Huckabee Forgets the First Amendment of the US Constitution

US News • Views: 5,241

Mike Huckabee is at it again, joining Jim DeMint in claiming that the stimulus is ‘anti-religious’.

Former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee warned supporters Tuesday that the $828 billion stimulus package is “anti-religious.”

In an e-mail that was also posted on his blog ahead of the Senate’s passage, Huckabee wrote: “The dust is settling on the ‘bipartisan’ stimulus bill and one thing is clear: It is anti-religious.”

The former Republican presidential candidate pointed to a provision in both the House and Senate versions banning higher education funds in the bill from being used on a “school or department of divinity.”

World Net Daily takes the hysteria to the next level: Stimulus to ban religious worship.

Let’s look at the language in the stimulus bill that’s causing this freak-out, shall we?

PROHIBITED USES OF FUNDS. - No funds awarded under this section may be used for - (C) modernization, renovation, or repair of facilities - (i) used for sectarian instruction, religious worship, or a school or department of divinity; or (ii) in which a substantial portion of the functions of the facilities are subsumed in a religious mission.

Apparently we’re supposed to just forget about that pesky old Establishment Clause of the First Amendment of the US Constitution, which states:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion…

The government does not fund religious schools or churches for this very reason, and the language in the stimulus bill is absolutely consistent with the Constitution of the United States.

Mike Huckabee is feeding raw meat to Christian fundamentalists, but apparently he’s forgotten that if you revoke the Establishment Clause for Christian schools and churches, you also have to revoke it for Jewish and Muslim schools and houses of worship. For some reason, I don’t think that would meet with Huck’s approval.

There are plenty of things in the stimulus bill to be unhappy about, but this issue is being cynically distorted by people like Huckabee and DeMint to stir up the far right religious wing of the GOP.

And by the way, Huckabee, DeMint, and World Net Daily have another thing in common; they’re all in favor of teaching creationism in public schools—another violation of the Establishment Clause.

UPDATE at 2/10/09 6:22:21 pm:

Mike Huckabee apparently doesn’t like the US Constitution very much: Huckabee: Amend Constitution to be in ‘God’s standards’.

“I have opponents in this race who do not want to change the Constitution,” Huckabee told a Michigan audience on Monday. “But I believe it’s a lot easier to change the Constitution than it would be to change the word of the living god. And that’s what we need to do — to amend the Constitution so it’s in God’s standards rather than try to change God’s standards so it lines up with some contemporary view.”

(Hat tip: Killgore.)

Jump to bottom

985 comments
1 soxfan4life  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 6:09:04pm

This stimulus bill sucks for a million reasons, but this is not one of them. Micheal Steele needs to get word to Huckabee to keep his mouth shut.

2 ArmyWife  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 6:09:22pm

Why won't he just go away? Can't we buy an island somewhere and send all the kook politicians to it? Then Huckabee, Ron Paul and Dennis Kucinich could campaign against each other for the rest of their ridiculous lives.

3 Summer Seale  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 6:09:29pm

Well, you know, I remember Huckabee basically saying that the Law of God should be above the Law of the Constitution during his campaign trail....

He may be a likable guy, but I don't think he lives in the same country as I do or something.

4 Dustyvet  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 6:09:31pm

And so it begins...

5 Bloodnok  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 6:09:45pm

Shouldn't that be "Republican Rising Star Mike Huckabee"?

/spitspitspit

6 jcm  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 6:09:54pm

I'm not smarter than 5th grade civics.
/Huckster

7 ArmyWife  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 6:10:19pm

re: #3 Summer

I find him oily. A Republican version of Bill Clinton.

8 Shug  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 6:10:38pm
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion.

unless that Religion is Global Warming

/

9 Racer X  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 6:10:42pm

Oh Jeez!

[lightning bolt strike. Racer X lies in smoldering pile of leather.]

10 MandyManners  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 6:10:54pm
they’re all in favor of teaching creationism in public schools

And CAIR is just waiting to get its version taught in public schools.

11 Sharmuta  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 6:11:00pm
PROHIBITED USES OF FUNDS. - No funds awarded under this section may be used for - (C) modernization, renovation, or repair of facilities - (i) used for sectarian instruction, religious worship, or a school or department of divinity; or (ii) in which a substantial portion of the functions of the facilities are subsumed in a religious mission.

And if this wasn't in the bill, and funds were used for islamic foot baths, they would be screaming bloody murder. What prevents the government from funding Christianity also protects us from other faiths with which we might just disagree.

12 FrogMarch  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 6:11:06pm

Please Republicans - don't do this. Not helping.

13 Sharmuta  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 6:11:19pm

re: #4 Dustyvet

And so it begins...

What?

14 Bloodnok  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 6:11:30pm

re: #7 ArmyWife

I find him oily. A Republican version of Bill Clinton.

One ArmyWife's "oily" is another Bloodnok's "slimy".

15 Salamantis  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 6:11:37pm

Mike Huckabee has about as much chance of getting my vote as Bobby Jindal does.

16 Walter L. Newton  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 6:11:44pm

This is going to kill the Republicans in 2010, 2012 and for the near future.

17 jcm  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 6:11:48pm

Hey Huck why to you worry about some real stuff in the Porkulus Bill.

Ruin Your Health With the Obama Stimulus Plan:

The stimulus bill does that, and calls it the Federal Coordinating Council for Comparative Effectiveness Research (190-192). The goal, Daschle’s book explained, is to slow the development and use of new medications and technologies because they are driving up costs. He praises Europeans for being more willing to accept “hopeless diagnoses” and “forgo experimental treatments,” and he chastises Americans for expecting too much from the health-care system.
18 Summer Seale  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 6:12:04pm

re: #7 ArmyWife

I find him oily. A Republican version of Bill Clinton.

I dunno, I've never met him. But he does seem genuinely nice whenever I see an interview with him. I just happen to think he's 100% wrong in these issues. I wouldn't ever vote for him, and I wish he'd stay out of the whole debate about reforming the party.

19 Shug  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 6:12:21pm

If a trauma patient comes into the Emergency department with a severed arm from a car accident, the Stimulus Bill Solution would be to enroll that patient in a defensive driving course.

20 Van Helsing  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 6:12:34pm

re: #2 ArmyWife

Why won't he just go away? Can't we buy an island somewhere and send all the kook politicians to it? Then Huckabee, Ron Paul and Dennis Kucinich could campaign against each other for the rest of their ridiculous lives.

And Leahy could have his Inquisition...
I'm liking it.

21 Vicious Babushka  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 6:13:23pm

re: #7 ArmyWife

I find him oily. A Republican version of Bill Clinton.

Without the sex appeal

22 Slumbering Behemoth Stinks  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 6:13:23pm
What prevents the government from funding Christianity also protects us from other faiths with which we might just disagree.

A simple enough truth to understand, yet it seems to elude so many.

Maybe I am being cynical, but I don't think this truth has eluded Huck.

23 Noam Sayin'  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 6:13:38pm

And this guy wanted to be president?

24 doppelganglander  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 6:13:40pm

Good Lord, why won't this toothless hillbilly go away? I had been watching less and less Fox News over the last year, but hiring him was the last straw.

25 jaunte  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 6:13:44pm

re: #17 jcm

I don't think I've ever heard of a powerful politician who was willing to accept "hopeless diagnoses" and "forgo experimental treatments" on their own behalf.

26 HelloDare  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 6:13:45pm

World Nut Daily

27 jcm  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 6:13:48pm

re: #11 Sharmuta

And if this wasn't in the bill, and funds were used for islamic foot baths, they would be screaming bloody murder. What prevents the government from funding Christianity also protects us from other faiths with which we might just disagree.

I DON'T WANT GOVERNMENT FUNDS!

I want to practice my faith without GOVERNMENT STRINGS!

And what Sharm said!

28 Wishing  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 6:14:02pm

Fear-mongering law should be enacted, post-haste?

29 Dustyvet  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 6:14:07pm

re: #13 Sharmuta

What?

Please disregard that comment, never leave a 10 year old sitting at the keyboard while you go use the restroom, he was trying to send an email about a puter game and screwed it up.

30 Killgore Trout  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 6:14:12pm

Huckabee: Amend Constitution to be in 'God's standards'

"I have opponents in this race who do not want to change the Constitution," Huckabee told a Michigan audience on Monday. "But I believe it's a lot easier to change the Constitution than it would be to change the word of the living god. And that's what we need to do -- to amend the Constitution so it's in God's standards rather than try to change God's standards so it lines up with some contemporary view."

31 jcm  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 6:14:17pm

re: #25 jaunte

I don't think I've ever heard of a powerful politician who was willing to accept "hopeless diagnoses" and "forgo experimental treatments" on their own behalf.

Bet you dollars to donuts congress critters are "exempted."

32 Salamantis  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 6:14:20pm

re: #2 ArmyWife

Why won't he just go away? Can't we buy an island somewhere and send all the kook politicians to it? Then Huckabee, Ron Paul and Dennis Kucinich could campaign against each other for the rest of their ridiculous lives.

I noticed that you didn't mention Mike Gravel. To avenge that slight, he will wordlessly stare at you for 15 minutes, then throw a boulder in a pond.

33 Bloodnok  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 6:14:25pm

re: #23 Noam Sayin'

And this guy wanted wants to be president?

Unfortunately he's not done yet.

34 soxfan4life  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 6:14:29pm

re: #17 jcm

Hey Huck why to you worry about some real stuff in the Porkulus Bill.

Ruin Your Health With the Obama Stimulus Plan:

I wonder how willing this asshole would accept a hopeless diagnosis and go curl up somewhere. It's easy to make the decision for someone else.Much like paying ones taxes.

35 MandyManners  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 6:14:33pm

re: #23 Noam Sayin'

And this guy wanted to be president?

I paid almost no attention to him.

36 sngnsgt  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 6:15:16pm

re: #19 Shug

To learn hand turn signals.

37 jaunte  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 6:15:28pm

re: #31 jcm

Bet you dollars to donuts congress critters are "exempted."

They all have enough money to buy whatever they need, as long as someone will provide it. I think we all pay for their healthcare anyway.

38 doppelganglander  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 6:15:29pm

re: #17 jcm

Hey Huck why to you worry about some real stuff in the Porkulus Bill.

Ruin Your Health With the Obama Stimulus Plan:

That's just swell. Let Daschle forgo new medicines and breakthrough treatments for himself and his family, then come talk to me. And I'll still tell you to go to hell.

39 MandyManners  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 6:15:31pm

re: #1 soxfan4life

This stimulus bill sucks for a million reasons, but this is not one of them. Micheal Steele needs to get word to Huckabee to keep his mouth shut.

Tomorrow.

40 Sharmuta  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 6:15:32pm

re: #29 Dustyvet

Um- ok. But please remember what I said the other morning about World Net Daily not being a reputable news source. You blew me off, but this overblown hyperbole is exactly what I was talking about.

41 soxfan4life  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 6:15:58pm

re: #35 MandyManners

I paid almost no attention to him.

That is a little bit more than I gave him

42 Killgore Trout  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 6:16:03pm

Huckabee simply doesn't like the Constitution.

43 MandyManners  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 6:16:27pm

re: #41 soxfan4life

That is a little bit more than I gave him

I gave him a cursory glance.

44 Bloodnok  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 6:16:35pm

re: #42 Killgore Trout

Huckabee simply doesn't like the Constitution.

Or squirrels.

45 Van Helsing  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 6:16:48pm

re: #31 jcm

Bet you dollars to donuts congress critters are "exempted."

They wouldn't do that! They'd suffer just like the rest of us on Medicaid and Social Security and...
Oh. Nevermind... I forgot. They don't do that, do they?

46 Dustyvet  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 6:17:12pm

re: #40 Sharmuta

Um- ok. But please remember what I said the other morning about World Net Daily not being a reputable news source. You blew me off, but this overblown hyperbole is exactly what I was talking about.

Umm, I did not blow you off, I answered you...if anyone got blowen off it was me.

47 Salamantis  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 6:17:18pm

re: #40 Sharmuta

Um- ok. But please remember what I said the other morning about World Net Daily not being a reputable news source. You blew me off, but this overblown hyperbole is exactly what I was talking about.

They're even more unreliable than Debka.

48 soxfan4life  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 6:17:38pm

re: #42 Killgore Trout

Huckabee simply doesn't like the Constitution.

Obama must have a cabinet post for him then, or a deputy posting somewhere.

49 Sharmuta  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 6:17:59pm

re: #42 Killgore Trout

Huckabee simply doesn't like the Constitution.

Quite a few fundamentalists don't. And yet for months some of us defending science education from these same fundies were mocked for mentioning the desire of some to establish America as a theocracy. Seems there actually are some politicians calling for a theocracy after all.

50 jcm  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 6:18:05pm

re: #30 Killgore Trout

Huckabee: Amend Constitution to be in 'God's standards'

Which "God?
Catholics and Episcopalians aren't going to be very happy with my interpetation of God. I won't be happy with theirs.

It a minefield Huck, don't go there.

51 LEGION  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 6:18:19pm

There is so much socialist garbage in this bill it will kill the demonrats for the next 50 years, if the folks bother reading what is in it. I like frisbee but all that money for a frisbee park is crazy, like the demonrats pushing this bill through without discussing it. They are using the politics of fear they just finished crying about- what lying losers. And with his appointees, he's had more crises with them already with nanny and tax problems than most Presidents do in a full first term! Nobody is talking about that. So what what Huckabee said- it is a drop of water in the ocean- look at the big picture and discuss that!

52 Van Helsing  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 6:18:32pm

re: #48 soxfan4life

Obama must have a cabinet post for him then, or a deputy posting somewhere.

Only if he has some tax issues, too.

53 [deleted]  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 6:18:37pm
54 HelloDare  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 6:18:50pm

The Republican party needs a secular spokesperson. Yeah, like that's gonna happen.

55 Slumbering Behemoth Stinks  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 6:19:40pm

re: #46 Dustyvet

Wait, what? Did I miss something? Is that a new LGF feature, hidden somewhere in the flippy triangle section? Why wasn't I told about this?
//

56 Van Helsing  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 6:19:52pm

re: #51 LEGION

There is so much socialist garbage in this bill it will kill the demonrats for the next 50 years, if the folks bother reading what is in it. I like frisbee but all that money for a frisbee park is crazy, like the demonrats pushing this bill through without discussing it. They are using the politics of fear they just finished crying about- what lying losers. And with his appointees, he's had more crises with them already with nanny and tax problems than most Presidents do in a full first term! Nobody is talking about that. So what what Huckabee said- it is a drop of water in the ocean- look at the big picture and discuss that!

Not when 40% of the wage earners aren't paying for it.

57 tradewind  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 6:19:54pm

Charles, fyi.... Nova on PBS now... Judgement Day , re ID and the schools.

58 ArmyWife  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 6:20:37pm

re: #32 Salamantis
OH NOES!

59 Dustyvet  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 6:20:41pm

re: #55 Slumbering Behemoth

Wait, what? Did I miss something? Is that a new LGF feature, hidden somewhere in the flippy triangle section? Why wasn't I told about this?
//

quit dat..

////////

60 Opinionated  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 6:20:47pm
the stimulus is ‘anti-religious’.

Not true.

When people realize what damage it will do, they will start praying.

61 shanester  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 6:21:04pm

Sorry, Charles... but I disagree.

The Constitution bans the ESTABLISHMENT of (an official state) religion. It does not ban religions, or even the funding of religions - as long as there is no real, palpable preference for one religion over the other.

As for the "wall" seperating Church and State? That's not in the constitution.

The Constitution protects religions from government interference as much as protecting government from religious interference.

It is not unconstitutional to fund a religious program, etc... It is only unconstitutional to prefer one religion over the other. Unless you are a left-wing "living constitution" believer.

62 ArmyWife  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 6:21:21pm

re: #54 HelloDare

Not really. But they don't need this yahoo, either.

63 tradewind  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 6:21:32pm

re: #24 doppelganglander

We are soo glad he's outta here, is the word from my next-door neighbors, the folks in AR.
The sumbitch (Huck) freed a rapist who went on to murder as soon as he was released from jail.

64 ziggyelman  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 6:21:34pm

I'm really going to enjoy seeing the republican party split in half on secular and religious lines, and Obama in office for 8 years.
Lets really sweat the small stuff, destroy Palin and Jindal, have some bland middle of the road white guy, you know, someone like John McCain run in 2012, and lose by 20 points!
Just imagine what we have seen in the past 3 weeks, going on til 2016.

65 FrogMarch  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 6:21:39pm

re: #54 HelloDare

The Republican party needs a secular spokesperson. Yeah, like that's gonna happen.

The Republican party needs to pull its head out of its ass.
or we will get smothered by socialism. oh wait.

66 shanester  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 6:21:47pm

re: #60 Opinionated

Not true.

When people realize what damage it will do, they will start praying.


LOL.

/praying now.

67 Shug  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 6:22:15pm

How can people who are otherwise intelligent folks, believe the Earth is only 6000 years old?

Other than being mentally ill, I am at a loss to explain this belief

68 twincitiesgirl  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 6:22:17pm

I can't figure him out, nor do I want to. He should devote his concern to the fairness doctrine and the implications for religious broadcasting and free speech.

69 Kronocide  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 6:22:26pm

Strange times indeed.

70 Dirk Diggler  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 6:22:34pm
World Net Daily takes the hysteria to the next level: Stimulus to ban religious worship.

If World Net Daily reports it, it must be true.

This is the news organization that identified the causal link between soy milk and "teh ghey".

71 [deleted]  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 6:22:37pm
72 jcm  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 6:22:49pm

re: #60 Opinionated

Not true.

When people realize what damage it will do, they will start praying.

I praying they don't find my money in the mattress.

73 Sharmuta  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 6:22:55pm

re: #53 buzzsawmonkey

Hmmm- FEMA funds given to a town to rebuild after a hurricane or tornado that might go to helping rebuild religious institutions, so long as all denominations and religions were provided for equally with no discrimination?

74 [deleted]  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 6:23:01pm
75 MandyManners  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 6:23:28pm

re: #61 shanester

Sorry, Charles... but I disagree.

The Constitution bans the ESTABLISHMENT of (an official state) religion. It does not ban religions, or even the funding of religions - as long as there is no real, palpable preference for one religion over the other.

As for the "wall" seperating Church and State? That's not in the constitution.

The Constitution protects religions from government interference as much as protecting government from religious interference.

It is not unconstitutional to fund a religious program, etc... It is only unconstitutional to prefer one religion over the other. Unless you are a left-wing "living constitution" believer.

Do you want your tax dollars to build or repair a mosque?

76 Van Helsing  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 6:23:58pm

re: #71 taxfreekiller

is Rahm Emanuel a tax cheat too also.

He'd fit right in then, wouldn't he?

77 jcm  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 6:24:08pm

re: #67 Shug

How can people who are otherwise intelligent folks, believe the Earth is only 6000 years old?

Other than being mentally ill, I am at a loss to explain this belief

6013, if you're going to ridicule get it right....
// ;-P

78 Shug  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 6:24:17pm

re: #74 buzzsawmonkey

Other than being drunk, I can't imagine what anyone thinks that has to do with this thread.


Yes, I have no idea what a comment about new earth creationists has to do with a thread about teaching creationism in schools

79 sngnsgt  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 6:24:46pm

re: #67 Shug

How can people who are otherwise intelligent folks, believe the Earth is only 6000 years old?

Other than being mentally ill, I am at a loss to explain this belief

Yea, I've been to more Earth birthday parties than 6000. /

80 shanester  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 6:24:52pm

Charles:

You're missing it....

The real reason that funds are not used to fund religious schools (er, even private ones that aren't religious) is because they are not unionized.

Even a Catholic sponsored school that is sponsored only by charity, and even if they do not teach ANY religious courses would be banned from 'infrastructure' funding. Even for poor, inner-city kids who are NOT subjected to any religious teaching.

This is a sneaky (and effective) way to fun ONLY UNIONIZED schools.

Can we say... Payoff to Unions?

I think so.

81 Bloodnok  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 6:25:13pm

re: #64 ziggyelman

I'm really going to enjoy seeing the republican party split in half on secular and religious lines, and Obama in office for 8 years.
Lets really sweat the small stuff, destroy Palin and Jindal, have some bland middle of the road white guy, you know, someone like John McCain run in 2012, and lose by 20 points!
Just imagine what we have seen in the past 3 weeks, going on til 2016.

Changing the Constitution to be in "God's standard" is "the small stuff"? We would deserve to lose by 20 points.

82 ArmyWife  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 6:25:22pm

re: #17 jcm

Is someone going to point out the irony of this as compared to the Dem outcry over poor Henrietta Hughes who lost her job and is battling cancer? According to this, we should consider letting her just die least she be too costly to treat or manage her pain. Wonderful, caring, compassionate people, those Dems.

83 shanester  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 6:25:45pm

re: #72 jcm

I praying they don't find my money in the mattress.


I'm turning you in!
It's my duty as an Obamanite!

/yeah... kidding

84 Slumbering Behemoth Stinks  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 6:25:56pm

re: #57 tradewind

Charles, fyi.... Nova on PBS now... Judgement Day , re ID and the schools.

It's not on for another hour and a half out on the west coast.

But there's always the interwebs.

85 Slumbering Behemoth Stinks  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 6:26:39pm

re: #59 Dustyvet

BIG LGF IS BLO....aw, never mind.

86 hiney von pewps  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 6:27:33pm

wanna be offended?

check this crap out:

[Link: media.answersingenesis.org...]

the series, "riddle of the dinosaurs" from the "kids" section of answers in genesis.

87 FloridaAnole  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 6:27:38pm

Huckabee's comment is just Huckabee sounding off again. He is the king of the off the wall remarks. I never could figure out why everyone takes him so seriously. I never could figure out why Fox News put him in that weird Saturday night show of his. Can anyone explain why we are still listening to this cat?

88 Sharmuta  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 6:28:12pm

re: #61 shanester

Jefferson's letter to the Danbury Baptists is where the "wall of separation" phrase originated. In that letter, it's made quite clear that the intent of the First Amendment was to keep government and religion as separate entities- protecting both from each other.

89 [deleted]  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 6:28:15pm
90 Dustyvet  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 6:28:17pm

re: #85 Slumbering Behemoth

BIG LGF IS BLO....aw, never mind.

*THUD*...crash...

91 FrogMarch  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 6:28:27pm

re: #87 FloridaAnole

Thank you.

