed with his death sentence and tried to put out their fires to stop his execution.

The festival was started three years ago in a bid to remember the execution and spread the message of religious tolerance.

The message flew right over the heads of some, though.

One villager explained his opposition to the festival. He said: I felt there was a drift towards the darker side of things, such as people selling five-pointed stars and other symbols of witchcraft. It didn't uphold the values I see in life.

Just one sentence which demonstrates the need for the festival.

"Intolerant" villagers stop "tolerance" festival —The Daily Telegraph, 30th July 2008.

Fortuneteller suing to overturn Montgomery ban on forecasting - Examiner.com

mikki — 2008-07-24T18:55:05-05:00

Fortuneteller suing to overturn Montgomery ban on forecasting - Examiner.com:

WASHINGTON (Map, News) - A fortuneteller is suing Montgomery County after he learned he would not be allowed to open a shop in Bethesda because the county bans the business of forecasting the future.

Attorneys for Nick Nefedro, previously of Key West, Fla., say county officials violated his First Amendment rights to free speech and discriminated against his “Roma,” or Gypsy, culture when they refused to give him a business license. Montgomery code dating back to the early 1950s prohibits collecting cash for predicting the future.

“The underlying purpose is to prevent people from being taken advantage of, because it’s a scam,” Clifford Royalty, a lawyer in the Montgomery County State’s Attorney’s Office, said.

In the Washington suburbs, however, Montgomery County is on its own — all other counties contacted by The Examiner allow fortunetellers to operate. The District does not even require a business license, but most other counties ask fortune-tellers to follow the same regulatory practices as other service providers.

Nefedro’s attorney Ed Amourgis said the county must show there “is a need for protection” rather than simply putting a “blanket ban” over the whole industry.

“This legislation, this policy is focused really on the Gypsies,” Amourgis said. “How is what he’s doing different than running a horoscope? Who are they to say that is not fraudulent but my client is?”

Montgomery County Council members met behind closed doors last week to discuss the lawsuit.

Council Members Nancy Floreen and Marc Elrich, who both sit on the economic development committee, said there did not seem to be support for repealing the measure.

“There are a lot more important things for us to worry about,” Floreen said. Elrich said the county should not encourage businesses “that take advantage of people.”

The penalty for fortunetelling in the county is a $250 fine.

A federal judge upheld a similar ban in Harford County in 2002, deferring to the county’s assessment of fortunetelling as “inherently deceptive” and citing a 1976 Supreme Court decision, albeit not in a fortunetelling case, that said “untruthful speech” is not protected.

Arthur Spitzer, legal director for the American Civil Liberties Union of the National Capital Area, said Nefedro had a “good case” and that very recent challenges to similar measures across the country have succeeded in overturning bans.

“Many churches say, if you do this you can reach the hereafter, if you don’t you’ll go to hell,” Spitzer said. “If that’s not predicting the future, what is?”

Marriage, church and state. Charles Haynes.

mikki — 2008-07-24T18:53:23-05:00

firstamendmentcenter.org: commentary:

Suddenly this summer, the reality of same-sex couples lining up to get married in California has led some religious leaders to rethink their government role.

In a letter last month, Bishop Marc Handley Andrus of the Episcopal Diocese of California directed his clergy to “encourage all couples, regardless of orientation, to follow the pattern of first being married in a secular service and then being blessed in The Episcopal Church.”

The bishop’s missive illustrates what a tangled web we have woven when clergy intone “by the power invested in me by the state.”

Because the Episcopal Church doesn’t sanction same-sex marriage — but gives the option of blessing the union — the bishop appears to be seeking a way to bless all couples while distancing the church from legal arrangements sanctioned by the state.

“There are a lot of benefits in getting out of the legal marriage business,” the Very Rev. Brian Baker told The Sacramento (Calif.) Bee in reaction to the bishop’s letter. “This way the clergy and the couple can focus on the spiritual blessings the church has to offer and not the political stuff.”

On the theological flip side, many conservative clergy worry that as agents of the state they will be pressured to perform same-sex marriages — or, in some other way, coerced into recognizing same-sex relationships in contradiction of church doctrine.

Maybe the bishop is on the right track: Separate secular from sacred by drawing a bright line between civil arrangements and the sacrament of marriage. Each state would limit itself to defining marriage as civil benefits for committed couples (as mandated by state law) — and each religious group would be free to define marriage according to the tenets of its faith.

The practice of dubbing clergy agents of the state is a vestige of history in Europe and some American Colonies when the established church determined who could be married. Disestablishment in America ended church monopoly over marriage — but left in place the dual role of clergy as religious leaders and state actors in the marriage arena.

Ending this church-state entanglement wouldn’t end the gay-marriage debate. But it might serve to reframe the issue by focusing on civic arguments for and against extending government benefits to same-sex couples. In my view, it isn’t the business of government to preserve the “sanctity of marriage.” Nor is it the business of government to dictate the meaning of marriage to any religious community.

At the same time, no religious group should be allowed to impose a religious definition of marriage on the rest of society. Various faiths in the United States define the sacrament of marriage in various ways. The establishment clause of the First Amendment should bar government officials from making public policy solely on the basis of a theological conviction about what constitutes “marriage.”

