<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0">
   <channel>
      <title>Religious Action Center :: RACBlog</title>
      <link>http://blogs.rj.org/rac/</link>
      <description></description>
      <language>en</language>
      <copyright>Copyright 2010</copyright>
      <lastBuildDate>Fri, 19 Mar 2010 15:37:28 -0500</lastBuildDate>
      <generator>http://www.sixapart.com/movabletype/?v=4.1</generator>
      <docs>http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/tech/rss</docs> 

      
      <item>
         <title>An Appeal to Bagel-Lovers (And Their Friends)</title>
         <description><![CDATA[<p><strong>&nbsp;Update on Immigration Reform:</strong></p>
<p>Yesterday, the chief authors of much anticipated comprehensive immigration reform legislation, Sen. Charles Schumer (D-NY) and Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC), published an op-ed in the <em>Washington Post</em> outlining their framework for action on repairing our broken immigration system.</p>
<p>Despite our nation's opposition to illegal immigration, the majority of Americans support legal immigration and the Senators have introduced four pillars for reform that will protect workers, secure borders, and create a path to citizenship for those already contributing to our country:</p>
<p>•&nbsp;requiring biometric Social Security cards to ensure workers are properly documented<br />•&nbsp;fulfilling and strengthening the commitment to border security and interior enforcement<br />•&nbsp;creating a process for admitting temporary workers<br />•&nbsp;implementing a tough but fair path to legalization for those already here<br /></p>]]></description>
         <link>http://blogs.rj.org/rac/2010/03/an_appeal_to_bagellovers_and_t.html</link>
         <guid>http://blogs.rj.org/rac/2010/03/an_appeal_to_bagellovers_and_t.html</guid>
         <category>jschnur</category>
         <pubDate>Fri, 19 Mar 2010 15:37:28 -0500</pubDate>
      </item>
      
      <item>
         <title>My Homeland, My Self, part 4</title>
         <description><![CDATA[In this blog series, based on the <a href="http://reformjudaismmag.org/Articles/index.cfm?id=1555">Focus story "Israel by Israelis,"</a> in the Spring 2010 edition of <a href="http://reformjudaismmag.org/"><em>Reform Judaism</em> Magazine</a>,
you will discover what it's really like to live as a Reform Jew in
Israel from the personal stories of 18 Jews who champion our Movement
in the Jewish state.
<br /><br />Israeli Reform Jews--some born in Israel, some via <em>aliyah</em>--share their stories about the agony and the ecstasy of living in this still young and struggling Jewish state.

<br /><br />Today, participants will respond to two questions, listed below.<br /><br />]]></description>
         <link>http://blogs.rj.org/rac/2010/03/my_homeland_my_self_part_4.html</link>
         <guid>http://blogs.rj.org/rac/2010/03/my_homeland_my_self_part_4.html</guid>
         <category>lpipergoldberg</category>
         <pubDate>Fri, 19 Mar 2010 15:32:08 -0500</pubDate>
      </item>
      
      <item>
         <title>Can We Discriminate?</title>
         <description><![CDATA[<p>
<p><img class="mt-image-right" style="FLOAT: right; MARGIN: 0px 0px 20px 20px" height="210" alt="courtdaylogo.png" src="http://blogs.rj.org/rac/courtdaylogo.png" width="235" />This week, the Union for Reform Judaism signed onto an amicus brief for the upcoming Supreme Court case, <em><a href="http://www.scotuswiki.com/index.php?title=Christian_Legal_Society_v._Martinez">Christian Legal Society v. Martinez</a></em>. This case began when the University of California-Hastings School of Law denied formal recognition to the Christian Legal Society (CLS), a student-run group, because it discriminates in who can become voting members and attain leadership roles. </p>
<p>While CLS allows any and all students to participate in their activities, they restrict their voting members and leadership to those who adhere to conservative Christian values as they define them. In particular, they exclude those who engage in "unrepentant participation in or advocacy of a sexually immoral lifestyle" including "sexual conduct outside of marriage between a man and a woman."</p>]]></description>
         <link>http://blogs.rj.org/rac/2010/03/can_we_discriminate.html</link>
         <guid>http://blogs.rj.org/rac/2010/03/can_we_discriminate.html</guid>
         <category>jweiser</category>
         <pubDate>Fri, 19 Mar 2010 14:38:09 -0500</pubDate>
      </item>
      
      <item>
         <title>Deal or No Deal</title>
         <description><![CDATA[<p>The decision to move critical health insurance reform toward passage by means of reconciliation may constitute a victory in the fight to preserve access to abortion services in reform. The Senate bill contains anti-abortion language that (though imperfect) is far less onerous than the Stupak Amendment in the House bill. Because the House will only have the opportunity to vote on the Senate legislation, the Stupak Amendment is, by all accounts, effectively dead. </p>
<p>For the last year, the Religious Action Center and other organizations which support reproductive rights have worked to pass meaningful and critical health insurance reform which does not constitute a further assault on a woman's right to choose. We worked toward "<a href="http://www.thehealthcareblog.com/the_health_care_blog/2009/12/voters-want-abortionneutral-health-care-reform.html">abortion neutrality</a>" in the legislation - language that would not advance or further limit reproductive rights. With 47 million Americans currently without health insurance, health reform should never have become mired in the controversial yet important issue of reproductive freedom. </p>]]></description>
         <link>http://blogs.rj.org/rac/2010/03/deal_or_no_deal.html</link>
         <guid>http://blogs.rj.org/rac/2010/03/deal_or_no_deal.html</guid>
         <category>slehman</category>
         <pubDate>Fri, 19 Mar 2010 09:17:32 -0500</pubDate>
      </item>
      
   </channel>
</rss>