92 kawfytawk  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 6:28:28pm

The ACLU would have a field day at every public school that was used as a church on Sundays...my daughters' elementary was used in just that way....and the groups like Fellowship of Christian Athletes, etc could be considered a breach. It may sound nit picky but it is on BOTH sides of the issue

93 doppelganglander  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 6:28:31pm

re: #80 shanester

Have you been huffing glue?

94 ornery elephant  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 6:28:42pm

Jim DeMint has been a shining star for the opposition to the Left in the Senate. He's never been afraid to stand up to the socialist agenda and has been one of the few that has had the fire to fight back against the demons on the other side of the aisle.

95 ArmyWife  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 6:28:50pm

re: #87 FloridaAnole

I chalk it up to macabre fascination.

96 FrogMarch  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 6:29:34pm

re: #91 FrogMarch

specifically this ...

I never could figure out why Fox News put him in that weird Saturday night show...

Why Fox, why?

97 MandyManners  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 6:29:56pm

re: #80 shanester

Charles:

You're missing it....

The real reason that funds are not used to fund religious schools (er, even private ones that aren't religious) is because they are not unionized.

Even a Catholic sponsored school that is sponsored only by charity, and even if they do not teach ANY religious courses would be banned from 'infrastructure' funding. Even for poor, inner-city kids who are NOT subjected to any religious teaching.

This is a sneaky (and effective) way to fun ONLY UNIONIZED schools.

Can we say... Payoff to Unions?

I think so.

So you're saying this is part of the plot to destroy private schools?

98 Salamantis  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 6:30:04pm

re: #61 shanester

Sorry, Charles... but I disagree.

The Constitution bans the ESTABLISHMENT of (an official state) religion. It does not ban religions, or even the funding of religions - as long as there is no real, palpable preference for one religion over the other.

I have yet to hear of a full-service divinity school that offers degrees in all faiths.

As for the "wall" seperating Church and State? That's not in the constitution.

But Thomas Jefferson, in his 1802 letter to the Danbury Baptists, explicitly states that a wall of separation between church and state was precisely what was intended by the Establishment Clause of the 1st Amendment:

[Link: www.usconstitution.net...]

The Constitution protects religions from government interference as much as protecting government from religious interference.

It does both. Government entanglement in religion corrupts both government and religion.

It is not unconstitutional to fund a religious program, etc... It is only unconstitutional to prefer one religion over the other. Unless you are a left-wing "living constitution" believer.

So you want the US to fund US divinity school programs for turning mullahs into ayatollahs and clerics into muftis in America?

99 shanester  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 6:30:08pm

"(ii) in which a substantial portion of the functions of the facilities are subsumed in a religious mission."

This is code for even charitable schools that get funding from religious institutions... even if religion ins't taught.

Meaning? ... No funding for Non-Unionized schools... period.

The Teacher's Unions are thanking Nancy Pelosi for sneaking in this rule as we speak, and we're arguing over seperation of church and state?

Meh.

It worked, Nancy... you have the right-leaning folks bickering over it when all the while you just wanted to keep the $$$ in the unionized schools.

Did we fall for it?

I didn't.

C'MON!

100 ArmyWife  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 6:30:40pm

re: #75 MandyManners

I don't, but not because I find it unconstitutional in and of itself. Could we attack that one from an enemy of the state angle instead?

/trying to be creative here

101 jcm  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 6:30:43pm

OT

Martha Putney, WWII WAC Veteran, Historian of Blacks, Is Dead at 92

Mrs. Putney, whose life was featured prominently in “The Greatest Generation,” Tom Brokaw’s popular history of the war and the unsung Americans who took part in it, entered the armed services in 1943 to better her prospects in life. She left the service determined to tell the story someday of how black Americans had contributed to the war. This she did in “When the Nation Was in Need: Blacks in the Women’s Army Corps During World War II” (1992) and “Blacks in the United States Army: Portraits Through History” (2003), which she edited.
102 FloridaAnole  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 6:30:44pm

re: #67 Shug

How can people who are otherwise intelligent folks, believe the Earth is only 6000 years old?

Other than being mentally ill, I am at a loss to explain this belief

There are even more people who read their horoscopes every day, and believe every word of it. Gullibility, superstition whatever seems to be a common human trait.

103 Bloodnok  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 6:30:51pm

re: #87 FloridaAnole

Huckabee's comment is just Huckabee sounding off again. He is the king of the off the wall remarks. I never could figure out why everyone takes him so seriously. I never could figure out why Fox News put him in that weird Saturday night show of his. Can anyone explain why we are still listening to this cat?

Because he is getting airtime as a standard bearer of the Republican party. WE may know that's not true, but there are many who would like to put the image of this crackpot into peoples' minds as what the Republican party is all about. And there are others who would love to have this guy get crushed by 0bama in '12.

104 MandyManners  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 6:30:54pm

re: #92 kawfytawk

The ACLU would have a field day at every public school that was used as a church on Sundays...my daughters' elementary was used in just that way....and the groups like Fellowship of Christian Athletes, etc could be considered a breach. It may sound nit picky but it is on BOTH sides of the issue

Aren't there exemptions?

105 [deleted]  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 6:31:04pm
106 Jim in Virginia  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 6:31:15pm

We have a clueless President and a half senile veep. Banning public funds from being used for religious purposes is the least of my worries.

107 Wishing  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 6:31:37pm

re: #89 taxfreekiller

Its not Huckabee, Its not the ID's, for a piratical matter of the "here and now", it is the three dam RINO's, ....its not even all Obama,,
IT IS THESE THREE RINO'S CALL EVERY NUMBER THEY HAVE,
GO TO THEIR OFFICES ANY WHERE THEY HAVE AN OFFICE
LET THEM KNOW CLEAR WE THINK THEY ARE TRAITORS TO AMERICA.

Doing my bit:
Using this Link, I am contacting every single legislator that has an email addy I can use and telling them to please NOT pass this damn stimulus bill.
So far I have made it to the F's.

108 ArmyWife  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 6:31:42pm

re: #101 jcm

I'm sorry to hear of this, but what a full life she led!

109 shanester  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 6:32:20pm

re: #88 Sharmuta

Jefferson's letter to the Danbury Baptists is where the "wall of separation" phrase originated. In that letter, it's made quite clear that the intent of the First Amendment was to keep government and religion as separate entities- protecting both from each other.

Exactly. Seperate entities. That doesn't mean that gov. can't give funds to religious institutions under certain circumstances. I agree.

Gotta keep 'em seperated!
But they can support each other.

Creating a true wall that libs want could mean that because I run a secular charity and was raised Catholic might ban me from Federal funds. No?

110 FrogMarch  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 6:32:22pm

re: #92 kawfytawk

Both sides over-react. The far left want to chase God out of the public square completely. The fundamentalists on the right push back and end up pushing too far and embarrassing themselves. Then there's the anti-science stuff.
It's too much.

111 [deleted]  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 6:32:47pm
112 Shr_Nfr  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 6:32:57pm

The question I have, is that is the establishment of no religion not a religion in and of itself? Hand over a voucher to the parents, let them put their kids through school, their choice. If it is a private school like Sidwell Friends, then that is fine with me. I am personally tired of the High Church of the PC. I have not attended a church in years except for hitchems and pitchems, so I hardly qualify as anything more than a rank heretic. But we now have the Church of the Global Warming, and all the rest going on. Bah! By the way, does this mean that any of the colleges that have established special Muslim facilities on campus are not eligible?

113 Vicious Babushka  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 6:33:34pm

re: #101 jcm

OT

Martha Putney, WWII WAC Veteran, Historian of Blacks, Is Dead at 92

Can someone explain to me why Rosa Parks got all the glory and attention for basically nothing, and nobody has ever heard of this authentic heroine?

114 Jim in Virginia  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 6:33:34pm

re: #87 FloridaAnole

Huckabee's comment is just Huckabee sounding off again. He is the king of the off the wall remarks. I never could figure out why everyone takes him so seriously. I never could figure out why Fox News put him in that weird Saturday night show of his. Can anyone explain why we are still listening to this cat?


He plays a mean guitar?

115 kynna  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 6:33:45pm

This is the guy that gave us McCain as a candidate. The left loves him. Just like they loved McCain.

I have this awful feeling in the pit of my stomach that he's going to be a serious contender again in 2012 thanks to media hype.

116 jcm  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 6:33:48pm

re: #108 ArmyWife

I'm sorry to hear of this, but what a full life she led!

Buried in Arlington.

117 kawfytawk  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 6:34:00pm

re: #104 MandyManners

there has been, but I think that is what Demint is worried about...in order for schools (Public) to take any of the money they have to insure that they meet the qualifications and that would mean boot out these groups.

To me, you wouldn't think it possible....but we all know to expect the unexpected when you have the wonderful ACLU snooping around

118 BigAl  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 6:34:30pm

OT: We have an unqualified CEO at the helm of the ship of state. And we are in rocky, uncharted waters. I hope we can put aside our theological controversies long enough to focus on job one.

119 shanester  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 6:34:44pm

re: #97 MandyManners

So you're saying this is part of the plot to destroy private schools?


No... just Nancy's ploy to make sure NO money goes to any non-unionized school (without expressly saying it). And she's making people fight over this (non existant) rife over church/state.

Remember, she also said there's no Pork in the bill. Sheesh!

Easy to see if you've followed Nancy for a while.

Yeck.

120 Sharmuta  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 6:35:15pm

re: #109 shanester

I don't want my church supporting the government outside of abiding by the law. I don't want the government in my church either.

121 kawfytawk  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 6:35:22pm

re: #110 FrogMarch

you are right...there is no middle ground when no one wants to be logical and level headed

122 MandyManners  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 6:35:25pm

re: #99 shanester

"(ii) in which a substantial portion of the functions of the facilities are subsumed in a religious mission."

This is code for even charitable schools that get funding from religious institutions... even if religion ins't taught.

Meaning? ... No funding for Non-Unionized schools... period.

The Teacher's Unions are thanking Nancy Pelosi for sneaking in this rule as we speak, and we're arguing over seperation of church and state?

Meh.

It worked, Nancy... you have the right-leaning folks bickering over it when all the while you just wanted to keep the $$$ in the unionized schools.

Did we fall for it?

I didn't.

C'MON!

So, you're okay with funding a madrassa?

123 Shug  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 6:35:25pm

re: #111 buzzsawmonkey

I didn't see anything at the top of this thread about "teaching creationism in schools." Perhaps you would point it out.

And by the way, Huckabee, DeMint, and World Net Daily have another thing in common; they’re all in favor of teaching creationism in public schools—another violation of the Establishment Clause

124 jcm  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 6:35:40pm

re: #113 Alouette

Can someone explain to me why Rosa Parks got all the glory and attention for basically nothing, and nobody has ever heard of this authentic heroine?

She didn't make waves, she served, and recorded the history.
She demonstrated by her life, the inequalities of the era.

125 capitalist piglet  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 6:35:43pm

re: #114 Jim in Virginia

He plays a mean guitar?

Except he doesn't.

126 Charles Johnson  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 6:36:02pm

re: #109 shanester

Exactly. Seperate entities. That doesn't mean that gov. can't give funds to religious institutions under certain circumstances. I agree.

Gotta keep 'em seperated!
But they can support each other.

Creating a true wall that libs want could mean that because I run a secular charity and was raised Catholic might ban me from Federal funds. No?

So you'd be fine with funding mosques to teach Koran studies too?

127 Salamantis  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 6:36:37pm

re: #64 ziggyelman

I'm really going to enjoy seeing the republican party split in half on secular and religious lines, and Obama in office for 8 years.
Lets really sweat the small stuff, destroy Palin and Jindal, have some bland middle of the road white guy, you know, someone like John McCain run in 2012, and lose by 20 points!
Just imagine what we have seen in the past 3 weeks, going on til 2016.

Jindal has done a fine job of self-destructing his chances on the national stage when he signed the Disco Institute crafted stealth creationism in public school science class bill into law in Louisiana. I am still waiting to see how Palin sounds once she devotes a solid chunk of time to studying national and international issues. The 'bland middle of the road white guy' I wish was in there is Rudy Giuliani; his leadership and GWOT credentials are impeccable. But a solid chunk of Republicans would vote against God Himself if He campaigned as pro-gay and pro-choice.

128 MandyManners  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 6:36:43pm

re: #117 kawfytawk

there has been, but I think that is what Demint is worried about...in order for schools (Public) to take any of the money they have to insure that they meet the qualifications and that would mean boot out these groups.

To me, you wouldn't think it possible....but we all know to expect the unexpected when you have the wonderful ACLU snooping around

Has this issue already been decided by the Supreme Court?

129 Scion9  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 6:36:47pm

re: #53 buzzsawmonkey

I agree that Huckabee is waaaaaaaaaaaay over the top. But there ought to be a way to support religious establishments in certain circumstances without it being taken as an "establishment of religion." I am thinking here of such things as hospitals which have a connection to a particular religious denomination--and, yes, even colleges which have a divinity school of some sort.

I'm not saying it isn't a tricky line to tread. I'm just saying that an establishment with a religious connection is not the same thing as an "establishment of religion," Constitutionally speaking.

Yes. The Establishment Clause was written under the assumption of a Federal Government that did not have a discretionary budget, and all government largess was specifically accounted for before even being collected.

It is really literally impossible not to 'establish' a religion when spending ~1 trillion dollars. Something in there is going to be in opposition to one religion or another, while being totally kosher to another.

As it relates to the Constitution, Congress's ability to 'promote the general welfare' by spending discretionary funds trumps the 1st Amendment and has for a very, very long time.

There have pretty much always been laws that were not kosher with literally every religion in the world though; so there has always been some form of Establishment. As we have moved further and further from a model of negative rights however, we have only added more layers of potential infringement of religious freedom.

130 [deleted]  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 6:36:48pm
131 [deleted]  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 6:37:04pm
132 irish rose  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 6:37:28pm

Counterproductive, and destructive.

133 Shug  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 6:37:38pm

re: #130 buzzsawmonkey

Perhaps so; but that has nothing to do with this particular Establishment Clause issue.

It has everything to do with it

134 jcm  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 6:38:07pm

The Fist Unclenches!
*we'll see*

When President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad of Iran on Tuesday took up President Barack Obama's oft-repeated invitation for direct talks between the United States and Iran - something that has not happened in 30 years - he seemed to be signaling the start of a long-delayed war-or-peace drama that may define the Obama administration's first engagement with the rest of the world.

While Dinnerjacket and The One talk, talk, talk, the centrifuges spin, spin, spin.

135 Bloodnok  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 6:38:08pm

re: #118 BigAl

OT: We have an unqualified CEO at the helm of the ship of state. And we are in rocky, uncharted waters. I hope we can put aside our theological controversies long enough to focus on job one.

Judging by the number of stealth creationist bills being put forth at this very moment I would suggest that this is precisely the time to be paying attention to such controversies.

136 Salamantis  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 6:38:13pm

re: #67 Shug

How can people who are otherwise intelligent folks, believe the Earth is only 6000 years old?

Other than being mentally ill, I am at a loss to explain this belief

I credit (if that is a suitable word) piously motivated willful ignorance.

137 [deleted]  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 6:38:23pm
138 Sharmuta  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 6:38:26pm

I have no problem with private, religious schools having non-union teachers and being funded completely privately. Government money equals government rules. I like to keep the scope of government rules limited- that's the beauty of private schools!

139 kawfytawk  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 6:38:36pm

re: #128 MandyManners

I am sure someone will sue someone to force an opinion if people get hacked off enough. I just think it shouldn't have been made an issue of....for what purpose?

140 jcm  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 6:39:32pm

re: #131 taxfreekiller

Job One.

NO MORE RINO'S.

The Top of the Hit Parade!
*for losing their seats*
Snowe
Collins
Specter

141 kansas  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 6:39:38pm

re: #67 Shug

How can people who are otherwise intelligent folks, believe the Earth is only 6000 years old?

Other than being mentally ill, I am at a loss to explain this belief

Obama got elected. Gonna have to disagree with that otherwise intelligent thing.

142 Wishing  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 6:39:41pm

re: #139 kawfytawk

I am sure someone will sue someone to force an opinion if people get hacked off enough. I just think it shouldn't have been made an issue of....for what purpose?

So Huck could toot his own horn, perchance?

143 karmic_inquisitor  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 6:39:57pm

If Mike's buddies get this money, what is to prevent Mullahs from getting such money to operate madrases here?

If it were my bill, the money would be further restricted - to degrees that directly support a job function in the private sector. How many Romantic Literature degrees or Linguist degrees do we need to create jobs in this country? Same goes for theology degrees. Those should be considered luxury degrees, IMO, with the student bearing the full economic cost.

I know - won't happen under Obama - we need our Universities to produce Marxists and other technological/economic illiterates to fill the jobs at ACORN.

144 Occasional Reader  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 6:40:05pm

When Ernest Shackleton finally made it to an Antarctic whaling station on South Georgia Island, in May of 1916, almost two years after setting out on the Endurance expedition, one of the first questions he asked the Norwegian station manager was, "when did the war end?"

The manager replied, "the war didn't end. Millions are dying. Europe is mad. The world is mad."

Lately, I've been feeling like Shackleton.

145 tackle  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 6:40:40pm

Despite the excitement of many in the religious community over Bush's faith based initiative, I was leery about churches receiving money from the Fed. I'm very religious but believe that such a separation is a positive for religion. Just look at how businesses receiving money from the government have affected business practice and even earnings and bonuses.
This is similar situation where I think religion would do well to stay way from the money (and influence) of the government.

146 kawfytawk  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 6:40:43pm

re: #142 Wishing

that man, just plain bothers me

147 hiney von pewps  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 6:41:03pm

i wish i knew what facile barks like "NO MORE RINOS!One11@" mean.

148 Wishing  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 6:41:22pm

re: #146 kawfytawk

that man, just plain bothers me

I think that is a spot on reaction!

149 jwb7605  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 6:41:26pm

re: #138 Sharmuta

I have no problem with private, religious schools having non-union teachers and being funded completely privately. Government money equals government rules. I like to keep the scope of government rules limited- that's the beauty of private schools!

Combine that concept with vouchers, and you have a winning argument.
I have a problem with the concept of paying for two schools at once.

All my kids are out of school, and I currently pay for the public ones, which is OK with me.

150 shanester  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 6:41:27pm

re: #120 Sharmuta

I don't want my church supporting the government outside of abiding by the law. I don't want the government in my church either.

If a church does good (feeds the poor) and does not indoctrinate, then there's no problem.

When my Mom (single Mom as my Dad split) was supported by a church (that we DIDN'T belong to) by getting food, job-training, etc... and we weren't even the same religion! We got help and NEVER once was asked to go to the church, etc...

Sorry... but my Mom was told by the Government that she couldn't get gov. help and food stamps because she owned a car. WTF? She used the car to get to a $3.85/hour job. If she left that job, it was over... poor for life.

That church gave us food, Christmas presents that were donated, Thanksgiving dinner, job-training for my Mom... ETC ... ETC... ANd NEVER once wanted her to go to "church", etc....

And in this Porkulous bill, it would be wrong to give this church $$ to continue their work.

Fine... without them, I would have been a ward of the freaking state. Because of them, we GOT OUT of the cycle of poverty -- and never once were asked to go to their church, donate... NOTHING.

THEY did BETTER for my family than ANY dumb*ss government program.


Don't you see? This isn't anout church/state! It's about UNIONS!

Sheesh!

151 [deleted]  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 6:41:40pm
152 ArmyWife  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 6:41:43pm

re: #120 Sharmuta


Here is something interesting on the Danbury Baptist letter, from a historical context. Of course, I love reading the Federalist Papers, so take my "interesting" with a grain of salt!

[Link: www.loc.gov...]

153 Trogluddite  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 6:41:55pm

This is why people who are not constitutional law lawyers should not proclaim on constitutional law issues - note to self: is the owner of this website a constitutional law attorney? Broadly stating that the 1st Amendment prohibits schools from using Federal funds to repair a building that happens to be used for religious purposes is a gross misstatement of the law.

I attended Penn State back in the Stone Age. There was one building near North Halls where you could attend a lecture in the morning, Saturday evening Mass around 6:00, and the Rocky Horror picture show (which is as close to porn as you could get in those days) at 9:00. Can no Federal funds be used for repairs to that school? What happens when I get a Federal loan?

Also, what the heck is "sectarian instruction?" Does this mean that you can't teach Balkan politics in a university building?

The language cited above is far broader than anything required by the 1st Amendment - it may be permitted and it is a legislative decision that the courts would have to give deference to, but it is not required by the 1st amendment. Regrettably, I am unlikely to be able to throw anything together on this, but if I have a little time over the weekend, I'll try to get to it.

154 Killgore Trout  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 6:42:11pm

re: #145 tackle

This is similar situation where I think religion would do well to stay way from the money (and influence) of the government.


I agree. The UK government's relationship with the Church of England has done a disservice to both.

155 Shug  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 6:42:17pm

re: #137 buzzsawmonkey

Really? How so?


You asked for proof once. I provided it. You changed the goal line.
I don't think I need to explain the motivations of these folks. You can read this blog for the last year and figure it out.
But the part of the thread I gave you which you missed is a good place to start in your journey

156 ArmyWife  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 6:42:43pm

re: #144 Occasional Reader

When in trouble or in doubt, raise your hands, run in circles, scream and shout.

What I feel like.

157 [deleted]  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 6:43:28pm
158 Wishing  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 6:43:35pm

re: #150 shanester

If a church does good (feeds the poor) and does not indoctrinate, then there's no problem.

When my Mom (single Mom as my Dad split) was supported by a church (that we DIDN'T belong to) by getting food, job-training, etc... and we weren't even the same religion! We got help and NEVER once was asked to go to the church, etc...

Sorry... but my Mom was told by the Government that she couldn't get gov. help and food stamps because she owned a car. WTF? She used the car to get to a $3.85/hour job. If she left that job, it was over... poor for life.

That church gave us food, Christmas presents that were donated, Thanksgiving dinner, job-training for my Mom... ETC ... ETC... ANd NEVER once wanted her to go to "church", etc....

And in this Porkulous bill, it would be wrong to give this church $$ to continue their work.

Fine... without them, I would have been a ward of the freaking state. Because of them, we GOT OUT of the cycle of poverty -- and never once were asked to go to their church, donate... NOTHING.

THEY did BETTER for my family than ANY dumb*ss government program.

Don't you see? This isn't anout church/state! It's about UNIONS!

Sheesh!

Shane, If you go back and read the clause, it says the funds are restricted if the FACILITIES are used for a religious only purpose, or something like that.