Of course, even if Americans agreed to separate civil and religious marriage, the patchwork of state solutions to the marriage conundrum would persist for some time.

Where civil same-sex marriage is prohibited, sacred ceremonies by religious groups that support gay marriage would still receive no legal recognition. And where same-sex marriage or civil unions are legal, those civil arrangements would still not be recognized by religious groups opposed to gay marriage. But at least decisions about civil arrangements in marriage would be determined without church dictating to state — and without state interfering with the religious freedom of churches, synagogues, mosques or temples.

When I first floated this idea four years ago (on the cusp of the Massachusetts decision legalizing gay marriage), I thought the cleanest break would be to call state arrangements “civil unions” and religious ceremonies “marriage.” Now I’m not so sure that’s workable.

Removing the much-contested term “marriage” from the same-sex marriage debate would have obvious political advantages. But it might not go down well with the millions of religiously unaffiliated or nonreligious Americans who are likely to prefer being “married” to “civil unioned.”

It’s probably best to stay with “marriage,” but separate the civil from the religious by ending the role of clergy as agents of government. After all, for people of faith, marriage in a house of worship should be by the power invested by God — not by the state.

Charles C. Haynes is senior scholar at the First Amendment Center, 555 Pennsylvania Ave., N.W., Washington, D.C. 20001. Web: firstamendmentcenter.org. E-mail: chaynes@freedomforum.org.

Australia to Phelps: bugger off!

mikki — 2008-07-21T21:47:34-05:00

Australia to Phelps: bugger off!:

Australia: According to a gay website, Australian authorities have refused visas to members of Westboro Baptist Church who planned to picket World Youth Day.

Shirley Phelps-Roper, spokesperson for Westboro, told Same Same, If your government would give us a visa we would be there, but they won’t!

I haven't seen this story anywhere else other than on this Australian gay site, but the Westboro Baptist Church did issue a press release on July 12th indicating their intent to go to Australia [PDF]. This reads:

WBC to picket Catholic World Youth Day Sydney, Australia, July 20

Yes, these Roman Catholic priests, bishops, cardinals – all the way up to the Pope – have got a lot of shameless nerve, luring hundreds of kids to a sodomite island thousands of miles away, in the middle of the Pacific Ocean, with their reputation of molesting kids! And what kind of idiots – escapees from the funny farm masquerading as parents – will let their kids go to Fantasy Island of the Fags, masquerading as a nation called Australia?

"GOD HATES AUSTRALIA" for criminalising gospel preaching about fags. Just to quote Leviticus 18:22, (Thou shalt not lie with mankind as with womankind; it is an abomination), will get you arrested in fag dominated Australia.

Now, the Phelps are US citizens, and could therefore go to Australia on an Electronic Travel Authority (Visitor) (Subclass 976), assuming picketing is considered to be tourism purposes (dubious at best). But they announced their intent 8 days before the event they planned to picket, and the Australian Department of Immigration and Citizenship recommends you are advised to apply for your ETA at least two (2) weeks before your proposed date of travel. They also note that there is a lot of demand for visas due to World Youth Day and suggest applying before June 1st! There are limitations with respect to criminal convictions, but the civil judgement against the church wouldn't fall foul of them. Perhaps the Australian authorities were concerned that they were trying to flee their financial obligations? Without any other sources, it's impossible to even guess.

Australia: A Fag Fantasy Island—Same Same, 18th July 2008; Walls close in on Phelpses—The Topeka Capital-Journal, 4th April 2008.

Yahweh doesn't have jurisdiction....

mikki — 2008-07-17T23:47:16-05:00

Four Claiming to Belong to Court Run by 'Yahweh' Indicted for Threats Against Judge:

Four Minnesota men who claim to belong to their own common law court where "Almighty Yahweh" has exclusive jurisdiction have been charged for allegedly trying to intimidate U.S. District Judge Ann Montgomery in an effort to stop her from holding a criminal trial. The men were trying to stop the April trial of Robert Bonine Beale, the former millionaire chief executive of Comtrol Corp., who was subsequently convicted by a jury on conspiracy and tax evasion charges.

Creationists get teacher fired - at college no less

mikki — 2008-07-17T16:01:27-05:00

firstamendmentcenter.org: news:

DES MOINES, Iowa — Southwestern Community College has reached a financial settlement with a professor who was fired after telling students the biblical story of Adam and Eve should not be taken literally.

Steve Bitterman taught world civilization at the Creston school. He was fired last September after students complained. Bitterman later sued for wrongful termination.

Patrick Smith, the school's lawyer, said the financial settlement should be completed this week. He did not disclose the amount of that settlement.

Bitterman's lawyer, Brad Schroeder, says academic freedom should have outweighed religious concerns.

"What was for him a purely objective, academic exercise in studying the religious beliefs of different Western civilizations became a group of fundamentalist students taking exception when it came time for their God to be put under the microscope," Schroeder said today.

Bitterman's case received widespread attention. He garnered support from the American Humanist Association, which says that people who eschew organized religion can lead ethical lives and contribute to the greater good.

Bitterman taught on the USS Dwight D. Eisenhower in Norfolk, Va., this summer through Central Texas College's Instructor At Sea program for sailors. He said he used the same textbook from his previous classes. Bitterman is scheduled to join the ship again in the Persian Gulf, but has also applied to work at other community colleges.