The Vatican’s Pontifical Council for the Pastoral Care of Migrants and Itinerant People has released “10 Commandments for Drivers” this week.  While these ten aren’t as binding as the original, they’re still generally good advice.

I. You shall not kill.

II. The road shall be for you a means of communion between people and not of mortal harm.

III. Courtesy, uprightness and prudence will help you deal with unforeseen events.

IV. Be charitable and help your neighbor in need, especially victims of accidents.

V. Cars shall not be for you an expression of power and domination and an occasion of sin.

VI. Charitably convince the young and not so young not to drive when they are not in a fitting condition to do so.

VII. Support the families of accident victims.

VIII. Bring guilty motorists and their victims together, at the appropriate time, so that they can undergo the liberating experience of forgiveness.

IX. On the road, protect the more vulnerable party.

X. Feel responsible toward others.

Bjorn Lomborg, a Danish academic heads the Copenhagen Consensus, a group that focuses on “the international community’s effort to solve the world’s biggest challenges and how to do this in the most cost efficient manner.”

 Last month, Dr. Lomborg testified before congress, where he had this to say about global warming:

To put it very bluntly, the Kyoto Protocol would likely cost at least $180 billion a year and do little good. UNICEF estimates that just $70-80 billion a year could give all Third World inhabitants access to the basics like health, education, water, and sanitation. More important still is the fact that if we could muster such a massive investment in the present-day developing countries, this would also give them a much better future position in terms of resources and infrastructure from which to manage a future global warming.”

As you’ve heard, SB 2,which grants minority status protection based on sexual orientation and gender identity is now awaiting Governor Ted Kulongoski’s signature.
 
Here’s a brief timeline of Senate Bill 2, and the some of the action that the Oregon Family Council has taken:
 
March 5 – SB 2 introduced in the Senate at the request of the Governor’s Task Force on Equality.
 
March 12 – Over 120 Oregonians sign up to testify in opposition to SB 2 at its first public hearing.  Despite many requests to amend the bill to protect religious organizations, the Senate Judiciary committee sends the bill to the Senate floor.  One Senator questions need to ever exempt religious organizations from any regulations.
 
March 21 – Despite thousands of calls and emails from citizens, Senate passes bill 21-7.  Those opposing the bill express concerns about the weak religious exemption.
 
April 5 – Nearly 500 pastors and religious leaders from across the state gather in Salem to meet their State Representatives and Senators and ask that SB 2 be amended to protect the right of religious organizations to hire those who share their values.  Attendees are from 57 different House districts, and represent many church denominations and organizations including private schools, rescue missions, mission agencies, and youth outdoors programs.. 
 
April 9 – Public hearing on SB 2 in the House Rules committee. Over 700 Oregonians attend a rally at the capitol opposing SB 2.  Capitol hearing rooms are packed in what some legislators called the “largest turnout for any bill in recent memory.”
 
April 10 – House Rules committee amends bill with what some have termed an “ironclad” religious exemption.  Churches and religious organizations are free to hire clergy, religious instructors and support staff that share their values, and may continue to take employment action based on a bona fide religious belief about sexual orientation.
 
April 17 – House of Representatives passes SB 2 35-25.  Those in opposition express many concerns, including that cross-dressers will be able to use the locker room of their choice based on the bill’s inclusion of “gender identity,” and that schools will eventually be forced to alter their curriculum so that all sexual preferences are addressed in sex-ed classes.  Representatives acknowledge the thousands of calls, letters and emails they received opposing the bill.
 
April 19 – Senate concurs in House amendments to SB 2.

Rep. Ron Maurer (R-Grants Pass) points out an interesting conflict between the Common School Fund and the Sierra Club. 

Oregon has an investment fund called the Common School Fund (CSF).  This fund like any financial investment provides annual returns that are given to schools.  The state has a fiduciary responsibility to maximize its investments and when that investment is for the support of education it is critical that we be smart in how we manage money.  A significant piece of the CSF investment portfolio is the Elliot Sate Forest.  The Elliot State Forest is about 93,000 acres of timberland near Readsport.  Historically, this investment has returned approximately 3% annually. Well below the 8.7% return seen by the Oregon Investment Council. 

HB 3434 is a bill that would require the State Land Board to ensure that this investment provide a rate of return at or above that received by the Oregon Investment Council for the CSF.  If the rate of return is not sufficient then the State Land Board would be required to solicit bids to sell the Elliot State Forest and any proceeds would be placed in the CSF for other investments. 

During public testimony it was clear who is on the side of kids in this debate.  And it is not the Sierra Club.  I might suggest that the Sierra Club just buy the Elliot State Forest.  I will open the bidding at $2 Billion. 

Where’s the tolerance? Senate Bill 2, the “Minority Status Bill” brewing in Salem, has been carefully devised by a handful of activist legislators who have made clear their intentions to “stick it to the faith community” with the bill’s decidedly paltry religious exemption.

