About the recent federal court order declaring the National Day of Prayer supremely illegal (well, that’s what “unconstitutional” really means): The President has filed a formal “intent to appeal.” This means he has notified Federal District Judge Barbara Crabb that her decision striking down the National Day of Prayer will be challenged. At the same time, the President’s lawyers at the Department of Justice have not indicated what they will say in their defense.

Now, here’s how these things work: When the President or his actions are “enjoined” (or prohibited) by a court, as in this case, he orders the Department of Justice to assign one or more of its many lawyers to legally defend his position. Inside the Department of Justice a decision is then made whether this matter is important, or really important. Really important means the best and most experienced lawyers are tapped and the most prominent personalities–like the Solicitor General (the nation’s top civil attorney) herself–or at least her deputies–are visible and vocal on the matter.

So far, I haven’t seen or heard from the Solicitor General or one of her deputies. (I may have missed it. If so, please bring my attention to it.) This could mean the matter is only in its preliminary stages, or . . . it’s just important, but not really important. Please pardon my cynicism, but after 16 years in Washington, I always give the benefit of the doubt–both ways. During the three presidential administrations I’ve observed up close (two Democrat and one Republican), I’ve seen an awful lot of horse and pony shows. In other words, legal window dressing. I’ve also seen presidents “throw the fight,” so-to-speak. It can be very convenient for an administration to blame-shift to the courts. On the campaign trail it sounds something like this, “Well, we tried to do the right thing, but the courts wouldn’t let us.”

Time will tell what President Obama plans to do with this legal contest. I hope and pray he’ll mount a vigorous defense of the constitutionality of the National Day of Prayer. Even more so, I hope and pray he’ll remind the court why prayer is so important to our nation and its well-being.

Regardless of how the President and his lawyers approach this, Faith and Action will mount its own vigorous effort. It’s why we’ve launched a new facebook page, “Defend the National Day of Prayer.” I hope you’ll sign on to it to show your support. By doing so, you’ll also be included in our own Faith and Action legal brief to be filed with the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals–and maybe even with the United States Supreme Court, should it get that far. You can also sign up to be listed on the legal defense at our website: www.faithandaction.org. (Use the National Day of Prayer Amicus Brief tab at upper left.)

It’s important for the courts to know what American citizens think about the National Day of Prayer. While it’s true the federal courts are to be free and independent of political pressure, they also want to contemplate the sentiments of the American people when deliberating their decisions. Let’s show them strong sentiments for the National Day of Prayer!

If you haven’t done it already, please go to our new facebook page now: http://www.facebook.com/pages/Defend-the-National-Day-of-Prayer/113264075374172?ref=ts and press the “Like” button at the top right-hand side of the page. Then, pass along the link and information to all your facebook friends. Thanks for helping us send a strong message to the courts: Americans want and need the National Day of Prayer!

Rob +

As I write this, President Obama is hosting a private Easter prayer breakfast at the White House for a select group of religious leaders from around the country. The only minister I know personally is in the room is Joel Osteen. (I’ve never commented on my relationship to the Osteens, but I preached for his father at the Lakewood Church many years ago, when Joel was just a young guy on staff!) Anyway, the other person I think is there is Washington Post reporter and fellow Christian Hamil Harris. I’ve done many interviews with him over the years. Mr. Harris and I once actually teamed up in an televised debate with Barry Lynn of Americans United for Separation of Church and State. Viewers were surprised that a Post Reporter and I were on the same side of the argument!

In any case, I was NOT on the invitation list for the breakfast. (Hmm . . I wonder why?) I’ll pass along anything I find out about what went on and what was said.

On a related matter, you may have seen that we covered the President’s Easter visit with his family to a nearby church, the Allen Chapel AME (African Methodist Episcopal) congregation in Southeast Washington. I’m familiar with the church and know one of the deacons there. I was actually criticized for the posting, as if we shouldn’t mention when the President goes to church. Frankly, I’d rather see the President attending church–no matter his motive–than not attending. A lot has been made that Mr. Obama, since being inaugurated, has spent more Sunday mornings shooting hoops than sitting in pews. This was a positive break in that pattern. Let’s pray it has a lasting effect on him.

OK, back later with more.

Rob +

President Barak Obama is the first chief executive to host a traditional Passover dinner in the White House. As he did last year, the President will tonight again preside at an intimate traditional “Seder” (pronounced Say’-der) meal with the First Lady, their daughters and a few staff members and friends. “Seder” means “order” and refers to the orderly way in which special foods are used in the telling of the story of the miraculous Hebrew Exodus from Egypt. Some consider it ironic that this president would be the trailblazer in bringing the signature Jewish observance into life in the executive mansion because he has one of the worst relationships with Israel, the Jewish state.

