FRC Blog

Girls Just Wanna Have Funds

by Tony Perkins

March 30, 2007

Of all the contentious government programs, surely everyone would agree on an initiative to promote responsible fatherhood, right? Wrong. The National Organization for Women (NOW) has filed a formal complaint with the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) for funding fatherhood programs that “discriminate” against women. Kathy Rodgers, the president of Legal Momentum, which joined the protest, said, “What we’re asking them to do is to make sure that the grantees provide equal services to men and women.

It should be a parenthood initiative.” Theirs is an interesting suggestion, seeing as the Food and Drug Administration was recently hammered by leading feminists for providing less funds for its Office of Women’s Health. If NOW were truly an equal-opportunity watchdog, why hasn’t its leadership launched a similar grievance against the FDA? Where is NOW’s campaign for an Office of People’s Health? Unfortunately, their anti-father crusade only exposes the group’s true agenda—to treat fathers as having no special role to play in children’s lives. As HHS says, “Helping men become better fathers will benefit women and children too.”

Furthermore, the initiative is modestly funded when compared to other government programs, many of which rake in far more than $50 million—and without the direct benefit to families. As part of Promoting Responsible Fatherhood, men, many of whom are low-income, receive job and parent training, substance-abuse prevention and treatment, and educational opportunities.

What’s more, there is no official ban on women in the program. One HHS official said the programs were advised to accept females if they applied. NOW claims to be a “voice” for women everywhere, the effect of which has been nothing less than a shriek by a group of fringe “feminists” taking aim not at discrimination, injustice, or chauvinism but motherhood, healthy sexuality, and traditional families.

Continue reading

On a Congressional Wing and a Prayer

by Tony Perkins

March 30, 2007

When it comes to promoting faith on Capitol Hill, there is safety in numbers—”219” to be exact. That’s the House meeting room where a group of members gather each week to ask the Lord’s blessing on our nation. In 2005, Rep. J. Randy Forbes (R-Va.) made it official by creating the Congressional Prayer Caucus, a group of leaders committed to praying for our nation and protecting the rights of all Americans to pray. In the past two years, the number of Caucus members has grown to 42 (almost a 10% of the representatives in the House).

Yesterday, FRC attended the press conference in which the Caucus announced its plan to spread what they call “219 prayer groups” across America. They hope that as the faithful meet to pray these “spiritual blocks” will form a powerful wall of protection around America. We applaud Rep. Forbes’ leadership in helping to fulfill 2 Chronicles 7:14: “If my people, who are called by my Name, will humble themselves and pray and seek my face and turn from their wicked ways, I will hear from heaven, will forgive their sin, and heal their land.” We invite you to join with the 219 group and FRC, which also has a prayer initiative as part of our Church Ministries Program. Both are keys to the revival our country so desperately needs.

Continue reading

Marriage and Caste in America

by Family Research Council

March 29, 2007

Kay Hymowitz has an excellent article on the “Marriage Gap” in America:

We are becoming a nation of separate and unequal families that threatens to last into the foreseeable future. On the one hand, well-educated women make more money. They get married, only then have their children, and raise them with their husbands. Those children are more likely to grow up to be well-adjusted, to do well in school, to go to college, to marry and only then have children. On the other hand, we have low-income women raising children alone who are more likely to be low-income, to drop out of school or, if they do make it to college, go to a less elite college, and to become single parents themselves.

Marriage, I think you can argue when you look at the numbers, now poses an even larger social divide than race.

(HT: Mere Comments)

Continue reading

Family Facts #9

by Family Research Council

March 29, 2007

The greater the fathers’ involvement was, the lower the level of adolescents’ behavioral problems, both in terms of aggression and antisocial behavior and negative feelings such as anxiety, depression, and low self-esteem. Though these behavioral problems were greatest among youths who said they did not have a father, the negative emotions were at the same level among those with no fathers and those with fathers who had low levels of involvement.

Source: “Family Structure, Father Involvement, and Adolescent Behavioral Outcomes” Carlson, Marcia J. Journal of Marriage and Family Vol. 68, Number 1. February, 2006. Page(s) 137-154.


Continue reading

King of the Hill

by Tony Perkins

March 29, 2007

Somewhere between the November elections and this week’s debate, the GOP must have rediscovered its backbone. Apart from the runaway pork, which a handful of Republicans did support, the new minority has used its humble status to block several unconstitutional anti-family measures on everything from emergency contraception to D.C. voting rights.

Tuesday, the GOP’s latest move, prompted by the Minneapolis lawsuit filed by the “flying imans” against their fellow plane passengers, managed to take liberals completely by surprise. Using a procedural vote, introduced an amendmentRepublicans to the Rail and Public Transportation Security Act that would protect passengers from being sued when they report suspicious activity. Although the debate was heated, the provision proved extremely popular among Republicans and nearly half of the Democrats, passing 304-121. Rep. Peter King (R-N.Y.) dismissed the claims that the bill would lead to racial profiling. When Americans “see something,” they should be free to “say something,” King argued.

