Annachie: The Thomas Moore Law Center has pretty much been on the wrong side of every social... and by that I mean religious issue, in the courts for many years. They lost the Dover Trial, they defended a teacher with the interesting habit of picking up the bible on her desk to read and make points to students... I think that they are primarily an instrument of the christian ideologue. In fact, the only thing that I can ever remember them doing... when they are not defending teachers who they feel have the academic freedom to substitute their sect's teachings for things like Biology, was to defend Pamela Geller and Robert Spencer, as the American Freedom Defense Initiative, when they try to place their anti-sharia, Anti-jihad, advertisements with public entities. Their track record there isn't great. However, they have also been the victims of some deeply questionable rulings in these cases, and also of some amok political preconceptions on the part of the entities resisting the placements of the ads. Weird, as they are first amendment issues.

Often, they take cases for clients that no credible law firm would take, as they are essentially unwinnable, because they are more far more interested in the Interview, press conference, and sound bite, that they see furthers their religious agenda. I think that it is (only partly, which is more the pity), the fact that they take these cases pro bono, that keeps them from having people call for them to be disbarred... Well, not really, but given that any firm that put the client's interests first would tell their clients that their case was unwinnable, and that their best course would be to simply stop breaking the law, the likelihood exists that the clients themselves must share that Ideologue agenda. And... Seeking precedent, even where I happen to agree with them, isn't really wrongdoing.

They do have an interesting history, and one night I actually began examining by looking through lists of trial verdicts, to see if there were any cases that made them look like defenders of basic rights and freedoms for the little guy. Most were cut and dried religious rights needing to trump everyone else's rights of any kind, and I found none that I could identify as neatly secular. Needless to say, I tired of looking at those verdicts pretty quickly, so they may indeed look after their neighbors cats, while one of their clients is trying to have that poor neighbor dragged away and burned as a witch.

This case, though not moot, is simply one more - equally disgusting - maneuver to challenge what they don't like, pitting parental rights as a tool against the clear and unspeakable evil - Only the sin that they abhore while dearly loving everything about that poor misguided 'BOY' - to use against people like... us.

They are careful not to sue people who might ask their clients to pay court and attorney's fees, and prefer to go after governments and corporations to create precedent/precedents useful to their quest to save the good people from people like us.

Hope that helps.

Sarah Lynn

I haven't seen anything in what you have recently written that I can recall disagreeing with or that I thought was untrue. In fact, I've always appreciated Cathy's comments on the environment, people's rights, religion, and politics. What you do is of course your choice. I'd hate to see you go and would miss you.

We'll just have to wait and see ... I have to agree, The Donald wouldn't have been my first choice if just about anyone else had been running against him, but I heard the audio recording made of Mrs. Clinton commenting over her defense of the rapist of a twelve-year old. I could have forgiven her defending the guy, even her actually winning the case ... but I heard her laughing over the result. Frankly, from that point on I was no longer certain she wouldn't burst into flame if someone accidently sprayed her with holy water.

So, we have the Donald to contend with ... well, he's a businessman first and foremost, he lives and breathes The Deal. One can work with that, just keep the pressure on and don't take your eyes off him for a second. As far as Brexit goes ... well, I've been watching the news, and what's going on in Europe isn't refugees, it's a hostile invasion. Britain leaving the European Union may be a drastic response, but I'm not going to say it's the wrong one. Yes, I have to agree we're seeing a lot of hostility, jingoism and hate these days, but it's a response, not a cause. You can only co-exist with a predator from the inside.