While the American Civil Liberties Union is well known for attempts to prevent students from voluntarily praying at graduation ceremonies, it is now gone a step further in wants to ban the words  "invocation" and "benediction" from use in public school graduation ceremonies.

The ACLU has told the Lewisville Independent school district in Texas is unconstitutional to use the words benediction and invocation. The organization says the two words implied prayer and to use them as part of their commencement programs is a violation of the establishment clause.

In order to please the ACLU the district decided to label the invocation and benediction "student remarks." Hiram Sasser with the Liberty Institute says it is not necessary to remove the words.

“They're concerned about using the words 'invocation' and 'benediction.' There's nothing legally magical about using those words," he asserts. "They want to be able to use those words to describe the opening remarks and closing remarks, where students are allowed to pray and [are] certainly free to do so."

He went on to say the liberal group is wasting their time in their attempts to squelch prayer public school graduations.

"If the kids want to pray -- those who are participating and speaking at the graduation because they earned the right to do that in some way, either being the valedictorian, or student class president, or whatever the school prescribes -- then those kids can pray, if they so choose," the attorney contends. "And no government official can stop them."

Last year an agnostic at the school was able to get judge Fred Biery to issue an order prohibiting Angela Hildenbrand from public prayer during her graduation speech. The student, who was in the senior class argued he would suffer irreparable harm if prayers were spoken at the ceremony.

The fifth US circuit Court of Appeals intervened and allowed Hildenbrand to pray. Following their decision the student chose to not attend his graduation ceremony.

Liberty Institute attorney Erin Leu said Berry's actions violated federal and state laws. Leu said Hildenbrand was nearly telling students and parents about "her experiences and her wishes for the future -- and she is not a school official and not speaking on behalf of the school."

Share on Facebook

By Craig Masters

The following e-mail was distributed by the Loveland 9-12. It was titled, "Letter from Nancy Rumfelt regarding tonight's meeting." It is reprinted here to illustrate two very important points: 1) there are still people willing to step up and speak out against "closed door" meetings where taxpayers are forced to pay the bills after the deals are cut, and 2) the Thompson School Board must be forced to answer to those who pay the bills - not to those who receive it.

I did not include an attached spreadsheet mentioned, however, it can be read by visiting the Loveland 9-12 web site and requesting e-mails.

May 16th at 6pm at the Thompson School District Board of Education meeting (800 So Taft Ave) the newly negotiated Teacher's Union contract for FY2012-2013 will be voted on. The problem is that while the Board of Education (BOE) has discussed in great detail behind closed doors, the public has not been allowed to participate or ask questions.
The union contract is on the agenda as part of the Consent Agenda which means there will be no discussion as items on the consent agenda are generally those items that have been discussed and only need an up or down vote.

The recommendation is to pass the contract and also the compensation proposals which there are no details for and the proposed changes to the contract which were just posted this morning. So it would seem that BOE President Sharon Olson is taking a cue from Rep. Nancy Pelosi as the contract needs to be passed first and then we can find out all of wonderful things hidden within! Note: after the meeting is adjourned the BOE will then go into an executive meeting to discuss compensation once again behind closed doors.

We are still finding out all of the wonderful "gems" buried in the Patient Protection Act (Obamacare) - do we really want to do this with the union contract?

I ask all of you to please attend the BOE meeting tomorrow and during the public comment which is at the start of the meeting, to ask that the Memo of Understanding (union contract) be pulled from the consent agenda for a public discussion. Please spread the word to all that you know as to often the meeting is heavily skewed towards teachers and district employees.

I would also ask that if you speak to request the board to propose and adopt that the negotiations be made open to the public and Douglas County is a great example of this being possible.

I read through what I can of the 284 package that was posted this morning and below are some key points and questions:

1. While the district is looking to cut spending on textbooks, cut advanced placement classes, cut bus service for high school, assess instructional fees, etc., the wage freeze per the new contract is gone. The memo from Superintendent Ron Cabrera recommends that the MOU (memo of understanding) be approved along with the compensation proposal. The proposed compensation increases are nowhere to be found!! Why?

2. The contract was agreed to on May 8th and so why wasn't the public given more time to review the proposed changes?

3. Nowhere in the contract is there any mention of the employees needing to start sharing in the cost of their individual premiums for health insurance especially since there is an 8% increase which equals $720,000. How many textbooks would this purchase? How could this help with busing?

4. Early Release Wednesday is still here - now it is called "Collaboration Days". Maybe if this time was spent developing the students learning, the reading proficiency for 3rd graders might b higher than 77%!

5. Previously when a teacher served as president of the teacher's union the cost of the replacement teacher's salary was to be shared equally but was capped at step 3/column 3 of salary schedule A which is $33,851. The district had to pay the excess of salary over this plus 100% of all benefits. The district also had to pay 100% of the president's salary and benefits.

