Sen.David Vitter (R-LA) to earmark $100,000 for creationist group

Senator David Vitter to earmark $100,000 for creationist group
http://www.afriquenligne.fr/news/daily-news/senator-david-vitter-to-earmark-$100,000-for-creationist-group-200710039858/

United States Senator, a Republican from Louisiana, David Vitter has earmarked $100,000 for Louisiana Family Forum (LFF), a conservative creationist organization. Vitter put the earmark into the labor, health and education financing bill for fiscal year 2008. The bill specifies the Louisiana Family Forum received the money "to develop a plan to promote better science education."

Vitter has close ties to the LFF through Dan Richey, the group's grass-roots coordinator, who received $17,250 as a consultant in Vitter's 2004 Senate race. Also Vitter's campaign paid Beryl Amedee who is the education resource council chairwoman for the Louisiana Family Forum.

As part of the Louisiana Family Forum efforts to "combat" the teaching of evolution, the group included Kent Hovind's "Battle Plan" on its website. Hovind, whose education from Patriot Bible University is widely considered to be a diploma mill, is currently serving a ten year prison sentence for tax evasion and obstructing federal agents.

..................

"to...promote better science education"
The nerve of that is just appalling! And from Mr. Pampers too!

...explain Science Facts like my Dog explains Quantum Physics. :)

Idiots.

Vitter earmarked federal money for creationist group
Bill Walsh, Washington bureau Sept 22, 2007
http://blog.nola.com/times-picayune/2007/09/vitter_earmarked_federal_money.html

The nonprofit Louisiana Family Forum ... has in recent years taken the lead in promoting "origins science," which includes the possibility of divine intervention in the creation of the universe.

The group's stated mission is to "persuasively present biblical principles in the centers of influence on issues affecting the family through research, communication and networking." Until recently, its Web site contained a "battle plan to combat evolution," which called the theory a "dangerous" concept that "has no place in the classroom." The document was removed after a reporter's inquiry.

.....

The group's tax-exempt status prohibits the Louisiana Family Forum from political activity, but Vitter has close ties to the group. Dan Richey, the group's grass-roots coordinator, was paid $17,250 as a consultant in Vitter's 2004 Senate race. Records also show that Vitter's campaign employed Beryl Amedee, the education resource council chairwoman for the Louisiana Family Forum.

....

The money in the earmark will pay for a report suggesting "improvements" in science education in Louisiana, the development and distribution of educational materials and an evaluation of the effectiveness of the Ouachita Parish School Board's 2006 policy that opened the door to biblically inspired teachings in science classes.

Vitter earmarks funds for religious group
Nonprofit supports creationist education
Sunday, September 23, 2007
By Bill Walsh

WASHINGTON -- Sen. David Vitter, R-La., earmarked $100,000 in a spending bill for a Louisiana Christian group that has challenged the teaching of Darwinian evolution in the public school system and to which he has political ties.

The money is included in the labor, health and education financing bill for fiscal 2008 and specifies payment to the Louisiana Family Forum "to develop a plan to promote better science education."

The earmark appears to be the latest salvo in a decades-long battle over science education in Louisiana, in which some Christian groups have opposed the teaching of evolution and, more recently, have pushed to have it prominently labeled as a theory with other alternatives presented. Educators and others have decried the movement as a backdoor effort to inject religious teachings into the classroom.

The nonprofit Louisiana Family Forum, launched in Baton Rouge in 1999 by former state Rep. Tony Perkins, has in recent years taken the lead in promoting "origins science," which includes the possibility of divine intervention in the creation of the universe.

The group's stated mission is to "persuasively present biblical principles in the centers of influence on issues affecting the family through research, communication and networking." Until recently, its Web site contained a "battle plan to combat evolution," which called the theory a "dangerous" concept that "has no place in the classroom." The document was removed after a reporter's inquiry.

(snip)

http://www.nola.com/timespic/stories/index.ssf?/base/news-9/1190529501310280.xml&coll=1

A "little" pay-off to get back in the good graces of the looney rw? Smells like it.

I could be wrong but I've lived in the Bible Belt a long time now and I think the dirty diapers are just too much for most folks down here. They don't like adultery, prostitution makes it much worse, but if they know and understand about the diaper fetish, I think he's toast. (By understand, I mean they have to know he wasn't just wearing the diapers.)

Of course, Louisiana is different from the rest of the South, but even there I think the diapers will raise a big stink.

Vitter Gives Federal Money to Creationist Group
Sept24, 2007 by Ed Brayton
http://scienceblogs.com/dispatches/2007/09/vitter_gives_federal_money_to.php

.........

The Louisiana Family Forum has every right to advocate creationism and rail against the evils of evolution, but there's certainly no reason why they should get our tax dollars to do it. Especially if they're going to be promoting crap like this:

Mills said his group is not attempting to push the teaching of evolution out of the schools, but wants to supplement it. Yet, some of the material posted on the Louisiana Family Forum's Web site suggests a more radical view.

Among other things, a "Louisiana Family Forum Fact Sheet" at one point included "A Battle Plan -- Practical Steps to Combat Evolution" by Kent Hovind, a controversial evangelist who is serving a 10-year prison sentence for tax offenses and obstruction of justice.

Hovind's paper stated, "Evolution is not a harmless theory but a dangerous religious belief" that underpinned the atrocities committed by Adolf Hitler, Joseph Stalin and Pol Pot of the Khmer Rouge in Cambodia.

The bill has yet to be voted on. How about contacting your senator and telling them to get this nonsense out of the bill? You can find the earmark in this PDF file on page 238. (http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=110_cong_reports&docid=f:sr107.110.pdf)

End of Line.