President Obama hosts first Passover Seder dinner in White House, 2009

President Obama isn’t the only study in presidential religious irony. George W. Bush, the “evangelical” president, was the first to host and maintain an annual White House “Iftar” (pronounced If’-tar’), the celebratory night-time feast that breaks the daily fasts held during the observance of the Islamic holy month of Ramadan.

For more on Passover, see my HEADLINE story to post at our website later today. Better yet, join me for a Passover Seder tomorrow night, Tuesday, March 30, 7:30 PM, at our ministry center across the street from the Supreme Court. (Where I don’t think they hold either a Seder or an Iftar, but the Chief Justice does hold an annual Christmas carol sing!)

Just a little aside: Many older and ancient Christian communities refer to the Easter season as “Pasqua,”  (Italian) or Paskha (Greek), both of which are translations for the Hebrew word for Passover, “Pesach.” It was, of course, the Passover meal that Jesus celebrated with his disciples in the Upper Room, which is commonly called The Last Supper. St. Paul also refers to Christ as “our Passover.” (1 Corinthians 5:7)

Have a blessed Passover!

Rob +

Now that I have your attention, I’ll say, well, sort of . . .

Today, from the very same podium on the very same stage in the very same room where in January I called the nation to pray for an end to abortion in America, President Obama called lawmakers to pass a health care bill that will be a huge financial stimulus for the abortion industry.

The President spoke to Democrat members of Congress in the Congressional Auditorium this afternoon. It’s the same venue we used this past January 22 and last year for our annual US Capitol pro-life event. We plan to use it again next year and every year until our nation finally recognizes the value of every human life and protects them under law. It was sad to see that same podium used to advance an agenda that will place the resources of the federal government in the hands of abortion business owners. (See yesterday’s post for an explanation.)

Today wasn’t all bad news, though. While I was at the Capitol earlier today, I learned that a church service will be held inside the Capitol tomorrow morning–the first such service in more than 150 years–so members of congress can pray before casting their votes on health care. The members that organized this extraordinary prayer and worship service were concerned that because the vote is being held on Sunday, they wouldn’t be able to pray at their own churches. They’ve asked all Americans who care about this enormously consequential vote to pray with them beginning 11:00 AM EST tomorrow, Sunday, March 21, 2010.

More to follow . . .

Rob +

OK, somebody has to say it. It’s uncomfortable and it makes whoever says it open to being called a “Pharisee,” a “homophobe,” a “bigot,” a sanctimonious hater, a benighted troglodyte, or worse. Somebody has to endure that, though. We need to act like grown up, secure people who can talk about difficult things and resolve them.

So, to quote one of my favorites, Bob Seger and the Silver Bullet Band, “Call me a relic, call me what you will. Say I’m old-fashioned, say I’m over the hill,” but here it goes.

First, for the President to use the State of the Union to call on Congress to repeal the current policy on gays serving in the military was wrong. It is incendiary, provocative, distressing and contrary to the most deeply held religious and moral convictions of millions of Americans. Second, if he really believes passionately in this, he has other means to accomplish it. He can use the budget process, or, even quicker and cleaner, he can simply issue an executive order.  He used such an order last night for something far less consequential. The President obviously thought the deficit so important he by-passed the Congress and created a Deficit Commission by fiat.

If, in fact, allowing gays to serve openly in the military is, as the President said, “The right thing to do,” then why not simply do it? What the President actually did was lob an explosively contentious grenade into the public square. Gay activists were instantly in knots about it—disgusted the President didn’t do what they really wanted, but only renewed a campaign promise by punting to the Legislative Branch. And a whole lot of ethnic and cultural groups, moral conservatives, religious people, and, yes, military men and women, are now left to painfully wrestle with what is surely another divisive, corrosive and likely dead-end issue.

Why is this? Because no matter how you cut it, gays-in-the-military does not present the same set of questions as blacks-in-the-military, or latinos-in-the-military. There is near universal belief that it is always wrong to use race, color or ethnicity to judge a person’s character, ability or willingness to serve. (For that matter, there’s no debate the data eliminate whether a gay person can serve admirably or is willing to serve admirably. In fact, not only have gay persons done so, they have given the ultimate sacrifice in doing so.)

