Exorcism lawsuit

The Nightly Build...

---

Exorcisms, Underage Marriages, and the Texas Supreme Court

Jeffrey Weiss, in The Dallas Morning News religion blog, reports on a Texas Supreme Court ruling against a girl who says she was injured by an exorcism. The girl claimed the church abused her and falsely imprisoned her. The Court ruled that a church can't be sued for what it was doing as part of its religious activities.

"We further conclude the case, as tried, presents an ecclesiastical dispute over religious conduct that would unconstitutionally entangle the court in matters of church doctrine and, accordingly, reverse the court of appeals' judgment and dismiss the case."

I am curious about the case's impact on the FLDS case in west Texas. In that case, it was alleged that underage girls were being "married" to adult men. The Texas Supreme Court recently ruled that there wasn't enough evidence in the FLDS case for Child Protective Services to take children away from their parents. Now, with this latest ruling, I wonder if even if there had been strong evidence of sexual abuse of children, whether the state of Texas could do anything about it. FLDS could claim this is just another "ecclesiastical dispute over religious conduct that would unconstitutionally entangle the court in matters of church doctrine."

LDS vs FLDS

The Nightly Build...

---

They Are Not Real Mormons

Jeffrey Weiss, in The Dallas Morning News Religion blog, reports that The Church of Jesus Christ of Later-day Saints, commonly known as the Mormon church, is not the same as the Fundamentalist Church of Latter-Day Saints, the sect in west Texas that's accused of polygamy and child sexual abuse. The LDS is making a public relations blitz to make sure the public knows there's a difference.

Elsewhere, the American League uses the designated hitter. The National League does not. Quit trying to equate the two by calling them both baseball. Real fans know which is the true baseball.

Death penalty

The Nightly Build...

---

Who is Responsible for the Death Penalty?

Recently, The Dallas Morning News reversed its long-standing support for the death penalty. Mike Hashimoto apparently was one of the few members of the editorial board to oppose that switch.

Today, he uses the example of a killer who set out to kill, who killed with no hesitation, and who has no remorse, to defend the death penalty. Hashimoto challenges readers "spell out your principles, in whichever direction, on this case, since this is the guy whose life we're trying to spare."

Hashimoto himself offers no principles. He makes an emotional appeal by giving us a particularly heinous crime. What principles does he offer that can be captured in legislation so we can distinguish between the heinous cases and the mistakes? None. I particularly object to Hashimoto shifting the responsibility to those who want to "spare" a killer's life instead of keeping the responsibility on those who want to take it.

In reader responses, Zachary Hilbun offers the fullest argument in favor of the death penalty.

He argues that, despite arguments to the contrary, you can be certain of the guilt of criminals in many cases. Perhaps he has a lower bar for certainty than others do. In the next breath, he says "the SCOTUS has said that trials do not have to be perfect for there to be justice." Yes, he does has a lower bar.

He admits that "You can find studies for or against capital punishment being a deterrent." In the next breath, he concludes that capital punishment must be a deterrent because no one wants to be put to death. In other words, the evidence be damned, go by what I think must be so.

He dismisses the possibility of rehabilitation, saying the future doesn't matter, only the past. OK, but he should dismiss his argument of deterrence then, too.

He dismisses the argument that poor people are put to death more often than rich people by saying, in effect, life isn't fair. No, life isn't fair. But our justice system ought to be.

He argues that capital punishment isn't "just revenge." He calls it "social justice" instead. Tomato, tomahto. I'll admit that the case Hilbun makes for capital punishment isn't based on emotion, but it isn't based on logic, either, at least not sound logic.

I am used to hearing that the irreversibility of the death penalty is a reason to do away with the death penalty. Eyewitness mistakes and prosecutorial misconduct can lead to wrongful convictions. It's too late to make things right if the defendant has already been put to death. Another reader, "JK", uses irreversibility as a point in the death penalty's favor. Lest society might change its mind in the future, "JK" prefers to put criminals to death now. I'm used to this argument used by, say, dieters ("Get the cake out of the house, so I'm not tempted to eat it."), but I've never heard it used in a matter of social policy ("Kill him now, in case I change my mind later.")

Outsourcing journalism; Chet Edwards

The Nightly Build...