Vitter’s creationist pork - Sept24th, 2007
The Carpetbagger Report - http://www.thecarpetbaggerreport.com/archives/12985.html

Sen. David Vitter’s (R-La.) ... apparently has a plan to keep himself in the religious right’s good graces. Vitter has decided to throw some pork-barrel spending at a bizarre Louisiana creationist group ... that has challenged the teaching of Darwinian evolution in the public school system and to which he has political ties.

.....

The group in question is the Louisiana Family Forum, which has a stated mission of trying to “persuasively present biblical principles in the centers of influence on issues affecting the family through research, communication and networking.” The group’s materials have also said it has a “battle plan to combat evolution,” which called modern biology a “dangerous” concept that “has no place in the classroom.”

.......

The money in the earmark will pay for a report suggesting “improvements” in science education .....

Allow me to translate. Vitter wants to give a creationist group $100,000 in federal money to encourage Louisiana officials to embrace creationism in public schools, the law notwithstanding.

Even by the standards of congressional Republicans, this is pretty breathtaking. It’s one thing for Vitter to endorse pseudo-science; it’s something else when he decides to subsidize it with federal tax dollars.

............

(...as in spending...)

Going to wipe that image clean!

Spending Fed Monies for Religious Crap is off limits...

Why???

Back in one of the 2004 Presidential debates - town hall like one where audience members could ask questions - some young little blonde anti-choice thing stood up and said I don't want my tax dollars going to kill the babies - I WAS SCREAMING at the TV I DON'T WANT MY TAX DOLLARS GOING TO KILL IRAQI BABIES AND CHILDREN - I swear to Christ I wish I could figure out a way NOT to pay taxes because I'M SICK of my money GOING TO SHIT I don't believe in - and I'm not an anti-tax kind of person but ENOUGH is FRIGGIN ENOUGH

Your children will pay for this war, just like Vietnam was finally paid for during Clinton/Gore.

why he needs those diapers!

But seriously, we need to communicate our distaste for this to our Congresspeeps and to Harry Reid in particular.

They're saying they want "to develop a plan to promote better science education."

Here's the plan: Let science teachers teach science and stop trying to insert religion into science.

There is nothing about evolution that's incompatible with belief in God. If God is all-powerful, He can certainly create the process of evolution. One of the two Creation stories in Genesis even follows the general evolutionary scheme. That's all that need be said about the Bible or God in a biology class, and then only if a student asks.

Teaching kids who were mostly Southern Baptists or Pentecostals, I usually just looked surprised that they would ask and responded "Don't you think God is powerful enough to start the process of evolution?" Kids would stop and think briefly, then nod their heads, or say, "Yeah, that would work." One or two usually wouldn't show any sign of agreement but they'd shut up about it because they were outnumbered.

Imagine their surprise that evolution does not say that we are descended from monkeys!

:eyes:

and strongly suggest an investigation into his sexual adventures and into his connections with this group. These are the committee members:

Democrats
Barbara Boxer, California, Chairman
Mark Pryor, Arkansas
Ken Salazar, Colorado

Republicans
John Cornyn, Texas, Vice Chairman
Pat Roberts, Kansas
Johnny Isakson, Georgia

The great thing here is that only Sen. Boxer is from a blue state; the others should be concerned about how the Vitter scandal, as well as the Craig scandal, is viewed in their home state. The Democrats and Republicans have reasons for denouncing and investigating Vitter and Craig. I think they're already going to investigate Craig, though maybe they are just considering it.

E-mail them and call their office, too. Some won't accept e-mail unless you live in their state. Pelosi won't, unless she's changed her site, and I'm plenty annoyed about that since she is the Speaker now, not merely a Rep from CA.

If you don't want to call long-distance and live in one of their home states, call their local office. But long-distance is pretty cheap today, relatively speaking.

You can get address, phone and FAX numbers for the committee, and I suppose writing to the entire committe is also a good idea, here:

http://ethics.senate.gov/

then go to:

http://senate.gov

and look them up individually by state or name. The more of us who write, the better. And the more of them we contact the better.

if not a few more.

It is easy to send faxes for many with decent IT equipment.

Also, send an e-mail to the White House. That way, you go down in history (if they are no longer deleting their e-mails!).

If Vitter goes, we get an appointed Dem who can run for re-election in 2008, or whenever Vitter's term is up. If Craig goes, we get another Repub appointed, who can run for re-election after Craig's term is up. I think we'd get Republican appointees in place of Lott, Sessions, and Stevens, too. They might be kindler, gentler Republicans, of course. :D

I posted this in several forums, giving you credit for the original post, and encouraged people to write, call, e-mail, FAX. Whether anybody will, who knows?

better science education? = That is like, sooo stupid.
Patriot Bible University? Pleeeease... like isn't that mixing religion and government already?
currently serving a ten-year prison sentence for tax evasion and obstructing federal agents? Well... duh.

What-ever!

Valspeak /off

I have always been taught that the first phrase meant that there would be no "National Religion" established by law (at least not by Congress).

But I have begun to think it can also be interpreted to mean that there should be no law passed that gives preference ("respect") to an establishment of religion - again, at least by Congress.

I think that a group promoting Biblical belief is definitely a religious establishment; "an establishment of religion." And this little barrel of pork certainly gives preference (respect) to that religious establishment - in the form of federal funding.

I suppose it all hinges on the meaning of the word "respecting" in this context, and whether "establishment of religion" was meant as a verbal or noun phrase when the Amendment was written.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patriot_Bible_University

Basically it is unaccredited by any higher learning institute, has ridiculously low graduation requirements, is a residential address, and has a total of four employees. Four. What the fuck kind of university is this?

100 K for creationism and they're the fiscal conservative party. Ugh. Whynot ear mark 100 K for Leprechaun research. That way they can use the pot of gold to balance the budget.