The new contract now is written so that TSD will pay for all of the replacement teacher's salary and benefits and the union will pay half of the president's salary at the rate of $39,969 and this will increase EVERY year through 2016. For the first year the union will reimburse $20,000 and by 2016 will be up to $30,00 but the salary will be at $61,509 per the current salary schedule.

This means that the taxpayer is paying the salary and benefits of the union president whose job is to negotiate the best benefits possible for the union members. Who is negotiating for the best education for our kids and for the best use of the taxpayer's money?

Here is the link to the packet and the union contract begins on page 245: contract

I have also attached a spreadsheet showing that since 2005 the district has spent LESS than budgeted and received more than budgeted and even the CFO has admitted that there is NO DEFICIT when you do not start the new budget using the deficit for a prior year that did not happen!

Even if you do not wish to speak please still attend and stand with Robert and I as we speak - this will help to show that the community is involved and expects true transparency from the district and the union. We must also show support for those board members who are making the kids priority number one!!

This is about our children's future which without a quality education is not possible!!

If you have any questions please don't hesitate to ( check the 9-12 web site ) email or call me.

In Liberty,

Nancy and Robert Rumfelt

Share on Facebook

DISH Network, an Englewood based leading pay-TV provider, is now offering more choices in family-friendly entertainment by adding G-Movies, the new faith friendly streaming movie service from GMC TV, to its on-demand programming lineup.

DISH subscribers with the exclusive "heartland package"or “Blockbuster @Home” service can stream inspirational titles from G –Movies directly from their television or mobile devices.

Available on-demand programming from G-Movies includes the bible-based animated series "Pahappahooey Island;" teen drama "Much Ado About Middle School" staring Bill Cobbs, Lee Meriwether and Amanda Waters; and the "Left Behind" series of dramatic movies starring Kirk Cameron and based on the New York Times bestselling books by Tim LaHaye and Jerry B. Jenkins.

DISH customers can now enjoy over 150 faith-friendly feature films, television se at ries and biblical documentaries from G-Movies using their mobile device or an Internet connected DISH receiver.

"DISH is leading the way with a growing lineup of networks and programs for households seeking value-based television," said Dave Shull, senior vice president of Programming at DISH. "G-Movies provides the best titles for families searching for entertainment that upholds their faith and values and offers uplifting programs every member of the household can enjoy."

"The ratings success of GMC's World Premiere Movies franchise has proven that there is a huge appetite for faith-driven films," said Charles Humbard, president and CEO of GMC TV. "With that in mind, we created G-Movies as an extension of the GMC brand. As we continue our commitment to expand production of our World Premiere Movies, G-Movies provides a win-win for our distributors and faith conscious consumers who enjoy this genre providing an opportunity for them to further enjoy quality, faith-friendly, family entertainment anywhere."

Humbard said following the ratings success GMC World Premiere Movies, the network has begun to present at least one new original movie every month, with 16 productions scheduled for 2013.

GMC TV is the only television network with every program certified as family safe by the Parents Television Council.

In addition to the on-demand programs from G-Movies, DISH's Heartland Package features seven family-entertainment networks, including, GMC TV, Hallmark Channel, Hallmark Movie Channel, PiXL, Baby TV, RURAL TV and RFD TV.

Share on Facebook

This week President Obama spoke on television that he believes that homosexual couples should be allowed to be married with all the rights that a husband and wife receive through marriage – (not exact quote).  The President was forced to face this issue because Vice Pres. Biden stated his support on the same issue earlier in the week.  The President said he was ‘evolving’ in his decision about this situation. No, he did this for political reasons.

It’s on record that the President had previously said because of his Christian belief that marriage was sacred between a man and a woman.  I’m so thankful that I serve a God that changes not. God has moral laws that will never change no matter what any man says about them.

God does not categorize sins – all sin is sin in God’s sight. Revelation 21:8 NLT states, “But cowards, unbelievers, the corrupt, murderers, the immoral, those who practice witchcraft, idol worshipers, and all liars—their fate is in the fiery lake of burning sulfur. This is the second death.”  We will all stand in judgment according to God’s Word, not the President’s personal belief.

Galatians 5:19 – 21 NLT states, “When you follow the desires of your sinful nature, the results are very clear; sexual immorality, impurity, lustful pleasures, idolatry, sorcery, hostility, quarreling, jealousy, outbursts of anger, selfish ambition, dissension, division, envy, drunkenness, wild parties, and other sins like these. Let me tell you again, as I have before, that anyone living that sort of life will not inherit the Kingdom of God.”  Sexual immorality includes adultery, fornication, pornography, homosexuality, sexual abuse, sex trafficking, prostitution, etc.