---

Journalists Discover Their Jobs Can Be Outsourced

Rodger Jones, in The Dallas Morning News Opinion blog, uses exclamation marks to headline a report that copy editing for the Orange County Register, a major daily, is being outsourced to India. Apparently, outsourcing journalism is news in The Dallas Morning News newsroom, which, I had imagined, is filled with professional journalists who might be expected to be on top of developments in, say, journalism. Apparently not. Suggestion to Rodger Jones: Google 'outsourcing journalism' for many other examples. You have heard of Google, haven't you?

Nicole Stockdale followed with her own blog post on the subject. She quotes the copy chief at The Billings Gazette telling readers all the reasons why they should care about copy editors. He does a good job at that. But he does a poor job of making a case why that copy editor needs to be located in Billings. He fails to explain why copy editors in India can't be the readers' advocate, can't "bring clarity to murky writing", can't "challenge flimsy assumptions or conclusions", can't "fix errant facts", can't "bang the drum for fairness and propriety." Maybe he could have used a good copy editor in India.

---

The Great Mentioner Speaks Chet Edwards' Name

The Texas blogosphere has been lit up the last couple days by Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi's mention of Texas Rep. Chet Edwards as someone Barack Obama should consider for Vice President.

Has anyone offered a reason why Pelosi wanted to throw a big air kiss Chet Edwards' way? Because there's not a chance that Edwards will get the nod, but he's gotten a lot of good publicity the last couple days because of it. Pelosi's statement was better than money in Edwards' campaign coffer.

Soaring gas prices; Dobson attacks Obama

The Nightly Build...

---

Does either McCain or Obama Have the Answer?

Joel Thornton, in The Dallas Morning News Trailblazers blog, summarizes the presidential candidates' responses to high gas prices:

"John McCain thinks he has a way to battle soaring gas prices: expand offshore drilling and suspend the federal gasoline tax for the summer. Barack Obama says neither one is the answer: he wants to strengthen oversight of energy traders whose futures speculation he blames in large part for the rising price of oil."

Thornton over-simplifies both candidates' positions. Both understand the root cause of rising oil prices: finite supply and ever-growing demand. Both have said that there's little that can be done that would have an immediate effect. Both have said that the solution involves a broad strategy.

That said...

McCain's gas tax holiday is pure pander.

McCain's proposal for offshore drilling is an environmental risk for a teeny benefit, years in the future. Someone aptly described it as tearing up your couch looking for loose change because the mortgage payment is overdue.

Obama's suggestion that energy traders are playing a part deserves investigation. Supply/demand forces are driving up the price of oil, no doubt, but for the oil price to double in a year indicates that something else may be at work. We all remember Enron's manipulation of the electric power industry in California and the resulting rolling blackouts. We are now painfully learning how the mortgage banking industry ran the housing industry into the ground. The oil industry needs thorough investigation, too, especially after eight years of oil men running the White House.

---

Dobson to Obama: Fruitcake

Wayne Slater, in The Dallas Morning News Trailblazers blog, reports on a speech by Christian right icon James Dobson attacking Barack Obama for distorting the Bible. Dobson is reacting to a speech Obama gave two years ago to a Christian group, in which he called for tolerance.

A blog commenter asks, "Did you listen to Obama's speech? Obama calls out Dobson and threw the first stone."

In fact, Obama did not call out Dobson.
Obama did not throw stones.

Obama merely used Dobson and Al Sharpton as examples of two religious leaders whose opinions of the Bible differ.

"Even if we did have only Christians in our midst, if we expelled every non-Christian from the United States of America, whose Christianity would we teach in the schools? Would we go with James Dobson's or Al Sharpton's?"

Dobson's attack on Obama today supports Obama's point that not all Christians agree on everything.

Ironically, when he gave the speech two years ago, Obama drew more criticism from the left for arguing that people of faith shouldn't have to leave their religion at the door when they enter the public square.

"Not every mention of God in public is a breach to the wall of separation - context matters. It is doubtful that children reciting the Pledge of Allegiance feel oppressed or brainwashed as a consequence of muttering the phrase 'under God.' I didn't. Having voluntary student prayer groups use school property to meet should not be a threat, any more than its use by the High School Republicans should threaten Democrats. And one can envision certain faith-based programs - targeting ex-offenders or substance abusers - that offer a uniquely powerful way of solving problems.

Dobson's attack on Obama today shows why some on the left think religion should be kept out of the public square. Thankfully, Obama himself is tolerant where Dobson is not. Thankfully, Obama is running for President and Dobson is not.

Read Obama and Dobson in their own words. Obama doesn't say Dobson can't seek to pass legislation based on his religious beliefs. Obama says that Dobson is likely to be more successful if he can express his views using more universal values because not everyone shares the same faith that James Dobson does. Dobson would be more likely to get his anti-abortion laws passed if he listened to Obama's practical advice about how democracy works. I suspect Dobson's problem is not so much with Obama as it is with democracy.

Obama:

"Democracy demands that the religiously motivated translate their concerns into universal, rather than religion-specific, values. It requires that their proposals be subject to argument, and amenable to reason. I may be opposed to abortion for religious reasons, but if I seek to pass a law banning the practice, I cannot simply point to the teachings of my church or evoke God's will. I have to explain why abortion violates some principle that is accessible to people of all faiths, including those with no faith at all."

Dobson:

"What the senator is saying there, in essence, is that I can't seek to pass legislation for example, that bans partial birth abortion because there are people in the culture who don't see that as a moral issue and if I can't get everyone to agree with me, it is undemocratic to try to pass legislation that I find offensive to the Scripture. That is a fruitcake interpretation of the Constitution."

DC gun law

The Nightly Build...

---

Will SCOTUS Give Everyone a Gun?

William McKenzie, in The Dallas Morning News Opinion blog, writes:

The Supreme Court is supposed to decide this week or next on a controversial Second Amendment case that involves D.C.'s ability to regulate the possession of firearms. Should individuals have the unlimited right to possess firearms? If not, what restrictions would you favor on a person's right to possess guns?

No, individuals should not have an unlimited right to possess firearms. But I'm afraid that the Second Amendment to the US Constitution gives them that right.

What restrictions would I favor? Strict limits on the types of guns that private citizens are allowed to own and strict registration of the guns that private citizens do own.

But what I favor is a moot point, given the Second Amendment. And amending the Constitution again to restrict the right to bear arms is both very difficult and very risky. Difficult because there is a significant voting bloc opposed to restrictions. Risky because other rights will come under scrutiny and I'm not sure there's a majority of Americans who are all that enamored of, say, free speech or a free press or the ban on government establishing religion. Better leave the Constitution alone.

I would like to see the government preserve the right the bear arms and beef up the part about "a well-regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state." Why not require all adults to be part of a militia, with regular training in the safe and skillful use of guns? Perhaps give citizens the choice of opting out of being in the militia if they pledge not to keep or bear arms. That way, individual liberty is maintained, while at the same time, society is ensured that the people who do exercise their right to bear arms are doing it for the reason cited by the Founders, the need for a well-regulated militia.

Contaminated tomatoes; Public financing; Natural born

The Nightly Build...

---

TomatoGate?

Rodger Jones, on The Dallas Morning News Opinion blog, reports that Lou Dobbs argues that the recent outbreak of salmonella from contaminated tomatoes is reason enough to impeach President Bush. Har, har, har. Lou Dobbs, through hyperbole, turns a serious subject into fodder for late night comedians. Rodger Jones sees the humor and misses the problem.

The FDA is underfunded, understaffed, under-equipped. The FDA estimates it will take 1900 years to inspect all the food production plants that serve the American market. Bush budgets are directly responsible. Impeach Bush for tomatoes? That's over the top. But look forward to Jan. 20, 2009? Definitely.

---

Obama's New Public Financing System

William McKenzie, on The Dallas Morning News Opinion blog, is whining that Barack Obama is forgoing public financing, the first candidate in a generation to do so.

