News -> Cover Story

Holy Warriors

20100526-cover-0101Wednesday, May 26, 2010
By Jeremy Alford
Photos by Robin May

With help from conservative Democrats and emphatic shareholders, the Louisiana Family Forum is advancing its policy agenda beyond the usual slaying of pro-choice advocates and undermining of same-sex couples — but not too much.


Outside the state Capitol, as many of us are well aware, there’s a statue of Huey P. Long. When the sun is situated just right, and even when it’s not, it casts an unmistakable shadow over the skyscraper’s 34 stories of Alabama limestone.

According to biographer T. Harry Williams, Long had a firm grasp on the state’s spiritual scruples, if nothing else. In fact, Williams chose to open his Pulitzer Prize-winning tome on the Kingfish with this anecdote: When Huey would campaign in south Louisiana, he would recount to audiences how he would awake early on Sunday mornings and put his old horse on the family buggy to bring his Catholic grandparents to Mass. When he was in the piney north, however, he retold how he hitched his old horse to the buggy, but only this time to bring his Baptist grandparents to church. A close campaign ally commented soon after that he had no idea Huey had Catholic grandparents. “Don’t be a damn fool,” Long replied. “We didn’t even have a horse.”
 
Religion still plays an important role in Louisiana politics, and nowhere is that more evident than about a dozen or so blocks south of where Long’s statue stands today. That’s where the Louisiana Family Forum has set up shop. Casually placed on the ground outside its headquarters are two stone tablets listing the Ten Commandments. They’re significantly smaller than the building itself, but like Long’s monument, they cast a long shadow over nearby political operations. And much like Long’s horse and buggy speech, LFF’s mission is easy to digest for most adhering to strict Christian teachings, whether they be Protestants, evangelicals or non-denominational Christians.
There’s another marble replica of the Big 10 inside LFF’s lobby. In case you haven’t caught it yet, there’s a theme building here, one of man and law and God, and it continues in the executive director’s office. To access this inner sanctum, you must pass by a small kitchenette where staffers grind coffee beans at 7:50 a.m. But once inside, you can probably guess what’s among the nicknacks, photos and books. Indeed, yet one more reproduction of the Ten Commandments sits behind the desk of Gene Mills, LFF’s official keeper of the faith and chief executive.

20100526-cover-0102
Gene Mills
When state lawmakers are in session and Louisiana politicians are seeking office, it’s usually Mills who’s following them around with one tablet in each hand — metaphorically at least — reminding them of right and wrong, of redemption and reconciliation. But Mills, 46, doesn’t look much like Moses. Nor does he fit the stereotype of the Bible-thumping politico — that is to say, he isn’t flashy and doesn’t publicly condemn people to hell.

He’s part of a regime change that’s been swooping in across the nation, and everything from his choice of words to his clothing screams, “I’m not like the others! No sir. No fire and brimstone here.” In the latest of his many commentaries posted on YouTube from a program called Baton Rouge Today, Mills, an ordained minister, is sporting a loud, turquoise dress shirt with a criss-cross pattern, the same untucked kind that both hipster pastors wear while leading post-modern congregations and middle-aged men wear to the clubs.

On this morning, about two hours before the Legislature’s committees will gavel in their usual 9 a.m. meetings, Mills is slamming back a Red Bull and tooling around on his MacBook. He’s clean shaven, all smile and immediately engaging. But then he confesses to rarely giving interviews before eagerly handing over an 11-page guideline explaining how LFF reviews and scores legislation. It’s a simple enough formula and similar to how candidates are put to the test. It’s anchored by four themes: “traditional values,” “limited government,” “free enterprise” and “taxes.”

While Mills, an Opelousas native, might be media shy — or more to the point, possibly mistrustful of reporters — he is about as polished as a Louisiana lobbyist comes. He says folks just don’t understand the Louisiana Family Forum at the Capitol because it doesn’t have a corporate clientele like other special interests, but rather represents a Christian God and more specifically family values. “We don’t have a piece of the puzzle we’re trying to protect,” Mills says, referencing the almighty budget process while spinning an oversized yellow jack on his desk. Then he brings his glare up. “Our measures, the ones we care about, are talked about every day. We work on them every day. You just don’t hear about them much because we don’t grandstand. That’s not our style.”

