October 27, 2011, 06:31 pm
By Elwyn Raymer, President and CEO, Church Music Publishers Association Action Fund
Just as pop and country music writers’ and publishers’ livelihoods have been decimated from the growth and proliferation of illegal Web sites making copyright infringement easy, the writers and publishers from within the church and religious music publishing marketplace have been impacted just as severely.
It is often noted that digital theft is “devastating” or “bad for jobs and the economy”, and this is true. Too often, however, the true impact of the problem on communities all across America is discounted and overlooked because the red carpets and the fancy costumes of a handful of “mega-stars” form people’s impression of the music industry. Let me paint a more realistic picture.
The Church Music Publishers Association, founded in 1926, currently represents 46 member publishers. A diverse group, our membership includes representation from the publishing houses of almost every major church denomination, the publishing companies or affiliates from every major contemporary Christian record label, the church music divisions of several major secular publishing houses, several independents, both small and large, as well as publishers who are involved primarily in educational markets, just to name a few.
As John Feehery pointed out in his article “Obama and the Catholic vote,” there are some “regulations run amok” in the recent Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) decision to mandate contraception coverage in employer insurance plans. The problem is not, as he suggested, because contraception and Catholicism are somehow mutually exclusive. The otherwise sound regulation goes awry because of the refusal clause that has been written into the rule.
The amended regulation infringes on no one’s conscience, demands no one change her or his religious beliefs, discriminates against no man or woman, puts no additional economic burden on the poor, interferes with no one’s medical decisions, compromises no one’s health—that is, unless it includes a refusal clause. For all these reasons, millions of Catholics, including Catholics for Choice, support the IOM’s recommendation, but not an implementation by HHS that would deny some women access to preventive healthcare they need.
Government should indeed listen to what American Catholics want. But they should let Catholics speak for themselves. Most U.S. Catholics disagree with the bishops and their lobbyists who claim to speak for us—notably, 98 percent of sexually active Catholic women have used a form of birth control prohibited by the Vatican. When Catholic voters considered healthcare reform in 2009, more than six in ten supported health insurance coverage—whether it is private or government insurance—for contraception and family planning.
On July 9, the world will witness the birth of a new nation and a triumph for religious freedom and related rights. The people of South Sudan chose independence in a January referendum mandated by a comprehensive peace agreement (CPA), of which the United States was the primary broker. Signed in 2005, the agreement ended Sudan’s 22-year north/south civil war.
The war was triggered by the brutal attempts of the Khartoum regime in the north to impose its extremist version of Islam, leading the U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom (USCIRF), on which we serve, to deem it among the world's most egregious religious freedom abusers. Of the two million Sudanese dead, four million driven from their homes, and many forced into slavery, most were southern Christians and followers of traditional African religions, as well as hundreds of thousands of Nuba Muslims declared apostate and targeted in the same conflict by President Omar Hassan al-Bashir’s regime.
November 17, 2010, 04:16 pm
By Rep. Mike Honda (D-Calif.)
This week, as chairman of the Congressional Asian Pacific American Caucus, I introduced legislation, cosponsored with Reps. Keith Ellison and André Carson, recognizing the cultural and religious significance of Eid al-Adha.
I wish all Muslim Americans and Muslims around the world a prosperous holiday and stand with them in recognizing the importance of sacrifice, freedom and justice. Muslim Americans contribute substantially to the success and pluralism of the United States, making significant strides in all areas of national discourse, development and diplomacy. As award-winning scientists, doctors, engineers, athletes, artists, ambassadors and an estimated 10,000 Armed Service men and women, Muslim Americans continue to serve the greater good of our county.
The debate around Park 51 has polarized into two
opposing camps who claim they can’t find common ground. On the one hand are
people who say the sensitivity of 9/11 families means a Muslim group should not
build a community center near Ground Zero - even one where interfaith
cooperation is the goal. On the other side are people who say the American
tradition of religious freedom requires us to allow this group to build where
The Zionist Organization of America (ZOA) has called for the Ground Zero Cordoba Mosque under extremist, anti – U.S., pro – Hamas Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf, being planned 600 feet from the scene of the 9/11 Islamist terrorist attack which murdered 3,000 Americans, not to be built. The ZOA supports the stand taken by the Anti-Defamation League and the Simon Wiesenthal Center in opposing the construction of Rauf’s mosque. The ZOA’s National Convention on August 8th passed overwhelmingly a resolution opposing the construction of this extremist Imam Rauf’s mosque.
At a time when the civil and constitutional rights of Muslims are under attack throughout the United States, I celebrate the statement made by President Obama on August 13th, which affirmed the right of the American Muslim community to establish houses of worship, and expand current facilities when required by our community needs. This right of religious freedom is guaranteed by the First Amendment of United States Constitution.
August 19, 2010, 08:57 pm
By Richard Bernstein, author
According to polls, nearly seventy percent of Americans are against building a mosque two blocks from Ground Zero. They instinctively understand that it’s offensive to build a mosque near the ground where radical Islamists perpetrated the worst domestic attack in American history. The majority of Americans believe in freedom of religion, but they know this issue is not about that.
Rather than debating whether or not Muslims should be allowed to build a mosque at Ground Zero (they have a Constitutional right to do so), we should be questioning why they insist on building it in that exact location. There is no significant Muslim population in lower Manhattan, much less one that requires a $100 million community center. Therefore, it stands to reason that the proposed center’s proximity to Ground Zero, where Muslims killed nearly 3,000 people, is the primary impetus for its construction.
August 19, 2010, 03:18 pm
By Jesse R. Morton, attorney and public accountant
Dear Rep. Peter King (R-N.Y.),
After hearing your recent comments on a plethora of media outlets
regarding the lack of “responsibility” in building a Mosque and Islamic
cultural center (“the Cordoba House”) two blocks away from Ground Zero,
I have grave concerns. While I appreciate that you fully recognize the
Constitutional right, and more broadly the legal right, for the Cordoba
House to be built in its Park 51 location, I feel that you are sorely
misguided in your request that the proposed center be moved to a “more
suitable” location for several reasons.
A recent CNN poll shows that 68% of Americans oppose the construction of the mosque and Islamic center planned near Ground Zero in lower Manhattan. Most Americans don’t know that the mosque’s proposed name is Cordoba House, nor do they realize that the first Cordoba Mosque was built by Muslims in Cordoba, Spain after they conquered the Spanish kingdom. Many historians see the mosque there as a symbol of the conquest of Spain by the forces of Islam.