159 [deleted]  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 6:43:49pm
160 tackle  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 6:44:29pm

re: #120 Sharmuta

I don't want my church supporting the government outside of abiding by the law. I don't want the government in my church either.


Precisely. Churches should be privately funded and free from government influence.

161 MandyManners  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 6:44:41pm

re: #139 kawfytawk

I am sure someone will sue someone to force an opinion if people get hacked off enough. I just think it shouldn't have been made an issue of....for what purpose?

To keep government money out of religion?

162 jcm  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 6:44:56pm

re: #150 shanester

The Porkulus Bill is wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong.

It doesn't salvage any bit of the bill by giving some of the money to religious outreach.

What would be more immediate, more effective would be across the board tax cuts and let The People choose when and where to donate.

Why should government take my money and give my church 35¢ on the dollar when with a tax cut I'd give them the whole $1?

163 slartybartfast  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 6:44:56pm

OT, but this was brought to my attention earlier tonight.

We were recently "notified" by the MSM that there was a "a spike in possible suicides in the new year."

Has it occurred to anyone else that our service men and women may feel betrayed by the U.S. electorate, having elected someone who has no concept of the level of commitment they have made to this country? Our service people are defending our constitution, our society--something that is being discarded as quickly as possible by the current administration in a naked power-grab.

If our service men and women are despondent to the point of suicide, should we be surprised?

164 Sharmuta  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 6:44:59pm

re: #150 shanester

What does a private religious institution's ability to provide public services better than the government's ability have to do with this?

Don't you think the government getting involved in that church's affairs might have made it worse?! They don't need government support.

And I was helped by Catholic Charities while never once being Catholic or asked to convert. That's not the point. The point is they do just fine without government involvement. I'd rather we kept it that way.

165 kansas  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 6:45:04pm

Ruh roh. Food Fight.

166 Spare O'Lake  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 6:45:22pm

Huckabee is yesterday's news, is he not?

167 Sharmuta  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 6:46:08pm

re: #159 shanester

Are you stupid?

How stupid are you to display such rude manners to your host?!

168 FrogMarch  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 6:46:28pm

re: #149 jwb7605

Combine that concept with vouchers, and you have a winning argument.
I have a problem with the concept of paying for two schools at once.

All my kids are out of school, and I currently pay for the public ones, which is OK with me.

AS we know, Democrats are against choice and vouchers. They essentially want people to pay twice. (people who desire to remove their kids from failing inner city schools etc.. )
and why is it that democrats always send their children to private schools?

169 Shug  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 6:46:51pm

re: #167 Sharmuta

How stupid are you to display such rude manners to your soon to be former host?!


fixed

170 Charles Johnson  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 6:46:52pm

re: #159 shanester

Are you stupid?

I may be stupid, but I can also ban you from posting here.

171 tackle  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 6:47:01pm

re: #166 Spare O'Lake

Huckabee is yesterday's news, is he not?


I wish. What happened to his Fox show?

172 MandyManners  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 6:47:09pm

re: #153 Trogluddite

This is why people who are not constitutional law lawyers should not proclaim on constitutional law issues - note to self: is the owner of this website a constitutional law attorney?

This is America, bud. We have the freakin' right to proclaim, debate and even boviate. If you don't like it, hit the road.

173 Salamantis  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 6:47:14pm

re: #100 ArmyWife

I don't, but not because I find it unconstitutional in and of itself. Could we attack that one from an enemy of the state angle instead?

/trying to be creative here

But it IS unconstitutional, in the sense that it would favor some faiths over others.

The US government should not be in the business of building religions houses of worship or private schools. But if it does it for any of them, then it has to do it for all of them.

174 Bloodnok  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 6:47:19pm

thy downding come
thy banstick flung

/golly wog

175 Shug  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 6:47:51pm

That was like Suicide by Cop

176 Syrah  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 6:47:52pm

Government funding is a trap.

Hillsdale has not taken any federal taxpayer money since its founding in 1844. Now the college won't take any state taxpayer money, either, likely making it one of only a handful of colleges across the nation to refuse all government money.

Hillsdale College President Larry Arnn said the action continues the college's "historic independence from government regulation" of its operations and curriculum.

"Hillsdale College has proven that a higher education institution can not only operate, but also thrive, free of federal taxpayer subsidy and of the strings that come with that support," Arnn said in a statement. "We view this new step to be in line with the mission of the college and with the interests of Michigan taxpayers, who are being asked by Lansing for increased taxes."

177 MandyManners  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 6:47:55pm

re: #159 shanester

Asshole.

178 ArmyWife  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 6:47:58pm

re: #153 Trogluddite

Though I understand your sentiment, I respectfully disagree and find your comment somewhat elitist. Constitutional lawyers are NOT the only ones who can intelligently and rationally discuss the content of the constitution and it's applicability in various situations. Frankly, I find many of the posters here far more qualified to discuss the constitutional merits of specific bills over our President, who is, in fact, a constitutional lawyer.

I do look forward to what you prepare as this is a topic I enjoy learning about greatly.

179 kansas  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 6:48:34pm

re: #172 MandyManners

This is America, bud. We have the freakin' right to proclaim, debate and even boviate. If you don't like it, hit the road.

I'm cornfused. Walter L.Newton advised me personally that this, being a not Kos or Huff Po type blog, must have "proof."

180 Wishing  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 6:48:36pm

Shanester:

No funds awarded under this section may be used for - (C) modernization, renovation, or repair of facilities - (i) used for sectarian instruction, religious worship, or a school or department of divinity; or (ii) in which a substantial portion of the functions of the facilities are subsumed in a religious mission.

Get it?

181 hazzyday  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 6:48:46pm

re: #159 shanester

Your marbles are on the floor.

182 hiney von pewps  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 6:48:55pm

re: #157 taxfreekiller

pretty much as i figured. it operates on the same level of as the social boundary mechanisms used by 13 year-old girls protecting their cafeteria table clique.

183 Sharmuta  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 6:49:02pm

re: #174 Bloodnok

In full:

Our Overlord, who art in cyberspace
Hallowed be thy flame.
Thy downding come, thy ban stick flung
On Nirth as it is on Nodrog.
Give us this day our daily thread
And forgive us our spins
As we forgive those who spin upon us.
For thine is the website
And the powerblog, and the rational
Forever and ever
GAZE!

~golly wog

184 Occasional Reader  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 6:49:03pm

re: #164 Sharmuta

Don't you think the government getting involved in that church's affairs might have made it worse?!

That may be so, but it doesn't directly address the First Amendment issue. "Bad idea" is not the same thing as "unconstitutional".

185 jcm  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 6:49:08pm

It's going.... going..... GONE!

186 MandyManners  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 6:49:15pm

re: #153 Trogluddite

. Regrettably, I am unlikely to be able to throw anything together on this, but if I have a little time over the weekend, I'll try to get to it.

We're not worthy.

187 jwb7605  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 6:49:51pm

re: #168 FrogMarch

AS we know, Democrats are against choice and vouchers. They essentially want people to pay twice. (people who desire to remove their kids from failing inner city schools etc.. )
and why is it that democrats always send their children to private schools?

The wealthy ones can afford to? I can't answer that sensibly, but it sure does seem like there are more Democrats in high positions than their Republican counterparts that do that.

188 UberInfidel67  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 6:50:01pm

This is all fine and dandy, but the first time I hear of federal funds being used to install footbaths at a college......

You know it will happen. There will be some end run around this or some loop hole.

189 Charles Johnson  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 6:50:34pm

re: #153 Trogluddite

This is why people who are not constitutional law lawyers should not proclaim on constitutional law issues - note to self: is the owner of this website a constitutional law attorney?

As a matter of fact, yes, I am. I also put out oil fires in my spare time, and review Ph.D candidates' dissertations. When I'm not busy apprehending gangsters or excavating dinosaur fossils.

190 kawfytawk  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 6:50:44pm

re: #161 MandyManners

To keep government money out of religion?

So where would you draw that line? Would you say that the new young church can no longer meet in the cafeteria on Sundays? Or that the Athletes for Christ cannot meet in the facilities? How is it paying into religion? The Church pays the school a fee each month. The kids meet during lunch breaks. see how it gets nit picky? There is no easy answer except to say I didn't find it necessary to put in the bill.

191 Shug  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 6:50:58pm

His comment was rough
His account vamoosed
Shanester's Chickens
Came home to roost

Burma Shave

192 [deleted]  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 6:51:17pm
193 MandyManners  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 6:51:35pm

re: #179 kansas

I'm cornfused. Walter L.Newton advised me personally that this, being a not Kos or Huff Po type blog, must have "proof."

Whatever.

194 Occasional Reader  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 6:51:57pm

re: #173 Salamantis

But it IS unconstitutional, in the sense that it would favor some faiths over others.

Not necessarily, if it's not supporting faiths qua faiths.

Example: Say the federal government gives grants for running soup kitchens for the homeless. Churches (etc.) may apply, but on the condition that their soup kitchen activity does not engage in proselytizing. So, if your church wants to participate, great, they take money, they give out soup. My church decides not to. I don't see that as favoring one religion over another.

195 jorline  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 6:52:04pm

re: #138 Sharmuta

I have no problem with private, religious schools having non-union teachers and being funded completely privately. Government money equals government rules. I like to keep the scope of government rules limited- that's the beauty of private schools!

Agree Sharm.

We use to have private business.

196 jcm  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 6:52:04pm

re: #188 UberInfidel67

This is all fine and dandy, but the first time I hear of federal funds being used to install footbaths at a college......

You know it will happen. There will be some end run around this or some loop hole.

Is that what those are?
I thought they were part of the French studies program, introduce the US to Pissoirs!

Am I embarrassed or what!

197 rightwinger3  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 6:52:08pm

re: #189 Charles

As a matter of fact, yes, I am. I also put out oil fires on my spare time, and review Ph.D candidates' dissertations. When I'm not busy apprehending gangsters or excavating dinosaur fossils.

Damn. And all this time I thought you just played guitar and did shit with Ajax.

198 Catttt  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 6:52:16pm

Gov. Huckabee always made me kinda uncomfortable during the debates, and it troubled me that people kept saying he was the best in this or that debate.

These comments by Gov. Huckabee bring Charles' posts on ID and creationism into perspective, no? There is a definite agenda here to bring the Christian God into federally funded schools AND into the federal government's laws. This is a no no no.

I have friends who worship other gods. Do they have to leave the country or get tossed in jail? Do they not get covered by Gov. Huckabee's new constitution?

This is nutballness.

199 Salamantis  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 6:52:39pm

re: #109 shanester

Exactly. Seperate entities. That doesn't mean that gov. can't give funds to religious institutions under certain circumstances. I agree.

Gotta keep 'em seperated!
But they can support each other.

Creating a true wall that libs want could mean that because I run a secular charity and was raised Catholic might ban me from Federal funds. No?

The federal government cannot constitutionally favor any religious establishment over any other. If it disburses funds to help build a church, or the kind of private school of which its parishioners approve, it cannot deny funds to help build a temple or a mosque, or the kinds of private schools (for instance madrassas) of which THEIR parishioners approve.

200 HelloDare  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 6:52:47pm

re: #62 ArmyWife

Not really. But they don't need this yahoo, either.

Here's the problem. It's too easy for the left and even moderate democrats to point to the republican party and call it a bunch of religious fanatics. Stealth creationist bills, Ben Stein, Mick Huckabee, any number far right preachers...

The Republican party needs somebody, just one person, to stand up for science and against kooks like Huckabee. Somebody who will be welcome in the Republican tent. Somebody who can give the Republican party a secular face.

When people find out I'm conservative, many assume that I don't believe in evolution. You should hear the stupid questions I get. You probably get them, too.

Why?

Because of stuff like this:

The Proper Role of Science
By Chuck Colson

Exposing Scientism

Wouldn't it be great if the next time a liberal thought of the Republican party, he had an image of a politician standing up and telling Huckabee that he was full of crap.

201 MandyManners  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 6:52:50pm

re: #190 kawfytawk

So where would you draw that line? Would you say that the new young church can no longer meet in the cafeteria on Sundays? Or that the Athletes for Christ cannot meet in the facilities? How is it paying into religion? The Church pays the school a fee each month. The kids meet during lunch breaks. see how it gets nit picky? There is no easy answer except to say I didn't find it necessary to put in the bill.

Hasn't there been a Supreme Court opinion on this?

202 FrogMarch  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 6:52:56pm

re: #187 jwb7605

The wealthy ones can afford to? I can't answer that sensibly, but it sure does seem like there are more Democrats in high positions than their Republican counterparts that do that.

I do believe the Bush daughters wet to public schools - the Obama daughters are in private. I have no problem with that choice. It's a great choice if you can afford it. But why then do these same democrats stand in the way of choice and vouchers for others? I think it's clear - - they love to tax people and if they can tax people twice - ka-ching. among other elitist hypocritical bad faith reasons.

203 NJDhockeyfan  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 6:53:07pm
Trogluddite

(Logged in)
Registered since: Mar 21, 2007 at 7:12 pm
No. of comments posted: 5
No. of links posted: 0

Hmmmmm...

204 UberInfidel67  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 6:53:20pm

re: #196 jcm
Well DUH! Happy to clear that up for you : )

205 Shug  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 6:53:47pm

re: #192 buzzsawmonkey

You made an assertion; I asked you to justify, or at least explain it. You are refusing to do so, which suggests you know that your position is shaky at best.

I've gone on record here time and again arguing against the intermixing of creationism with science instruction, and against the fallacy of regarding the Bible as a science textbook. As a member of a minority religion, and as someone who has lived in a country where church and state are not separate, I have every interest in ensuring that the Establishment Clause remains in robust health.

That does not mean that I am about to go stampeding around in hysterics, as you appear to be doing, because someone who wrongly supports creationist teaching is also raising an issue regarding an overbroad reading of the Establishment Clause. If you believe that an overbroad reading of the Establishment Clause is the only thing that can combat creationist teaching, then you are halfway to not only losing the battle against creationism, but to Balkanizing the country to such a degree that you will be ceding it to the Leftists for the next several decades.


It's not such a leap I made, considering the teaching of creationism was important enough to be made in the thread.

206 GGMac  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 6:53:58pm

re: #188 UberInfidel67

This is all fine and dandy, but the first time I hear of federal funds being used to install footbaths at a college......

You know it will happen. There will be some end run around this or some loop hole.

I believe it has already been done - a year or so ago at George Mason University -

Anyone know for sure?

207 FrogMarch  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 6:54:23pm

re: #189 Charles

I knew it!

208 albusteve  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 6:54:28pm

re: #189 Charles

As a matter of fact, yes, I am. I also put out oil fires on my spare time, and review Ph.D candidates' dissertations. When I'm not busy apprehending gangsters or excavating dinosaur fossils.


holy shit Batman!...on that note I'm gonna go hide out for a bit

209 ArmyWife  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 6:54:31pm

re: #173 Salamantis

I was actually viewing it as the Gov't assisting with the building of a Mosque as well as other religious sites. Don't mistake that as me being a fan of any of those options - I don't like my Government to get involved in religion beyond protecting the freedom to practice as we chose, or not practice as the case may be. That said, I have no problems with Christmas Trees in schools or Government buildings, or Menorahs in the same buildings. The 10 Commandments on a Court House is perfectly OK with me.

210 MilkOfMalfeasance  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 6:54:47pm

re: #21 Alouette

Without the sex appeal

With a Bass instead of a Sax too.

211 J.D.  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 6:54:48pm

re: #202 FrogMarch

They're going to the same school Chelsea attended. Just another one of those Clinton coincidences...or whatever they are...

212 hazzyday  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 6:55:02pm

re: #203 NJDhockeyfan

Hmmmmm...

A troll who hates computers by the nic.

213 UberInfidel67  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 6:55:18pm

re: #206 GGMac
It will happen again. This time it won't be for "religious" purposes though....it will be "respecting their culture". BULLSHIT

214 Killgore Trout  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 6:55:24pm

Boss took his funny pills today.

215 Dar ul Harb  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 6:55:41pm

re: #149 jwb7605

I quite agree. Government shouldn't own and run schools anyway.

Subsidize the students, not the teachers unions.

If the funding is directed to make education more affordable and competitive, the establishment clause problems take care of themselves.

216 Salamantis  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 6:55:45pm

re: #118 BigAl

OT: We have an unqualified CEO at the helm of the ship of state. And we are in rocky, uncharted waters. I hope we can put aside our theological controversies long enough to focus on job one.

I'm sure that the Disco Institute will agree by pulling all of its stealth creationism in public school education bills out of legislative consideration in the several states in which they are being submitted.

Not.

217 Walter L. Newton  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 6:55:54pm

re: #179 kansas

I'm cornfused. Walter L.Newton advised me personally that this, being a not Kos or Huff Po type blog, must have "proof."

Hi asshole. You talk to me if you want to use my name in a post. Idiot, you were spurting shit on the other thread and I suggested that you offer some proof.

If you will go back to that thread, you will notice that Charles deleted all of the posts that I was taking about and which you were supporting, with your hot air comments.

You chicken shit, you don't have to use me or any one else here to speak for yourself.

If you can't stand up tot he heat, leave.

218 jaunte  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 6:56:03pm

re: #206 GGMac

Here's a link on the footbaths issue:
[Link: www.nytimes.com...]

219 FrogMarch  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 6:56:04pm

re: #176 Syrah

Government funding is a trap.

bingo. and once the government gets you - you are a slave.

220 J.D.  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 6:56:13pm

re: #214 Killgore Trout

Boss took his funny pills today.

I found it both creative and entertaining.

221 [deleted]  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 6:56:16pm
222 [deleted]  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 6:56:19pm
223 Occasional Reader  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 6:56:19pm

re: #214 Killgore Trout

Boss took his funny pills today.

I believe they're called "reefer pills".

224 kawfytawk  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 6:56:30pm

re: #203 NJDhockeyfan

Hmmmmm...

Other than the boorish way He/she put out their opinion, I have to agree with the gist of it.

ok, ok don't smack me for going against the obvious grain here :O)

I'm just saying

225 [deleted]  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 6:56:34pm
226 jwb7605  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 6:56:50pm

re: #202 FrogMarch

I do believe the Bush daughters wet to public schools - the Obama daughters are in private. I have no problem with that choice. It's a great choice if you can afford it. But why then do these same democrats stand in the way of choice and vouchers for others? I think it's clear - - they love to tax people and if they can tax people twice - ka-ching. among other elitist hypocritical bad faith reasons.

Both Bush and Obama helped "build" the schools in their respective states.

Bush apparently was satisfied with the job he did, Obama wasn't. So, "we" elected Obama to run the whole shebang.

Go figure.

227 karmic_inquisitor  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 6:57:03pm

From the department of education -

While the total number of engineering degrees conferred in the United States was relatively high compared with other OECD countries, the proportion of graduates earning degrees in engineering in the United States was relatively low. The proportion of U.S. graduates earning their degrees in engineering (6.4 percent) in 2004 was lower than the other five Group of Eight (G-8) countries reporting data, including Canada (7.8 percent), France (12.4 percent), Italy (15.5 percent), Germany (16.5 percent), and Japan (20.2 percent). Compared more generally with the other 27 OECD countries reporting data, Hungary (6.3 percent), Iceland (5.6 percent), Greece (5.2 percent), and New Zealand (4.9 percent) had proportions lower than the United States, while the remaining 23 countries had higher proportions of graduates earning degrees in engineering.

Remember folks that engineering innovations drive productivity, and productivity drives wealth creation. Wealth creation provides the surpluses needed for the arts and humanities to flourish.

Point is that our education funding assumes that ANY degree will contribute to the economy, yet we have had a sustained shortage of engineering here for sometime.

Our education policy should put the cart in front of the horse - simply beating out Hungary, Iceland, Greece and New Zealand isn't enough for the next generations to prosper.

228 zimriel  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 6:57:08pm

"The Prophet, Peace Be Upon Him (PBUH) says that (the title) King of Kings otherwise known as Shah-in-Shah (a title used by Reza Shah) is the most hateful titles to God Most High. Islam is not compatible to the regime of the Shah-in-Shah and all those aware and observe the regime know that Islam came to tear down all palaces of the oppressive Shah-in-Shah, and the Shah-in-Shah is the biggest regime that is hateful and regressive" -- Ayatollah Khomeini

Beware of politicians who say that such-and-such a programme is "anti-religious".

229 Syrah  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 6:57:44pm

re: #219 FrogMarch

bingo. and once the government gets you - you are a slave.

I like to remind people that "if you take the devils coin, you will have to dance to the devils tune."

230 GGMac  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 6:58:02pm

re: #213 UberInfidel67

It will happen again. This time it won't be for "religious" purposes though....it will be "respecting their culture". BULLSHIT

Precisely.

P.S. I like your nic!

231 FrogMarch  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 6:58:13pm

OT - I know this is making the rounds- but is Schumer a schmuck or what?
[Link: pajamasmedia.com...]

232 Catttt  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 6:58:34pm

re: #153 Trogluddite

I guess we should change the Preamble, then, from

We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.

to

We the Constitutional Lawyers of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.

/sarc

233 J.S.  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 6:58:45pm

re: #203 NJDhockeyfan

It's probably just someone who's yet to learn how to spell the word "troglodyte."

234 Mr Pancakes  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 6:58:46pm

re: #177 MandyManners

Asshole.

No kidding, what a asshole it was.

That was probably the oddest, rudest post I've ever seen on here.

I love it when Stinky whacks the nut-jobs.

235 zimriel  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 6:58:49pm

[sorry, didn't show my source. "Speech given in 1971 on the occasion of the 2,500 year anniversary of uninterrupted monarchial rule in Persia. From the Arabic Al-Thawra Al-Iraniah (The Iranian Revolution) by Dr. Ibrahim Disooki Shatta. Dar-Al-Kuttub, Beirut, Lebanon, 1979. p. 137." Quoted here.]

236 kansas  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 6:58:53pm

re: #217 Walter L. Newton

Hi asshole. You talk to me if you want to use my name in a post. Idiot, you were spurting shit on the other thread and I suggested that you offer some proof.

If you will go back to that thread, you will notice that Charles deleted all of the posts that I was taking about and which you were supporting, with your hot air comments.

You chicken shit, you don't have to use me or any one else here to speak for yourself.

If you can't stand up tot he heat, leave.

Asshole, idiot, chicken shit. That makes you what?

237 kawfytawk  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 6:59:04pm

re: #229 Syrah

I like to remind people that "if you take the devils coin, you will have to dance to the devils tune."