LFF, though, has garnered a reputation for its hard-nosed, in-your-face approach in recent years. Still, its operations are viewed with some political ambiguity. They’re a mystery to most not watching it unfold firsthand in Baton Rouge and elsewhere. Ethics laws and a nonprofit status have kept it from having to file campaign finance reports, although the group does indirectly get involved in the election process. LFF was formed in 1998 but only recently started filing paperwork as a lobbying entity, due chiefly to Gov. Bobby Jindal’s ethics reform session of 2008.
Its tactics are unconventional, if not brutally effective. Bottom line: It may just be the most influential lobby in Louisiana that you know the least about. What exactly is the group up to? Well, on its Web site and in its promotional literature, LFF proclaims that it’s already “writing the next chapter in Louisiana history.” While that might be a stretch for God’s favorite Bayou State advocacy group, Mills and his troops sure seem hellbent on trying.

The way Rep. Bubba Chaney tells it, he was “ambushed” by Mills’ outfit last month when he presented legislation to House Education Committee that would have changed the panel process for selecting textbooks for public schools. It’s a hot-button topic for Christian conservatives, especially when it comes to evolution and other biological sciences, so Chaney shouldn’t have been surprised to see the group’s cavalry in force that morning of April 21. But he was.

Mills had lined up his heavy hitters — Darrell White, a former judge and conservative lawyer, and Michelle Ghetti, a law professor from Southern University in Baton Rouge. Chaney, D-Rayville, who had filed the bill several weeks prior to the hearing, had no idea there was even opposition to his House Bill 50. “If we had an opportunity to talk to these folks, we could have worked it out,” he says.

Whether it was strategy, several committee members say they were contacted by the advocacy group, even if the bill’s author was not. “They did contact me ahead of time,” says Rep. Frank Hoffmann, R-West Monroe. Regardless, the bill died that day in committee, clearly overwhelmed, or rather surprised, by the opposition.

Later, Mills says politics can be like war, “And you don’t go to a gunfight with a knife in your hand.”

Despite such flexing, a wide spectrum of lawmakers seem to at least respect the group’s style — even when they loathe what it stands for at times. They consider Family Forum just another lobbying outfit, albeit one with considerable influence, but the tinfoil-hat and fringe status that dominates Internet chatter, conversations with Democratic operatives and defectors in general doesn’t appear to stick deep inside Huey’s House.
 
Rep. Juan LaFonta, D-New Orleans, has faced off against Mills and Co. just about as much as any other lawmaker. LaFonta represents the French Quarter and is consistent in his push for equal rights for same-sex couples. This also makes him a consistent target for Mills, but the two appear to have a surprising relationship. For what it’s worth, LaFonta has some of the loosest lips in the Legislature and isn’t one to hold back. “They’re very professional,” he says. “I’ve never had a concern with them. Seriously. And it’s not just these kinds of bills. Family Forum is beginning to get involved in other issues, too.”

As a 501(c)3, LFF was not originally created to lobby the Legislature in this fashion, which is why another related entity — Louisiana Family Forum Action, a 501(c)4 — was formed in 2004. According to records on file with the state Board of Ethics, Mills is the only lobbyist identified to represent the LFFA, which has spent nearly $29,000 since January 2009 hosting, entertaining, meeting with and otherwise influencing lawmakers. Most recently, LFFA dropped about $930 on a late April gathering for the House and Senate at the lieutenant governor’s residence during the ongoing regular session. The group also sponsored a $24,000 “legislative awards banquet” in September 2009.
As for where LFF and LFFA get their funding, Mills is tight-lipped but says individuals, churches and businesses give to the groups like they would any nonprofit, although grants are practically nonexistent.

To be certain, the Louisiana Family Forum’s reach is growing by the day, and a great deal of that growth is directly linked to its past. LFF was created 12 years ago by former state Rep. Tony Perkins and others. Today, Perkins heads up the Family Research Council in Washington, D.C., which promotes “traditional values,” like LFF but on a bigger scale. It’s a political offshoot of Focus on the Family, James Dobson’s well-known vehicle. Perkins, for his part, stays close to his Louisiana roots and was back home last week giving a speech to the Baton Rouge Press Club on why Elena Kagan is unfit to serve on the U.S. Supreme Court.