During the March 12 public hearing, Senator Vicki Walker (D-Eugene) cited constitutionally forced arm-twisting as the only conceivable reason to even consider a religious exemption.  She even went so far as to suggest that churches’ religious freedom be eliminated altogether!

During testimony by one of the state’s leading pastors, Senator Ginny Burdick’s (D-Portland) disengaged posture during the testimony did nothing to hide her lack of interest… like listening to public testimony was cramping her legislative style.

Specifically, SB 2 limits a church’s religious freedom to employ those who follow their faith, the deciding factor being whether the position in question is tied to the church’s primary purpose. And who do you suppose will decide that? The courts will, of course. Which brings up the question of whether defending themselves against lawsuits is a fair burden to attach to Oregon churches’ purse strings. Definitely not.

And for any non-church enterprise—whether faith-based or secular—there is no exemption; a religious bookstore may be forced to employ someone who is gay, lesbian, bisexual, or whose gender identity differs from their biology. (READ: A Christian bookstore may be legally forced to hire a cross-dresser to man the checkout line.)

Religious freedom? Why, that may be a thing of Oregon’s past! Now we have the government to decide where our convictions must lie. And if that’s where we’re heading, a Measure 36-style conflict may be the only option left for Oregon’s faith community to defend itself. It may be the only course of action for churches, mosques, and synagogues that want to keep their religious freedoms intact.

The Big Bang Theory has new meaning: mention the Bible in biology class, and—BANG!—you’re out of a job. Religious intolerance has reached a fever pitch.

Kris Helphinstine, a high school biology teacher in Sisters, was fired last night for deviating from the established curriculum on evolution by “including biblical references in material he provided students.”

When asked about the incident by the Bend Bulletin, Helphinstine said, “Critical thinking is vital to scientific inquiry… my whole purpose was to give accurate information and to get them thinking.”

From a House Republicans Press Release:
 
“Rep. Bruce Hanna today spoke on behalf of House Republicans at the Governor’s ceremonial signing of the Rainy Day Fund legislation. He had the following to say regarding the enactment of HB 2707 and HB 2301:
 
“On behalf of the House Republican caucus, I am pleased to be here to celebrate the signing of the Rainy Day Fund legislation.  This has been a top priority of our members for many sessions.
 
We very much appreciate the willingness of the Governor and Democratic leadership to work with us to create a rainy day fund in a way that protects small businesses – the backbone of our state’s economy.
 
The state rainy day fund will bring much-needed stability to our budget process, and it will improve Oregon’s credit rating, which helps save taxpayer dollars.
 
It is important that our rainy day fund is starting with a healthy balance. It is just as important that thousands of small businesses will receive their kicker tax credit, and enable the $24.8 million to be reinvested in Oregon’s economy.
 
Hopefully, this will set a positive tone for the remainder of the session, where we can work together to address issues that are important to Oregonians.”
  
After years of negotiating, fighting and cajoling, we finally have a rainy day fund, and small businesses still get their kicker.  Here’s hoping it works!

Now, get off the computer and enjoy the beautiful weekend!

Citizen Magazine’s John Paulton has a fascinating article on the possibility that Supreme Court Justice John Paul Stevens will retire this summer, leaving an opening for a conservative Bush nominee.

All political eyes are on John Paul Stevens these days. For months, the 86-year-old Supreme Court Justice has been the subject of speculation. First, there were rumors of ill health. Then came surprising reports that the Court’s longest-serving liberal wants to resign his seat while a Republican holds the White House, out of a sense of loyalty to the man who nominated him—the late President Gerald Ford. Current speculation is that a Stevens resignation could come this summer, after the Court has concluded its current term.

Even if a Stevens vacancy does not happen this year, the odds are that the next Supreme Court opening will result from a liberal vacating his or her seat. The average age of the four conservative jurists is 59, while the average age of the remaining justices is 73. Should one of the liberal seats open up while President Bush is still in office, the political battle for the ages would begin. After all, if one of the liberal justices were to be replaced with one who recognizes a constitutional duty to interpret rather than create the law, there is a strong chance that the 1973 Roe v. Wade decision could be overturned, sending control over abortion back to the states.

 That reality has the Left apoplectic. As the Roberts and Alito confirmation battles revealed, most liberals view abortion as the one right that must be protected above all others—and that means holding on to the courts at all cost.
 
But many other critical matters are at stake as well. The definition of marriage, religious freedom, school choice, property rights and national security are among the many issues in which activist, left-leaning courts have held sway. While adding a fifth conservative to the Court wouldn’t change things overnight, the eventual impact could be breathtaking. It’s no wonder that the battle lines are drawn.
 
The first question regarding any Supreme Court vacancy is whether President Bush will deliver a solid nominee whom social conservatives can enthusiastically support.
 
Read the rest here.

Happy 148th Birthday to Oregon!