I like that....I'm gonna have to remember that

238 hazzyday  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 6:59:19pm

re: #231 FrogMarch

OT - I know this is making the rounds- but is Schumer a schmuck or what?
[Link: pajamasmedia.com...]

It's his gossip that got the Indymac failure rolling. Schumer and Reid both tried to stampede the economy in an election year.

239 rightwinger3  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 6:59:27pm

re: #231 FrogMarch

OT - I know this is making the rounds- but is Schumer a schmuck or what?
[Link: pajamasmedia.com...]

FrogMarch, yes. I will check the link later though.

240 jwb7605  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 6:59:28pm

re: #221 Iron Fist

Love the nic :-)

One avenue to persue this on would be how Pell grants are permitted to be used. Can someone go to Brigham Young on a Pell Grant? What about Liberty whatever, Falwell's university?

Keep in mind that all or almost all, universities have classes, and even degree programs, in religion. Many religions, but certainly not all religions. Are all State Universities Unconstitutional?

I doubt that you can find one anti-religious zealot that would go that far. The question is where, exactly, can you draw the line? And where, exactly, would drawing the line constitute an abridgement of the right to free excersize of Religion that the First Amendment guarentees.

When considering this, recall that the Piss Christ was paid for with taxpayer money. Was that Constitutional?


My oldest daughter went to Regis University on a Pell grant. It is run by Jesuits, and it's an excellent school.

241 Catttt  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 6:59:33pm

re: #231 FrogMarch

OT - I know this is making the rounds- but is Schumer a schmuck or what?
[Link: pajamasmedia.com...]

Yes. He is loathesome.

242 Jetpilot1101  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 6:59:44pm

OT: I just finished watching a NOVA special called "Intelligent Design On Trial". It was a brilliant piece on the Dover trial. I would recommend it to everyone; it is extremely informative.

1. Judge Jones is a national hero.
2. Ken Miller is a brilliant scientist.
3. The Discovery Institute not only is dishonest but their tactics give Christians like myself a really bad name and destroy the witness of Jesus Christ.

Charles, I don't know if you have seen this, I assume you have, but it really educated me and laid out all the issues in vivid detail. Not that I needed anymore convincing concerning evolution but this really helped cement my belief in evolution.

243 UberInfidel67  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:00:02pm

re: #230 GGMac
Thank you : )

244 FloridaAnole  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:00:46pm

re: #229 Syrah

I like to remind people that "if you take the devils coin, you will have to dance to the devils tune."

Yeah, but the devil's coin was hijacked from our paychecks.

245 UberInfidel67  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:00:59pm

BBIAB

246 Walter L. Newton  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:01:44pm

re: #236 kansas

Asshole, idiot, chicken shit. That makes you what?

Having a grand time! Haven't you noticed?

247 hazzyday  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:01:48pm

re: #242 Jetpilot1101

It should be required viewing in Baptist churches.

248 Wishing  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:01:57pm

re: #242 Jetpilot1101

OT: I just finished watching a NOVA special called "Intelligent Design On Trial". It was a brilliant piece on the Dover trial. I would recommend it to everyone; it is extremely informative.

1. Judge Jones is a national hero.
2. Ken Miller is a brilliant scientist.
3. The Discovery Institute not only is dishonest but their tactics give Christians like myself a really bad name and destroy the witness of Jesus Christ.

Charles, I don't know if you have seen this, I assume you have, but it really educated me and laid out all the issues in vivid detail. Not that I needed anymore convincing concerning evolution but this really helped cement my belief in evolution.

Watch it online, too

249 Syrah  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:01:57pm

re: #244 FloridaAnole

Yeah, but the devil's coin was hijacked from our paychecks.

Once they filch it from your pocket, it becomes cursed.

250 jwb7605  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:02:05pm

re: #217 Walter L. Newton

{ Walter! }
We've got at least an inch of snow up here!
Eat your heart out. :-)

251 Digital Display  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:02:14pm

re: #242 Jetpilot1101

OT: I just finished watching a NOVA special called "Intelligent Design On Trial". It was a brilliant piece on the Dover trial. I would recommend it to everyone; it is extremely informative.

1. Judge Jones is a national hero.
2. Ken Miller is a brilliant scientist.
3. The Discovery Institute not only is dishonest but their tactics give Christians like myself a really bad name and destroy the witness of Jesus Christ.

Charles, I don't know if you have seen this, I assume you have, but it really educated me and laid out all the issues in vivid detail. Not that I needed anymore convincing concerning evolution but this really helped cement my belief in evolution.

It was awesome wasn't it..although I keep sneaking back to the IU game

252 J.D.  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:02:19pm

re: #231 FrogMarch

OT - I know this is making the rounds- but is Schumer a schmuck or what?
[Link: pajamasmedia.com...]

Yes.

Oh! Was I supposed to read something first?

253 FrogMarch  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:02:23pm

re: #226 jwb7605

go figure. A nation in decline.

254 NY Nana  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:02:36pm

re: #7 ArmyWife

NY Grampa and I are both Type 2 diabetics, as is Hucklebrain, who proudly proclaimed that he cured himself and was no longer a Type2, after losing weight.

If it were only that simple..he may very well have had surgery, but I think that he was trying to slither out of being a diabetic, as he probably feared it would hurt him as a candidate...I would love to know his family history, as they are now finding more and more info re Type 2 also being genetic in a majority of cases.

He could have done so much for the ever-growing numbers of Type 2's in the USA and world-wide. It is becoming endemic. Hucklebrain is a hypocrite, among other things.

Now, with Hussein's idea of medical care? As a 71 year old diabetic? I might as well go to Alaska, and just drift away on an ice floe.

/Hmmm, Lake Erie is closer.

255 ArmyWife  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:02:46pm

Does anyone think that the stress of the unknown, or perhaps more importantly, the stress of what we DO know about Obama is causing us to be a bit more reactive (euphemism for grouchy) than normal? I'm seeing people who are typically quite rational spout off toward argugment for argument's sake, and I must include myself in this group - I've stopped a number of posts headed toward people I really enjoy "conversing" with because they were simply ugly.

Maybe it's just me and I am over analyzing. Or projecting.

256 mirage  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:02:53pm

re: #197 rightwinger3

Damn. And all this time I thought you just played guitar and did shit with Ajax.

Don't forget the duct tape...

257 Occasional Reader  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:02:54pm

re: #229 Syrah

I like to remind people that "if you take the devils coin, you will have to dance to the devils tune."

I have a mint condition 1921 "Walking Lucifer" half-dollar coin in my collection.

258 kawfytawk  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:03:16pm

re: #255 ArmyWife

Does anyone think that the stress of the unknown, or perhaps more importantly, the stress of what we DO know about Obama is causing us to be a bit more reactive (euphemism for grouchy) than normal? I'm seeing people who are typically quite rational spout off toward argugment for argument's sake, and I must include myself in this group - I've stopped a number of posts headed toward people I really enjoy "conversing" with because they were simply ugly.

Maybe it's just me and I am over analyzing. Or projecting.

YES!

259 slartybartfast  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:03:28pm

re: #198 Catttt

I confess, I was disappointed in Huckabee when the Republicans were asked during a CNN debate if they "believed in evolution" as though it was belief system--as though it was a foundation of faith.

To compare faith and evolution is like asking, "Which color is better, green or red?" It's a meaningless comparison, yet all the candidates 'answered' it by raising their hands--or not, in Huckabee's case. I can't believe they were sucked into that trap.

IMHO, the creation account in Genesis was never intended to impart some scientific truth. It was intended to point out that God did create the things that were worshiped by the pagan people who lived around the nation of Israel (that was established by God). When and how God created creation is not the issue. The fact that he did is what is important.

260 [deleted]  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:03:58pm
261 GGMac  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:04:01pm

re: #218 jaunte

Here's a link on the footbaths issue:
[Link: www.nytimes.com...]

Thanks for the link. Interesting that the Times says there was no outcry at George Mason University - as I recall, the information got onto blogs precisely because of students who WERE ticked off.

262 Jetpilot1101  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:04:01pm

re: #251 HoosierHoops

It was awesome wasn't it..although I keep sneaking back to the IU game

What an excellent job they did! I love reading the evolution threads here but that special wrapped up a lot of the details that I had heard about but never could quite place. It also put some names to faces which is always helpful.

263 Walter L. Newton  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:04:06pm

re: #250 jwb7605

{ Walter! }
We've got at least an inch of snow up here!
Eat your heart out. :-)

it has just started here, about an 1/2 hour ago. We'll have to see how well it does. If you remember that Sunday, two weeks ago, they said flurries, and we got 6-8 inches. Five miles north, Arvada, a dusting. Downtown Denver, about an inch. Northeast side, barely nothing, we had a white out when I woke up Monday morning.

Loved it.

264 NJDhockeyfan  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:04:29pm

OT:

ISRAEL: Advantage Netanyahu After Uncertain Poll

JERUSALEM, Feb 11 (IPS) - Israeli voters went into their polling booths Tuesday uncertain about the government they wanted to lead them over the next four years, only to emerge from their vote even more uncertain about their country's future.

They delivered a surprise by narrowly preferring foreign minister Tzipi Livni over the right-wing former prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu. The depth of the surprise was not, however, sufficient to give Livni's centre-right Kadima party victory.

Instead, though finishing behind his rival, Netanyahu will almost certainly be Israel's next prime minister. This, because of the overall serious shift of voters to the right that gives his Likud party, together with its allies, a narrow, but probably workable majority in the 120-seat Knesset.

265 kawfytawk  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:04:33pm

re: #255 ArmyWife

I thought it was just me being over sensitive

266 FrogMarch  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:05:06pm

re: #250 jwb7605

{ Walter! }
We've got at least an inch of snow up here!
Eat your heart out. :-)

1/2" here. Pavement is merely wet.

267 Bloodnok  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:05:14pm

re: #255 ArmyWife

Does anyone think that the stress of the unknown, or perhaps more importantly, the stress of what we DO know about Obama is causing us to be a bit more reactive (euphemism for grouchy) than normal? I'm seeing people who are typically quite rational spout off toward argugment for argument's sake, and I must include myself in this group - I've stopped a number of posts headed toward people I really enjoy "conversing" with because they were simply ugly.

Maybe it's just me and I am over analyzing. Or projecting.

YOU WANNA MAKE SOMETHIN' OF IT OR WHAT?
///

268 Charles Johnson  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:05:36pm

re: #242 Jetpilot1101

OT: I just finished watching a NOVA special called "Intelligent Design On Trial". It was a brilliant piece on the Dover trial. I would recommend it to everyone; it is extremely informative.

1. Judge Jones is a national hero.
2. Ken Miller is a brilliant scientist.
3. The Discovery Institute not only is dishonest but their tactics give Christians like myself a really bad name and destroy the witness of Jesus Christ.

Charles, I don't know if you have seen this, I assume you have, but it really educated me and laid out all the issues in vivid detail. Not that I needed anymore convincing concerning evolution but this really helped cement my belief in evolution.

It's a terrific show. Maybe it's time to repost the video.

269 J.D.  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:05:46pm

A Few Modest Suggestions for Our President [Victor Davis Hanson]

1) Calling for bipartisanship seems contradicted when you then allege that those who disagree are being "partisan", and you preface almost every major issue with a blanket invective against the past eight years, even when you seem to adopt many of the past policies, from rendition to FISA. Perhaps try to raise the debate from one of your opponents seeking cheap advantage to one of innate philosophical differences, and then try to cease the campaign mode. The election is over. Bush is gone. Like it or not, the executive responsibility of the U.S. is now yours alone.

2) Those who will embarrass you the most are not the Republican minority, but your own Congressional majority. That majority will shortly, no doubt, attempt to have an inquisition of past administration officials, to repeal the fairness doctrine, to move to politicize the census, and to so expand the government that taxes will at some point bother even the upscale professionals who now so welcome your presidency. Remember, the same instinct that makes a Wall Street pirate want a Citation X also drives Speaker Pelosi to enjoy a Congressional jet; mutatis mutandis, what drove a Richard Fuld or Franklin Raines also drove a Charles Rangel and Chris Dodd. The difference was not in the intent, but only in the means.

3) We got the message already of a new horizon, new dialogue, new partnership, novus ordo seclorum, etc. overseas with our allies and a new reaching out to our enemies. They get it too. All that is fine and psychologically reassuring. But Bush 2005-8 was about as multilateral as you could get; governments in Europe are pro-American. Russia, Iran, North Korea, Venezuela, China, etc. offer challenges that transcend American politics. The chances are likely that, for all the utopian visions, you will quietly conclude that the Bush second term, faced with bad and worse choices, did about what you will do now. So perhaps a little more tragic, quiet, and calm acceptance of the fact human nature is, well, human nature, and a little less soaring rhetoric of the summer-2008 style. Reexamine what Jimmy Carter said from November 1976 to January 1977—and what he learned of the world by late 1979.

4) Remember that the more you claim unprecedented morality (cf. the higher the rhetorical bar of ethics was raised to the skies, the easier Daschle, Geithner, Richardson, Solis, et al. pranced under its material form), the easier it is for facts to belie the rhetoric. Bush learned that with the smoke 'em out, bring 'em on lingo that was countered by the looting, the pullback from Fallujah, etc. For Bill Clinton to appoint a Daschle is a misdemeanor, for you it's a felony.

5) When it comes to town meetings and press conferences: One-minute answers with direct tough talk designed to frame not so easy choices are worth 10 minutes of Harvard Law Review recall and Great Society idealism. Perhaps read just a bit more Sophocles and less Reverend Warren. If one must repeat one's self, a five-second "Don't worry, we're going to make it fine," or "We've been through far worse together" is worth hundreds of long convuluted Chicken-Little riffs on "worst since the Great Depression", "catastrophe," and "impending disaster." Markets are not always rational, and, as reflections of human nature, they can be lectured into psychological depression.

270 winston06  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:05:49pm

re: #2 ArmyWife

He's GOP's jimmy carter. he won't go away ;-)

271 winston06  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:06:03pm

Does Huck still have his show on FNC?

272 jwb7605  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:06:04pm

re: #266 FrogMarch

1/2" here. Pavement is merely wet.

Good grief! You're only 5 miles west of me.

273 [deleted]  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:06:09pm
274 Hobbes  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:06:14pm

re: #31 jcm

Bet you dollars to donuts congress critters are "exempted."

Yes they are. Funny isn't it that during the campaign BHO said Americans all deserved health care like he had as a Senator. Guess that got "changed" too!

275 FrogMarch  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:06:15pm

re: #252 J.D.

Yes.

Oh! Was I supposed to read something first?

ding - he's a schmuck - no link required. but the link proves it in case anyone was wondering.

276 Marvo76  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:06:15pm

re: #11 Sharmuta

And if this wasn't in the bill, and funds were used for islamic foot baths, they would be screaming bloody murder. What prevents the government from funding Christianity also protects us from other faiths with which we might just disagree.

Sharm, they are already using funds to install footbaths for muslims in airports, funded by the governments that run them, most of the big ones are municiple owned and they recieve federal grants.
I think what the article was driving at, was that if a civic center Or school gym gets used for say a religous worship on the weekends even though they don't own it, because of that use, it would not be eleigible for funds, so they would have to stop allowing the religous stuff to take place in them, hence the exclusion. Compare that with the federal funds for foot baths, and there is a double standard.

277 Wishing  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:06:16pm

re: #262 Jetpilot1101

What an excellent job they did! I love reading the evolution threads here but that special wrapped up a lot of the details that I had heard about but never could quite place. It also put some names to faces which is always helpful.

I have it linked and will begin watching it in a bit. There are a lot of vids to it!

278 ArmyWife  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:06:20pm

re: #254 NY Nana

You will float no where. I don't care what Obama Health Gurus proclaim. You would be welcome here, and we would figure out a way to care for you - we would be creative with the medical resources I am close too. Very close. The health care provision sickens me more than a lot of this bill (no pun intended). You just do not treat human beings this way.

279 kansas  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:06:25pm

re: #246 Walter L. Newton

Having a grand time! Haven't you noticed?

I don't know, last time I got all worked up and called someone an idiot, chicken shit, and asshole in the same post, I wasn't having a good time. I was pissed. Plus I forgot to ask for your proof. Seems like your opinion.

280 MandyManners  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:06:35pm

re: #255 ArmyWife

Does anyone think that the stress of the unknown, or perhaps more importantly, the stress of what we DO know about Obama is causing us to be a bit more reactive (euphemism for grouchy) than normal? I'm seeing people who are typically quite rational spout off toward argugment for argument's sake, and I must include myself in this group - I've stopped a number of posts headed toward people I really enjoy "conversing" with because they were simply ugly.

Maybe it's just me and I am over analyzing. Or projecting.

Some of us (I include myself) seem to have had an extra bowl.

281 Walter L. Newton  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:06:36pm

re: #266 FrogMarch

1/2" here. Pavement is merely wet.

South Golden Road has snow on it, snow on payments and all other areas. Maybe Golden will get socked in like two Mondays ago. Ok with me, I'm working from home tomorrow.

282 Occasional Reader  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:06:36pm

re: #260 Iron Fist

I wasn't referring to war, in particular, just to the overarching feeling of "the world has gone mad".

We have left-wingers and RINOS in Congress pushing socialism-by-the-numbers, and some of the political figures we count on to push back declare that the Constitution should be amended to make us more of a theocracy.

Madness.

283 GGMac  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:06:49pm

re: #221 Iron Fist

Love the nic :-)

One avenue to persue this on would be how Pell grants are permitted to be used. Can someone go to Brigham Young on a Pell Grant? What about Liberty whatever, Falwell's university?

Keep in mind that all or almost all, universities have classes, and even degree programs, in religion. Many religions, but certainly not all religions. Are all State Universities Unconstitutional?

I doubt that you can find one anti-religious zealot that would go that far. The question is where, exactly, can you draw the line? And where, exactly, would drawing the line constitute an abridgement of the right to free excersize of Religion that the First Amendment guarentees.

When considering this, recall that the Piss Christ was paid for with taxpayer money. Was that Constitutional?

What a remarkably good comment - thought-provoking, and well stated.
Many upclicks

284 ArmyWife  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:07:17pm

re: #267 Bloodnok

I got your what right here!

285 Syrah  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:07:21pm

re: #257 Occasional Reader

I have a mint condition 1921 "Walking Lucifer" half-dollar coin in my collection.

A prized possession I am sure.

It begs the question though, do you own the Coin? Or does the Coin own you?

That's the problem with such things. Possession is tricky. It could end up requiring an exorcism.

286 Catttt  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:07:33pm

re: #255 ArmyWife

Does anyone think that the stress of the unknown, or perhaps more importantly, the stress of what we DO know about Obama is causing us to be a bit more reactive (euphemism for grouchy) than normal? I'm seeing people who are typically quite rational spout off toward argugment for argument's sake, and I must include myself in this group - I've stopped a number of posts headed toward people I really enjoy "conversing" with because they were simply ugly.

Maybe it's just me and I am over analyzing. Or projecting.

I think you may be right. I was grouchy to the new lady at the Royal Farms today. She kept setting things behind the candy displays then asking me "is this yours?" Fuck yeah - that's why I brought it in a basket and put it on the counter, asshole!" OK, I didn't say that, but I was really grouchy. I'm normally little mary sunshine.

287 jaunte  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:07:56pm

re: #261 GGMac

Yes, I'm seeing that in this article from the columbus times. The NYT may be leaving a few important points out.

But when word of the plan got out this spring, it created instant controversy, with bloggers going on about the Islamization of the university, students divided on the use of their building-maintenance fees, and tricky legal questions about whether the plan is an accommodation of students' right to practice their religion -- or unconstitutional government support for that religion.


[Link: www.dispatch.com...]

288 Walter L. Newton  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:08:07pm

re: #266 FrogMarch

1/2" here. Pavement is merely wet.

Ok, where are you, general location. Don't need enough info to steal your identity.

289 Jetpilot1101  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:08:19pm

re: #268 Charles

It's a terrific show. Maybe it's time to repost the video.

It might be helpful and at least get those people who haven't seen it a chance to view it. I stumbled on it tonight. Two of the best hours I have ever spent in front of the TV.

290 tackle  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:08:23pm

re: #254 NY Nana

Now, with Hussein's idea of medical care? As a 71 year old diabetic? I might as well go to Alaska, and just drift away on an ice floe.

/Hmmm, Lake Erie is closer.


LOL. Can you be my new grandma?

291 kawfytawk  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:08:31pm

re: #286 Catttt

ROFL...have a nice day (in my best sing song voice)

292 Walter L. Newton  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:09:10pm

re: #289 Jetpilot1101

It might be helpful and at least get those people who haven't seen it a chance to view it. I stumbled on it tonight. Two of the best hours I have ever spent in front of the TV.

Don't spoil the ending.

293 FurryOldGuyJeans  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:09:41pm

So now Huck wants to start his own Hyper-Sectarian Christian Theocracy here in the U.S. Please tell me why that is acceptable and an Islamic Theocracy such as is practiced in Iran is not?

294 Dan G.  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:09:43pm

There were several shills shilling about this in the spin-offs for the last couple of days...

295 Catttt  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:10:02pm

re: #291 kawfytawk

ROFL...have a nice day (in my best sing song voice)

Thank you - I have other plans. :D I think it was Tony Randall who came up with that reply, God rest his soul.

296 kawfytawk  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:10:10pm

Mandy Manners....whatever happened to our resident weather guy...ed?

297 FloridaAnole  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:10:17pm

re: #255 ArmyWife

Does anyone think that the stress of the unknown, or perhaps more importantly, the stress of what we DO know about Obama is causing us to be a bit more reactive (euphemism for grouchy) than normal? I'm seeing people who are typically quite rational spout off toward argugment for argument's sake, and I must include myself in this group - I've stopped a number of posts headed toward people I really enjoy "conversing" with because they were simply ugly.

Maybe it's just me and I am over analyzing. Or projecting.

Nope, I don't think you are. Me, I have to forcibly restrain myself from saying things that would get me banned for life from LGF or at the least waterboarded at Guantanamo. That's why I haven't posted very much since the election.

298 jcbunga  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:10:21pm

re: #61 shanester

Sorry, Charles... but I disagree.

The Constitution bans the ESTABLISHMENT of (an official state) religion. It does not ban religions, or even the funding of religions - as long as there is no real, palpable preference for one religion over the other.

As for the "wall" seperating Church and State? That's not in the constitution.

The Constitution protects religions from government interference as much as protecting government from religious interference.

