Militant secularists have launched an outrageous campaign to ban one of the most famous symbols of the September 11th attacks from a place of honor in the new memorial museum at the World Trade Center site. Many Americans felt inspired by two twisted girders that somehow survived the wreckage and formed the huge 9/11 cross. Now American Atheists has begun legal action to keep that cross out of the publicly funded museum despite its historic significance, insisting it's a religious relic that belongs instead at a nearby cathedral. This obnoxious allergy to crosses, and the ongoing push to drive them from monuments and parks where they've stood for years, shows that it's the non-believers, not religious conservatives, with a radical, intolerant agenda. They want to change America beyond recognition and to sweep away any symbols that challenge their absolutist views.

The president’s re-election campaign attacks Mitt Romney as hopelessly “out of touch,” but a recent vote in North Carolina revealed that it’s Obama himself who is removed from ordinary Americans. Voters (both black and white) overwhelmingly backed a constitutional amendment preventing redefinition of marriage—an amendment strenuously opposed by leading Democrats.

Meanwhile, the administration welcomed a U.N. bureaucrat to America to review “oppression” against Indians--a “rapporteur” who then demanded the U.S. to give Native Americans more land, including Mount Rushmore. Speaking of public land, it’s Obama supporters who have filed frequent lawsuits to remove crosses or 10 Commandment displays while deriding the influence of religion.

Mitt Romney may well be far wealthier than average Americans, but he shares their attitudes toward family, faith and hard work. In judging who’s really out of touch, values matter more than the size of a candidate’s personal bank account.

The Obama campaign released an embarrassing comic strip called “The Life of Julia” designed to show Obama policies helping a “typical” American from cradle to grave.

The story begins with three-year-old Julia in the federal Head Start program and ends with her retirement on Social Security benefits at age 67. Along the way, she gets free contraception, subsidized student loans, and enhanced ability to sue her bosses. Julia never marries, though she “decides to have a baby” with free health care guaranteed by Obama. That baby –the only person who appears with Julia in any chapter of her existence – disappears when he’s six and she’s 37.

“The Life of Julia” seems above all lonely—unintentionally revealing that those without family and community depend more on government, while those depending on government are less likely to build strong families and communities.

The suburban town in which I live recently shocked the political establishment in a public vote on new school bonds for $200,000,000. The officials wanted to tear down all five local schools, replacing totally functional 30-year-old buildings with high-tech, cutting edge “green” facilities.

Every politician in the area—Republicans as well as Democrats—backed the new borrowing and our community, proud of its top-ranked schools, had always approved previous calls to boost education spending. But citizens crushed the new proposal by a margin of nearly two to one. 

A recent report shows nearly one in six Americans depending on federal money through the food stamps program, while costs of the giveaway more than doubled in the last four years. In part, that’s because the Obama administration loosened restrictions and boosted benefits as part of its so-called “stimulus” package.

It’s illogical to think subsidized meals stimulate economic growth, and even more illogical to suggest hungry families must rely on far-away Washington instead of local or state programs, not to mention private charities. Moreover, current costs for the food stamp program--$72 billion a year—exceed the most optimistic estimates of all new funds the president seeks by hiking taxes on the rich.

Inevitably, the middle class must help pay the bills, with higher taxes or deepening debt, for their neighbors’ food entitlements—which now include fast food like pizza, hot dogs and French fries! 

The Disney Company’s handsome new nature film, Chimpanzee, features spectacular jungle footage from the Ivory Coast, but it’s coupled with insipid narration that actually ruins the movie.

As delivered by Tim Allen, the script centers around a lovable baby chimp whose mother falls victim to a rival band of chimpanzees described repeatedly as “a mob,” or “gang,” comprised of “thugs.” In fact, no meaningful difference in behavior distinguished supposedly nice chimps from purported meanies—both groups struggle desperately to survive amidst scarce resources.

The movie shows even intelligent animals ruled by instinct, not some code of honor; they are incapable of either morality or immorality. Only human beings, discerning for thousands of years some timeless rules established by a higher power, can exercise real choice, displaying conduct that counts as genuinely good or evil. 

In a campaign speech in Exeter, New Hampshire, Vice President Joe Biden attacked Mitt Romney as “out of step with American values.”

This is an outrageous charge that demands a direct challenge from fair-minded sources in the media. In what way does Mitt Romney fail to honor American values? His family life has been exemplary: 42 years of marriage with five married sons and sixteen grandchildren. He gives prodigiously to charity, with no hint of impropriety in either his business or political careers. Does Romney violate “American values” just because he’s rich?

In fact, Americans have always honored the goal of creating wealth through hard work and honest effort—as did Romney. Biden and Obama are actually more out of step with traditional American values, through their support for bigger government, more dependency, and less individual accountability. 

If the public thinks race relations have gotten worse in the last three years, doesn’t the president deserve some of the blame? A Newsweek/Daily Beast poll showed  that 63% of whites and 58% of blacks feel that race relations have stayed the same or gotten worse since Obama became president; less than 40% of either blacks or whites say relations have improved.  Meanwhile, a staggering 85% of African-Americans insist they approve of Barack Obama’s handling of race relations. How can you overwhelmingly approve of this president at the same time that you’re overwhelmingly convinced we’re going in the wrong direction? Even if you blame someone else – like conservatives – for persistent racism, the current gloomy situation is proof that Obama’s leadership has been so weak that he failed in his most important goal of unifying the nation. 

A recent poll shows that most Americans want to give lottery winners big tax breaks while punishing those who earn their living through honest effort. According to a YouGov survey, a majority wanted lottery winners collecting millions to pay less than 10% to the government, at the same time they demanded tax hikes above 35% for any family earning $250,000 or more.

In other words, if you got your money through pure chance like the Mega Millions winners, the public wants you to pay a lower rate than, say, a modestly successful doctor who benefits society.  The only possible explanation for this illogical attitude is that the public looks at lottery winners as ordinary people like themselves who caught a break, while they resent well-paid professionals for even constructive achievements that seem foreign and unattainable. 

GUEST  BLOG  BY  DIANE  MEDVED

As we approach this year’s near simultaneous celebration of Easter and Passover, why don’t religion writers and influential clerics begin to fret over perplexed families that must do battle with the awkward, unavoidable “April Dilemma”?

Every winter, articles abound over the December Dilemma, highlighting husbands and wives in mixed-marriages struggling to jointly honor Christmas and Hanukah, or focusing on divided clans with their share of non-believers unable to decide whether to center festivities on Jesus or Santa.

The spring festivals speak to us with greater clarity and force because they’re unequivocally and inescapably religious.

Christmas has been largely secularized around the world, but efforts to drain faith-based messages from the Easter holiday have, for the most part, failed miserably. For one thing, it’s much tougher to secularize a festival about Resurrection (which doesn’t happen all that often) than one about birth (which, in one form or another, happens all the time).

This means that if Easter isn’t religious, it’s empty and inconsequential. Few Americans feel deep emotion or profound sentimental attachment to the procedure of rolling colored eggs. The Easter Bunny remains an indistinct personality who’s gained limited traction, but Santa Claus has become a distinctly beloved figure around the world. Consider the difference between cherished Kris Kringle movies (“Miracle on 34^th Street” or “The Santa Clause”) and the rancid recent release “Hop” (just out on DVD), with Russell Brand voicing the son of the Easter Bunny, who leaves the family business and goes out to Hollywood to ogle starlets. Families enjoy watching Santa films to savor the season, but children should only view “Hop” as a form of punishment if they’ve been very, very naughty.

Attempts to separate Passover from its religious roots have fared no better than the bid to secularize Easter. As far as Hanukah is concerned, it’s a minor festival in the Jewish calendar with no practical requirements (other than lighting candles) and a religious message (purification, re-dedication) that’s widely ignored. Passover, on the other hand, is a big deal (and the most widely observed of all Jewish occasions)—Biblically mandated, with elaborate rituals for an extended seder meal and a radical change of diet and (even dishware) that’s supposed to last eight days. Meanwhile, only masochists savor the matzo for its own sake (it’s traditionally described as “the bread of affliction”) but the potato pancakes (latkes) of Hanukah seem tasty even without religious associations. Those who prefer not to think about God can be perfectly comfortable with Hanukah as commemoration of a liberation struggle, honoring the military genius of Judah the Maccabee. But during the Passover season atheists and skeptics are stuck: it wasn’t civil disobedience or inspiring speeches by Moses (he was tongue-tied, remember?) that got the Hebrew slaves out of Egypt, but a series of miracles by a supernatural God.

The spring festivals both count as tougher, more demanding, more personal and (surprisingly) less controversial than the winter celebrations. Easter insists that Jesus died and rose again for you, personally – not for some other guy, or just for a group of disciples long ago. The Passover liturgy recited at the seder meal similarly demands that you experience the Exodus as if you yourself escaped from Egypt - not your great grandfather or your Orthodox Uncle Max - and you owe the Almighty undying gratitude as your personal liberator.

The religious messages in the April holidays are pointed, unequivocal, impossible to fudge. There’s no annual “War on Easter” to compare to our annual (and increasingly tedious) “War on Christmas” because no one tries to claim that Easter’s a secular occasion, or attempts to empty Holy Week of its New Testament substance. While ardent believers seek to “Put Christ back into Christmas,” there’s never been a comparable effort to “Put Christ Back into Easter”—since it’s been unthinkable to take him out of the holiday at any point. Sure, Christians can bring their skeptical, non-believing friends along with them to experience an inspiring sunrise service this Sunday morning, but the worshippers will be honoring more than the new buds of spring.

In America’s wonderfully pluralistic and open society, the clear, fervent expression of religious messages makes for less conflict, not more. In this country, Christians have never repeated the horrors of Medieval Europe, when the Easter holiday frequently offered an excuse for violent persecution of Jews as “Christ-killers,” producing bloody pogroms that interrupted traditional Passover celebrations. Here, increasing numbers of Christians seek to experience Passover, not to suppress it – hoping to familiarize themselves with some of the same rituals that Jesus may have led at the Last Supper.

