Recently in Free Speech Category

There's nothing wrong with the Catholic Church - or other churches - addressing the issue of abortion.  As you know, this country has a rich and welcomed history of turning to churches and houses of worship during the debate of the great moral issues of the day.  Let's not forget the calls to action - to end slavery - and the powerful voices raised during the civil rights movement. 

Consider the call to action from the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. at Ebenezer Baptist Church in Atlanta in 1965.  These were his words: "Legislation, executive orders, or judicial decrees will have to control the external effects of bad internal attitudes. Therefore, if we are to realize the American dream, we must continue to work through legislation. So it is necessary for Congress to pass meaningful legislation."

That's exactly what the Catholic Church did with its strong support of the Stupak/Pitts Amendment, which prohibits federal funding of abortion in health care.  The Catholic Church should be congratulated, not criticized, for standing-up for the life of the unborn.  We heard from nearly 170,000 Americans - including many Catholics to be sure - who wanted a guarantee that the House health bill would prohibit the use of federal funds for abortions.

Barry, would you have criticized the Catholic Church if it had OPPOSED the Stupak/Pitts Amendment and it failed to clear the House?

Barry, it looks like the White House got the message:  its email 'flagging' operation appears to have been disabled.

As I reported to you last week, the White House launched in early August what can only be described as a citizen reporting program.  The program was unveiled on the White House website by Macon Phillips, the White House Director of New Media.  As you recall, Phillips claimed that "[t]here is a lot of disinformation about health insurance reform out there" both on the web and floating around in chain emails.  Phillips stated that "[s]ince we can't keep track of all of them here at the White House, we're asking for your help. If you get an email or see something on the web about health insurance reform that seems fishy, send it to flag@whitehouse.gov."

Barry, there's a troubling pattern developing as the White House and Congressional leadership embark on a campaign to silence their critics - especially when it comes to concerns about health care.

Example One:  Last week, in an official White House release from Macon Phillips, the White House Director of New Media, the White House launched what can only be described as a citizen reporting initiative on the White House website.  Phillips claimed that "[t]here is a lot of disinformation about health insurance reform out there" both on the web and floating around in chain emails.  He stated that "[s]ince we can't keep track of all of them here at the White House, we're asking for your help. If you get an email or see something on the web about health insurance reform that seems fishy, send it to flag@whitehouse.gov."

I like Peeps, too.  Barry, the key issue is whether there is religious discrimination going on when it comes to the issue of the Easter Peeps.

If the landlord is simply enforcing in an evenhanded manner a religion-neutral lease provision regarding cleanliness, there's probably not much of a case. On the other hand, however, if the landlord has a policy or practice that treats religious expression on less favorable terms than non-religious expression, there is likely a violation of the federal fair housing laws (and also the First Amendment if the landlord is a state actor).

I have a certain endearing respect for Peeps, those marshmallow creations which used to be seen solely in the form of chickens and rabbits at Easter but now have a ubiquitous presence during every holiday period.  The creatures come from the Just Born candy company in Bethlehem, Pennsylvania, the place I grew up.  (Even earlier, during the Depression, my father swept floors at the company.)

Now, Peeps are playing a role, admittedly a supporting one, in a strange "religious liberty" case in Colorado. As reported in a local newspaper, Carol Burdick was evicted from her apartment for keeping her Easter decorations on her door 17 days after Easter, an alleged violation of her lease provision to keep all areas under the tenant's control "in a clean and sanitary condition." Her display included cardboard cutouts of chickens and rabbits, some plastic grass, and some Peeps.  Later this week she will argue that the leasing company violated Ms. Burdick's religious freedom.  Her lawyer noted: "You can't evict somebody for Easter bunny decorations.  An Easter decoration is a religious statement and should be protected-- even if it is just bunnies."