God’s laws are for our protection and provision. America is built on laws. There is a law we must pay taxes. If we don’t, we are extremely penalized. There are traffic laws. There are consequences to breaking these laws. If you decide to run red lights because you feel you have the right, then you will have an accident, you may be killed and you may murder someone in the process.

If all Christians in America would vote for godly moral laws and politicians, we could turn this nation around. I refuse to keep silent in a world that is wanting to flaunt their sinful causes in my face and then say because I’m a believer in godly morals that I’m prejudice or homophobic.

God came to this world in a ‘robe of flesh’ (God manifest in the flesh) and showed how much He loves the sinner by dying on a cross to shed His blood that we could be redeemed/restored in our relationship with Him.  He loves the sinner but hates the sin.  Our words will either justify or condemn us when we stand before God.  I’m sorry for you Mr. President; you evolved in making an opinion about marriage for homosexuals that God calls an abomination.  Your words will ‘justify’ even to children that hear ‘The President’ declare a sinful act is OK to make choices that will dictate their eternity.

Mr. President, God puts up and He takes down.  You will not escape the judgment of God even though you are President. Everyone will stand before his or her Creator, Almighty God. All sexual immorality, lying, gossiping, sowing discord, murder (abortions), hatred, cheating, abusive anger, all abuse, backbiting, plotting deceitfulness, dictators, manipulators for evil – ALL is sin declared by God.

God is Love.  He is full of mercy and grace to those who humble themselves before Him. But sin will not enter into heaven.  It’s our words and actions on this earth that dictate our eternity.  Just because we declare we are ‘Christian’, if our heart and actions do not manifest the same, we are in trouble with God.  Mr. President, beware. You will stand before God. None of us will escape the final judgment of God. As for me and my house, we will serve the Lord!

Carol Clemans is a Certified Pastoral Counselor/Bible conference speaker/Christian Life Coach. She provides confidential nationwide phone counseling for pastors & laypersons (636) 448-0121. Go to: www.carolclemans.org for 118 articles, teaching CD’s and new book: GOD’S DESIGN FOR MARRIAGE.

Share on Facebook

Share on Facebook

Share on Facebook

Share on Facebook

In an example how “the word of God is not bound” a Korean-American NGO that launches Bibles and gospel flyers into North Korea 70-80 times a year has said it now has proof the balloons are in fact reaching their target.

By using GPS tracking devices overlaid onto Google maps, Seoul USA is now confirming the precise location of several of its launches this year and posting the photographic images on its website.

“We’ve known for years that our balloon launches were reaching the targeted areas because of the angry response of the North Korean government,” said Seoul USA President the Rev. Eric Foley. “But the GPS devices provide us with precise verification that will enable us to further increase the accuracy of future launches.”

North Korea is universally regarded as the most hostile environment for Christians. The country consistently tops the list of open doors USA's list of countries that persecute Christians.

Foley notes that with the extreme persecution faced by Christians, balloon launches provide one of the only ways to do a mass distribution of Scripture and gospel messages inside the Hermit Kingdom.

The U.S. State Department notes that the country is under rigid control by the Communist Party. It reports that “due to its isolationist nature, North Korea’s human rights record is difficult to evaluate.”

The state department goes on to say that “Reported human rights abuses include arbitrary and lengthy imprisonment, torture and degrading treatment, poor prison conditions (including cases of starvation), forced labor, public executions, prohibitions or severe restrictions on freedom of speech, the press, movement, assembly, religion, and privacy, denial of the right of citizens to change their government, and suppression of workers’ rights. All sources of media, such as radio, television, and news organizations, are controlled by the government and heavily censored. Correspondence is strictly monitored and Internet use is limited to the political elite.”

Additionally, North Korea has one of the largest standing armies in the world with an estimated active duty force of up to 1.2 million personnel, compared to around 680,000 for South Korea. The country also has one of the world’s largest special operations forces, designed for insertion behind enemy lines.

Following the Japanese surrender in 1945, Korea was divided into two occupation zones. America occupied the area south of the 38^th parallel, while the Soviet Union administered the area north of the 38^th parallel.

Foley says proof that the balloon drops are having a real impact inside the country is how importantly North Korea ranks the issue during political negotiations with the South.

“When the South Korean government sought to appease North Korea politically in the 1990s,” Foley says, “they asked the North, ‘How can we make you happy?’ ‘Stop sending balloons and stop doing radio broadcasts,’ the North said. So Seoul USA has partnered with the North Korean underground church since that point to do daily radio broadcasts and as many balloon launches as our funds permit.”

Share on Facebook

This last week I received my fourth Subaru to test, a 2012 Outback with the six-cylinder engine.  It was the 3.6R “Limited” model in Ice Silver metallic with black leather interior.  This car is made by Fuji Heavy Industries, a Japanese firm, in Lafayette, Indiana.  The Limited is the top-line Outback, out of six models offered in both four-, and six-cylinder configurations.  This one had  an option package that included power moonroof, navigation system, 440-watt harman/kardon  stereo, Bluetooth phone, backup camera, and Ipod/USB connections.  This $2,995.00 package, plus $223.00 for “puddle lights”, brought the total M.S.R.P. to $35,886.00, including freight.  I really enjoyed the puddle lights that shine beneath each of the four doors on the vehicle, after dark.

The Outback is a derivative of the Subaru Legacy wagon, introduced in 1994.  It was originally called the “Legacy Outback”, and the Legacy name was dropped in 2003.  Subaru in the 1990’s could not afford a new design for its “crossover SUV” to be produced, so simply modified an existing offering.  They added side body cladding, raised the ground clearance, and added a rugged-looking rack on the top.  In 2009, the second generation Outback came out, and sales since then have been brisk – over 90,000 in 2010 and over 100,000 in 2011.  Crossover SUV’s are quite popular nowadays, and in large part it is the fault of the Subaru Outback.

Power for the Outback is supplied by a 3.6 liter, “boxer” six-cylinder, DOHC, all-aluminum engine with 256 horsepower and 247 lb. ft. of torque.  Boxer refers to its horizontally-opposed configuration, like a Corvair or Porsche.  The weight of the engine, although modest, is kept at a lower center-of-gravity with this design.  Ground clearance, however, is a category-best 8.7 inches.  The transmission is a five-speed automatic with manual mode and paddle shifters behind the steering wheel.  All-wheel drive, is, of course, standard equipment.  Fuel economy is rated at 18-city and 25-highway for the car, and I observed about 20 mpg during my trips to Denver (2), along with running around Greeley.  The tank holds 18.5 gallons of regular gasoline and acceleration from zero to sixty is reportedly in the 8/9 second range.  Wheelbase/length/weight are 107.9”, 188.2”, and 3,631 lbs., respectively.

The front leather buckets in the Outback are nice, and the three-passenger rear seat is split and reclines somewhat.  Cargo space is 34 cubic feet with the back seats up and 71 cubic feet with the back seats dropped down.  The center passenger in the rear has a shoulder belt, adding to the Outback safety reputation.  Both of the front seats are power-adjustable, and the driver ergonomics are fine.

I don’t think the Outback styling is its calling card, but I happened to like it OK.  The 17” alloy wheels on the Limited are attractive, and they are surrounded by 225/60R17 all-season radials.  The silver paint was offset with the dark cladding and bumpers, and the black roof rack gave the car an off-road look.  I did not go off-road, but took some bumpy dirt roads with satisfactory results.  I like the hefty feel of the car both in town and out on the highway.

While on one of the Denver trips, I enjoyed dinner at John Elway’s (sizzle), and found pleasure in the ride down and back in the Outback (steak – solid, sturdy, safe, and stylish). 

Share on Facebook

While Mitt Romney may be the presumptive GOP nominee for president, he still has credibility issues with evangelical and conservative voters and a statement of over the weekend did nothing to help assuage their concerns.

Romney has stated publicly on multiple occasions that he supports traditional marriage between a man and a woman, questions still persist over his support for the "gay" agenda.

While he did come out with a strong affirmation of traditional marriage following Obama's announcement that he now supports “gay” marriage, Romney subsequently made a statement that is disturbing to traditional values groups with his support for “gay” adoptions.

Last week, the presidential hopeful told Fox News host Neil Cavuto, “I know many gay couples that are able to adopt children -- that's fine. But my preference is that we … continue to define marriage as the relationship between a man and a woman’"

Peter LaBarbera with Americans for Truth about Homosexuality (AFTAH) has a problem with Romney's position, saying that one of the major reasons for fighting for natural marriage is so that children will be placed in homes where they will have a father and a mother.

As a pro-family person, he shouldn't be fine with homosexual adoption," LaBarbera contends. "Just because it exists and it's happening doesn't mean you're fine with it. And so here Romney is undercutting his base, and it's sad to see, but he's obviously conflicted on all the issues surrounding homosexuality."

By placing children in the homes of same-sex pairs, the AFTAH president says this means homosexuals now become the role models for children and the picture of what an ideal family should be.

"When your children are forced to be in a situation where the person that's closest to them is a homosexual and they're being exposed daily at a very young age to homosexuality, you are teaching children that immorality is okay," he argues. SAnd that's destructive."

While Governor of Massachusetts, Romney signed an executive order directing marriage clerks to issue same-sex marriage licenses, effectively legalizing same-sex marriage in the state. This was in response to a state Supreme Court decision declaring that limiting marriage to opposite sex couples was incompatible with the state's constitution.

