July 13, 2007

From the Desk of Phil Burress
President of Citizens for Community Values
Citizens’ E-Courier · July 13, 2007

Over the past several years there are not many issues that have concerned me as much as the “hate crimes” proposals which are being debated in Congress right now. Why?

First, because the driving force behind them – homosexual activists – are seeking such a radical departure from the moral foundations upon which this nation was founded. Their ultimate goal is the acceptance of same-sex behavior not the prevention of crimes against homosexuals.

Supporters of the bill argue that the law is necessary because a crime against one member of a protected class affects the entire class. But isn’t that true about most every crime. When one child is harmed by a predator, all parents become fearful that their child might be next. When one elderly person is mugged, all seniors become fearful that they might be targeted next. Special protections for homosexuals is just that…SPECIAL. And it’s unjust under our constitution.
Secondly, these laws concern me because they are a blatant violation of the Constitution. You’ve heard it from us before and for good reason.

Just this week, a prominent contingent of African American pastors sent a strong message to the Senate with an ad in USA Today in opposition to these proposals: “Don’t allow misguided compassion to erode America’s most basic freedoms of speech, conscience, and the free exercise of religion.” Click here to see the ad.


There is an all-out push right now for the U.S. Senate to pass S.1105. Sen. Ted Kennedy is trying to attach this bill as an amendment to the Department of Defense Reauthorization bill instead of asking for a vote on the bill by itself.

I encourage you to take just a minute today to contact Ohio’s two Senators, George Voinovich (R) and Sherrod Brown (D), and ask them to vote AGAINST this dangerous legislation. Click here to send a quick e-mail to Sens. Voinovich & Brown.

Please help us reach more readers by forwarding this e-mail others. If they like what they see, they can sign up to receive our e-mails directly. Together, I believe we can truly make a difference!

Will the real Senator Fedor please stand up?

Is Sen. Fedor turning her back on the strippers she recently stood with? Shoulder to shoulder, she defended it as free speech. Now it’s “disrespectful to all women”?

Toledo, OH – At a May 1, 2007 press conference Senate Minority Leader Teresa Fedor (D-Toledo) stood with the “Dancers for Democracy” (pictured at right) in a convoluted defense of the First Amendment while railing against Senate Bill 16 (the Community Defense Act), a law that places statewide regulations on porn stores, peep booths, and strip bars. That was at a time and place not long ago when she evidently thought defending strippers was popular.

Today, she’s trying to find her way out of the midst of a storm of controversy surrounding the Lucas County Democratic Party for their decision to bring in strippers to pass out drinks at their golf fundraiser on June 29. Attempting to dance around the issue of objectifying women, Sen. Fedor is calling for resignations of any and all who were responsible for hiring the dancers.

We definitely agree with Sen. Fedor that the sex industry creates a mentality that contributes to the exploitation and objectification of women, which she says is “disrespectful to all women.” But what was motivating her when she stood with the Dancers for Democracy and spoke against a bill to stop the groping of women in strip bars? Is there something about duplicity that we don’t understand?

Deseret News editorial: The nasty taint of porn

Make no mistake about pornography’s influence on society. A recent report from the American Psychological Association drew strong ties between pornography’s pervasive influence and the “sexualization” of girls and women. This, the report said, has resulted in greater societal sexism; “fewer girls pursuing careers in science, technology, engineering and mathematics; increased rates of sexual harassment and sexual violence; and an increased demand for child pornography.” Click here to read the entire article.

Reinstating Fairness Doctrine would hurt free speech

In the Radio Act of 1927, Congress declared that the airways belong to the people, though the members didn’t know what an airway really was or, in fact, how radio actually worked. That premise, nevertheless, allowed it to do to broadcasters what it could not do to newspaper men and women because of the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution: force them to obtain government-issued licenses, and thereby submit to federal rules and regulations.

Hence the Fairness Doctrine, which, until it was finally repealed about 20 years ago by the Federal Communications Commission, required broadcasters to meet a test of fairness – generally defined as giving both sides of an issue or all candidates for an office equal time on the air.

Click here to read the entire article at the Lancaster Eagle Gazette.

Progressive radio had chance; listeners said no

The success of conservative talk shows is based on the listeners. The only thing that matters to broadcasters and advertisers is what people want to hear.

In Cincinnati there are just two 50,000-watt AM radio stations. Clear Channel turned one of them over to the progressives in 2005, brought in a former politician and national schlock TV host to anchor the lineup, and backed that with a $50,000-plus billboard and bus card campaign.

In addition to the largest outside advertising campaign for any local radio station in years, the “Return of Jerry Springer” angle was good enough for five or six front-page newspaper stories during the first two weeks of the format.

And nobody listened. “Progressive talk” got its “opportunity.” If it was going to be successful anywhere it would have been here. But it was a dismal failure, just as it has been in virtually every other market in the country.

Liberals simply can’t face the fact that most people don’t want to listen to their ideology. So they blame station ownership, management and corporate advertisers. Because they can’t control what people want to listen to, they demand more government regulation.

It’s the classic socialist response.

Dusty Rhodes is the Hamilton County (Ohio) auditor and a precinct captain for the Democratic Party
Copyright 2007, Enquirer.com Click here to read the entire article at The Cincinnati Enquirer

Legislator reintroduces measure to outlaw abortion in Ohio

Columbus, OH – State Rep. Tom Brinkman has reintroduced legislation that would effectively end the practice of abortion in the state of Ohio. Similar to a measure he sponsored in the previous session, HB 284 would change Ohio law to provide criminal penalties for doctors performing abortions. The bill is clear on this point, stating, “(N)o person shall perform or induce an abortion.” HB 284 also would ban the controversial drug RU-486.

CCV believes that opposition to the murder of innocent human beings is still a mainstream value for most Ohioans, and applauds Rep. Brinkman on his courageous effort to protect the most vulnerable citizens of our state.