Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

House Judiciary Committee Passes Public Expression of Religion Act (HR 2679)
Liberty Counsel ^ | 09.11.06

Posted on 09/11/2006 11:23:53 AM PDT by Coleus

Liberty Alert

September 11, 2006

House Judiciary Committee Passes
Public Expression of Religion Act

Washington D.C. - On Friday the United States House of Representatives Judiciary Committee passed the Public Expression of Religion Act (PERA), also known as HR 2679. This bill will go to the full House for a vote. The bill's intent is to eliminate the chilling effect on the constitutionally protected expression of religion by state and local officials that results from the threat that a plaintiff may seek damages and attorney's fees. If the bill passes, advocacy groups like the ACLU would no longer be able to use the threat of monetary awards to force the removal of Ten Commandments displays, Nativity scenes, crosses from city seals, or the words "under God" from the Pledge of Allegiance.

Congressman Hostettler, who introduced the bill, stated, "This is a big victory for Americans who care about our rich religious heritage in this country. There is a lot of excitement about this bill." Senator Sam Brownback sponsored a similar Senate bill.

Mathew Staver, Founder and Chairman of Liberty Counsel, gave oral testimony in favor of this bill before the House Judiciary Subcommittee on the Constitution and the Senate Judiciary Subcommittee on the Constitution, Civil Rights and Property Rights. Mr. Staver pointed out that in every other area of litigation, a plaintiff must have sustained a direct injury in order to sue, but in Establishment Clause claims, a plaintiff merely has to claim he or she was offended by some religious symbol or action. This unusual exception has opened the floodgates to litigation. Mr. Staver also pointed out that Establishment Clause interpretation is both confused and conflicted. Government officials should not be financially punished for a minor misstep in this constitutional minefield. If the Act passes, a plaintiff who files suit and wins under the Establishment Clause would be entitled to an injunction, but could not recover damages, attorney's fees or costs, which have in some cases surpassed five hundred thousand dollars.

Mathew D. Staver commented: "The Public Expression of Religion Act is long overdue. The threat of attorney's fees and damages has been wielded like a bully club to beat local government officials into submission, even when the church-state claims are outrageous and frivolous. When the Supreme Court candidly admits that its Establishment Clause decisions are 'hopelessly confused,' how can we expect local government officials to navigate in the dark and then hit them with financial penalties?"

A transcript of Mr. Staver’s congressional testimony is available on Liberty Counsel’s web site, www.LC.org. For more information call us at 800-671-1776 and order our free brochure entitled "Taking the Club Out of the Bully's Hand." Here are a few ways you can support PERA:
1. Pray for the passage of PERA in the House and Senate.
2. Call your Representatives and ask them to vote for PERA (Call 202-224-3121 and ask to talk to your Representative.)
3. Forward this email to your contacts.

Never Forget 9-11-01

This is a particularly solemn day as we remember the terrible events of that September morning five years ago. We lift up in prayer the families of those whose lives were changed forever by the loss of precious loved ones. Even in light of such tragedy we can give thanks to know that our God is still in control. Only a sovereign God is able to bring good results from tragedy in the lives of those who trust in Him. We pray that all in this great nation will be reminded of our need for the Lord. This life on earth is important, to be sure, but much more important is that we spend eternity with Him. Do you know an unbeliever who needs to hear that assurance? Tell them about Jesus today.



TOPICS: Culture/Society; Government; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: 109th; aclu; boyscouts; bsa; bsalist; flelection2006; hr2679; libertycounsel; mathewstaver; pera; stopaclutaxfunding; stoptheaclu

1 posted on 09/11/2006 11:23:56 AM PDT by Coleus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Coleus

Well it's about time.


2 posted on 09/11/2006 11:26:24 AM PDT by seawolf101
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 2ndMostConservativeBrdMember; afraidfortherepublic; Alas; al_c; american colleen; annalex; ...
Send Christmas cards to the ACLU!

Send the ACLU a Christmas Card

Stop The ACLU

Signatures Stop taxpayer funding of the ACLU Petition

Stop the ACLU Coalition

Stop The ACLU

The War on Christmas

3 posted on 09/11/2006 11:30:37 AM PDT by Coleus (Roe v. Wade and Endangered Species Act both passed in 1973, Murder Babies/save trees, geese, algae)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: seawolf101

Pray for the passage of this bill. We need to push it through the House and Senate before the November elections. The Dims are sure to try and knock this one down, ACLU corroborators that they are.


4 posted on 09/11/2006 11:31:07 AM PDT by stm (Katherine Harris for US Senate!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: seawolf101

It could have been MUCH better, had it applied in ALL cases to a "loser pays" mandate on Lawyer fees, so that frivolous lawsuits would cost the plaintiff not only his own legal fees (which usually are minimal, as jackpot-justice lawyers will take cases on a contingency-fee basis only, or the ACLU-taxpayer-funded socialists try to appropriate someone elses' money)), and the money-chaser would have to pay ALL legal expenses and court costs for a suit that is found in favor of the Defendant.


5 posted on 09/11/2006 11:34:07 AM PDT by traditional1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Coleus

The left will be in overdrive to kill this.

What are the chances of it passing the House?


6 posted on 09/11/2006 11:36:00 AM PDT by annalex
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Coleus

Zounds! This sounds like...common sense! Too bad common sense has to be legislated.


7 posted on 09/11/2006 11:38:03 AM PDT by AmericanChef
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Coleus

Did the ACLU get to testify for the other side? If so, just for grins, I'd like to know what they said.


8 posted on 09/11/2006 11:44:06 AM PDT by upchuck (Q:Why does President Bush support amnesty for illegal aliens? A:Read this: http://tinyurl.com/nyvno)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: AmericanChef

The requirement to legislate common sense is one of the early warning signs of a failing set of morals within a society.


9 posted on 09/11/2006 11:46:56 AM PDT by taxcontrol
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: stm

Will pass the house along party lines with the exception of Democrats who live in districts with many churches.

It will never get out of the Senate.


10 posted on 09/11/2006 11:47:28 AM PDT by EQAndyBuzz (Mediacrat - A leftwing editorialist who pretends to be an objective journalist.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Coleus

This bill really doesn't seem to do what is implied here. It does nothing to change the constitutionality of any actions, it mearly defines one subset of constitutional violations as exempt from awards of damages.


11 posted on 09/11/2006 12:11:17 PM PDT by ndt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Coleus

If the republicans work this right,they can have a winning issue here.They need to make a really big deal out of this with the media so they can corner democrats.If the democrats vote against it the republicans can say they are anti-religion and use it in the election too!


12 posted on 09/11/2006 12:42:51 PM PDT by INSENSITIVE GUY
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Coleus
The same principle is true of many lawsuits. The left often uses the threat of lawsuits to impose their agenda. They can't get bills passed so they use judges and lawyers to put their minority ideas in force.

In Texas the Democrats ran off to Oklahoma to impose their minority view. In Washington they filibuster to do the same.

Power is their only desire no matter how it is obtained. They are not nice people.

13 posted on 09/12/2006 10:06:21 AM PDT by Mind-numbed Robot (Not all that needs to be done, needs to be done by the government.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: taxcontrol

-The requirement to legislate common sense is one of the early warning signs of a failing set of morals within a society.-

No argument there. The more laws we have, the less they all mean.


14 posted on 09/13/2006 10:47:58 AM PDT by AmericanChef
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson