Religious-right groups have swooned over Greg Abbott, the Texas attorney general and candidate for the Republican nomination for governor next year. Now they appear to be lining up behind a candidate to replace Abbott as AG: state Sen. Ken Paxton, R-McKinney.
Today Paxton’s campaign released a long list of religious-right activists who are backing his bid to become the state’s chief law enforcement officer. The list includes Cathie Adams of Texas Eagle Forum, Kelly Shackelford of Liberty Institute (and its lobby arm in Austin, Texas Values), Tim Lambert of the Texas Home School Coalition, Peggy Venable of Americans for Prosperity-Texas, leaders from Concerned Women for America of Texas, and David Barton‘s WallBuilders sidekick Rick Green. These are among the most rabidly anti-gay, anti-sex education and anti-abortion culture warriors in the state (not to mention their strident opposition to church-state separation).
Paxton’s extreme positions on important issues makes their hearts flutter, of course. This year, for example, Paxton tried to pass legislation that would have effectively ended sex education in much of Texas, a state with one of the highest teen birth rates in the nation. Fortunately, TFN and our coalition partners succeeded in stopping that bill. Paxton has also supported massive cuts to family planning programs for women as well as, in legislative special sessions this summer, some of the most extreme restrictions on abortion in the country. Make no mistake, Paxton has made the war on women, birth control and sex education a priority. And he would take that agenda to the Texas Attorney General’s Office.
As if I wasn’t depressed enough about the state of the state politically already. Jeez. Will some pro-choice Dem run please?
And the War on Women continues. Let’s not get mad, let’s get even!
Ken Paxton–what a peach. If by “peach” you mean asshat.
Where are these religious freaks coming from? I make it a point to spark up conversations with strangers while in line at the grocery store, or clothes shopping or just about anywhere I am. I have yet to talk to anyone who is as extreme about abortion and religion as these kooks are that are trying to turn this state into a Theocracy. People need to understand that we need normal people with common sense to get out and vote, to prevent these religious nuts from taking over. Please talk to your family and friends about voting, and let’s get these nuts back in their box!!
Read the Constitution. Separation between church and state, this is a violation. No other way to put it.
8.5.13 — SBOE Chair Barbara Cargill did nothing wrong by interacting with the state review panels who were evaluating instructional materials. Here is the statutory authority for her (and other SBOE members) to do that:
Texas Administrative Code Title 19, Part 2, Chapter 66, Subchapter B, Rule 66.45(a) specifically indicates that Texas State Board of Education members are permitted to interact with the members of the instructional materials review panels:
“During this [no-contact] period, state review panel members shall not be contacted either directly or indirectly by any person having an interest in the adoption process regarding content of instructional materials under evaluation by the panel. This restriction is not intended to prohibit members of the state review panels from seeking advice regarding materials under consideration from the State Board of Education.” (emphasis added)
Donna Garner
[email protected]
Donna,
Perhaps you meant to post your comment in our blog post about Barbara Cargill here. In any case, the issue isn’t whether Cargill was simply responding to requests from the review panels. The issue is whether Cargill was promoting her personal views about evolution when she spent substantial time with the biology review panels. We don’t know yet whether Cargill did that. Neither do you. Reviewers should be permitted to come to their conclusions independently. It would also be a good thing if reviewers were qualified in a field relevant to the course materials they are reviewing. We know that at least some of the reviewers were not.