The Public Eye THE PUBLIC EYE FALL  2002 23 attempt to indoctrinate your children in the UN’s New Age paganism.” Jasper cautions concerned  Christians  that  “(i)f  the  Earth Summiteers  have  their  way,  Johnny  and Suzie will not be able to pledge allegiance to ‘one nation, under God,’ but they will be able to  pledge  to  ‘One World,  under  Gaia’— that is, Mother Earth.” Source, The New American,  9/23/02 “WE’REVAGUE, ETHEREAL, IGNORANT, AND WE JUST DON’T CARE” David Brooks, senior editor of the Weekly Standard and a regular guest on public tele- vision’s “News Hour,” has gone to the trou- ble of monitoring the “evasions, distractions and miasma of the anti-war left,” or as he calls it, “The Fog of Peace.” Characterizing a pro- peace full-page ad in the New York Times as a “picture perfect example of moral exhibi- tionism,” Brooks quotes a few of the ad’s “vague sentiments, ethereally removed from the tensions before us today….” Sentiments such as, “Nations have the right to determine their own destiny, free from military coercion by great powers…” Brooks uses a favorite conservative ploy, defining the terms of the debate: either we attack Iraq or we do nothing.  Since the anti- war Left opposes attacking Iraq, they must be for—doing nothing. This “logic” allows Brooks to describe such disparate thinkers as Edward  Said,  Noam  Chomsky,  Frances Fitzgerald, Barbara Ehrenreich, Susan Son- tag, Tony Kushner, and even Tom Daschle as “playing culture war, and …disguising their eruptions as position-taking on Iraq, a coun- try about which they haven’t even taken the trouble to inform themselves…For most in the peace camp, there is only the fog. The debate is dominated by people who don’t seem to know about Iraq and don’t care. Their positions are not influenced by the facts of world affairs.” Source: Weekly Standard, 9/30/02 “FREE SPEECH FOR CHURCHES?” On October 2, 2002, the Houses of Worship Political Speech Protection Act (H.R. 2357) was defeated on the House floor by a vote of 178 to 239. The bill would have exempted only churches and other houses of worship (not  other  501(c)(3)  organizations)  from restrictions  on  endorsing  political  candi- dates  and  participating  in  election  cam- paigns on a candidate’s behalf. That pesky separation of Church and State clause keeps getting in the way, or was this an attempt at “Faith-based” electoral politics? Source: Concerned Women for America, http://www.cwfa.org/library/freedom/2002-10-03_jones- bill.shtml “LESBIAN HEALTH & CITIZENS’ WEALTH” The Family Research Council is appreciative that the Bush administration is finally tar- geting  LGBT  communities  for  reduction and  elimination  of  “so-called  health  care programs that squander taxpayer dollars and promote radical agendas.” The immediate cause for celebration is the Department of Health  and  Human  Services  recent  deci- sion to withdraw support for a conference on lesbian  health  because  it    “…did  not  fit with  Secretary Thompson’s  vision.”  FRC welcomes  “…the  administration’s  change of  heart  and  applaud[s]  the  concern  to protect citizens’ hard-earned money from government waste.” Source: Family Research Council daily email update, 10/4/02. “MADE IN OUR MO[U]LD” The Heritage Foundation has put together a new series of policy statements addressing what should be done with Iraq after ousting Saddam Hussein. In the section, “The Road to Economic Prosperity for a Post-Saddam Iraq” they boldly state, “The new post-Sad- dam federal government should develop a modern legal system that recognizes property rights and is conducive to privatization…” ‘Nuff said. Source: http://www.heritage.org/Research/MiddleEast/ iraqroom.cfm “PRO-FAMILY PORTRAIT” The  Family  Research  Council  recently announced that it would release The Fam- ily Portrait, which is ostensibly a compilation of  data,  research,  and  public  opinion  on marriage and the family. FRC hopes that this book would be a “one-stop shop” of “both the good and the bad news” on the family that policy makers, activists, and educators can use. As part of the launch, FRC will “unveil The Family Portrait” at the National Press Club in Washington DC, where a panel of experts will ascertain why sometimes “Amer- icans'  actions  strongly  conflict  with  their conservative  views  on  marriage  and  fam- ily.” Hmmm. Maybe because, increasingly, most Americans’ views of what makes a fam- ily are not in sync with conservative values? Source: FRC email, 09/12/02. “WHY IS THERE SUFFERING?” Pat Robertson has probably been reading up on Buddhist philosophy, which is perhaps what led him to ask the deep question, “Why is there suffering?” Well, according to Pat, “To say there is suffering because there is crime, or because there are auto accidents, is not nearly enough. Our question goes far beneath the surface, where it hits at the very roots of human pain and anguish. There are many causes of suffering, and the list could go on for pages. But our question is not concerned with causes. We are looking for the reasons for suffering.” Is there a difference? Lest we worry too much and really begin to reflect on the reason for suffering, Pat provides us the answer that, “[a]ll suffering is temporary.” It will end with the second coming of Christ. But that still leaves one to worry  whether  this  is  a  pre-millennial  or post-millennial perspective. Will we be trou- bled  before  being  raptured  or  will  we  be raptured without being troubled? Source: http://www.cbn.com/spirituallife/biblestudyand theology/Pat-Why_suffering.asp Compiled by Nikhil Aziz, Kate Cloud, and Allen Jackson. HAIKU Clever sucker punch uses democracy to undermine U.S. Chip Berlet