The question really is whether it is appropriate for the military to be used to validate a dubious sexual practice. Lets face it, that’s what this is really all about. To the gay rights activists, please be at least that transparent. Tell us what you’re really thinking so we can have an honest conversation. This is about validation of a lifestyle that has as its defining feature a sexual attraction and even a set of sexual acts. After all, isn’t that what on the opposite side makes a heterosexual?

The fact is, well-considered, well-informed, carefully researched and fully contemplated moral and religious philosophies hold that sexual acts between persons of the same sex are injurious to the individuals involved and the society around them. These convictions cannot be dismissed as veneers for irrational hatred or the base animus of the uneducated and ignorant masses. There are plenty of Ivy League PhDs in this camp, along with caring, compassionate, even loving pastors of souls; there are also the vast majority of those who embrace one of the earth’s three great monotheistic faiths. Which brings me to the next point.

A former chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff told me chaplains are “critical to good order and morale, and therefore to the success of our military.” As a board member of an organization that fields a large number of chaplains to the military, I interact with them regularly and I routinely hear about the things that concern them, and this is definitely one. And this doesn’t only affect Evangelical or Catholic clergy. I’m also talking about Jewish, Muslim and Mormon chaplains. In each case, their religious systems teach homosexual behavior violates God’s intended purpose for human sexuality and is therefore not allowed. You don’t have to have a Harvard degree (though many of these chaplains do) to know there will be conflict between what these chaplains are charged to teach and preach, and the President’s proposed policy change. It’s a huge—read that HUGE—problem for morale and good order.

And there’s another thing. Come ‘on, let’s be grown ups. There’s a reason the military doesn’t have men and women showering together. Please don’t dismiss this one as a childish vestige of a now distant Victorian past. The fact is you don’t generally want people around you in a shower that are erotically stimulated by your naked body. Now, I may be betraying my naïve ignorance here about how gay people get excited, but none of my gay acquaintances have ever said it works terribly different for them then it does for straights. The site of an attractive nude body probably does for gays what it does for straights. (Unless, of course, you are gifted with a disinterest in sex, period. That’s another matter.) For most of us, testosterone, estrogen and libido are forward moving forces that need at least a modicum of external controls, including segregated showering and dressing spaces.

I’ve purposely left until last the most incendiary element of this State of the Union attack on personal, moral, social and religious sensibilities—its affect on our relations with the Muslim world. When I participated in my first face-to-face formal dialogue between Christian and Muslim leaders in an Islamic country, I was asked at the start, “Do you accept homosexuality?” Homosexuality is a deal-breaker for the vast majority of Muslims. I know, we don’t want to kowtow to oppressive religions, no matter how many adherents they have, but, again, if we’re looking to solve problems, this is not the way to do it.

Surely the President knows these things. He told us during his campaign he’s a man of deep and considered Christian faith; he had a Muslim father and a partial Muslim upbringing; he has a Harvard law degree and an IQ off the charts. Surely he’s not ignorant of the considerable and principled convictions held by so many on this subject; and of the dangerous pitfalls it presents given the already tense environment military women and men sacrificially occupy.

Let’s grow up and have the big conversation before President Obama’s proposal brings about unintended, irreversible and even terrible consequences for our valiant American heroes.

I’d really like to hear from you on this.

Rob +

What? you’re asking.

Yes, Sunday night, December 20, during the annual “Christmas in Washington” concert at the National Building Museum, President Obama and the First Lady took to the stage to join entertainers in singing “Hark! The Herald Angels Sing.”

Before I go further, let’s recall the first verse of this powerful and all-time classic carol by the musical “prophet” Charles Wesley (1707 – 1788):

Hark! the herald angels sing, “Glory to the new-born king; Peace on Earth and mercy mild, God and sinners reconciled!”

Joyful all ye nations rise, Join the triumph of the skies; With th’ angelic hosts proclaim, “Christ is born in Bethlehem!”

Now, I ask you, how can someone sing these great words and not be affected in their soul? This is the plain Gospel, “the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth”. (Romans 1:16 b) I call these carols, “Musical Gospel Tracts.”

Of course, the key is that last part, “to every one that believeth.” That’s the difference between “affect” and “effect,” but whether one “believes” or not, you must feel the “affect” of such a magnificent message.

Time will tell whether the President bears the “effect,” but the optimist in me says he definitely felt the “affect.”

This is why I love the CHRISTmas season. No one—not even an isolated, insulated, hyper-protected, inordinately shielded President of the United States, can escape hearing and being touched by the echo of that glorious angelic pronouncement heralded from the Heavens 2000 years ago,

“For unto you is born this day in the city of David a Savior, which is Christ the Lord.”

It’s enough to make even a president cry.

Rob +