However, the court’s decision ordered the legislature, which is the branch tasked with making laws to come up with legislation that would incorporate their decision into law. To this day, the Massachusetts legislature has not done so. With no legislation passed same-sex marriage technically is still illegal in the state and is only permitted based on an executive order, not legislation.

With Romney’s executive order, Massachusetts became the first state to permit same-sex marriage and opened the door for “gay” marriage in other states.

LaBarbera points out that Romney has left himself wide open, because activists will suggest that if he is okay with homosexuals adopting, why would he not want the adoptive couples to be able to marry?

Share on Facebook

A measure has been introduced in Congress that would help stop the problem of school personnel accused of sexual misconduct from simply being transferred from one district to another.

Steve Gunn with the Education Action Group Foundation says all too often school districts throughout the country simply cover up sexual misconduct by teachers.

"Instead of dragging it through the media and going through the official process to fire them, we'll quietly cut a deal -- usually with the teachers union involved -- to just have the teacher quietly resign, and often they leave with a letter of recommendation from the district," Gunn says.

But those teachers often wind up in another school district, where the problem only happens again. But Rep. Michael Fitzpatrick's (R-Pennsylvania) proposed "Jeremy Bell Act" could help put a stop to that by requiring schools to share information about alleged incidents of sexual misconduct by staff who might seek employment elsewhere.

The bill is named after a 12-year-old West Virginia student who was sexually abused and murdered by his principal, despite his having already been fired by school in Pennsylvania over allegations of sexual misconduct.

As in California, Republican lawmakers attempted to pass a measure that would prohibit educators from having any type of sexual relationship with her students. However, Democrats shot down the bill saying that it was an infringement on the rights of two consenting adults.

There are been many incidents of teachers having sexual relations with her students over the years. In one case, a teacher was told by the judge she would serve no prison time because “she was too pretty to go to jail.”

Gunn says under the legislation school administrators who knowingly help an employee who has committed sexual misconduct gain employment at another school across state lines can get up to five years in prison.

Share on Facebook

Sheriff Jeff Christopher

by Matt Lacy --

Private meetings, political chicanery and the resurrection of a dead bill under a different name were all part of the tactics employed by the Delaware state legislature who were in fear of a single sheriff who was simply doing what his constitutional duties allowed.

On a 36-2 vote the Delaware state House approved  a bill that states the sheriff or his deputies are only considered to be law enforcement officers when the court says so. The bill now moves to the senate where it is unclear if Republicans will oppose it or not.

Senate Majority leader Gary Simpson told a consituent, “Regardless of the outcome of this particular piece of legislation, I am convinced the issue will eventually be decided by the Courts and I can live with their decision either way in regards to their interpretation of the Constitution.”

Unlike police chiefs, who are hired by government officials, sheriffs are elected by the people and historically have been recognized as a highest-ranking law enforcement officer in their counties.

There have been several threats to the authority of sheriffs recently. In Montana, a proposal would have required all federal law enforcement officers to coordinate any activities in counties with the local sheriff. And in Maricopa County, Ariz., Sheriff Joe Arpaio continues to give the administration headaches with his investigation of whether Barack Obama is perpetrating a fraud on county voters by running for president without being an eligible candidate.

In Maryland, the office of sheriff is a constitutionally created position similar to the secretary of state or attorney general and demands, “The sheriffs shall be conservators of the peace within the counties . . . in which they reside.”

The first bill, HB 290 was proposed at the request of Sussex County officials who took issue with their sheriff, Jeff Christopher who is attempting to restore the office to its constitutional role.

The bill stated “‘Police officer’ as used in this code shall not include sheriffs and sheriff deputies,” and that it “is the intent of the General Assembly to specifically state the sheriffs and their deputies do not have any arrest authority.”

The bill would have redefined the role of sheriffs to where they can serve papers and process administrative work but have no hand in actual law enforcement. Supporters of the legislation say law enforcement authority belongs in the hands of the state police and city police.

However, Rep. Danny Short (R), the bill’s sponsor, announced earlier this month he was striking the bill from further consideration saying it was being hijacked for political purposes.

According to Short, prior to passing the bill, the legislature was planning to draft a concurrent resolution asking the Delaware Supreme Court to issue a ruling as to whether sheriff’s and their deputies have arrest authority under the state constitution.

However, prior to the resolution being submitted, the bill was placed on the House Administration Committee’s agenda, without his request promoting him to table the bill, effectively killing it.

“This issue is too important to allow it to be used as a pawn in an apparent game of politics,” Short said. “There is a long-standing tradition in the General Assembly that if the sponsor of a bill has requested his or her legislation to be tabled in committee, the committee chairman yields to the sponsor's request. That was not the case with House Bill 290.”

“It is my opinion that there was an attempt to take control of this issue from me, is the prime sponsor of the bill, by having it placed on the committee agenda. The only right course of action was to strike the bill and prevent any further political stunts from happening.”

However, House democrats quickly crafted a proposal to resurrect the bill.

In an e-mail obtained by the Gazette, Sarah Rivin, communications director for the Delaware Democratic Party told legislators that House Majority Leader Pete Schwartzkopf wanted to hold a conference call on Apr. 30 to “talk about the issue…and what we can do to counteract many misconceptions flying around in Sussex County.”

Riven’s e-mail provided “talking points” for democratic legislators and said the legislation was a direct result of Sheriff Christopher’s actions.

“The issue of the Sussex County sheriff's authority and arrest powers (or lack thereof) has been an issue for several years… Now sheriff, Jeff Christopher has taken up the same mantle as his former boss, claiming the Delaware Constitution give [sic] him the authority to arrest citizens.”

One of the talking points stated that their reasoning for saying sheriffs do not have arrest authority is because other state officials such as Attorney General Beau Biden, son of Vice-President Joe Biden are also listed in the state constitution as “conservators of the peace,” but they do not have the ability to arrest.

“According to the Constitution, sheriffs in Delaware are "conservators of the peace", but that remains an undefined term. Additionally, the Constitution says the chancellor, judges, and the attorney general are also conservators of the peace throughout the state,” she said. “Does that mean Attorney General Biden or any judge should be granted arrest powers? Given what we know of their legal roles, being a 'conservator of the peace' does not equate with the possession of arrest powers.”

She went on to say those interested in participating on the call could contact her for a call in number. “We welcome anyone interested in participating, but we do want to know who joins.”

However, when the Gazette contacted Rivin about obtaining a contact number for the call, she said members of the press would not be permitted to attend the meeting.

While it is unclear what was discussed at the meeting, on May 3, in an apparent attempt to get around Short’s tabling of his bill, Schwartzkopf introduced HB 325, which is virtually identical to HB 290.

Under both bills, the sheriff and his deputies would be stripped of all authority to enforce any laws including traffic stops.

While legislators say it is not their intention to eliminate the sheriff’s office, it is difficult to reconcile that when considering who the bill does give arrest power to.

Under the definition of law enforcement officers it includes the fire marshal and even “dog catchers,” however sheriffs are not even allowed to enforce dog control laws and ordinances in their counties.

State forest officers even have the ability to arrest anyone who is “committing or about to commit an offense against any of the laws enacted for the protection of forest, brush, grass or wild lands in this state” but the sheriff does not.

In their obsession to prevent sheriffs from exercising their constitutional role, the legislation included a provision that could result in tragic consequences in child abduction cases.

Recognizing the importance of swift action in child abduction cases HB 290 said, “Every sheriff, constable, chief police officer, officer in charge, member of the State Police and other law-enforcement agency and officer of the State and of any local governmental unit shall immediately accept and act upon information on any missing child by police radio broadcasts.”

While the section went on to say sheriffs did not have any arrest authority in these situations, they were at least permitted to participate in helping locate the child.

However, under Schwartzkopf’s bill the word sheriff is stricken from the same section, meaning they are not allowed to assist or investigate in any way even if to do so could save a child’s life.

Gazette attempts to contact Schwartzkopf for information about the bill were not returned.

In an attempt to defend their attempts to strip sheriffs of their authority, Delaware officials have attempted to claim that the sheriff has never had arrest authority in the state.

Chip Guy, a spokesman for Sussex County said the bill was not taking away any of Christopher’s authority, because the ability to arrest “was never there in the first place.”

Schwartzkopf’s bill echoed Guy’s sentiments saying, “Historically the sheriffs and deputies have not exercised arrest authority and the Attorney General’s office has given an opinion that the sheriff’s ‘power to arrest is no greater than that shared by any citizen.’”

The problem with these statements is that in Delaware the office predates the founding of America by nearly 100 years. The state’s first sheriff took office in 1669.

Faced with this dilemma, Schwartzkopf has attempted to walk back statements that the sheriff has never had arrest powers.

Wolf von Baumgart, state chairman for the Independent Party of Delaware sent an e-mail to Schwartzkopf asking him what was the legal, statutory and constitutional basis for determining that sheriffs do not have arrest powers.

Schwartzkopf replied saying Baumgart needed to “state the legal, statutory and constitutional basis upon which you rely to induce or demonstrate that Sheriffs, as duly sworn constitutionally designated elected Conservators of the Peace, do have powers of arrest.”

Then contradicting the statement in his own bill he said, “I have never said they never had that authority.  I have said that they do not have that authority now.”

Christopher said he suspects that Schwartzkopf has been one of the key figures behind the entire legislative process to strip the sheriff’s office of their constitutional power.