It is not unconstitutional to fund a religious program, etc... It is only unconstitutional to prefer one religion over the other. Unless you are a left-wing "living constitution" believer.

I have to agree, and I'm not a right wing holy roller. How does this language constitute Congress establishing a religion?

That's the kind of massaging of the Constitution that has led to a host of wacko liberal living document nonsense. "So help me God", "In God We Trust" are just two examples that send the far left frothing.

I'd agree that if Congress announced religion "x" was now the official religion of the nation it would time to freak.

IMHO

When Congress

299 Bloodnok  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:10:23pm

re: #284 ArmyWife

I got your what right here!

Thank you for your thoughtful post, though. I may not be argumentative, but in true passive aggressive form I have shut the PC off or just decided to stay quiet a lot for exactly the reasons you stated. I think there is a lot to what you say. You are a treasure.

300 [deleted]  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:10:28pm
301 Digital Display  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:10:48pm

re: #284 ArmyWife

I got your what right here!

In the immortal words of Paris Hilton 'That was hot!'

302 jcm  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:10:53pm

re: #296 kawfytawk

Mandy Manners....whatever happened to our resident weather guy...ed?

Backstabbing Charles on other sites.

303 Sharmuta  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:10:55pm

re: #276 Marvo76

And that's just as wrong. Recently the ACLU filed a lawsuit against a muslim school violating the Establishment clause. I saw it as a hopeful sign that perhaps that organization is becoming more rational and less hypocritical. When these sorts of violations are noticed, they should be fought, but it by no means makes it okay for others to violate the law.

304 Salamantis  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:11:00pm

re: #153 Trogluddite

This is why people who are not constitutional law lawyers should not proclaim on constitutional law issues - note to self: is the owner of this website a constitutional law attorney? Broadly stating that the 1st Amendment prohibits schools from using Federal funds to repair a building that happens to be used for religious purposes is a gross misstatement of the law.

I attended Penn State back in the Stone Age. There was one building near North Halls where you could attend a lecture in the morning, Saturday evening Mass around 6:00, and the Rocky Horror picture show (which is as close to porn as you could get in those days) at 9:00. Can no Federal funds be used for repairs to that school? What happens when I get a Federal loan?

Also, what the heck is "sectarian instruction?" Does this mean that you can't teach Balkan politics in a university building?

The language cited above is far broader than anything required by the 1st Amendment - it may be permitted and it is a legislative decision that the courts would have to give deference to, but it is not required by the 1st amendment. Regrettably, I am unlikely to be able to throw anything together on this, but if I have a little time over the weekend, I'll try to get to it.

Religious clubs formed by students, not faculty, can even meet on public high school grounds in otherwise empty classrooms; they cannot, however, do so during school hours, when the school is functioniong as a school.

And teaching Balkan politics, involving the history of religious conflict there, is vastly different from teaching the dogmas of particular religions as facts.

305 Wishing  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:11:12pm

re: #289 Jetpilot1101

It might be helpful and at least get those people who haven't seen it a chance to view it. I stumbled on it tonight. Two of the best hours I have ever spent in front of the TV.

NOVA vids

306 kansas  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:11:15pm

re: #293 FurryOldGuyJeans

So now Huck wants to start his own Hyper-Sectarian Christian Theocracy here in the U.S. Please tell me why that is acceptable and an Islamic Theocracy such as is practiced in Iran is not?

It's not, but his theocracy would probably be without the explosive vests, honor killings, and beheadings. Or is that not correct?

307 jwb7605  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:11:30pm

BBL ... a new Menatalist is on, and I like that show (#3, behind the Unit and NCIS)

308 ArmyWife  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:11:31pm

re: #280 MandyManners

re: #258 kawfytawk

re: #286 Catttt

I feel better that I'm not alone. That doesn't help the situation, but at least I know I am in good company.

309 kawfytawk  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:11:38pm

ruh roh...power seems to be flickering....guess the storm is getting close to us.

310 Dar ul Harb  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:11:58pm

re: #296 kawfytawk

The stick.

311 kawfytawk  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:12:15pm

re: #302 jcm

Backstabbing Charles on other sites.

Really? how weird...he never posted much more than a weather update.

312 Dan G.  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:12:25pm

re: #306 kansas

I'm sure he'd burn a witch or two.

313 Occasional Reader  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:12:32pm

re: #292 Walter L. Newton

Don't spoil the ending.

THE DINOSAURS ALL TURN INTO BIRDS AND FLY AWAY

314 ArmyWife  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:12:36pm

re: #273 taxfreekiller

Thank you. Really. I've had a really rough go over the last few weeks at work (long, involved, boring) and that put a much needed smile on my face.

315 J.D.  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:12:36pm

re: #296 kawfytawk
He's been drunk here, you know.

316 reine.de.tout  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:12:53pm

re: #255 ArmyWife

Does anyone think that the stress of the unknown, or perhaps more importantly, the stress of what we DO know about Obama is causing us to be a bit more reactive (euphemism for grouchy) than normal? I'm seeing people who are typically quite rational spout off toward argugment for argument's sake, and I must include myself in this group - I've stopped a number of posts headed toward people I really enjoy "conversing" with because they were simply ugly.

Maybe it's just me and I am over analyzing. Or projecting.

I know I'm more grouchy.
I seem to have a lot more on my mind lately, too, and I think what it really is, is that I'm worried about the direction we're headed.

317 jcbunga  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:12:59pm

re: #309 kawfytawk

ruh roh...power seems to be flickering....guess the storm is getting close to us.

This is impossible.

The One was elected.

318 Jetpilot1101  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:13:08pm

re: #292 Walter L. Newton

Don't spoil the ending.

I certainly won't.

319 kawfytawk  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:13:10pm

re: #308 ArmyWife

We need a support group...LOL....will Obama supply us with one? and feed us and burp us too?

320 FurryOldGuyJeans  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:13:37pm

re: #233 J.S.

It's probably just someone who's yet to learn how to spell the word "troglodyte."

Furry no can spell dat. ;)

321 Walter L. Newton  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:13:41pm

re: #313 Occasional Reader

THE DINOSAURS ALL TURN INTO BIRDS AND FLY AWAY

MAISEY....!

322 Occasional Reader  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:14:28pm

re: #309 kawfytawk

.guess the storm is getting close to us.

"I know."

-Sarah Connor, just before driving off into desert

323 Wishing  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:14:40pm

Well it looks like Netanyahu is in. I am greatly relieved.
Off to watch Nova.
Sleep well Lizards.
Cya around the bend.

324 kansas  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:14:43pm

Lightning here. About 10 seconds between the flash and thunder so about 10 miles coming from the SW.

325 Marvo76  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:14:43pm

re: #138 Sharmuta

I have no problem with private, religious schools having non-union teachers and being funded completely privately. Government money equals government rules. I like to keep the scope of government rules limited- that's the beauty of private schools!

but if government decided that say a voucher program where each child is given set amount of funds for their education and the parents could use it a school of their choice (a grant) would you be against them using it at a religious school? Simple because they be seen as favoring a religion? History shows that the GI bill funded thousands of service men in seminary's across the country after the war, should we go back and ask them to honor the constitution and give the money back? Or are we trying to overturn the precedence?

326 Sharmuta  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:14:46pm

Me? I'm just as pissy as I was before.

327 formercorpsman  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:14:57pm

re: #296 kawfytawk

Batta Bing

328 kawfytawk  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:15:00pm

re: #315 J.D.

I didn't realize.....there was a few months when I was away caring for my father and when i came back I saw bits and pieces about babbazee I think but nothing about ed

329 EllisGee  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:15:03pm

Time for the voters to get him the huck out of there!

330 [deleted]  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:15:34pm
331 GGMac  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:15:54pm

re: #255 ArmyWife

Does anyone think that the stress of the unknown, or perhaps more importantly, the stress of what we DO know about Obama is causing us to be a bit more reactive (euphemism for grouchy) than normal? I'm seeing people who are typically quite rational spout off toward argugment for argument's sake, and I must include myself in this group - I've stopped a number of posts headed toward people I really enjoy "conversing" with because they were simply ugly.

Maybe it's just me and I am over analyzing. Or projecting.

Maybe just a form of sibling-squabbling...:)

332 MandyManners  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:16:08pm

re: #296 kawfytawk

Mandy Manners....whatever happened to our resident weather guy...ed?

He got the stick.

333 kawfytawk  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:16:11pm

well folks...think i will shut this thing off before the lightening does it for me...take care and good nite

334 Digital Display  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:16:15pm

re: #313 Occasional Reader

THE DINOSAURS ALL TURN INTO BIRDS AND FLY AWAY

The problem is they all live at Walters house disguised as Parrots..
I think the autopsy is going to be ugly..Get out while you can Walter..

335 Sorge  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:16:20pm

Alternative Headline: "Charles Johnson, once again, forgets to actually read the first amendment and takes leftist's interpretation instead."

336 ArmyWife  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:16:22pm

re: #299 Bloodnok

Thank you.

337 jaunte  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:16:52pm

It must be whack-a-mole night tonight.

338 J.D.  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:16:55pm

re: #328 kawfytawk

I missed all of both of those and someone mentioned them when I came back. [shrug]

339 FurryOldGuyJeans  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:17:02pm

re: #323 Wishing

Well it looks like Netanyahu is in. I am greatly relieved.
Off to watch Nova.
Sleep well Lizards.
Cya around the bend.

Jumped the Net', eh? KU-EL! ;)

340 Sharmuta  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:17:09pm

re: #325 Marvo76

No- I would not be opposed to parents using a voucher for a private religious school, because the voucher represents their share of the tax levy used to pay for the public schools. They get their own money back and can use it where they wish.

341 Dar ul Harb  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:17:30pm

re: #311 kawfytawk

Well, meteorology, scatology, and alcohology.

342 MandyManners  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:17:41pm

re: #326 Sharmuta

Me? I'm just as pissy as I was before.

HA!

343 jaunte  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:17:46pm

re: #335 Sorge

Can you expand on that thought for us, or is that it?

344 jcm  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:17:46pm

re: #321 Walter L. Newton

MAISEY....!

You ever notice her looking at you with her head cocked to one side.
That's the T-Rex in her sizing up her next meal.
;-)

345 reine.de.tout  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:17:47pm

re: #319 kawfytawk

We need a support group...LOL....will Obama supply us with one? and feed us and burp us too?

Let's ask him.

346 Sharmuta  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:17:59pm

re: #335 Sorge

Breaking- another asshole posts cheap shot.

347 FurryOldGuyJeans  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:18:04pm

re: #335 Sorge

You sir, are a fucking idiot, if you think people here don't read and understand the Constitution.

348 [deleted]  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:18:07pm
349 MandyManners  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:18:12pm

re: #335 Sorge

Asshole.

350 reine.de.tout  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:18:19pm

re: #343 jaunte

Can you expand on that thought for us, or is that it?

Where the heck are these guys coming from?

351 Occasional Reader  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:18:32pm

re: #324 kansas

Lightning here. About 10 seconds between the flash and thunder so about 10 miles coming from the SW.

No, about 2 miles.

352 J.D.  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:18:34pm

alcohology

Sorry...just had to spellcheck that one.

353 Salamantis  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:18:47pm

re: #194 Occasional Reader

Not necessarily, if it's not supporting faiths qua faiths.

Example: Say the federal government gives grants for running soup kitchens for the homeless. Churches (etc.) may apply, but on the condition that their soup kitchen activity does not engage in proselytizing. So, if your church wants to participate, great, they take money, they give out soup. My church decides not to. I don't see that as favoring one religion over another.

That was indeed the rationale behind Dubya's faith-based initiatives.

354 Occasional Reader  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:18:59pm

re: #334 HoosierHoops

The problem is they all live at Walters house disguised as Parrots..
I think the autopsy is going to be ugly..Get out while you can Walter..

His last words will be, "clever girl..."

355 jaunte  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:19:24pm

re: #350 reine.de.tout

Ron Paul's district?

356 Bloodnok  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:19:29pm

re: #346 Sharmuta

Breaking- another asshole posts cheap shot.

Pissy!

/:p

357 FurryOldGuyJeans  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:19:33pm

re: #346 Sharmuta

Breaking- another asshole posts cheap shot.

I wonder who's sockpuppet it is.

Karma: 47
Sorge
(Logged in)
Registered since: Feb 15, 2005 at 5:14 pm
No. of comments posted: 169
No. of links posted: 0

358 rightwinger3  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:19:53pm

What is it with people tonight? "It's Tuesday, think I'll get banned at LGF tonight."

359 doppelganglander  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:20:21pm

re: #255 ArmyWife

Does anyone think that the stress of the unknown, or perhaps more importantly, the stress of what we DO know about Obama is causing us to be a bit more reactive (euphemism for grouchy) than normal? I'm seeing people who are typically quite rational spout off toward argugment for argument's sake, and I must include myself in this group - I've stopped a number of posts headed toward people I really enjoy "conversing" with because they were simply ugly.

Maybe it's just me and I am over analyzing. Or projecting.

I was certainly in that kind of foul mood today. I try not to let it get to me but I got very little sleep last night, which tends to make me super cranky. I've cut out TV news almost completely, which helps.

360 NJDhockeyfan  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:20:40pm

re: #358 rightwinger3

What is it with people tonight? "It's Tuesday, think I'll get banned at LGF tonight."

Full Moon?

361 Bloodnok  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:20:43pm

re: #358 rightwinger3

What is it with people tonight? "It's Tuesday, think I'll get banned at LGF tonight."

And over Mike Huckabee too.

362 formercorpsman  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:20:50pm

re: #357 FurryOldGuyJeans

I would suspect Charles could go back and look at who registered at that time.

363 jcbunga  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:21:05pm

No fighting.

It will scare away the Great Unicorn when he appears.

364 rightwinger3  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:21:14pm

re: #361 Bloodnok

LOL

365 reine.de.tout  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:21:30pm

re: #355 jaunte

Ron Paul's district?

Ha!
Prolly so.
Why are they all popping out tonight, I wonder?
Is there a full moon?

366 Dar ul Harb  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:21:36pm

re: #352 J.D.

alcohology

Sorry...just had to spellcheck that one.

If you're too drunk to spell alcohology... you probably thought you were making that word up.

367 ArmyWife  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:21:38pm

re: #335 Sorge

A subject for my island proposal.

(I tried not to post something snide, but I was over taken)

368 doppelganglander  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:21:56pm

re: #335 Sorge

Alternative Headline: "Charles Johnson, once again, forgets to actually read the first amendment and takes leftist's interpretation instead."

Here's a novel idea for you. Learn to express yourself without making personal attacks on your host. It's a lot more effective than peeing on the carpet in someone else's house.

369 J.S.  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:22:01pm

re: #360 NJDhockeyfan

Yesterday, there was a full moon...

370 yesandno  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:22:12pm

re: #308 ArmyWife

re: #258 kawfytawk

re: #286 Catttt

I feel better that I'm not alone. That doesn't help the situation, but at least I know I am in good company.

I agree....I fear I might have something similar to BDS. I try to focus on facts, but every car I see with the 0 sticker, people I hear talking about how great he is, I grit my teeth. and ponder how an entire 1/2 of the voting public could have been so stupid.

371 Sharmuta  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:22:20pm

Full moon was Feb 9th.

372 Digital Display  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:22:36pm

re: #357 FurryOldGuyJeans

I wonder who's sockpuppet it is.

Karma: 47
Sorge
(Logged in)
Registered since: Feb 15, 2005 at 5:14 pm
No. of comments posted: 169
No. of links posted: 0

Shhh! don't scare em away..This should be fun..Ready? Set? Action!

373 sphincter  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:22:44pm

the moon indeed does look full. I was just out barking at it a little while ago.

what the hell happened to my clothes?

374 jaunte  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:22:47pm

re: #365 reine.de.tout

It's a new sport; counting jerky-boy coup just before the banstick, then lurking around for a new open door.

375 rightwinger3  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:22:51pm

re: #368 doppelganglander

Here's a novel idea for you. Learn to express yourself without making personal attacks on your host. It's a lot more effective than peeing on the carpet in someone else's house.

No. You know what, fuck them. Let 'em all get banned.

376 reine.de.tout  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:22:59pm

re: #371 Sharmuta

Full moon was Feb 9th.

Good grief!
How did you know that so quickly?

377 ArmyWife  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:23:06pm

re: #371 Sharmuta

residual affects?

378 Sharmuta  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:23:08pm

Full moon calendar

Blue moon in December!

379 J.D.  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:23:13pm

re: #366 Dar ul Harb

If you're too drunk to spell alcohology... you probably thought you were making that word up.

Wrong.
I thought you were.

380 Salamantis  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:23:13pm

re: #209 ArmyWife

I was actually viewing it as the Gov't assisting with the building of a Mosque as well as other religious sites. Don't mistake that as me being a fan of any of those options - I don't like my Government to get involved in religion beyond protecting the freedom to practice as we chose, or not practice as the case may be. That said, I have no problems with Christmas Trees in schools or Government buildings, or Menorahs in the same buildings. The 10 Commandments on a Court House is perfectly OK with me.

You mean Yule trees, don't you? They were originally a Pagan religious symbol...;~)

And I'd much rather have the Bill of Rights carved in the chunk of courthouse granite.

381 Sharmuta  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:23:35pm

re: #376 reine.de.tout

I keep track of these things.

382 reine.de.tout  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:23:36pm

re: #374 jaunte

It's a new sport; counting jerky-boy coup just before the banstick, then lurking around for a new open door.

It's sad, really, that they don't have better and more interesting things to do with their time.

383 Digital Display  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:24:02pm

re: #373 sphincter

the moon indeed does look full. I was just out barking at it a little while ago.

what the hell happened to my clothes?

Goodwill dude..sorry

384 Ringo the Gringo  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:24:05pm

I have not read all of the comments here, but It's worth mentioning that President Obama has renamed Bush's Faith-based program, The White House Office of Faith-Based and Neighborhood Partnerships, and given it a new, community organizer twist: A Promising Start for Obama's Faith-Based Office

385 Bloodnok  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:24:11pm

I love that he/she is just standing there waiting with his/her fly open waiting for Stinky to come. It's much less dramatic for them that way.

386 Occasional Reader  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:24:13pm

re: #378 Sharmuta

Full moon calendar

Blue moon in December!

December? Why wait?

387 J.S.  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:24:17pm

re: #376 reine.de.tout

I've got a "gadget" which gives the moon's phases...(on a sidebar).

388 Catttt  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:24:25pm

I kind of agree with some posters on the issue of the wall of separation - it's a controversial issue, since it was in a letter, not the Constitution, and I think the Establishment Clause is confusing.

However, I continue to be troubled by Gov. Huckabee's take, which to me is extreme well beyond any equivocation or confusion about the Establishment Clause.

Just having read the PROHIBITED USES OF FUNDS clause, to me, this just reflects prior SCOTUS Establishment Clause tests, such as the secular purpose, primary effect, and broad class tests.

389 Kaymad  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:24:30pm

I sort of agree with Huckabee and I have never been nor am I now a Huckabee fan. Nor am I religious nor do I go to church. There, now that my non religious creds are in order, the first amendment does not read, "congress may fund every loony liberal ideal under the sun, as long as it is not religious in nature". So in a way he is correct, STD and abortions for all! But please, no seminary funding at the university.

390 Dar ul Harb  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:25:03pm

re: #363 jcbunga

No fighting.

It will scare away the Great Unicorn when he appears.

I heard that he goes to the town hall meeting that is the most sincere, and rises up to the podium, and starts giving away presents to all the unfortunate people who believe in him.

(I got a rock.)

391 zombie  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:25:03pm

Huckabee wants to be the William Jennings Bryan of the 21st century.

His kind of shallow, rabble-rousing, Christian-tinged populism has a long history in this country.

Bryan stood a chance of winning the White House 100 years ago because the people were a bit more naive than they were today. But for all his flaws and lopsided ideology, jennings was at least a brilliant speaker and communicator. Huckabee is a Lilliputian in comparison.

I've never actually seen it, but I saw somewhere that Fox News has given Huckabee a TV show all his own. I only shake my head in dismay.

Huckabee is probably a good man as a human being, and he is free to believe all he wants to believe, but I simply don't want him anywhere near my Constitution or near the reigns of political power in this country.

392 [deleted]  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:25:05pm
393 hazzyday  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:25:08pm

Mike Huckabee sermonizing... Ya Ba Da Ba Do! I've seen his program and like it. But he should field some of these hard questions.

394 [deleted]  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:25:11pm
395 Sharmuta  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:25:12pm

re: #377 ArmyWife

residual affects?

I think so, because it seems to me we get a lot more whacked out posts a day or two after a full moon. The question about the full moon gets asked quite a bit, and that was one of the reasons I started noting when they were.

396 Sorge  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:25:14pm

re: #346 Sharmuta

Breaking- another asshole posts cheap shot.

The establishment cause prohibits the establishment of a church. That has a very specific meaning--no official religion for the FEDERAL government. The expansive vision of what the first amendment "really" means is not the first amendment.

The establishment cause, incidentally, only applies to the Federal Government. Connecticut, for example, had a state established Church until 1818 and Massachusetts had an established Church until 1834.

397 reine.de.tout  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:25:26pm

re: #387 J.S.

I've got a "gadget" which gives the moon's phases...(on a sidebar).

Shar posted a calendar.
I love the internet.
Virtually unlimited information at your fingertips, FREE.

398 Sharmuta  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:25:30pm

re: #386 Occasional Reader

December? Why wait?

I love that beer.

399 Killgore Trout  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:25:37pm

The crazies are out tonight.

400 Sorge  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:25:59pm

re: #368 doppelganglander

Here a novel idea for the host: he must learn to express himself to avoid personal attacks on others.

401 jcbunga  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:26:20pm

re: #390 Dar ul Harb

I heard that he goes to the town hall meeting that is the most sincere, and rises up to the podium, and starts giving away presents to all the unfortunate people who believe in him.

(I got a rock.)

now THIS is extremely funny. I know this because Coke Zero is running out ma nose :)

402 Sharmuta  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:26:40pm

re: #396 Sorge

No- the 14th Amendment made the states beholden to the Bill of Rights just as much as the rest of the Constitution.

403 doppelganglander  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:26:42pm

re: #375 rightwinger3

No. You know what, fuck them. Let 'em all get banned.

I guess I just try to give people a chance. Just one, mind you. He/she will probably be back and calling me a sycophant in no time.

404 Dar ul Harb  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:26:48pm

re: #379 J.D.

Wrong.
I thought you were.

Right.
I did. I should have said "If one is too drunk..."

