ADF Email: Ninth Circuit Hits the Brakes

Just got the following in an email from Alliance Defense Fund:

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit Monday put the brakes on an Aug. 18 implementation date for U.S. District Judge Vaughn Walker’s order overthrowing the will of 7 million California voters with regard to marriage.

The court granted a motion filed by the ProtectMarriage.com legal team, including attorneys with the Alliance Defense Fund, that asked the court to stay the judge’s Aug. 4 decision in Perry v. Schwarzenegger until the appellate court has time to hear the case.

“It made no sense to impose a radical change in marriage on the people of California before all appeals on their behalf are heard, so the 9th Circuit’s decision is clearly the right call,” said ADF Litigation Staff Counsel Jim Campbell. “Refusing to stay the decision would only have created more legal confusion surrounding any same-sex unions entered while the appeal is pending. This case has just begun. ADF and the rest of the legal team are confident that the right of Americans to protect marriage in their state constitutions will ultimately be upheld.”

As part of its order, the 9th Circuit also issued an expedited appeal schedule in the case, with the opening brief due Sept. 17 and oral argument to be heard the week of Dec. 6.
----------
ADF is a legal alliance defending the right to hear and speak the Truth through strategy training funding and litigation.

Copyright © 2010 Alliance Defense Fund. All Rights Reserved 15100 N. 90th Street Scottsdale, AZ 85260

Here's ADF's pitch for a donation:

Your prayers and financial support enable ADF to fight – and WIN – in the battle to preserve marriage as the union of one man and one woman. Please continue to join us in prayer and consider giving a generous $35, $50 or $100 donation to help preserve marriage and religious freedom in America.

Here's ADF's donation link.

Free Speech and Policing

Over in the comments for this YouTube video, someone calling herself JessicaSideways has decided to spar with me on the subject of free speech. The video is from the Alliance Defense Fund and is about Christian students being defamed and silenced for their faith and moral beliefs. For example, one young man gave a speech about his faith and was called a "fascist bastard" by the professor in front of the rest of the class. Then he was mocked and told to "ask God what his grade is".

Now—when my wife calls me a "fascist bastard" I know it's sort of a term of endearment. But I'm not sure that was in the case in this college classroom. What's ironic and worth pointing out in my mind is that although JessicaSideways brings up so-called "hate speech" in her argument against the type of speech used by the two Christian students, it's all at a hypothetical level. Whereas the real threatening and degrading remarks in the video are all aimed at the Christian students. For example, in her first remark to me in reply to my statement that students should have free speech, she said: "Would you say the same thing if they started talking on how they think the Aryan race is superior and started targeting Latinos, Blacks and Asians?" But nobody was talking like that. This seems the perfect demonstration of the straw-man fallacy with a side of red herring. Likewise she brings up the act of "throwing around the word 'nigger' in class" which she claims would rightly offend black students. I'll concede the point, although that word only offends most blacks when "thrown around" by non-blacks. But the real point is that there wasn't anything analogous said about gays. It's pretty safe to say the girl in the class didn't say "[Expletives for gays and lesbians] shouldn't be allowed to adopt kids." But where's the drama in that? She focuses on a hypothetical situation by which she insinuates bad behavior.

I left a challenge to Ms. Sideways regarding her assertion that "Christianity works to the detriment of society." I sarcastically pointed out that there was hostility in that remark, echoing her fears about "targeting" by using her words. But my main thought about freedom of speech is that the best cure for what you think is incorrect speech is more speech, not less. Correct someone if they are wrong especially about the facts, don't tell them to shut up or bully them into it by wrongly characterizing their words. What she is doing in the combox can be called "policing"; someone is told they should be quiet because their words are perceived to be dangerous. Likewise the young man's professor was exercising a policeman's role by silencing his speech rather than allowing the speech then countering it with different speech.

Reasonable debates and conversations always produce clarity because they serve to ultimately bring out the underlying philosophical foundations of the words comprising the speech. And if nothing else, an audience can tell who is losing ground by the crescendo of shrillness of the tone and the callow mockery offered in place of sound argument.

Update: Found Jessica Sideways's site. So... there you go.

Thanks for reading my blog. For current commentary and what-not, visit the Est Quod Est homepage

Stand Up Against Religious Discrimination on Campus

The Aliance Defense Fund has been doing yeoman's work toward the goal of providing equal treatment for religious, especially Christian, students on university campi which, as we know, are overrun with angry, vindictive leftists posing as professors. Here's a quick spot providing sample cases and explaining what it is that they do to resolve them.

This is the great news, as reported on the ADF's very informative website, that "every time a public university’s speech code is challenged in a courtroom – it fails. ADF has been instrumental in several of those cases." In other words, these university's policies vis-à-vis speech codes, speech zones, compelled participation, etc. are all unenforceable and probably unconstitutional.

Of course, this group needs donations to operate. Currently they have a campaign running where some wealthy folks have agreed to match funds up to $2.2 million. I donated to this group, and not just because the dude in the video has the same hairstyle as I have. Maybe I'm weird, but a 100% success rate never fails to impress me.