Brown v. Bowman: A lack of homo-se-xual orthodoxy leads to bond-age
If there is any fixed star in our constitutional constellation, it is that no official, high or petty, can prescribe what shall be orthodox in politics, nationalism, religion, or other matters of opinion, or force citizens to confess by word or act their faith therein. West Virginia State Board of Education v. Barnette, 319 U.S. 624 (1943)
I, Bryan J. Brown, must admit to being about as politically incorrect as one can be. Not only do I have multiple misdemeanor arrests for civil disobedience on my record between 1988 – 1991 (but almost no convictions due to my pro se lawyering before law school) but I also have multiple civil suits on my record due to my leadership in Operation Rescue. (The only one that troubled the Indiana bar went away by order of the issuing court last summer, as explained here), but I also attended the ever controversial Regent University (started a Newman Center while there), worked for the ACLJ (Jay Sekulow and Keith Fournier), and then left that paradise for an even better one – I was a constitutional law attorney for Brother Don Wildmon (pray for his health) at the American Family Association mainly representing controversial pro-lifers and street preachers and such. If that was not controversial and politically incorrect enough, I left that fine gig to ride with Kansas’ terminally controversial Phill Kline as one of his few Deputy Attorney Generals. That assignment made Governor Kathleen Sebelius my neighbor and she did duly denounce me at least a few times, as would be expected of a liberal of her stature.
And then, to top it all off, there is The ArchAngel Institute.
Yes, I must admit to being about as politically incorrect as one can be. And not just for my pro-life activities.
My gig with Kline involved me in writing a winning appellate brief adverse to the homosexual agenda. That was not my first sortie against that perversion. I spoke out against it in the national press as an AFA attorney a few times – and litigated adverse to it at least once.
And that once was a pretty big case. I ended up arguing it before then Judge Sam Alito when he was on the Third Circuit Court of Appeals. It was listed as one of his most important cases during his confirmation before the Senate. That case is Saxe v. SCASD. Here is the report from a group that gave me some advice on the final appellate brief. Here is a link to the actual case.
This case brings us to Kevin Jennings, a man much in the news of late. He is our Safe School Czar, thanks to Barrack Hussein Obama.
When I interacted with Jennings he was the Executive Director of a homosexual activist group promoting homosexual safe zones in the public schools. At this link Jennings commented on the Saxe victory, which had just struck down a speech code that punished religious speech against homosexual conduct that Jenning’s ilk had fashioned and first installed in Vermont public schools.
I expect that Kevin Jennings was, like me, at the Hates Crime Summit in Atlanta when this hate speech code was unleashed. He was there managing the release, I was there undercover, not knowing that a mere two years later I would be the attorney who took the code down.
Given this history, one can understand my consternation when the government chosen and government pre-briefed psychologist ran me through an iteration of the MMPI-2 psych exam that probed my views on proper sexual conduct and views of sexual deviance.
Some of those religious and political questions are set forth in Appendix A of the federal complaint.
This paragraph from the complaint was my response, after my notes had been seized in which I recorded the subject matter of the most disconcerting questions:
As to the testing, in the letter dated June 12, 2008, Plaintiff wrote:
The imprecise and intrusive personal questions were bothersome to me, but the religious questions were even more disconcerting. More than a few probed my views of the Divine, angels, sexual mores, sin and redemption. I have some understanding of the major doctrines of Christianity, and must report that most all were probed on the MMPI-2. I realized, as the test unfolded, that this was the anti-religious test that I had read about in orthodox Catholic literature.
Complaint paragraph #67
My concerns about such testing and a seeming attempt to discover my views toward what is called “the homosexual agenda” ripened into me being shipped off to a government-chosen (personally known to JLAP’s Terry Harrell I was told) and government pre-briefed psychiatrist, Dr. Elizabeth Bowman, who was already on the record as to her views on things such as the Saxe decision. In reviewing a radically pro-homosexual books Dr. Bowman wrote:“To her credit, Dr. Mollenkott takes on “Christian Doublespeak” and confronts the logical contradictions of scriptural interpretation offered by the religious right in trying to crush homosexual and other transgendered people. These sections of her book in which she argues scriptural interpretations and theology are the most powerful portions.” (http://www.eewc.com/Reviews/Spring2001Omnigender.htm (emphasis added.)
Complaint paragraph #187
Now, I might be crazy (so says the government), but I think, given that I had participated in what Dr. Bowman deemed “the religious Right’s” attempt to “crush homosexual and other transgendered people” and had demonstrated, in her presence, a dedication to “Christian Doublespeak” as my scriptural interpretations and theology” that JLAP should NOT have remanded me to Dr. Elizabeth Bowman, anymore than I should have been remanded to Kathleen Sebelius or Kevin Jennings.
Chances are they all three could have agreed that I had Personality Disorder, Not Otherwise Specified by a mere review of my resume’ . Why, I must have it, for I have clearly rejected the government’s post modern orthodoxy. And so was sent to the rack. And so I have appealed to Caesar to be set from the bondage that my “heresy” has brought down upon me.
Stay tuned for more analysis in the public interest.