“He wants to abolish the office of sheriff in Delaware. While he issued a statement saying he isn’t interested in getting rid of the sheriff the truth is he wants to neuter us so the office is under his authority rather than the people who elected us.”

Christopher had publicly said if the legislation were to pass, he was going to challenge its constitutionality arguing that the office is protected by the state constitution which defines the sheriff as a “conservator of the peace, “ which is a term given to law-enforcement officers.

In an apparent attempt to head off a challenge, the legislature passed an amendment saying the sheriff and his deputies actually are law-enforcement officials, as per the constitution, however unlike every other law-enforcement officer in the state, they do not have arrest powers.

The amendment states that “A sheriff or deputy sheriff shall be considered a ‘law-enforcement officer’ when acting upon a specific order of a judge or commissioner of Superior Court.”

However, even though a court may consider them to be law-enforcement officers, they still do not have any arrest authority.

“Sheriffs and deputy sheriffs shall not have any arrest authority.  However, sheriffs and deputy sheriffs may take into custody and transport a person when specifically so ordered by a judge or commissioner of Superior Court.”

Share on Facebook

Following president Obama’s statement that he supports homosexual marriage, leaders from two of the nation’s largest religious denominations have denounced the endorsement.

New York Cardinal Timothy Dolan, the head of the US conference of Catholic Bishops said the president's remarks, “undermine the institution of marriage, the very cornerstone of our society." He adds, "The people of this country, especially our children, deserve better."

The Rev. Bryant Wright, president of the Southern Baptist Convention, predicted that voters will hold Obama accountable for what Wright calls “a calculated, politically expedient decision that completely ignores the biblical foundation of marriage."

While the president claims to be a Christian, showing how out of touch his stand is with mainline Christianity, the evangelical pastor who Obama calls his spiritual advisor has even spoken out against it, saying he is disappointed in the president's decision to endorse same-sex marriage.

While the president reassured Hunter he would protect religious freedom of churches who oppose gay marriage, there appears to be no similar promise to protect the religious freedom of individual Christians and others who oppose same-sex marriage.

As the homosexual community becomes more emboldened to flaunt their lifestyle in public they are demanding not just tolerance but acceptance and that Christians keep their beliefs about homosexuality to themselves.

In Kentucky, a Christian T-shirt manufacturer that employees “gays” had a human rights complaint issued against him after he refused to print T-shirts promoting a “gay” pride event.

The homosexual organization promoting the event claimed that disagreement with their message amounted to discrimination based on sexual orientation. The head of the local human rights commission stated that a gay group would have the perfect right to refuse to print material that disagreed with their lifestyle, however Christians might not have that same privilege.

Christian photographers and cake makers have been threatened and in some cases even fined for refusing to participate in same-sex ceremonies.

Share on Facebook

The founder of the pro-life movement says for the first time in many years, he has hope that he could see the end of abortion before he dies, because of a bill in Ohio that would outlaw abortion, however supposed pro-life Republicans are preventing its passage.

While many are focused on Personhood measures that are in the process of getting on ballots in several states, many pro-lifers may not realize that currently Ohio is ground zero for the abortion movement and that all abortions could soon be illegal in the Buckeye state.

While some may disagree whether life begins at conception, most agree that it is a living being once the heart begins beating. The Ohio Heartbeat bill, which passed the house nearly a year ago, would prohibit all abortions after the child's heartbeat is detected, except when necessary for the physical health of the mother.

While the bill has drawn the usual critics such as the ACLU and Planned Parenthood, the threat to the bill’s passage is coming from pro-life Republicans who are attempting to water down the bill.

In December, the leader of the Ohio Senate abruptly suspended hearings on the bill claiming the amendments were making the bill confusing.

In an attempt to force lawmakers to act on the pro-life values they campaigned on, Faith2Action, a pro-life organization is doing a series of steps to hold the senate accountable including a pro-life rally at the statehouse on May 19.

The bill has revealed a “tea party” type movement within the pro-life community. On the one hand, there are the established pro-life organizations such as Ohio Right to Life which have called for a gradual chipping away of abortion rights. However, there is a growing segment of individuals within the movement that are fed up with 40 years of these types of tactics, and are instead calling for a full frontal assault on Roe v. Wade.

Janet Porter, president of Faith2Action, states, “We will no longer allow babies with beating hearts to be ripped apart by Senate excuses and political games. It's not enough to regulate abortion, it's time to end it.”

The organization is running an ad in the Columbus Dispatch on Tuesday that makes it plain that the pro-life community is weary of Republican lawmakers who claim to be pro-life in an attempt to garner pro-life votes, but refuse to take meaningful steps to end abortion.

A similar ad last week was accompanied by 50,000 e-mails to grassroots supporters, 10,000 phone calls, inserts in hundreds of church bulletins and hundreds of calls and e-mails to Senate offices.