Perkins also keeps in close contact with Mills, his successor as of 2003, which affords Mills close proximity to political power on the far right and LFF some added influence it wouldn’t otherwise have. But to truly understand LFF’s pull, you have to understand its structure. It has created a handful of resource councils throughout the state linking shareholders such as pastors and attorneys. That foundation has empowered LFF to build an enviable grassroots structure of Christian conservatives, the same base Jindal can credit with his landmark 2007 victory and the same voter segment that is carrying U.S. Sen. David Vitter, R-Metairie, through and above his own prostitution scandal.

One veteran lobbyist with decades of experience working the Louisiana Legislature says LFF has tapped into a gold mine that even money and press coverage can’t trump. Over the past dozen years, it has built up a massive contact list of supporters who are always ready to go in the name of their religion. “They are extremely powerful because they have this extensive e-mail list of people they can easily mobilize, and they’ve carefully branded themselves and wrapped themselves in the American flag,” says the lobbyist, who spoke on the condition of anonymity. “They’re a subset of the Republican Party and are in close with Jindal and Vitter. Some people may have not taken Family Forum seriously in the beginning, but they better now. They got stroke.”

Precisely what kind of stroke was made clear in September 2007, when Vitter inserted a $100,000 earmark in a finance bill for LFF to “develop a plan to promote better science education.” Moreover, Vitter has deep ties to the organization. Former state Rep. Dan Richey of Baton Rouge is a key grassroots consultant for LFF and has previously served in a similar capacity for Vitter. Others who have worked for Vitter in the past have also moved through LFF’s ranks.
 
20100526-cover-0103
Tony Perkins
Despite the public humiliation and dead madam — Deborah Jeane Palfrey died of an apparent suicide in 2008 — Mills says he still supports Vitter and that his “very serious sin,” as the senator himself put it, doesn’t conflict with LFF’s call for traditional family values. After all, a big part of being a Christian is about forgiveness, he says during a quiet rant that sounds a touch rehearsed. “I get asked that all the time,” he says.

But to claim the Louisiana Family Forum is serving as a puppet for the state GOP is one of many misnomers, says Mills, laughing. When asked during his interview if he was a Republican, Mills was quick on the draw. “I am,” he says. “For now.” He adds that pressure has been building in recent years for LFF to join other Louisiana Republicans under the big tent, something Mills says he has fought against. “I get criticized a lot,” he says. “But I don’t want to be a surrogate for the party.”

Mills is also quick to add that LFFA has found itself sitting beside an unlikely partner this year, a pairing that either means hell is freezing over or the bill they’re railing against is a real stinker. As lawmakers have considered withdrawing from a national ID card program, Mills has aligned himself with the American Civil Liberties Union to support the move. House Bill 870 is about protecting privacy, Mills says, but his supporters shouldn’t read too much into his newfound relationship with the ACLU. “Even a broken clock gets the time right twice a day,” he quips.

WHILE THE LION’S SHARE of legislators embraced their incumbency last fall, a battle was brewing down the bayou in Senate District 20, then an open seat covering Terrebonne and Lafourche parishes. It was a classic partisan showdown that pitted now-Sen. Norby Chabert, D-Houma, against former Lafourche Parish Councilman Brent Callais, a Republican from Cut Off. All the usual party players coalesced behind their candidate, and Callais told at least one reporter early in the contest that he had been endorsed by the Louisiana Family Forum.

LFF staffers jumped to attention and squashed the inaccuracy with haste, largely because such nods are no-nos for nonprofits. The endorsement probably came from Mills personally, staffers mused and Callais confirmed at the time, although Mills now says he isn’t sure how the misunderstanding even came about in the first place.

Confusion aside, the incident offers an inside peak at how LFF gets involved in the election process without overstepping legal boundaries. In this case, Mills serves as a surrogate for the very organization with which he’s employed. Over the years, Mills has endorsed several candidate in his own name this way, which inarguably carries as much weight as a tap from LFF itself, and he’s even donated money to lawmakers like Sens. John Smith of Leesville and Nick Gautreaux of Abbeville. Both men are Democrats.

LFFA, meanwhile, prepares an annual scorecard grading members of the House and Senate on key Christian-conservative issues. Coincidentally, perhaps, Smith and Nick Gautreaux were the only two Democratic senators to score 100 percent.

Dr. Pearson Cross, a UL political science professor, says the scorecard, which is distributed through direct mail and churches, not to mention free media like newspaper reports, reminds lawmakers that LFF is watching, which is one way the group has been able to increase its profile.