405 hazzyday  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:26:52pm

re: #380 Salamantis

You mean Yule trees, don't you? They were originally a Pagan religious symbol...;~)

And I'd much rather have the Bill of Rights carved in the chunk of courthouse granite.

Popular convention would be Christmas Trees.

406 ArmyWife  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:26:52pm

Good night, guys (except you Sorge). I'm beat and tomorrow is going to be equally taxing.

I tell my children that some words should stay in their heads. I think that is appropriate advice for this evening's mood.

407 jcm  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:26:59pm

re: #386 Occasional Reader

December? Why wait?

You'd have to come to Seattle.
I'd buy, the place is overrun by moonbats, we'd have to beat them up and throw them out first.

408 jaunte  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:27:10pm

Not taking Federal money will help preserve a religions' tax-exempt status a while longer. I say a while longer, because the Federal taxing authority doesn't appear to have many limits at this point.

409 Dar ul Harb  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:28:13pm

re: #401 jcbunga

now THIS is extremely funny. I know this because Coke Zero is running out ma nose :)

Coke Zero?
How apropos.

410 [deleted]  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:28:25pm
411 J.D.  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:28:28pm

re: #401 jcbunga

now THIS is extremely funny. I know this because Coke Zero is running out ma nose :)

I ♥ Coke Zero.

412 MandyManners  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:28:31pm

re: #400 Sorge

Oh, go piss up a rope.

413 Digital Display  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:28:35pm

re: #406 ArmyWife

Good night, guys (except you Sorge). I'm beat and tomorrow is going to be equally taxing.

I tell my children that some words should stay in their heads. I think that is appropriate advice for this evening's mood.

Good Night Armywife..
/weet dreams

414 [deleted]  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:28:37pm
415 jcbunga  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:28:44pm

re: #394 Iron Fist

So what do I get? I have no children, and either had academic scholarships to pay for my higher education, or I paid for it myself (I borrowed some of the money from a family trust, but I also paid that money back in full). I'm still paying the same taxes as everyone else. it is just that I get nothing in return. I'm gonna whine about it.

You are self-reliant, and therefore a threat to the Obamanation.

Please remain where you are, and someone will be along to collect you. /

416 [deleted]  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:28:48pm
417 GGMac  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:29:07pm

OT B. Hussein's familiarity and comfort with pronouncement of names of mideast origin disturbs me for some reason: Paaahkistaaahn, Fahhhhtah.

Anyone else? Or am I just another racist pig?

418 doppelganglander  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:29:08pm

re: #400 Sorge

Here a novel idea for the host: he must learn to express himself to avoid personal attacks on others.

When has Charles ever made a personal attack on anyone? rightwinger 3, you were right, and I'm sorry I ever thought otherwise.

419 HelloDare  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:29:09pm

re: #391 zombie

Long live Bimetallism!

420 J.S.  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:29:20pm

re: #391 zombie

Here's a Youtube clip of Huckabee congratulating Canada on its "national igloo...

421 Killgore Trout  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:29:30pm

re: #408 jaunte

I am in favour of taxes churches anyways. If they really want to run as a nonprofit organization they are free to do so. Otherwise they can go ahead an pay the same taxes as everyone else.

422 Sorge  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:29:49pm

re: #402 Sharmuta

No- the 14th Amendment made the states beholden to the Bill of Rights just as much as the rest of the Constitution.

Ah, the "due process" canard...

No, that's how it has been applied; it was neither the intent nor the meaning of the amendment.

423 Killgore Trout  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:30:07pm

re: #400 Sorge

Here a novel idea for the host: he must learn to express himself to avoid personal attacks on others.

Fuck you.

424 Sharmuta  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:30:18pm

re: #396 Sorge

Also- you seem to be neglecting the World Nut Daily link which is saying the stimulus bill is banning religion. That's just as much a violation of the First Amendment as establishing a religion- but you be sure to snark Charles about his understanding of the First Amendment and ignore the whackos at wmd for their crazy ass headline.

425 Dustyvet  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:30:25pm

re: #412 MandyManners

Oh, go piss up a rope.

Electric fences are more productive for that...:)

426 Occasional Reader  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:30:26pm

re: #411 J.D.

I ♥ Coke Zero.

I concur. Well, maybe not "love", but it's quite good.

427 doppelganglander  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:30:42pm

re: #416 Iron Fist

I have an amusing story about that from my freshman year of college. It wasn't me that took a piss in the corner of the room, though.

I hope it wasn't your carpet, either.

428 rightwinger3  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:30:48pm

re: #403 doppelganglander

I guess I just try to give people a chance. Just one, mind you. He/she will probably be back and calling me a sycophant in no time.

Sure, me too. Hey I guess as long as posts on the "establishment cause" keep coming he/she can stick around.

429 [deleted]  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:30:49pm
430 hazzyday  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:30:59pm

re: #388 Catttt

The establishment clause is like ID to me. Maybe more hidden. It's something I would never think about until people start arguing about. Then I might think I need an opinion about it that I could express. Though on the establishment clause Google lead me to purgatory. Maybe I'll go out and look again.

431 Jetpilot1101  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:31:27pm

re: #429 Sorge

I'm sorry, have you said your prayers to St. Charles tonight already, or are you waiting until later?

How do people like you get so stupid?

432 jcbunga  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:31:31pm

The Great Unicorn will never come now. Not even the one with 2 horns.

433 NJDhockeyfan  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:31:43pm

re: #400 Sorge

Here a novel idea for the host: he must learn to express himself to avoid personal attacks on others.

Question....what is your IQ?

434 J.D.  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:31:51pm

re: #404 Dar ul Harb

Right.
I did. I should have said "If one is too drunk..."

True.

I like the word, though.

435 CynicalConservative  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:32:10pm

re: #429 Sorge

Not a smart move.

436 FrogMarch  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:32:13pm

re: #288 Walter L. Newton

Ok, where are you, general location. Don't need enough info to steal your identity.

sorry for the delay. Getting ready for bed here.

East Boulder.

437 jcm  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:32:28pm

re: #400 Sorge

Here a novel idea for the host: he must learn to express himself to avoid personal attacks on others.

Sorge?.... You a un-repentant red diaper doper baby?

438 SaintGeorgeGentile  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:32:33pm

Huckabee is no better than any other phony revival preacher. As for my tax $ going to any school, I say Bah! Dept. of Education should be abolished.

439 MandyManners  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:32:33pm

re: #431 Jetpilot1101

How do people like you get so stupid?

They work hard at it.

440 doppelganglander  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:32:45pm

re: #431 Jetpilot1101

Calling us sycophants, I called it. Hasta la vista, Sorge.

441 jaunte  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:32:52pm

re: #421 Killgore Trout

I am in favour of taxes churches anyways. If they really want to run as a nonprofit organization they are free to do so. Otherwise they can go ahead an pay the same taxes as everyone else.

I don't think the income would be worth the civil disturbance.

442 Slumbering Behemoth Stinks  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:32:56pm

re: #153 Trogluddite

This is why people who are not constitutional law lawyers should not proclaim on constitutional law issues

And if you're not a professional Hollywood actor/actress, you should not share your opinion on movies.

/sheesh

443 Sharmuta  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:33:03pm

re: #422 Sorge

14th Amendment

Section 1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

No due process involved. The State can't deny my Constitutionally protected rights.

444 FurryOldGuyJeans  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:33:14pm

re: #396 Sorge

Changing the Constitution by its very nature means changing an aspect of the FEDERAL Government.

You really need to learn Constitutional Law and Application before you start being a pontificator.

Normally I am exceeding tolerant of spelling and syntax mistakes, since I am a frequent violator myself, but you do need to know it is Establishment Clause, with an L, not Cause. Your repetition is showing your stupidity.

445 Bloodnok  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:33:21pm

re: #437 jcm

Sorge?.... You a un-repentant red diaper doper baby?

Nicely sleuthed.

446 J.D.  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:33:29pm

re: #400 Sorge

Why don't you talk to him about it.
He reads... you know...

447 [deleted]  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:33:32pm
448 Cato the Elder  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:33:35pm

Huckabee's new version of the Constitution = Christian Shariah.

449 FrogMarch  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:33:42pm

re: #281 Walter L. Newton

South Golden Road has snow on it, snow on payments and all other areas. Maybe Golden will get socked in like two Mondays ago. Ok with me, I'm working from home tomorrow.

Snow day! here's 'hopin.

Catch up with you tomorrow.
nighty, all.

450 Dar ul Harb  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:33:45pm

re: #411 J.D.

I ♥ Coke Zero.

Sure beats Opepsi.

(Not to mention Diet Coke. Supposedly somewhere out there are the real hard core diet soda people who're still drinking Tab.)

451 doppelganglander  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:34:03pm

re: #437 jcm

Sorge?.... You a un-repentant red diaper doper baby?

Good catch.

452 Sharmuta  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:34:03pm

re: #438 SaintGeorgeGentile

Huckabee is no better than any other phony revival preacher. As for my tax $ going to any school, I say Bah! Dept. of Education should be abolished.

Um- your tax money would still be going to public schools via the local property taxes. That's still where most schools get their money.

453 rightwinger3  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:34:13pm

Where is annefrance when you need her?

454 Sorge  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:34:20pm

re: #433 NJDhockeyfan

Question....what is your IQ?

It has been measure two times. But that's private information.

455 hazzyday  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:34:22pm

re: #400 Sorge

Here a novel idea for the host: he must learn to express himself to avoid personal attacks on others.

Lordy, Charles "having to listen to dopes" ratio is a lot higher than yours. And for the thousands of trolls and such that have run through here with smug and snide remarks, don't you think he would be faster on the draw than you? You would get all shot up in a western saloon just as you stepped your self righteous boots in town. You're nothing new under the sun.

456 Sharmuta  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:34:39pm

Our Overlord, who art in cyberspace
Hallowed be thy flame.
Thy downding come, thy ban stick flung
On Nirth as it is on Nodrog.
Give us this day our daily thread
And forgive us our spins
As we forgive those who spin upon us.
For thine is the website
And the powerblog, and the rational
Forever and ever
GAZE!

457 Digital Display  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:34:41pm

re: #418 doppelganglander

When has Charles ever made a personal attack on anyone? rightwinger 3, you were right, and I'm sorry I ever thought otherwise.

It's worse than that..Sorge is accusing Charles of following leftist doctrine in his Edited Headlines...Just twisted logic..Hey Sorge..Big boy..If you are going down this road..lets go down it..one little chicken shit line ain't making it..
What are you saying about Charles Editorial headlines?

458 Catttt  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:34:49pm

re: #394 Iron Fist

So what do I get? I have no children, and either had academic scholarships to pay for my higher education, or I paid for it myself (I borrowed some of the money from a family trust, but I also paid that money back in full). I'm still paying the same taxes as everyone else. it is just that I get nothing in return. I'm gonna whine about it.

I thought we all got Kindles! And contact lenses! /

459 Vicious Babushka  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:35:03pm

re: #400 Sorge

What Mandy said.

460 Salamantis  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:35:10pm

re: #276 Marvo76

Sharm, they are already using funds to install footbaths for muslims in airports, funded by the governments that run them, most of the big ones are municiple owned and they recieve federal grants.

But, afaik, goverment funds were not explicitly spent to build those footbaths. I would have preferred that they not be built at all. As a Pagan, I do not demand that airports plant sacred groves for my co-religionists and myself to hold circles.

I think what the article was driving at, was that if a civic center Or school gym gets used for say a religous worship on the weekends even though they don't own it, because of that use, it would not be eleigible for funds, so they would have to stop allowing the religous stuff to take place in them, hence the exclusion. Compare that with the federal funds for foot baths, and there is a double standard.

Student-formed religious clubs can indeed meet on public school property, but after school hours.

461 Racer X  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:35:14pm

re: #416 Iron Fist

I have an amusing story about that from my freshman year of college. It wasn't me that took a piss in the corner of the room, though.

Heh.

My roommates girlfriend wound up in my room one night. She pulled open a dresser drawer, sat down and took a piss.

462 Bloodnok  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:35:15pm

re: #454 Sorge

It has been measure two times. But that's private information.

Don't worry, they'll find it the next time I'm sure.

463 Sorge  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:35:46pm

re: #451 doppelganglander

Good catch.

No, Sorge is my real name. I was born in Cuba, and came to the U.S. in 1995, after spending a year at GITMO.

So, nope, it wasn't a good catch at all.

464 Killgore Trout  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:35:47pm

re: #441 jaunte

The Pope wants to pay....
Pope says Catholic Church wants no tax privileges

465 rightwinger3  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:35:52pm

re: #447 Sorge

Excellent come back sorge, you tell him.
/

466 jcm  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:36:18pm

re: #456 Sharmuta

Our Overlord, who art in cyberspace
Hallowed be thy flame.
Thy downding come, thy ban stick flung
On Nirth as it is on Nodrog.
Give us this day our daily thread
And forgive us our spins
As we forgive those who spin upon us.
For thine is the website
And the powerblog, and the rational
Forever and ever
GAZE!


ROFLMAO! Favorited.....

Sharmuta's Prayer, to be uttered in the presence of insufferable trolls.

467 Vicious Babushka  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:36:18pm

re: #454 Sorge

It has been measure two times. But that's private information.

So the sum of those measurements would be what, 17?

468 jaunte  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:36:38pm

re: #464 Killgore Trout

Maybe it's closer than I thought.

469 Catttt  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:36:44pm

re: #430 hazzyday

The establishment clause is like ID to me. Maybe more hidden. It's something I would never think about until people start arguing about. Then I might think I need an opinion about it that I could express. Though on the establishment clause Google lead me to purgatory. Maybe I'll go out and look again.

I feel your pain. Seriously. I tend to lean on the SCOTUS, see what they do, then decide how much I agree with them - or not. Usually, they are pretty good, and I wouldn't have their job for millions.

470 Charles Johnson  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:36:45pm

re: #400 Sorge

Here a novel idea for the host: he must learn to express himself to avoid personal attacks on others.

Or else I could just ban your moron ass.

I think I'll choose the latter.

471 Jetpilot1101  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:36:47pm

re: #463 Sorge

What exactly did you do in GTMO?

472 Sharmuta  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:36:53pm

re: #466 jcm

NOOOOOO! It's from golly wog!

473 reine.de.tout  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:37:04pm

re: #464 Killgore Trout

The Pope wants to pay....
Pope says Catholic Church wants no tax privileges

page not available.

474 rightwinger3  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:37:05pm

re: #418 doppelganglander

When has Charles ever made a personal attack on anyone? rightwinger 3, you were right, and I'm sorry I ever thought otherwise.

Sometimes you just have to go with the gut feeling, doppel.

475 jcm  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:37:50pm

re: #472 Sharmuta

NOOOOOO! It's from golly wog!

Golly Wog's Prayer then!

476 jcbunga  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:37:50pm

re: #470 Charles

Or else I could just ban your moron ass.

I think I'll choose the latter.

If Charles had changed his icon to a Unicorn, I would have passed out.

477 reine.de.tout  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:37:54pm

re: #456 Sharmuta

Our Overlord, who art in cyberspace
Hallowed be thy flame.
Thy downding come, thy ban stick flung
On Nirth as it is on Nodrog.
Give us this day our daily thread
And forgive us our spins
As we forgive those who spin upon us.
For thine is the website
And the powerblog, and the rational
Forever and ever
GAZE!

I think I'll save this for volume 2 of the cookbook next year.

478 Catttt  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:37:58pm

re: #454 Sorge

It has been measure two times. But that's private information.

OH. IQ. For a minute, I thought you meant the old "see honey, you are above average" measurement. Nod nod, wink wink.

479 Vicious Babushka  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:38:05pm

re: #471 Jetpilot1101

What exactly did you do in GTMO?

Enjoyed the fun and the sun and the waterboarding.

480 Dustyvet  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:38:08pm

re: #470 Charles

Toddles Sorge...

481 jcm  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:38:11pm

re: #471 Jetpilot1101

What exactly did you do in GTMO?

A guest.....

482 Killgore Trout  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:38:12pm

re: #473 reine.de.tout

Huh, it works for me. Try via google. It will be the first result.

483 Sharmuta  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:38:18pm

BTW- I did ask golly wog's permission to use the Troll Prayer in the future, and s/he agreed. I'm sure you gals and guys can use it too.

484 FurryOldGuyJeans  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:38:30pm

re: #454 Sorge

It has been measure two times. But that's private information.

Can't be more than single digits since you keep making exceedingly stupid spelling mistakes. Measured, with a D.

Unless you are actually trying to say such events will be in the future.

485 J.D.  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:38:31pm

re: #450 Dar ul Harb

Sure beats Opepsi.

(Not to mention Diet Coke. Supposedly somewhere out there are the real hard core diet soda people who're still drinking Tab.)

Ewwwwwwwwww. Is that approaching infringement or something?

They still sell Tab. I guess the saccharin or whatever didn't kill them all the way it was supposed to...

486 Sharmuta  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:38:39pm

re: #477 reine.de.tout

Just be sure to credit golly wog.

487 reine.de.tout  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:39:09pm

re: #482 Killgore Trout

Huh, it works for me. Try via google. It will be the first result.

really really odd.
it again says page not available.
I'll try something else.

488 Catttt  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:39:22pm

re: #470 Charles

Or else I could just ban your moron ass.

I think I'll choose the latter.

Chawls take kitty toy away. /

489 [deleted]  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:39:26pm
490 Jetpilot1101  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:39:34pm

I think our pal Sorge got the stick. Pity really, I was going to ask him a few GTMO trivia questions since I have spent a fair amount of time there.

491 MandyManners  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:39:51pm

re: #454 Sorge

It has been measure

LOL!

492 Catttt  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:40:01pm

re: #487 reine.de.tout

really really odd.
it again says page not available.
I'll try something else.

Do you have a firewall?

493 FurryOldGuyJeans  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:40:12pm

re: #463 Sorge

Your real name now is Banned Troll. Oh, so sorry! NOT!

494 NJDhockeyfan  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:40:21pm

re: #490 Jetpilot1101

I think our pal Sorge got the stick. Pity really, I was going to ask him a few GTMO trivia questions since I have spent a fair amount of time there.

Turn him back on Charles for a few minutes....I'd like to see that.

495 Dark_Falcon  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:40:25pm

re: #268 Charles

It's a terrific show. Maybe it's time to repost the video.

Yes, please do.

496 reine.de.tout  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:40:26pm

re: #486 Sharmuta

Just be sure to credit golly wog.

got it.

497 osopestoso  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:40:27pm

The "establishment" clause is overworked by athies and their ilk. The government would not be "establishing" a religion, just allowing funding for an opposing view to the athie religion of the THEORY of evolution, and other ideologies that the Gramsci/Deweyites deem canon.
But then, we all know that THE DEBATE IS CLOSED on Christianity, Man Made Global Warming, etc. dogma of the sec/hum athie socialists and their dupes.

498 Catttt  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:40:29pm

re: #491 MandyManners

LOL!

Gimme five!

499 CynicalConservative  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:40:38pm

re: #470 Charles

Or else I could just ban your moron ass.

I think I'll choose the latter.

I just don't get the whole "insult your host" thing. Thanks Charles!

500 J.D.  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:40:45pm

re: #456 Sharmuta

That is beautiful.

501 Bloodnok  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:40:50pm

re: #492 Catttt

Do you have a firewall?

No, but I have a smoking jacket.

502 Dustyvet  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:41:06pm

re: #488 Catttt

Chawls take kitty toy away. /

Somebody mention catnip/...>^..^< Meow.

503 FurryOldGuyJeans  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:41:13pm

re: #470 Charles

Or else I could just ban your moron ass.

I think I'll choose the latter.

You certainly gave this one a LOT of rope with which to hang himself. *WHEW*

504 [deleted]  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:41:22pm
505 NJDhockeyfan  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:42:14pm

re: #501 Bloodnok

No, but I have a smoking jacket.

Bet it gets rather cloudy with the windows closed.

506 Dan G.  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:42:20pm

re: #497 osopestoso

[sigh] another turd... FLUSH!

507 MandyManners  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:42:23pm

re: #497 osopestoso

The "establishment" clause is overworked by athies and their ilk. The government would not be "establishing" a religion, just allowing funding for an opposing view to the athie religion of the THEORY of evolution, and other ideologies that the Gramsci/Deweyites deem canon.
But then, we all know that THE DEBATE IS CLOSED on Christianity, Man Made Global Warming, etc. dogma of the sec/hum athie socialists and their dupes.

What the fuck is your problem trying to smear Charles as an atheist socialist?

508 hazzyday  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:42:26pm

re: #499 CynicalConservative

I just don't get the whole "insult your host" thing. Thanks Charles!

I think they do so they can go back to HuffPo and do show and tell to their kinderpals. It's kinda like flipping of Bill O'Reilly.

509 Catttt  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:42:34pm

re: #502 Dustyvet

Somebody mention catnip/...>^..^< Meow.

The it has been measure just begged to be played with.......

510 VioletTiger  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:42:48pm

Wow....what's going on tonight? Something in the water?

511 Charles Johnson  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:42:49pm

We have an epidemic of stupid tonight.

512 reine.de.tout  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:42:52pm

re: #492 Catttt

Do you have a firewall?

I'm sure I do.
That's probably it.
That search had other links, but they don't lead to the full story.

513 FurryOldGuyJeans  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:43:05pm

re: #497 osopestoso

Charles, did you put out the "Morons Welcome" mat again?!?

514 Bloodnok  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:43:05pm

re: #505 NJDhockeyfan

Bet it gets rather cloudy with the windows closed.

Hey, how did your lunch with FBV go?

515 CynicalConservative  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:43:28pm

re: #511 Charles

We have an epidemic of stupid tonight.

Nomination for rotating title?

516 CynicalConservative  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:43:38pm

re: #508 hazzyday

I think they do so they can go back to HuffPo and do show and tell to their kinderpals. It's kinda like flipping of Bill O'Reilly.

Too true.

517 jaunte  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:43:46pm

athies:

Initially, Athies was called Atheiae, a word taken from Latin which means ’’hut’’, which indicates than it was a marshy area with shacks for fishermen or peat-gatherers.
In 1493, the village was looted and burned by German soldiers from the garrison of Arras.
A castle stood at the place now called "the Barony". The old church that was destroyed during the 1914-18 war had been built in 1786 just before the French Revolution. Whilst many churches were destroyed during this time, this new church was spared.
The village was invaded several times over the centuries, especially by the Spanish in the 17th century and was all but destroyed during World War I.