One of McKenzie's complaints is that Obama is running on the promise of a new politics. Well, Obama's Internet-based fundraising, based on small donations from a million regular Americans, is definitely new. The old system certainly wasn't working as intended. Let's see

Another McKenzie complaint is Obama's saying that the existence of unregulated 527 operations is an example of how the existing system is broken. McKenzie says that there are no "big-dollar 527 operations from the right going full bore against him" yet. Give the Republicans time, McKenzie. Give them time. Besides, one of the immediate consequences of Obama's decision was the news today that MoveOn.org has shut down its own 527 operation. Its executive director said, "In light of the new politics offered by Barack Obama, I've come to believe it's time to close the 527 forever." Thank you, Barack Obama!

Finally, McKenzie wants Barack Obama to just say he's forgoing public financing because he's raising boatloads of money from small contributions through the Internet. OK, I'll give McKenzie this one. Obviously, Obama couldn't turn down public financing unless he had a ready alternative. And he does. But even if this is the predominant reason behind Obama's decision, it doesn't negate his other arguments.

The current system is broken. Obama's new politics is already paying dividends. Obama's campaign is being financed, not by corporate fatcats, but by average Americans. And MoveOn.org is shutting down its 527. Rather than criticize Obama, maybe McKenzie ought to be encouraging John McCain to follow Obama's lead.

---

Natural Born?

Tod Robberson, on The Dallas Morning News Opinion blog, reports a lawsuit challenging John McCain's eligibility to be President, due to his having been born in the Panama Canal Zone.

This is a nuisance lawsuit. McCain's birth in the Canal Zone would be unique among Presidents, but I'm certain that courts would rule that his parents being American citizens is enough to make him "natural born." If the Supreme Court could tip the 2000 election to George W Bush, I can't imagine the Court cutting down McCain's candidacy.

By the way, in 2000, there was a lawsuit challenging Cheney's residency. Bush and Cheney were both residents of Texas, meaning that Texas' electors would not be able to cast their electoral votes for both Bush and Cheney. So, Cheney claimed Wyoming residency instead, even though he lived in Texas, had a Texas driver's license and (didn't) vote in Texas. Courts obliged him and dismissed the lawsuit.

Obama elitism; Obama rumors

The Nightly Build...

---

Obama Should Take Up Smoking

Michael Landauer, in The Dallas Morning News Opinion blog, refers to an op/ed piece by Tony Horwitz in which Horwitz suggests Obama should take up smoking to win the support the blue-color voters. Landauer asks readers, tongue-in-cheek, what else Obama should do to shed his elitist image.

A reader, "Linda", suggests:

"I've got a wacky, totally off-the-wall idea, but it just might work. Ready? Ok, here it is: the media could start reporting what Obama actually does (like when he showed up in Quincy, IL to fill sandbags) instead of repeating the GOP meme that 'all Democrats are elitist.'"

Another reader, "John R, Sr." asks:

"Isn't it just sick that we are even having this discussion?"

The premise that Obama is elitist goes unquestioned by Michael Landauer. In the coming weeks, maybe we can expect these equally insightful topics-of-the-day from Landauer...

What else should Obama do to shed his racist image?
... his Socialist image?
... his Muslim image?

And, for balance, "John McCain: Straight Talker? Or Straightest Talker?" (that is, if Stephen Colbert doesn't ask it first).

---

The Truth About Obama

In another The Dallas Morning News Opinion blog item, Michael Landauer reveals that fellow opinion page writer Rodger Jones believes that it's Barack Obama himself who is behind the scurrilous rumors about him. He's planting fake rumors to gain sympathy. Michael Landauer says that's as implausible as the conspiracy theory that the moon landing was faked. For support Rodger Jones cites the decades-old story of Karl Rove planting bugs in his own office, then calling in the press to insinuate they were planted by his political opposition.

Earlier, Michael Landauer suggested Obama should take up smoking. Rodger Jones is already smoking... something. Karl Rove saying he's the victim of bugging by his political opponents is in no way comparable to saying Obama is a secret Muslim terrorist.

My God, I took it as a joke, but now I think it deserves a response. Does Rodger Jones think the moon landing was faked?

I'm reminded of Rodger Jones' reaction to the deaths of Rufus Shaw and Lynn Flint Shaw. Before the bodies were even identified, while all other bloggers were expressing shock and condolences, Rodger Jones was spreading wild speculation that maybe "she [was] going to implicate him in the fraud case that the DA was bringing against her."