It’s a tactic that other powerful lobbies, like the Louisiana Association of Business and Industry, have found effective. “It shows that they’re paying attention. They’re letting lawmakers know they will be graded,” Cross says. “Coupled with the group’s relationship with the governor, I just can’t see how they could be more influential. I think they’ve really hit a peak.”

Without a doubt, that success would not be had if it weren’t for conservative Democrats like Nick Gautreaux and Sen. Sharon Weston Broome of Baton Rouge, who have been unlikely but key players for Mills and LFF. Gautreaux, whom Mills refers to as “scrappy,” helped navigate a religious freedoms bill through a narrowly divided Senate last year. Although the constitutional amendment eventually got snared in the final steps of the negotiation process, it was a coming of age moment for LFF and Gautreaux, who ascended to chair of the Senate Natural Resources Committee shortly after the 2009 session.
    
Broome carried the banner just last week when she moved legislation through the Senate that would force women to obtain an ultrasound before they’re granted an abortion. From the Senate floor, she mimicked some of the same talking points Mills had been throwing around days prior. “This gives women a real choice,” she says. “They can decide.”

As Senate Bill 528 got hammered with questions from hesitant lawmakers seeking exclusions for cases of incest and rape, Nick Gautreaux urged lawmakers to expand the bill so that young fathers would have to view the ultrasound. “It may change a young man’s life,” he says.

On the same day last week, another LFFA-backed bill from Sen. Danny Martiny, R-Metairie, advanced. Like Gautreaux’s 2009 measure, Senate Bill 606 seeks to protect religious freedom. And like Mills’ ACLU experience, he found himself on the same side of the proverbial table as the Louisiana Alliance of Wiccans. Again, either hell is freezing over or maybe that bill deserves a second look.

The biggest splash made recently by LFFA, however, came earlier this year when the group paired up with another Democrat, Sen. Elbert Guillory of Opelousas, to push a state Senate redistricting plan. It calls for three new majority black districts from the New Orleans delegation, the birthplace of the Legislature’s last, remaining true liberals. While that might sound like heaven to Family Forum supporters, it’s something different for Guillory. “This is an issue of fairness and equity,” he said when the plan was released. “It’s time for other areas in the state to have an opportunity for black representation.”

Even though several senators were consulted on the plan, more than a few were infuriated that LFFA advanced the agenda so early in the process. “This is an example of religious intervention in government, and that’s not what our forefathers intended. They intended the exact opposite,” Sen. Butch Gautreaux, D-Morgan City, said at the time. “The Louisiana Family Forum doesn’t have any business in redistricting. They have no more business directing legislation than we have in legislating religion.”

20100526-cover-0104
Nick Gautreaux
Redistricting will probably begin on the legislative level early next year, and LFFA’s plans will likely be rehashed then. Another senator who spoke on the condition of anonymity says the state is already strongly trending Republican, and the drawing of lines will become an issue that crosses traditional majority-minority barriers. “That Family Forum plan targets white Democrats, too,” the senator says. “You just watch how this thing unfolds.”

The state Senate plan followed on the heels of a congressional plan. As for a state House plan to finish things out, Mills says that’s not in the stars, and it has nothing to do with the reaction of miffed senators (some of the districts proposed to be eliminated in the LFFA plan include the seat of Senate President Joel Chaisson, D-Destrehan). “It would be very difficult to do a House version,” says Mills. “I wouldn’t even know how to do 104 seats.”
  
He says the current power structure in New Orleans, even after the Katrina-fueled population shift, inspired LFF to move forward with the Senate redistricting plan. “We just felt like the tail has been wagging the dog for too long,” Mills says.

On the horizon, don’t expect Team Mills to stray too far from the bread-and-butter issues of same-sex marriage and abortion. But you can anticipate hearing them on non-traditional matters like the budget. For instance, Mills says he has serious concerns about lawmakers raiding the so-called rainy day fund to balance the forecasted two-year, $3 billion shortfall. He says LFFA is also ready to rumble to keep the Legislature from calling a constitutional convention. At the end of the day, though, what business does a Christian-conservative advocacy group have with these topics? “We have a moral responsibility,” Mills says. “Our founders believed in limited government because you had to covet something that was not yours to grow government.”