[Link: en.wikipedia.org...]

518 Salamantis  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:43:51pm

re: #298 jcbunga

I have to agree, and I'm not a right wing holy roller. How does this language constitute Congress establishing a religion?

That's the kind of massaging of the Constitution that has led to a host of wacko liberal living document nonsense. "So help me God", "In God We Trust" are just two examples that send the far left frothing.

I'd agree that if Congress announced religion "x" was now the official religion of the nation it would time to freak.

IMHO

When Congress

"So help me God" is not part of the traditional Presidential pledge; it is traditionally extemporaneously and optionally added by inaugurating presidents during their swearing-in ceremonies (George Washington was the first President to do this).

And "in God we Trust" was adopted as the national motto and placed on our coinage in 1954, during the McCarthy Red Scare period. I much prefer the old motto, e. pluribus unum (out of many, one), which proffers not the idea of faith-based balkinization, but a cultural and religious melting pot, fused together by our shared identity as Americans and our common reverence for our constitutionally guaranteed rights and freedoms.

519 rightwinger3  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:43:57pm

Damn trollfest in here tonight.

520 CynicalConservative  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:44:04pm

re: #511 Charles

We have an epidemic of stupid tonight.

Sounds like a daily roll call in congress.

521 lawhawk  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:44:07pm

No surprises here. The Saudis are looking to ban any display relating to Valentine's Day.

Religious police in the Arab country are banning the sale of any gifts related to the romantic holiday, driving up black market prices for offerings like the ever-popular red rose, according to BBC News.

Shop workers actually said they were warned to remove all red items from their stores, BBC News reported.

Valentine’s Day is one of many holidays that are considered un-Islamic holiday and thus are prohibited by Saudi authorities, the station reported. But it has an even bigger stigma than most, as it is thought to encourage relations between unwed couples, which is illegal in the conservative kingdom.

Still, Saudis seem determined to celebrate the holiday.

No freedom of religion there. No freedom of expression in the Magic Kingdom. You either follow their state-sanctioned religious edicts, or you find yourself in a cell.

522 Vicious Babushka  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:44:16pm

re: #470 Charles

Or else I could just ban your moron ass.

I think I'll choose the latter.

Looks like meat's back on the menu!

523 Dan G.  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:44:24pm

This "issue" is the basis of the fundie's most recent victimization card; if it comes to light that there is no victimization here, then they'll be deprived of the much desired attention/outrage.

524 [deleted]  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:44:51pm
525 CynicalConservative  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:44:59pm

re: #519 rightwinger3

Damn trollfest in here tonight.

Who else? Late to the thread. Only saw Sorge.

526 FurryOldGuyJeans  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:45:08pm

re: #506 Dan G.

[sigh] another turd... FLUSH!

A new lizard, and THAT was its SOLE comment, ever? Yipes!

Karma: -6
osopestoso
(Logged in)
Registered since: Feb 6, 2009 at 7:30 pm
No. of comments posted: 1
No. of links posted: 0

527 NJDhockeyfan  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:45:23pm
Karma: -6
osopestoso
(Logged in)
Registered since: Feb 6, 2009 at 7:30 pm
No. of comments posted: 1
No. of links posted: 0

A fresh new hatchling. Bet he wasn't green when he was hatched.

528 jorline  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:45:28pm

What a wild night...OK, who's behind door #3?

529 Salamantis  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:45:48pm

re: #306 kansas

It's not, but his theocracy would probably be without the explosive vests, honor killings, and beheadings. Or is that not correct?

Theocracies never remain where they begin.

530 Vicious Babushka  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:45:50pm

re: #521 lawhawk

No surprises here. The Saudis are looking to ban any display relating to Valentine's Day.

No freedom of religion there. No freedom of expression in the Magic Kingdom. You either follow their state-sanctioned religious edicts, or you find yourself in a cell.

Mullah freaks out, says Valentine's Day is worse than AIDS, ebola and cholera

531 NJDhockeyfan  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:46:08pm

re: #521 lawhawk

There is no love in Islam. Only hate.

532 Catttt  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:46:11pm

re: #512 reine.de.tout

I'm sure I do.
That's probably it.
That search had other links, but they don't lead to the full story.

Did you try looking at it via the cache link?

533 Jetpilot1101  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:46:14pm

re: #529 Salamantis

Theocracies never remain where they begin.

That's because the guy in charge usually thinks he's THEO.

534 Sharmuta  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:46:20pm

re: #497 osopestoso

OFFS!

535 jaunte  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:46:52pm

re: #497 osopestoso

The "establishment" clause is overworked by athies and their ilk. The government would not be "establishing" a religion, just allowing funding for an opposing view to the athie religion of the THEORY of evolution, and other ideologies that the Gramsci/Deweyites deem canon.
But then, we all know that THE DEBATE IS CLOSED on Christianity, Man Made Global Warming, etc. dogma of the sec/hum athie socialists and their dupes.

When did someone decide that whining was effective?

536 rightwinger3  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:46:57pm

trogluddite and shanester as well showing some ass. Don't know if they were real trolls or just drunk though.

537 Dan G.  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:47:05pm

re: #518 Salamantis

Are you sure about Washington being the first? I thought it was Chester A. Arthur.

538 Sharmuta  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:47:06pm

re: #497 osopestoso

Do you think Catholics are heretics?

539 Dustyvet  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:47:45pm

In 1495, there was a wise saying which went: "a rat a day keeps the plague away." Come to think of it, it wasn't such a wise a saying.

540 Catttt  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:47:53pm

OT

Calf on TV today - has a pretty white heart on his forehead.

Owner can't keep him, as he has a dairy farm. Wants new owner to avoid turning cute calf into veal.

Question: how come he has a calf, if he doesn't keep bulls?

541 Dar ul Harb  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:47:58pm

re: #528 jorline

What a wild night...OK, who's behind door #3?

"The Third Way"?

542 J.D.  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:47:59pm

growthology

Just...because.

543 Digital Display  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:48:04pm

re: #470 Charles

Or else I could just ban your moron ass.

I think I'll choose the latter.

You got to admit charles that was a pretty crazy joker..If it wasn't a public blog..you'd want to say..go a head and take a seat..Tell me more..What was your first clue LGF was crashing headway into a leftist view of the world? Really?
Johnson! you magnificent bastard!

544 Dr. Shalit  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:48:07pm

OK - ALL LIZARDIM -

Cutting to the CHASE - the real issue is PAYMENT - Out of Public Funds. Historically, Public Funds for "Religious" uses has been severely limited to the Four (4) "T's" on a Non-Discriminatory Basis "T-4" being "Tuna Fish"/Food Aid - meaning that taxpayers were not to lose benefits due to their choice of their children's schools.
Where "Faith Based Organizations" offer services on a Non-Discriminatory Basis - I HAVE NO PROBLEM FUNDING THEM. Such organizations deserve PRAISE.
Where they are Discriminatory - NOT A CENT - of Public Funds.

My 2 Cents.

-S-

545 Syrah  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:48:08pm

re: #522 Alouette

Looks like meat's back on the menu!

Troll Al Pastor

Yum!

546 FurryOldGuyJeans  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:48:26pm

re: #538 Sharmuta

Do you think Catholics are heretics?

I seriously doubt it thinks at all.

547 Bloodnok  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:48:36pm

re: #539 Dustyvet

In 1495, there was a wise saying which went: "a rat a day keeps the plague away." Come to think of it, it wasn't such a wise a saying.

Bubonic thread!

548 jorline  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:48:36pm

re: #531 NJDhockeyfan

There is no love in Islam. Only hate.

You stand corrected, NJD.

What about love the neighbors 10 year old daughter?
/

549 GGMac  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:48:50pm

re: #287 jaunte

Yes, I'm seeing that in this article from the columbus times. The NYT may be leaving a few important points out.[Link: www.dispatch.com...]

Yeah - no surpre: #348 Iron Fist

Ah, I see. You ae quite correct. Few people should be more jealous of the First Amendment than the faithful. That is why travesties like the Westborough "Baptist" Church are permitted to spew their drivel. Anything done to suppress them, no matter how well meaning, is worse than letting them continue to be a boil on the ass of humanity. Or, for that matter, why the Christian Church should have welcomed the decision that protected animal sacrifice in Santaria. Prohibiting the free excercize of religion is, in effect, no different than establishing a State Religion.

As much as I despise Mohammedanism, they should be allowed to worship their moon rock in peace. The problem is that the moon rock worshippers don't believe that they should let other people live in peace at all.

Okay - your next occupation will be ghost-writing for Victor Davis Hanson. :)

550 Catttt  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:48:56pm

Oh, wait. I bet he does that insemination thing. Never mind/chanelling Emily LaTella

551 Vicious Babushka  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:49:06pm

re: #540 Catttt

OT

Calf on TV today - has a pretty white heart on his forehead.

Owner can't keep him, as he has a dairy farm. Wants new owner to avoid turning cute calf into veal.

Question: how come he has a calf, if he doesn't keep bulls?

The cow was sneaking out at night.

552 Dan G.  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:49:09pm
553 yesandno  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:49:24pm

re: #518 Salamantis

"So help me God" is not part of the traditional Presidential pledge; it is traditionally extemporaneously and optionally added by inaugurating presidents during their swearing-in ceremonies (George Washington was the first President to do this).

And "in God we Trust" was adopted as the national motto and placed on our coinage in 1954, during the McCarthy Red Scare period. I much prefer the old motto, e. pluribus unum (out of many, one), which proffers not the idea of faith-based balkinization, but a cultural and religious melting pot, fused together by our shared identity as Americans and our common reverence for our constitutionally guaranteed rights and freedoms.

Well stated...

554 sngnsgt  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:49:36pm

Totally OT:

A neighbor of mine just called to tell me she heard on her scanner there was an armed robbery @ the Subway sandwich shop around the corner from me. They were seen running through our neighborhood when they left. Police are cruising the neighborhood with lights on as I type. I hope they catch the little bastards.

555 Jetpilot1101  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:49:41pm

Goodnight all, see you tomorrow.

556 VioletTiger  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:49:41pm

re: #521 lawhawk
I guess no adds for Pajama Grams or Teddy Bears there either....

557 jcm  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:49:46pm
558 FurryOldGuyJeans  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:50:16pm

re: #539 Dustyvet

In 1495, there was a wise saying which went: "a rat a day keeps the plague away." Come to think of it, it wasn't such a wise a saying.

re: #547 Bloodnok

Bubonic thread!

Ah, ol' Yersinia pestis. Good times, good times. ;)

559 Hobbes  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:50:17pm

re: #521 lawhawk

Well they better not come around my house. Valentine's Day is one of my favorite holidays. It's a day just for romance and I love it. Post Obama, it's one of the few things I have to look forward to.

560 Sharmuta  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:50:17pm

If you like the Troll Prayer, the original is still available for dinging.

561 Salamantis  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:50:22pm

re: #325 Marvo76

but if government decided that say a voucher program where each child is given set amount of funds for their education and the parents could use it a school of their choice (a grant) would you be against them using it at a religious school? Simple because they be seen as favoring a religion? History shows that the GI bill funded thousands of service men in seminary's across the country after the war, should we go back and ask them to honor the constitution and give the money back? Or are we trying to overturn the precedence?

Even childless people are required to pay taxes in order to fund free public schooling, because it is in the economic, sociocultural and national security interests of our nation to have an educated citizenry. If parents want their children to have private religious educations, they should pay for their own choice, rather than demand that the government subsidize it.

562 Sharmuta  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:50:47pm

re: #557 jcm

NICE!

563 Ben G. Hazi  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:50:58pm

re: #189 Charles

As a matter of fact, yes, I am. I also put out oil fires in my spare time, and review Ph.D candidates' dissertations. When I'm not busy apprehending gangsters or excavating dinosaur fossils.

So, in other words, you're our version of Buckaroo Banzai?

;-P

564 jcm  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:51:06pm

re: #555 Jetpilot1101

Goodnight all, see you tomorrow.

Night JP.
Maintain thine airspeed least the earth rise up and smite thee.

565 CynicalConservative  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:51:15pm

re: #554 sngnsgt

Totally OT:

A neighbor of mine just called to tell me she heard on her scanner there was an armed robbery @ the Subway sandwich shop around the corner from me. They were seen running through our neighborhood when they left. Police are cruising the neighborhood with lights on as I type. I hope they catch the little bastards.

Hmmm, my dogs just went nuts. Wonder how close we live...

//

566 NJDhockeyfan  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:51:23pm

re: #554 sngnsgt

Totally OT:

A neighbor of mine just called to tell me she heard on her scanner there was an armed robbery @ the Subway sandwich shop around the corner from me. They were seen running through our neighborhood when they left. Police are cruising the neighborhood with lights on as I type. I hope they catch the little bastards.

Lock the doors and grab the Glock!

567 Syrah  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:51:24pm

re: #497 osopestoso

So much love in your first post.

What brought you to LGF?

Was it the Discovery Institute posts that brought LGF to your attention?

568 Vicious Babushka  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:51:42pm

re: #560 Sharmuta

If you like the Troll Prayer, the original is still available for dinging.

Dinged and hearted.

569 Dark_Falcon  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:51:42pm

re: #477 reine.de.tout

I think I'll save this for volume 2 of the cookbook next year.

What will that be: Soups and Desserts?

570 Truck Monkey  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:51:52pm

re: #548 jorline

You stand corrected, NJD.

What about love the neighbors 10 year old daughter?
/

Love has nothing to do with that.

571 Bloodnok  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:52:00pm

re: #560 Sharmuta

If you like the Troll Prayer, the original is still available for dinging.

It deserves to be an all time leader. It's that good.

572 Cato the Elder  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:52:01pm

re: #497 osopestoso

Your very first post, and you get a -9 rating. Impressive. I don't think I've ever seen the like here.

Keep trying, maybe you'll give Tunnel Rat a run for his treadmill.

573 jcbunga  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:52:10pm

re: #518 Salamantis

"So help me God" is not part of the traditional Presidential pledge; it is traditionally extemporaneously and optionally added by inaugurating presidents during their swearing-in ceremonies (George Washington was the first President to do this).

And "in God we Trust" was adopted as the national motto and placed on our coinage in 1954, during the McCarthy Red Scare period. I much prefer the old motto, e. pluribus unum (out of many, one), which proffers not the idea of faith-based balkinization, but a cultural and religious melting pot, fused together by our shared identity as Americans and our common reverence for our constitutionally guaranteed rights and freedoms.

Agreed. Just saying there is a perceptible frothing in favor of quashing all references to religion of any kind. An FDR quote on the WW2 memorial is set in stone minus the "so help us God." WTF? It's not even historically accurate. No doubt it offended someone.

I think there is a tendency today by mostly the far left to assert a right to not be offended. Much of this springs from "that offends me" etc.

If a quote from FDR, the dean of big government, can be deemed offensive or a threat to the 1st Amendment, I think we've gone silly.

There are non-wacko but religious and patriotic folks who find comfort in those comments and don't think they establish a religion.

575 J.D.  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:52:23pm

re: #560 Sharmuta

Dung.

It.

Thanks!

576 Dark_Falcon  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:52:23pm

re: #497 osopestoso

The "establishment" clause is overworked by athies and their ilk. The government would not be "establishing" a religion, just allowing funding for an opposing view to the athie religion of the THEORY of evolution, and other ideologies that the Gramsci/Deweyites deem canon.
But then, we all know that THE DEBATE IS CLOSED on Christianity, Man Made Global Warming, etc. dogma of the sec/hum athie socialists and their dupes.

GAZE

577 FurryOldGuyJeans  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:52:25pm

re: #566 NJDhockeyfan

Lock the doors and grab the Glock!

Would be time to Hug my Bersa Thunder 9 if that were near me. ;)

578 sngnsgt  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:52:29pm

re: #565 CynicalConservative

I'm in NW PA, my dog is on guard duty as I type.

579 Sharmuta  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:52:54pm

re: #568 Alouette

Dinged and hearted.

I favorited it too for just such an occasion and I'm glad I could turn new people on to it. It's brilliant.

580 jorline  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:52:58pm

re: #560 Sharmuta

If you like the Troll Prayer, the original is still available for dinging.

dinged...I missed that one...thanks.

581 Scion9  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:53:00pm

re: #421 Killgore Trout

I am in favour of taxes churches anyways. If they really want to run as a nonprofit organization they are free to do so. Otherwise they can go ahead an pay the same taxes as everyone else.

I'm completely against taxing anyone for their political beliefs, including Churches. Nonprofits shouldn't be taxed either, and the legislation that taxes them based on rather or not they stick their noses into the political sphere is just anti-free speech legislation.

An individual that isn't a celebrity has no voice with which to reach the masses. For any common man to get a voice he needs to raise funds from multiple sources. Taxing that is just a coercive measure to limit the extent to which fund raising for political advocacy can make an impact. It barely impacts organizations that have tens of millions of donors (like the RNC and DNC) or have powerful bankrollers (such as MoveOn).

The wealth of the citizens of the US isn't the rightful property of the government(s). Ultimately that is where all the wealth that funds NGOs (and Churches and political parties) is generated; and it is already triple taxed, at least, in the process of generating it. Applying a tax on spending money to get your voice heard in an attempt to influence a vote, or advocate a political ideology, is just shockingly and brazenly anti-democratic.

I'm surprised there is so much support for the use of taxes as a penalty against free speech, by anyone, much less Americans. Why, if these laws apply to organizations formed of citizens and legal residents of the US, should they not apply to individuals? Oh, right. McCain-Feingold.

582 [deleted]  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:53:15pm
583 Slumbering Behemoth Stinks  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:53:48pm

re: #337 jaunte

It must be whack-a-mole night tonight.

That tends to happen when one criticizes someone's religious idol (the religious idol in this instance being Huckabee).

584 CynicalConservative  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:53:51pm

re: #578 sngnsgt

I'm in NW PA, my dog is on guard duty as I type.

Hmmm, either my guys are REALLY perceptive, or something else is going on.

Portland, OR area; moonbat central #3 I think (after SF and Seattle)

585 mfarmer1  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:53:54pm

Wow, this thread reminds me of the ones Charles got going when he started exposing the Discovery Institute and the young Earth nutburgers. When you've got Charles calling someone a moron ass, you know there are some lively exchanges going on.

Huckabee seems like a decent guy. But man oh man, has anyone watched his show on Fox? Eeek, that audience. They look like they are time travelers from The Lawrence Welk show circa 1971. And the guitar shtick makes the whole show even weirder.

586 jorline  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:54:01pm

re: #570 Truck Monkey

Love has nothing to do with that.

True, but try to explain that to them.

587 [deleted]  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:54:03pm
588 Cato the Elder  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:54:08pm

re: #521 lawhawk

No surprises here. The Saudis are looking to ban any display relating to Valentine's Day.

No freedom of religion there. No freedom of expression in the Magic Kingdom. You either follow their state-sanctioned religious edicts, or you find yourself in a cell.

And with a few modifications, that's what Huckabee would like to see here.

589 Randall Gross  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:54:27pm

re: #511 Charles

We have an epidemic of stupid tonight.

That's to be expected when you point to egg on demagogue faces.

590 karmic_inquisitor  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:54:38pm

@osopestoso

Who is Athie? Is he related to Opie? Or Dobey?

591 swamprat  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:55:05pm

they couldn't wait for an evo thread
'Bye sorge and shanester
We're already halfwat through the "s"es

592 lawhawk  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:55:07pm

re: #559 Hobbes

You have your holidays. I have mine (and which not coincidentally happens to be my anniversary).

593 jaunte  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:55:15pm

re: #583 Slumbering Behemoth

That tends to happen when one criticizes someone's religious idol (the religious idol in this instance being Huckabee).

Slim pickins' for idols these days.

594 J.D.  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:55:22pm

re: #590 karmic_inquisitor

@osopestoso

Who is Athie? Is he related to Opie? Or Dobey?

Gillis?

595 reine.de.tout  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:55:37pm

re: #569 Dark_Falcon

What will that be: Soups and Desserts?

Oh, golly, I hope we get vol 1 out quickly enough that I'm still alive and able to do a vol 2.

FlakMusic has been in touch with me, and we believe he has fixed the glitch.

He has now ordered a copy, and if it's OK, which the lulu.com book preview function indicates is indeed the case, then I can finally, finally, put up the sale link.

596 Randall Gross  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:55:42pm

re: #567 Syrah

So much love in your first post.

What brought you to LGF?

Was it the Discovery Institute posts that brought LGF to your attention?

The "gramsci" ref tells me this is an old timer with a new sock.

597 lawhawk  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:55:46pm

re: #591 swamprat

EVO thread? Since when did Rachael Ray start showing up? I know we have a few cooks here, but the least you could do is warn folks! /

598 J.D.  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:56:12pm

re: #585 mfarmer1

I saw part of it once. So that's it for me!

599 [deleted]  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:56:24pm
600 sngnsgt  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:56:32pm

re: #584 CynicalConservative

Hmmm, either my guys are REALLY perceptive, or something else is going on.

Portland, OR area; moonbat central #3 I think (after SF and Seattle)

I'm in Erie, PA moonbat haven, I hope he tripped over a few 0bama lawn signs in his escape.

601 Catttt  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:56:41pm

re: #554 sngnsgt

Totally OT:

A neighbor of mine just called to tell me she heard on her scanner there was an armed robbery @ the Subway sandwich shop around the corner from me. They were seen running through our neighborhood when they left. Police are cruising the neighborhood with lights on as I type. I hope they catch the little bastards.

I hope no one was hurt.

In my hood, there is not a lot of robbery, but we did have a couple of idiots from the city try to pry open a washer for change. Everyone here calls the cops; the cops come; everyone goes outside and mocks the perps as they are led away. Perps are really embarrassed by the hundred or so people laughing at them. Fun times.

602 karmic_inquisitor  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:56:44pm

I get first dibs on the nic "Deweyite Dupe"

603 Salamantis  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:57:08pm

re: #335 Sorge

Alternative Headline: "Charles Johnson, once again, forgets to actually read the first amendment and takes leftist's interpretation instead."

Text of the 1st Amendment:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

Thomas Jefferson's commentary upon it in his 1802 letter to the Danbury Baptists (subsequently recognized in an 1878 SCOTUS decision as authoritative (relevant excerpt):

Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely between man & his god, that he owes account to none other for his faith or his worship, that the legitimate powers of government reach actions only, and not opinions, I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof, thus building a wall of separation between church and state. [Congress thus inhibited from acts respecting religion, and the Executive authorised only to execute their acts, I have refrained from presenting even occasional performances of devotion presented indeed legally where an Executive is the legal head of a national church, but subject here, as religious exercises only to the voluntary regulations and discipline of each respective sect.] Adhering to this expression of the supreme will of the nation in behalf of the rights of conscience, I shall see with sincere satisfaction the progress of those sentiments which tend to restore to man all his natural rights, convinced he has no natural right in opposition to his social duties.