No wonder that Jews and Christians can simultaneously enjoy the twinned seasonal expression of our distinct traditions, with little of the confusion or torment associated with the December Dilemma. In this sacred season we see that religion isn’t a zero sum game –a more devout and meaningful Easter for Christians in no way detracts from a joyous Passover for the Jewish community, just as a strictly observant Passover (which begins this week at sundown of Good Friday) takes nothing away from the drama and impact of Holy Week.

Barack Obama promised to unify the country by moving beyond partisan bickering, but he breaks that promise with divisive, dishonest rhetoric. In a speech to the Associated Press he said Republicans want to “strip away more regulations and let businesses pollute more … lay off thousands of teachers” and “close hundreds of national parks.”

Why does the GOP yearn to do such damage? The president says it’s to give a “trillion dollars in tax giveaways” to millionaires. What’s worst about this attack is the president knows it’s not true. The Republican Ryan budget wouldn’t cut revenue to the government—it helps revenue grow when the economy grows by getting rid of loopholes and tax giveaways, not creating new ones. When a desperate president lies shamelessly to the American people seven months before an election, we’re in for an ugly political season. 

A new survey from Public Religion Research Institute shows American Jews continuing to lean left—with 73 percent saying our “economic system unfairly favors the wealthy” and 81 percent demanding higher tax rates on the rich.

Disproportionately prosperous Jewish voters apparently feel guilty about our own success and want to identify with the underdog. Unfortunately, they don’t rally behind the ultimate underdog, Israel—just 4 percent list Israel’s security as their top priority issue. Maybe that’s why Obama, despite his angry, unreliable Israel record, still retains overwhelming Jewish support –only 7 percent of the Jews who backed him last time now say they’ll vote Republican.

Within the Jewish community, conservatives must build stronger connections with Israel by encouraging the big majority of American Jews who’ve never visited our ancient, reborn homeland to journey to Jerusalem for the trip of a lifetime. 

President Obama’s advocates want to destroy conservative confidence by promoting the idea that incumbent presidents almost always win re-election. Actually, only 15 of the 42 men who preceded Obama in the presidency ever managed to win two consecutive terms—so nearly two thirds of prior presidents failed to win the re-election Obama loyalists take for granted.

Most two-termers were popular giants like Jefferson or Jackson, Ike or Reagan with far more impressive first term accomplishments and sturdier national support than Barack Obama. Moreover, two presidents generally admired by historians and counted as “great” or “near-great”—Harry Truman and Lyndon Johnson—both faltered when they tried to win second full terms on their own, and withdrew after early primary failures.

Yes, Obama could win re-election but an honest examination of electoral history suggests the odds are against him.

Rick Santorum’s decisive win in Louisiana came with exit polls showing 23% of voters citing “strong moral character” as the candidate quality that mattered most. Santorum won 71% of their support - not surprising given his long-standing stress on ethical issues. But these same “morality voters” expressed a two-to-one preference for Newt Gingrich over Mitt Romney – 13% to just 6%.

Why would they select the thrice-married, scandal plagued, House-censured former Speaker over an exemplary family man with 43 years of marriage, sixteen grandchildren, and a long business career shockingly free of ethical taint?

Some voters appear to hold Romney’s Mormon faith against him, but core principles of pluralism demand acknowledgement that theological disagreements don’t amount to bad character. Meanwhile, doctrinal differences haven’t stopped Mitt Romney and millions of other Mormons from living productive, patriotic and deeply moral lives. 

Film reviewers enjoy a natural, inalienable right to slam movies, but it’s not fair to review a film’s ideas rather than its artistic quality. October Baby, a well-crafted independent film with a passionate pro-life message, drew a particularly nasty review from the New York Times. Reviewer Jeanette Catsoulis decried the movie’s “essential ugliness,” calling it a “soapy melodrama,” but also made clear that her core objections were political.

To her, the film is “clearly intended to terrify young women—and fits right in with the proposed state laws that increasingly turn the screws on a woman’s dominion over her reproductive system.” This hardly describes the film’s heroine—a strong, courageous young woman, well-played by the beautiful Rachel Hendrix—nor did it keep October Baby from an opening weekend, per-screen average of $4,405 – second best of all the week’s new releases. 

Oscar-winning actress Charlize Theron became the latest Hollywood glamour girl to adopt a child as a single mother, joining Sandra Bullock, Sharon Stone, Diane Keaton, Madonna, Meg Ryan and many others in a hot Tinseltown trend.

Yes, these adoptions may provide unique opportunities for a few fortunate children, but they send terrible messages to the nation at large. If the wealthiest, most admired women in society despair of constructing lasting marriages, how can ordinary females feel confident about building families? And the celebrity single mom fad suggests that a father’s role in child-rearing is irrelevant—and that dads are easily replaced by well-paid household staff.

When sexy stars tout single mom adoption as a path to personal fulfillment, they devalue traditional family norms that still constitute the best shot at happiness for everyone else.