That’s Mills. The guy has an answer for everything and a trust-me smile to back it all up. From his position in the political landscape, it must get heady at times, and the lure of public office must never be far from his mind. Would he ever consider abandoning the Louisiana Family Forum to strike out on his own as a candidate? “That’s another question I’ve been asked thousands of times,” he says before pausing and unleashing a Cheshire Cat grin. “But I won’t rule it out.”

Jeremy Alford can be reached at This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it .

Comments (20)add
...
written by ragin_cajun , May 26, 2010 - 10:38 am
"“This is an example of religious intervention in government, and that’s not what our forefathers intended."

Bullshit. Our forefathers intended a federal government that "shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof"

They did not intend anything for state governments. They did not intend to preclude religious groups from participating in government. For a lawmaker to be so hopelessly misinformed about the US constitution and the intent of our forefathers is pathetic. That's why this country is so far from the constitutional republic our forefathers DID intend to create.
...
written by Stephen Handwerk , May 26, 2010 - 01:20 pm
It shocks me how easily people forget WHY people fled Europe to come to this unsettled land... it was to flee religious pursecution. Yes, or forefathers wanted goverment to be completely divorced from religion. But history revisionists want it completely different. And now after we have seen the work in Texas, they want to wipe even THAT FACT from history books.

Make NO mistake this group headed by Mills is nothing more than a HATE GROUP who is opposed to any equality for gays... they can cloak themselves in whatever else they like but facts are facts. And as long as legislators continue to be led by them our state will continue to suffer set back after set back.
Why is there such an outward migration of young folks from this state?
...
written by ragin_cajun , May 26, 2010 - 02:09 pm
Mr. Handwerk--

People came here from Europe so that they would be free to practice the particular religion they chose--instead of the state religion that was mandated by the king of whatever country they came from. That in no way means that they wanted no religion--correct? If I'm wrong, then enlighten me.

There is plenty of evidence, and I will quote some, to show that many of our forefathers, and many of the framers of the Constitution, were devout and supported religious observance in the public sphere, and in government.

For example, the Mayflower Compact states "Having undertaken, for the Glory of God and advancement of the Christian Faith and Honour of our King and Country, a Voyage to plant the First Colony in the Northern Parts of Virginia, do by these presents solemnly and mutually in the presence of God and one of another, Covenant and Combine ourselves together into a Civil Body Politic"

U.S. Supreme Court Chief Justice William Rehnquist says ""There is simply no historical foundation for the proposition that the Framers intended to build the 'wall of separation' [between church and state]."

Ben Franklin insisted in a speech in 1787 that the US Congress pray each morning before starting business.

Congress declared Thanksgiving day

Thomas Jefferson's letter to the Danbury Baptists....

"Let it simply be asked, "where is the security for property, for reputation, for life, if the sense of religious obligation desert the oaths which are the instruments of investigation in courts of justice?" And let us with caution indulge the supposition that morality can be maintained without religion."--George Washington's Farewell Address.

Now, are you SURE that our forefathers wanted "goverment to be completely divorced from religion"? You call it "THAT FACT"--well, prove it. If I'm wrong, show me. If I've misquoted G. Washington, Rhenquist, Bradford, then point me to the "right books". Support your position as I have supported mine, and maybe I'll change my mind.
...
written by Cajunrunner , May 26, 2010 - 02:49 pm
"Why is there such an outward migration of young folks from this state?"

Jobs, Stephen. Not because of Louisiana Family Forum, but JOBS, economic growth. Until our politicians stop spending money on re-election votes and start putting forth tax dollars for better transportation infrastructure, the better paying jobs, in general, will be elsewhere, from teachers to nurses, etc.

I'm going to agree that religious right groups, like LFF, do have too much an influence in state politics. I personally agree with them on most social issues, but their non-stop promotion of these issues as defining "conservative" makes it easy for someone to get elected on being pro-family, pro-life, then go to Baton Rouge and stick it to the taxpayers. Then they come back, and don't have to answer for their fiscally irresponsible, big government votes, because they're a "pro-family conservative".

However, to say the Louisiana's outmigration problem is due to its socially conservative leanings is flat out untrue. As Carville once said, "It's the economy, stupid!"

*I don't think you're stupid, but you're playing politics with false assumptions.*
...
written by Solutions? , May 26, 2010 - 03:36 pm
Maybe if these dumbasses at LFF would spend their money building homes for the homeless instead of trying to influence policy, they might get my support.