Shameful, just like this totally unfounded smear that maybe Obama himself is responsible for the smears about him. If you want to investigate such a hypothesis, fine, but keep it to yourself until you have the least bit of evidence.

Offshore drilling

The Nightly Build...

---

Why Not Let Oil Companies Be Oil Companies?

Rodger Jones is at it again, wondering why Barack Obama is picking on the oil companies by supporting the federal ban on offshore drilling. "Why not let oil companies be oil companies?" asks Jones.

Barack Obama is only trying to shift the balance just a teensie bit away from our overwhelming dependence on oil. The oil industry already gets plenty of benefits. The US spends more on the Pentagon every two days than it spends on alternative energy research in a year. Much of that military spending goes to protect our supply of oil. It's time we finally give others a little attention, too.

Jones accuses Obama of either-or thinking. But it's not those who promote alternative energy development who are guilty of either-or thinking. It's the oil industry who are obsessed with where to drill next and Americans like Rodger Jones who think that somehow the oil industry is the victim of political posturing and not running the show in Washington.

Gay marriage; Offshore drilling

The Nightly Build...

---

The State Should Get Out of the Marriage Business

California has begun marrying gay couples as a result of a recent state Supreme Court ruling. Voters may call a halt to this in November when a state Constitutional amendment is to be voted on. Even if gay marriage survives, many religious fundamentalists are unlikely ever to reconcile with the notion of gay marriage. Churches are not going to change their attitudes any time soon.

Churches have their rules for marriage.
The state has its own rules.
The rules conflict.
One way out of this is for the state to get out of the "marriage" business. Leave the religious part to churches. Don't treat the religious ceremony as legally binding. Instead, the state should focus on the legally binding contract that most couples will still want whether or not they get "married" in a church.

Go to church to get "married" in the eyes of God.
Or go to a justice of the peace to get your "civil union" recognized by the state as a legally binding contract.
Or both.
Or neither.
It's up to you.

---

Why Not Drill More Offshore?

Rodger Jones asks the sensible question, "Why not drill more offshore?" He doesn't want to hear the answer that drilling doesn't do anything to solve our long-term problem. Offshore drilling is a case of too-little, too-late. A large environmental risk in return for a drop in the bucket compared to the size of our problem. A short-term distraction that delays us from developing long-term alternatives (solar, win, bio, even nuclear). Jones says he's all for "renewable stuff," but he argues that this shouldn't be an either-or question. Maybe some of us just don't trust those who want to drill when they say it's not an either-or situation. Not when they mockingly dismiss renewable energy sources as "cow flatulence" and running our cars on "bacon grease," as Rodger Jones does.

Rod Dreher and Google; Red light cameras

The Nightly Build...

---

What Makes Rod Stupid?

On The Dallas Morning News Opinion blog, Rod Dreher asks, in his perfect straight man imitation, "Is Google making us stupid?"

Of course, the obvious answer is, "No, Rod, it's not Google that's making you stupid."

---

Richardson and Red Light Cameras

According to The Dallas Morning News, Richardson is considering expanding its use of cameras to catch red light runners. Assistant City Manager David Morgan said the city sees the camera program as a tool to improve safety, not as a cash cow. "We’re basically breaking even on revenue," he said. "The system is paying for itself."

The system works. Its purpose is public safety, not revenue generation. I say to Richardson, step on it.

Tim Russert

The Nightly Build...

---

Tim Russert, 1950-2008

All the blogs are all over the news of Tim Russert's sudden and unexpected death at age 58. For once, all the coverage, left and right, is of a kind -- praise for both Russert's professionalism and his character.

A reader on The Dallas Morning News Trailblazers' blog says, "It's like losing Cronkite!" Perhaps hyperbole, but Russert's influence does bring to mind the influence Walter Cronkite had on American public opinion. It's said that the day Cronkite closed his nightly newscast with his opinion that the Vietnam war was not winnable, that President Johnson said, "That's it. If I've lost Cronkite, I've lost middle America." Broadcast news is diminished since Cronkite's days, and no one fills Cronkite's shoes, but Tim Russert will be hard to follow himself.

My lasting memory of Tim Russert will be the reception his comment got when he declared after one of the later Democratic primaries that we now know who the nominee is going to be, there is no doubt. Other pundits said the same thing, days or even weeks before or after, but it was Russert's opinion that was treated as authoritative, almost official. There can be no higher praise from his peers in the news media than how they followed his lead in reporting the story.

Industrial Blvd; Reunion Arena

The Nightly Build...

---

The "Ethnic" Spoils System

Rod Dreher, in The Dallas Morning News Opinion blog, despairs of staying in the city when he sees the city council "tie itself up in knots" over the public's expressed preference to rename Industrial Blvd after Cesar Chavez. Dreher rails against the "ethnic spoils system." Maybe he yearns for the good old days, when cities had just a plain old fashioned "spoils system" and the ethnics were shut out altogether. In those days, naming highways for white leaders like Robert L. Thornton or Woodall Rodgers was not seen as part of an "ethnic spoils system." Whites weren't ethnics. That word was reserved for everyone else. Only now, when we start naming highways for people other than dead white males, do people like Rod Dreher notice the same politics at work and conclude its "ethnic."

P.S. A shorter version of this comment was posted to The Dallas Morning News Opinion blog, where it was quickly censored.

---

Convention Center Hotel? Yes. Reunion Arena? No

The irony in the Dallas City Council getting embroiled in controversy over the name change for Industrial Blvd is that the public survey on the subject was intended to distract public attention from the more serious project of getting the city into the hotel business. The plan to have the city fund and build and own a downtown convention center hotel was conspicuously not put to public vote.

Michael Landauer, in The Dallas Morning News Opinion blog, puts his finger on another irony. The same city council that is gung ho on getting the city into the hotel business is trying to get the city out of the arena business. Reunion Arena shuts for good on June 30. As Landauer says:

"Think about it. One group seems to be saying: Rail plus Hotel plus Meeting Space equals a Sure Thing. Another group is admitting that: Rail plus Hotel plus Meeting Space equals an unstoppable drain on city resources."

Cesar Chavez; Robert Gates; Franklin Graham

The Nightly Build...

---

Cesar Chavez, Illegal Immigration and Racism

The Dallas City Council conducted a public survey that resulted in the public expressing a preference for renaming Industrial Blvd for Cesar Chavez. Oops. Not what the council had in mind. Can you say Riverfront Blvd instead? Now, the council is backpedaling, delaying a renaming decision and suggesting that the city find another street to name for Cesar Chavez.

There's an old rule in politics. Don't call an election that you don't have to unless you already know the voters are going to side with you. Perhaps the council got itself into this mess by following another old rule in politics: if you don't really want to listen to the voters on one topic, get them talking about something else instead. The whole survey thing was primarily intended to distract voters from the move the council is making to commit Dallas taxpayers to become convention center hotel owners. And that's how Dallas might end up with the Trinity River paved over by something called Cesar Chavez Blvd.

Joseph Kony, a reader who has been filling the The Dallas Morning News blogs with frequent rants against African-Americans (and Africans, too, as skin color is everything in his worldview), tries to enlist Cesar Chavez in his anti-immigrant campaign. He points out that Cesar Chavez once led his United Farm Workers union on a protest march to the Mexican border to object to the growers' practice of encouraging illegal immigration to break union strikes. I suppose I'll let Joseph Kony have Cesar Chavez if Joseph Kony starts supporting unionization drives in Texas.

---

Barack Obama's Opportunity to Bring Us Together

Michael Landauer, in The Dallas Morning News Opinion blog, lobbies for whoever wins the November election to keep Robert Gates on in the next administration. I think it's an outstanding suggestion. I once suggested John McCain as Barack Obama's Secretary of Defense. Robert Gates might be an even better choice. It would be a wonderful act of bipartisanship in a time of war.

---

Obama's Meeting with Christian Leaders

Jeffrey Weiss, in The Dallas Morning News Religion blog, quotes an AP report that Barack Obama met privately with a wide spectrum of Christian leaders:

"Mark DeMoss, a spokesman for the Rev. Franklin Graham, said Graham attended and asked Obama whether 'he thought Jesus was the way to God, or merely a way.' DeMoss declined to discuss Obama's response."

Graham reminds me of Stephen Colbert, who frequently asks his guests: "George W Bush. Great President? Or greatest President?"