Unfortunately, the suit in Minneapolis is just a symptom of the broader strategy by radical Islamists to manipulate American law. The Twin City taxi drivers, three-fourths of whom are Muslim, now refuse to transport passengers carrying alcohol. Likewise, Muslim clerks at Target stores are refusing to scan items that contain pork. In both instances, Islamic law forbids the consumption of these foods—not the handling of them. But until their agenda is challenged by leaders like Rep. King and the freedom of Americans upheld, these determined radicals will continue to use our own code of tolerance to chip away at Western law.

Continue reading

Liberals’ ERA Denotes Screwball Politics

by Tony Perkins

March 29, 2007

Despite suffering several rounds of defeat on the state level, the Senate’s pro-abortion dream team of Sens. Ted Kennedy (D-Mass.) and Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.) reintroduced an archaic (and unnecessary) Equal Rights Amendment for consideration. In conjunction with the Feminist Majority Foundation, liberals hope their transparent ploy for women’s rights will ultimately nullify parental notification laws and the Hyde Amendment, which bans the use of taxpayer funds for abortions.

As an added bonus to same-sex marriage advocates, a federal ERA would create a legal avenue for attacking traditional marriage. Already a Maryland state court has ruled in favor of same-sex unions on the grounds that the state’s ERA prohibits a “sex-based classification.” If feminists were truly concerned about women, they would concentrate their efforts not on achieving a status they already enjoy but on policies that will reverse the worldwide phenomena of sex selection abortion and infanticide that have resulted in an estimated 100 million missing girls. It is clear that what radical liberals lack in principle, they certainly make up for in persistence.

Continue reading

News from Pelosi-land

by Family Research Council

March 28, 2007

Looking for an environmentally safe way to bring home your spotted owl steaks and baby seal sausages? Once again the hometown of speaker Nancy Pelosi has the answer.

SAN FRANCISCO (AP) - City leaders approved a ban on plastic grocery bags after weeks of lobbying on both sides from environmentalists and a supermarket trade group. If Mayor Gavin Newsom signs the ban as expected, San Francisco would be the first U.S. city to adopt such a rule. The law, passed by a 10-1 vote, requires large markets and drug stores to give customers only a choice among bags made of paper that can be recycled, plastic that breaks down easily enough to be made into compost, or reusable cloth. San Francisco supervisors and supporters said that by banning the petroleum-based sacks, blamed for littering streets and choking marine life, the measure would go a long way toward helping the city earn its green stripes.”

Apparently this has been a real source of worry for those who lean green . . .

The new breed of bags “offers consumers a way out of a false choice, a way out of the paper or plastic dilemma,” Noble said.”

Continue reading

Funding the War on Sugar Beets

by Family Research Council

March 28, 2007

Last week, the U.S. House proposed funding the war on spinach. This week the Senate has shifted the funding to the war on sugar beets. Here is a list of provisions in the emergency war supplemental U.S. Troop Readiness, Veterans Health and Iraq Accountability Act, 2007” that do not fund the war:

1) $24 million for funding for sugar beets.

2) $3 million for funding for sugar cane (goes to one Hawaiian co-op).

3) $20 million for insect infestation damage reimbursements in Nevada, Idaho, and Utah.

4) $2.1 billion for crop production losses.

5) $1.5 billion for livestock production losses.

6) $100 million for Dairy Production Losses.

7) $13 million for Ewe Lamb Replacement and Retention Program.

8) $32 million for Livestock Indemnity Program.

9) $40 million for the Tree Assistance Program.

10) $100 million for Small Agricultural Dependent Businesses.

11) $6 million for North Dakota flooded crop land.

12) $35 million for emergency conservation program.

13) $50 million for the emergency watershed program.

14) $115 million for the conservation security program.

15) $18 million for drought assistance in upper Great Plains/South West.

16) Provision that extends the availability by a year $3.5 million in funding for guided tours of the Capitol. Also a provision allows transfer of funds from holiday ornament sales in the Senate gift shop.

17) 165.9 million for fisheries disaster relief, funded through NOAA (including $60.4 million for salmon fisheries in the Klamath Basin region).

18) $12 million for forest service money (requested by the president in the non-emergency FY2008 budget).

19) $425 million for education grants for rural areas - (Secure Rural Schools program).

20) $640 million for LIHEAP.

21) $25 million for asbestos abatement at the Capitol Power Plant.

22) $388.9 million for funding for backlog of old Department of Transportation projects.

23) $22.8 million for geothermal research and development.

24) $500 million for wildland fire management.

25) $13 million for mine safety technology research.

26) $31 million for one month extension of Milk Income Loss Contract program (MILC)

27) $50 million for fisheries disaster mitigation fund.

28) $100 million to help pay for Republican and Democrat party conventions.

Continue reading