Here is a multiple answer question for you:

What are the consequences of allowing gay marriage?

a) The apocolypse
b) The death of the modern family
c) Russia Invades
d) Ice caps melt
e) Gay marriage

The correct answer is e.
...
written by ragin_cajun , May 26, 2010 - 05:47 pm
Those "dumbasses" at LFF don't want your support. They don't need it. They've learned that they can be much more effective at achieving their ends by just talking to legislators. Let sycophantic semi-pro politicians worry about getting support from voters, they'll just wait in Baton Rouge and influence whoever wins the election.

Also, keep in mind that Habitat for Humanity is one of the favorite causes of protestant/evangelical types. I'd lay you 4-to-1 odds that at LEAST one or two people at LFF are active in HFH, and have actually BUILT houses for homeless people. If they're protestant, they probably tithe, and that money more likely than not goes to poor people. You may not like their politics, but these are usually VERY charitable people.

So--who's the dumbass?
...
written by Frederick Peachie , May 26, 2010 - 06:14 pm
God is dead. If he ever existed at all. But I still think Handwerk is a dip stick. I wish he didn't exist either.
...
written by Morrow , May 26, 2010 - 08:42 pm
I don't want politics in my pulpit and I don't want the pulpit in my politics. Most people feel that way. I don't believe there are a huge number of abortions performed in Louisiana anyway. I hate the thought that the government would legislate a mandatory ultrasound. The abortion issue ad the gay rights/marriage issue is a political toy for most letisglators. If they needed to, you'd better damn believe 90 percent of them would be "pro choice", if the issue started leaning that way. So, I'm not impressed by the preacher and certainly, not by his political connections.
...
written by Farrow , May 27, 2010 - 10:23 am
I have opposed the Louisiana Family Forum and will continue to do so in the future.

Did you note the article's reference to "Vitter inserted a $100,000 earmark in a finance bill for LFF to “develop a plan to promote better science education.”"

What this really means is Vitter gate $100,000 of taxpayer money to LFF to help an extremist religious group undermine science. (LFF is the same group that convinced the state to relax rules concerning the promotion of creationism in the public-school classroom.)

No religious group should have such sway with our legislators.
...
written by Farrow , May 27, 2010 - 10:29 am
>They did not intend anything for state governments.

You are correct, ragin_cajun, that the lawmaker in question is citing the US Constitution and not a state constituion . . . but federal law outweighs state law when the two conflict, and thus federal courts can and do on occasion find state laws to be unconstitutional. Thus, if a state were theoretically to pass a law that promoted a religion, it could be struck down by a federal court, such as the SCOTUS.

Regardless, I think separation of church and state is in any event a wise policy, on the federal, state, and local level, and will support it.
...
written by Farrow , May 27, 2010 - 10:49 am
>There is plenty of evidence, and I will quote some

ragin_cajun, colonists came to America for many reasons, not merely the desire for religious freedom.

Some sought land, economic advancement, relief from European wars and violence, an escape from plagues and famine in the Old World, among other reasons.

To attribute the motivations of so many colonists to one cause is wreckless.

Furthermore, it is very easy to cherry pick quotations of this or that Founding Father to support one's beliefs; but the fact of the matter is that the Founding Fathers were hardly monolithic. They were a complex people with varied beliefs that often clashed.

Some, like Jefferson, believed in separation of church and state, and even his ideological opponent, James Madison, opined:

"Strongly guarded as is the separation between Religion & Govt in the Constitution of the United States, practical distinction between Religion and Civil Government is essential to the purity of both, and as guaranteed by the Constitution of the United States." Source: "Madison: Writings" (Library of America, 1999), p. 760.

Others, however, believed differently.

So to suggest that the Founding Fathers agreed as a whole on any particular issue, especially one as grand as religion, is to misrepresent the history of our nation.
...
written by ragin_cajun , May 27, 2010 - 11:59 am
Farrow--

In the same way, if Butch Gautreaux writes a law that bans LFF from lobbying, or running candidates for office, do you think that the SCOTUS would uphold that? would YOU support that?

I think that for us to speculate on what the SCOTUS would do is about as productive as trying to predict the next roll of the dice--they have little more reverence for Original Intent than Handwerk does. The fact remains that our forefathers did NOT intend to have a secular political environment that precludes the activities of religious groups like LFF.