The ad features a poignant open letter from Dr. Jack Wilke, who founded the Right to Life movement 40 years ago.

“I’m 87 years old and once thought that I would not live to see the end of abortion. However, since passage of the heartbeat Bill in the Ohio House, I have renewed hope.”

Wilke admits at one time he was one of those who believe in the gradual approach. “I was Mr. Incremental,” he said. “But after nearly 40 years of abortion on demand, it’s time to take a bold step forward.”

Not mincing words, Wilke makes it plain that this time around, it is not the pro-abortion Democrats who are obstructing the bill, rather it is the Republican senators who ran on a pro-life platform but are now refusing to act on the bill.

“After 40 years in the wilderness, we are a Senate vote away from the promised land of protecting babies whose heartbeats can be heard.”

In the letter to the state senators, Wilke says, “Talk is cheap. And abortion regulation is woefully inadequate. Because they told us they would end abortion, we sacrificially wrote checks, tiresomely stuffed envelopes, made calls, knock on doors, distributed ballot cards and photo these legislatures in the office,” he lamented. “We didn't elect him to regulate abortion but to end it. Ohio Senate Republicans can no longer call themselves "pro-life" while refusing to pass the fully protective Heartbeat Bill.

Janet Porter, president of Faith2Action says many pro-lifers are tired of halfhearted attempts by legislators who appear to want to have it both ways on the pro-life issue.

“We've answered every objection. We've jumped through every hoop. We've shown them more support than for any bill in America. It's time for Senate leadership to quit hiding behind empty excuses and bring the fully protective Heartbeat Bill to a floor vote or admit the pro-life platforms they ran on were a charade.”

While the bill would enact the strictest abortion prohibitions in the nation, there is some opposition among pro-lifers who believe the bill does not go far enough. They reason that by prohibiting abortions several weeks into pregnancy when a heartbeat is detected, it will weaken the ultimate goal of protecting all of the  unborn.

Porter says she agrees with those who want to extend protections to everyone including the moment of conception; however she says this bill is moving the battle in the right direction.

“If we can’t carry out every child, and rescue every child just yet, we can certainly carry out most of them into protection with the Heartbeat Bill.”

She said with the Hearbeat the pro-life community has never been this close to outlawing abortion.

“The Senate needs to act,” Porter said. “The Heartbeat Bill is on the two yard line, we’re fourth and goal right now. And what we’ve got to do is carry this bill over the line, over the end zone, for the victory.”

Porter also rejects the critics who say a defeat could set back the pro-life movement if the case were to reach the Supreme Court and receive an unfavorable ruling.

“After 40 years of fighting this battle, we (the Right to Life movement) have this defeatist mentality,” Porter said. “What we’re dealing with is some folks who say, ‘we better not try because we might fail.’”

Wilke said the time for patience has passed. “No one can tell us we have been patient; but after 40 years and 54 million dead babies, the time to protect them has come.”

Share on Facebook

For the 4^th consecutive year, the city of Evans has earned the distinction of being a “Playful City USA” by a group that empowers communities to build playgrounds.

The American Academy of Pediatrics says that play is critical to brain development. It allows children to use their creativity while simultaneously developing imagination, dexterity and physical, cognitive and emotional strength.

Despite these benefits, today's children spend less time playing outside than those of previous generations, in part because only one in five kids live within walking distance of a park or playground. Additionally, schools have cut back on recess time.

Playful City USA was created in 2007 by KaBOOM!, A national nonprofit organization dedicated to saving play. The organization helps local governments address the point deficit and through mayors, city Council members, Parks and Recreation departments, school district and community leaders the program succeeds in benefiting children.

“Some of the most innovative concepts and cost-effective programs are being developed in Playful City USA communities,” says Darrell Hammond, founder and CEO of KaBOOM! And author of the New York Times bestseller KaBOOM!: How One Man Build a Movement to Save Play. “Cities like Evans are key allies in the fight to combat the point deficit and service outstanding role models for government and community leaders across the country.”

KaBoom’s origins began in 1995 when Hammond read a story in the Washington Post about two local children who suffocated while playing in an abandoned car because they did not have anywhere else to play. He had built playgrounds for other organizations and felt the tragedy could have been avoided. With the help of over 500 volunteers over five days, Hammond and friend, Dawn Hutchison, built the first KaBoom! playground at Livingstone Manor in southeast Washington D.C.

“Not enough play-spaces are being built, and those that exist are often in disrepair. Fears surrounding lawsuits and safety are trumping common sense-resulting in sterile, uninspired play environments,” the KaBOOM! Website says. “Recess is being eliminated from our nation’s schools. Kids are overscheduled, and in their free time, many choose to stay indoors, lulled by television, computers and video games.”

Share on Facebook