If you want a political process that is different than what the founders intended, like you openly admit that you do, that's fine. But let's honestly admit that it is a departure from the type of government/society that Washington, Franklin, Jefferson, etc. established. Let's not twist and pervert the words/deeds/intentions of our country's greatest men to lend authority to positions they did not hold and would not support.


...
written by ragin_cajun , May 27, 2010 - 01:16 pm
Farrow--

I don't think it's reckless of me to assert that colonists came here seeking religious freedom when half of the original 13 colonies were founded by religious groups for religious reasons.

I don't think I "cherry picked" quotations. I think I gave examples to support my position. And my original position is "They did not intend anything for state governments. They did not intend to preclude religious groups from participating in government." Gauthreaux and Handwerk misspoke, not me.

Jefferson and Madison's concept of separation of church and state was born out of their experience with state-sponsored religions. To say they opposed state-sanctioned religion is NOT to say that they favored a perfectly secular government or society. Jefferson and Madison both attended religious services at the Capitol while they were president. They both recognized and pandered to influential religious groups in their day. And they were the most secular of the founding fathers.

However, I respect that you thought about your response, and posted the quote from Madison. I've never liked Madison, and have not read a whole lot about him. Now, I will.
...
written by Jim Halpert , May 27, 2010 - 07:14 pm
The most telling quote of the entire article is this: "Mills says he still supports Vittor and that his "very serious sin," doesn't conflict with LFF's call for traditional family values." SERIOUSLY?? Hypocrites. The Republican Party and so-called Christian "Family Value" groups are full of hypocrites just like David Vitter and Mills.
...
written by NORTHSIDIAN SHOTGUN , May 27, 2010 - 11:20 pm
Some of you have missed the boat, or as OREL, Jimmy, and Tammy would say, " to forgive is Godliness "! "PASS THE BASKET, BROTHER !
...
written by JP , May 28, 2010 - 08:18 am
Keep LFF away from our texbooks. We can't have these people persuading legislators to subvert scientific progress and historical accuracy in the name of narrow-minded dogma, like what has happened in Texas already. This is not against religion. Religion is a personal matter. The separation of church and state allows for freedom of thought which is the foundation of liberty.

These quasi-fascists use clever language to imply that they are working for the very thing they work against. Witness the Senator saying that forcing women considering abortions to have ultrasounds (and fathers watching it?) "gives them a real choice." They don't want choice. They want to legislate their view or morality. Mills talks about "limited government" but the only limits they want are on your social behavior and personal choices, scientific conclusions that conflict with their worldview, and knowledge of certain historical facts.
...
written by The Original Northsidian , May 28, 2010 - 06:52 pm
Vitter, Swaggart, Baker, and on & on & on. These people telling others how to live/ GIVE ME A BREAK!!!! IT'S ABOUT POWER AND MONEY!! Criminals have more integrity than these religious yahoos!!
...
written by EXISTENTIALIST HOMME , May 28, 2010 - 10:00 pm
FARROW, You say, "No religious group should have such sway with our legislators........Actually, our legislators sway both ways, with the religious groups and the big money Lobbyists !
Money creates power and power corrupts, and the day will come when money will mean more to people than religious faith, and that is what those people with 99 % of the money want, for when we are willing to set aside our faith for money, the "1 percenters, will dominate the world, and this will be known as............
" THE NEW WORLD ORDER ". The stage is set and the Puppet selected to brings us into this new era, is the most unlikely figurehead, one who will bring the least attention to the course at hand, until it is too late........
...
written by Morrow , June 01, 2010 - 12:41 pm
Ya'll better pray now, and pray hard, cause if B.P. don't stop this flow of grundge, there won't be enough people left in Louisiana to fill up the pews!
...
written by NOTORIOUS GENTLEMANS CLUB,TEN , June 08, 2010 - 02:26 pm
This MILLS character is a reincarnated Mr.Baker and ORELINE ROBERTS....... Just how low could God have made mankind, we learn more each day, the depth is bottomless and also with each Gene Mills who surfaces from the polluted pool of the Devils making............
You must be logged in to post a comment. Log in using your Facebook account or register if you do not have an account yet.

busy 
LA LA Land
Advertisement

Read the Flipping Paper!

Click Here for the Entire Print Version of
IND Monthly

Read the Dining Guide

Click Here for the Entire Print Version of
IND Eats Dining Guide
Most Read
Advertisement
Advertisement
in case you missed it