[Link: www.usconstitution.net...]

604 Randall Gross  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:57:27pm

Huck's right in line with Rushdoony, Gary North, and Westboro Baptist too, they'd like the Constititution changed to match their interpretation of Christianity as well.

605 J.D.  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:57:32pm

re: #599 Racer X

* * * choking * * *

606 Dark_Falcon  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:58:15pm

re: #595 reine.de.tout

Oh, golly, I hope we get vol 1 out quickly enough that I'm still alive and able to do a vol 2.

FlakMusic has been in touch with me, and we believe he has fixed the glitch.

He has now ordered a copy, and if it's OK, which the lulu.com book preview function indicates is indeed the case, then I can finally, finally, put up the sale link.

Are you ill? If you needs some help with volume two's recipe list, I might be able to help.

607 sngnsgt  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:58:20pm

re: #601 Catttt

I hope no one was hurt.

In my hood, there is not a lot of robbery, but we did have a couple of idiots from the city try to pry open a washer for change. Everyone here calls the cops; the cops come; everyone goes outside and mocks the perps as they are led away. Perps are really embarrassed by the hundred or so people laughing at them. Fun times.

LOL! Frog march 'em!

608 FurryOldGuyJeans  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:58:21pm

re: #589 Thanos

That's to be expected when you point to egg on demagogue faces.

Are you trying to say that foaming at the mouth and general incoherency is not something that inspires you? ;)

609 Truck Monkey  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:58:30pm

re: #599 Racer X

LOL!

610 Sharmuta  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:58:42pm

re: #596 Thanos

The "gramsci" ref tells me this is an old timer with a new sock.

Interesting pick up.

611 republic  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:58:51pm

re: #554 sngnsgt

Totally OT:

A neighbor of mine just called to tell me she heard on her scanner there was an armed robbery @ the Subway sandwich shop around the corner from me. They were seen running through our neighborhood when they left. Police are cruising the neighborhood with lights on as I type. I hope they catch the little bastards.

Be safe, and if you are armed, prepare yourself.

Unfortunately, if those punks are caught, and charged, they will be back out on the streets, regardless of their rap sheets, within a few months.

But law abiding firearms owners are who are targeted, when it comes to thug, punk gun crime.

Only in an upside down world.

I'll keep to myself about what I would like to see done to those punks.

612 jgold  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:58:58pm
613 [deleted]  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:59:12pm
614 Dar ul Harb  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:59:14pm

re: #599 Racer X

Bad Racer X.

615 Racer X  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:59:23pm

PBS / Nova is airing a show on the ID debate right now.

616 [deleted]  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:59:29pm
617 Charles Johnson  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:59:29pm

re: #596 Thanos

The "gramsci" ref tells me this is an old timer with a new sock.

Yep. They think they're being sneaky and clever when they do that.

618 Syrah  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:59:32pm

re: #596 Thanos

The "gramsci" ref tells me this is an old timer with a new sock.

I suspect you are right.

Was there a former Lizard with a habit of using "athie" in their comments?

That looks too practiced to be something one-off.

619 Hobbes  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:59:43pm

re: #592 lawhawk

You have your holidays. I have mine (and which not coincidentally happens to be my anniversary).

Ah, St. Patty's Day, now that's a good one too. That coming from a "good Irish girl". Can be romantic too, but I do like red roses. Happy Anniversary in advance.

Our anniversary is on a holiday also...Bastille Day.

620 Sharmuta  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:59:49pm

re: #567 Syrah

Hope you're not holding your breath foe reply.

621 MandyManners  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 7:59:54pm

re: #599 Racer X

I don't find jokes about that topic very funny.

622 Dar ul Harb  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 8:00:07pm

re: #605 J.D.

* * * choking * * *

Choke'm some more for me...

623 [deleted]  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 8:00:12pm
624 Truck Monkey  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 8:00:41pm

re: #623 buzzsawmonkey

I'm surprised nobody has used the nic "Gramsci cracker" yet.

You just did.

625 Marvo76  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 8:00:42pm

re: #442 Slumbering Behemoth

And if you're not a professional Hollywood actor/actress, you should not share your opinion on movies.

/sheesh

Uhm perhpas a better idea is we start teaching our kids the constitution so we exactly what are rights are, so we don't get them stepped on by "constitutional Lawyers" who have an agenda and activist judges who legislate from the bench?

626 Cato the Elder  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 8:00:51pm

re: #64 ziggyelman

Lets really sweat the small stuff, destroy Palin and Jindal, have some bland middle of the road white guy, you know, someone like John McCain run in 2012, and lose by 20 points!

Palin' around with Jindull and Hucksterbee will put the final nail in the GOP's coffin.

627 Randall Gross  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 8:00:52pm

re: #608 FurryOldGuyJeans

Are you trying to say that foaming at the mouth and general incoherency is not something that inspires you? ;)

Only when I was a kid. Then we would put Alka Seltzer's in our mouths, let the foam run down our chins and run up and down the streets shouting "I've got Rabies! I've got Rabies!" For some reason it was always funny to us.

628 [deleted]  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 8:01:06pm
629 Racer X  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 8:01:13pm

Sorry boss.

630 jorline  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 8:01:25pm

I think my #616 just got deleted...should have replied.

631 wee fury  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 8:01:31pm

A Tribute to my 401K and IRA

632 Dar ul Harb  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 8:02:04pm

re: #616 jorline

There are two convenient links, "reply" and "quote."

Please learn which is which.

633 republic  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 8:02:12pm

re: #577 FurryOldGuyJeans

Would be time to Hug my Bersa Thunder 9 if that were near me. ;)

My 1911 45 would suffice, unless of course the Rock River 6.8 was necessary.

634 Kosh's Shadow  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 8:02:22pm

re: #599 Racer X

Hinkley got this idea from the movie Taxi Driver, which shows that movies can affect deranged people. That doesn't mean that movies need to be controlled, though, as the deranged will find something to give them dumb ideas.

BTW, I was reading something on the Secret Service, and I wish the current president were as dedicated to defending his country as the Service are to defending him.

635 jcbunga  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 8:02:50pm

re: #625 Marvo76

Uhm perhpas a better idea is we start teaching our kids the constitution so we exactly what are rights are, so we don't get them stepped on by "constitutional Lawyers" who have an agenda and activist judges who legislate from the bench?

Yes. It makes one wonder if any of the stimulus process can be held as un-Constitutional.

To re-quote Mr. Madison,
"I cannot undertake to lay my finger on that article of the Constitution
which granted a right to Congress of expending, on the objects of benevolence,the money of their constituents."

636 jaunte  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 8:03:22pm

re: #631 wee fury

I just realized where John Kerry got his haircut. DC5.

637 CynicalConservative  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 8:03:23pm

re: #627 Thanos

Only when I was a kid. Then we would put Alka Seltzer's in our mouths, let the foam run down our chins and run up and down the streets shouting "I've got Rabies! I've got Rabies!" For some reason it was always funny to us.

It was funny before PC got ahold of the scrotum of America. I remember doing the same thing and getting tolerant smiles and chuckles from the neighborhood adults.

638 Achilles Tang  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 8:03:30pm

re: #596 Thanos

The "gramsci" ref tells me this is an old timer with a new sock.

I don't get it? And where does that and the funny spelling and grammar come from? Nobody writes or talks like that, even in the Disco Institute.

639 Dar ul Harb  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 8:03:37pm

re: #617 Charles

Yep. They think they're being sneaky and clever when they do that.

Not a very intelligent design.

640 Racer X  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 8:04:13pm

re: #621 MandyManners

I don't find jokes about that topic very funny.

My apologies if I offend.

I tend to get really pissed off reading about all the idiocy going on in the world. Posting humor is my release so I don't blow out a heart valve.

641 [deleted]  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 8:04:54pm
642 Sharmuta  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 8:05:41pm

re: #638 Naso Tang

It was a sock, and if I'm not mistaken, one that rather enjoyed coining different words and spellings.

643 Truck Monkey  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 8:05:45pm

re: #637 CynicalConservative

It was funny before PC got ahold of the scrotum of America. I remember doing the same thing and getting tolerant smiles and chuckles from the neighborhood adults.

We used to pour ketchup on a kid and gather around him in the street. When someone would stop and get out of their car we would all run like hell. The days before cell phones was great!

644 Marvo76  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 8:06:19pm

re: #635 jcbunga

Yes. It makes one wonder if any of the stimulus process can be held as un-Constitutional.

To re-quote Mr. Madison,
"I cannot undertake to lay my finger on that article of the Constitution
which granted a right to Congress of expending, on the objects of benevolence,the money of their constituents."

there has been a bill in the house for years, I wanna say Ron Paul or another of the "class of 94" that they can only get about 40 signatures on , which calls for each bill passed to cite the specific part of the constitution that authorizes the funding of said bill. They treat it like nuclear waste....

645 jorline  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 8:06:24pm

re: #632 Dar ul Harb

There are two convenient links, "reply" and "quote."

Please learn which is which.

Gee...thanks for setting me straight. I didn't know that. I'm a newbie.

646 Syrah  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 8:06:27pm

re: #620 Sharmuta

No. I would turn as blue as a smurf if i waited that long.

Blue is good for a smurf, but not so good for a Wine. ;-)

I just like to ask that question of newbies. I want to have a feel for why they want to be here with us.

I like it here. Its fun. I enjoy conversing with you all.

I think there might be a minority of others with different motivations.

647 jcbunga  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 8:06:32pm

Well, no Unicorn yet but the black lab has announced it's time for her walk.....nite folks :)

648 Randall Gross  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 8:06:36pm

re: #638 Naso Tang

I don't get it? And where does that and the funny spelling and grammar come from? Nobody writes or talks like that, even in the Disco Institute.

Gramsci was a communist political theorist, mentor of Alinski, for a long time every body a certain crowd didn't like was a "gramscian whore of the caliphate", including fellow lizards.

649 FurryOldGuyJeans  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 8:06:43pm

re: #633 republic

My 1911 45 would suffice, unless of course the Rock River 6.8 was necessary.

We have to make do with what we can afford, I say. I am exceedingly lucky I was able to afford even the Bersa, considering where and when I bought it (CA, late 90's).

650 zelnaga  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 8:06:56pm

re: #189 Charles

As a matter of fact, yes, I am. I also put out oil fires in my spare time, and review Ph.D candidates' dissertations. When I'm not busy apprehending gangsters or excavating dinosaur fossils.

I'm gonna have to guess that this is a joke? The excavating dinosaur fossils sounds like a jab at creationists, the apprehending gangsters sounds... well, like something that ought to be left to the FBI due to the potential danger involved, and the whole being a constitutional law attorney / professor sounds like a jab at Obama.

651 J.D.  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 8:07:14pm

Worth watching.
Change is Good

652 jcm  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 8:07:20pm

re: #638 Naso Tang

I don't get it? And where does that and the funny spelling and grammar come from? Nobody writes or talks like that, even in the Disco Institute.

Antonio Gramsci, Gramscian whores was a common term for Marxists around here for awhile back aways.

653 CynicalConservative  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 8:07:29pm

re: #643 Truck Monkey

We used to pour ketchup on a kid and gather around him in the street. When someone would stop and get out of their car we would all run like hell. The days before cell phones was great!

Never did that one. Sick and wrong, but I like it!

654 Randall Gross  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 8:07:43pm

re: #638 Naso Tang

I don't get it? And where does that and the funny spelling and grammar come from? Nobody writes or talks like that, even in the Disco Institute.

To answer the second part, I'm betting someone is off their meds.

655 Salamantis  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 8:07:48pm

re: #389 Kaymad

I sort of agree with Huckabee and I have never been nor am I now a Huckabee fan. Nor am I religious nor do I go to church. There, now that my non religious creds are in order, the first amendment does not read, "congress may fund every loony liberal ideal under the sun, as long as it is not religious in nature". So in a way he is correct, STD and abortions for all! But please, no seminary funding at the university.

The federal government does not pay for womens' abortions, although some have tried and failed to pass legislation permitting it. And I am all in favor of contraception subsidies and free STD testing and treatment for the indigent. The last thing society needs is for them to continue an established cycle of poverty and government dependence into future generations, or for them to remain infected with venereal diseases and to infect others.

656 Sunlight  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 8:07:54pm

My first thought was the foot baths when I first saw this kerfluffle earlier today. Seems to me that this could give a basis for holding the line on encroaching religious stuff.

657 Charles Johnson  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 8:07:56pm

re: #650 zelnaga

I'm gonna have to guess that this is a joke? The excavating dinosaur fossils sounds like a jab at creationists, the apprehending gangsters sounds... well, like something that ought to be left to the FBI due to the potential danger involved, and the whole being a constitutional law attorney / professor sounds like a jab at Obama.

I never joke.

658 Sharmuta  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 8:07:57pm

re: #646 Syrah

I like it here. Its fun. I enjoy conversing with you all.

Me too.

I think there might be a minority of others with different motivations.

That is an understatement, my friend.

659 Achilles Tang  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 8:08:32pm

re: #642 Sharmuta

It was a sock, and if I'm not mistaken, one that rather enjoyed coining different words and spellings.

So they come back with the same MO to say essentially nothing? Maybe I haven't been paying attention to the nuttiest ones, but it sounds like classic obsessive stalking, doesn't it?

660 Scion9  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 8:08:38pm

re: #596 Thanos

I knew about Gramsci before I ever knew about LGF (which was relatively recently). The Hoover Institute has papers on him. Unless I'm missing something else about 'Gramsci' that only an old timer would get.

661 CynicalConservative  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 8:08:53pm

re: #645 jorline

Gee...thanks for setting me straight. I didn't know that. I'm a newbie.

I think some of the more prolific posters consider you a newbie until you have at least five figures in your total post count. :-)

662 swamprat  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 8:09:11pm

re: #454 Sorge

It has been measure two times. But that's private information.


Top Secret!

663 Charles Johnson  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 8:09:17pm

Down-dingers weigh in:

Gozer the Carpathian, leww37334

664 republic  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 8:09:24pm

re: #649 FurryOldGuyJeans

We have to make do with what we can afford, I say. I am exceedingly lucky I was able to afford even the Bersa, considering where and when I bought it (CA, late 90's).

I hear you.

I've been blessed with a bunch of nice stuff.

665 Bloodnok  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 8:10:33pm

I wish I could stay awake because I think we'll have one more nutjob by midnight. Good night lizards!

666 Dar ul Harb  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 8:10:34pm

re: #645 jorline

Gee...thanks for setting me straight. I didn't know that. I'm a newbie.

S'alright.

When 13,000 posts you reach, as witty you will not be.

/Yoda

667 [deleted]  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 8:10:34pm
668 Randall Gross  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 8:11:42pm

re: #659 Naso Tang

So they come back with the same MO to say essentially nothing? Maybe I haven't been paying attention to the nuttiest ones, but it sounds like classic obsessive stalking, doesn't it?

Bug Zackly.

(one of my kids had an early speech impediment that he overcame and he pronounced "exactly" that way... I always thought it was cute, later he named his stuffed spider that, just so you know that I'm not off my meds.)

669 Salamantis  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 8:11:59pm

re: #396 Sorge

The establishment cause prohibits the establishment of a church. That has a very specific meaning--no official religion for the FEDERAL government. The expansive vision of what the first amendment "really" means is not the first amendment.

The establishment cause, incidentally, only applies to the Federal Government. Connecticut, for example, had a state established Church until 1818 and Massachusetts had an established Church until 1834.

Actually the law reads that "Congress shall make no law respecting the establishment of a religion...", which means that it cannot respect, that is, favor, any religions over any other religions.

670 jorline  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 8:12:03pm

re: #661 CynicalConservative

I think some of the more prolific posters consider you a newbie until you have at least five figures in your total post count. :-)

lol...not that far off. I may learn how to post a link soon.

671 Marvo76  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 8:12:19pm

I know learning from the interaction of this place, I have seen so much more news than I did at some of my old haunts. My awareness of events is much more well rounded, and much less msm biased

672 Sharmuta  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 8:12:20pm

re: #659 Naso Tang

So they come back with the same MO to say essentially nothing? Maybe I haven't been paying attention to the nuttiest ones, but it sounds like classic obsessive stalking, doesn't it?

Yes.

673 Hobbes  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 8:12:28pm

re: #651 J.D.

Worth watching.
Change is Good

Good find!

674 sngnsgt  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 8:13:17pm

re: #651 J.D.

Hopie, changie!

675 MandyManners  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 8:13:26pm

re: #663 Charles

Down-dingers weigh in:

Gozer the Carpathian, leww37334

I'm beginning to think some of these folks really want a theocracy.

676 CynicalConservative  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 8:13:39pm

re: #670 jorline

lol...not that far off. I may learn how to post a link soon.

Long road ahead for me; not a linker myself.

677 NY Nana  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 8:13:41pm

re: #662 swamprat

Sorge has left the building.

678 J.D.  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 8:14:15pm

re: #669 Salamantis

He's gone, you know.

Went pfffffffffffffffffffffft...

679 Dave the.....  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 8:14:34pm

Flyer being left around the Univ of Minnesota this week. Promoting a protest against the "Batshevea Dance Company" perfromance. Because they are from Israel.

Also fake flyers left "promoting" same perfromance, saying "A Dance of victory over the US and Israel's Arab enemies in Gaza".

680 CynicalConservative  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 8:14:36pm

re: #671 Marvo76

I know learning from the interaction of this place, I have seen so much more news than I did at some of my old haunts. My awareness of events is much more well rounded, and much less msm biased

Must agree, my news knowledge and bs filter has increase exponentially since frequenting this site.

681 Salamantis  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 8:14:40pm

re: #400 Sorge

Here a novel idea for the host: he must learn to express himself to avoid personal attacks on others.

Yeah, riiiight, shuuuure...and you're a shining sterling example of that principle in action (rolls eyes).

682 GGMac  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 8:14:56pm

re: #463 Sorge

No, Sorge is my real name. I was born in Cuba, and came to the U.S. in 1995, after spending a year at GITMO.

So, nope, it wasn't a good catch at all.

GITMO? Let me guess - as a prisoner?

683 Marvo76  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 8:15:28pm

re: #667 Iron Fist

How do you like the 6.8? As a concept, I like the idea. I've never been a big fan of the mousegun round, but 7.62X51 isn't so much a step up as it is a change on order of magnitude. I've considered the .458 SOCOM or .450 Bushmaster, but these still seem too heavy for an "assault rifle" round (although they may make fine hunting rounds).

Of course, all of them are expensive as hell to buy ammo for. I'm just curious for a first hand report on the round. All the gun mags make it sound like the greatest thing since sliced bread, but they did that with the .300 Whisper 10-15 years ago, and it never really went anywhere that I heard of.


The 30-06 is still the best all around hunting and assault round you are gonna get and the most available outside the 7.62 x 39 and the .243,

684 Achilles Tang  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 8:15:47pm

So much excitement for one evening.

Think I'll retire now.

Thanks for the explanations.

685 jorline  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 8:15:54pm

re: #675 MandyManners

I'm beginning to think some of these folks really want a theocracy.

If this keeps up, you'll need to issue more rope.

686 Marvo76  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 8:15:57pm

PIMF make that .223....

687 NY Nana  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 8:16:00pm

re: #675 MandyManners

For you and Kidlet!

688 Dustyvet  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 8:16:01pm

re: #677 NY Nana

Sorge has left the building.

Amazing watching his arms flailing as he sailed out the door...

689 J.D.  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 8:16:27pm

re: #673 Hobbes

Good find!

Someone sent me that.
I thought it was pretty good, too, and Stuart Shepherd used to be my weatherman...where I used to live...

690 J.D.  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 8:17:03pm

re: #674 sngnsgt

Hopie, changie!

Joy!

691 Bobblehead  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 8:17:05pm

Oh boy. I just got an email from John McCain asking for my financial support in his bid for Senate re-election. How much should I send him? Hmmm...

692 Sharmuta  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 8:17:27pm

re: #675 MandyManners

I'm beginning to think some of these folks really want a theocracy.

Read Monkey Girl, and you'll find out just how much.

693 Randall Gross  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 8:17:53pm

So it is written in the Lolcat bible, Ceiling cat will save us from Gozer.

I wil sav yu frum teh Gozer destroider. Den tehy wil kno mai naym is Ceiling Cat! Yarr!

694 Sharmuta  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 8:17:55pm

re: #692 Sharmuta

Read Monkey Girl, and you'll find out just how much.

[Link: www.amazon.com...]

695 jorline  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 8:18:33pm

re: #691 Bobblehead

Oh boy. I just got an email from John McCain asking for my financial support in his bid for Senate re-election. How much should I send him? Hmmm...

Mandy...more rope.

696 Salamantis  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 8:19:01pm

re: #422 Sorge

Ah, the "due process" canard...

No, that's how it has been applied; it was neither the intent nor the meaning of the amendment.

What part of "No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States" do you not understand?

697 jaunte  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 8:19:03pm

re: #694 Sharmuta

I was wondering about the title:

"Humes takes the title of his book, Monkey Girl, from the taunt leveled at a child whose mother objected to the new policy."

698 Dustyvet  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 8:19:35pm

re: #695 jorline

Mandy...more rope.

I got one of those as well.

699 Dark_Falcon  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 8:19:57pm

re: #693 Thanos

So it is written in the Lolcat bible, Ceiling cat will save us from Gozer.

I thought we had to cross the streams to defeat Gozer. And if we're going to do that we'd better hurry; If Gozer uses Charles's thoughts, Nodrog will appear to destroy us!

700 Sharmuta  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 8:20:02pm

re: #697 jaunte

Yes- Tammy Kitzmiller's daughter.

701 J.D.  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 8:20:16pm

re: #691 Bobblehead

Nuttin.
He finished ticking me off when he didn't stand up for Sarah Palin.

702 MandyManners  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 8:20:37pm

re: #687 NY Nana

For you and Kidlet!



The Kid had a cavity once and the dentist used nitrous. I was very uncomfortable seeing what it did to him.

703 MandyManners  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 8:21:17pm

re: #685 jorline

If this keeps up, you'll need to issue more rope.

I can wash out the old rope.

704 MandyManners  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 8:21:37pm

re: #692 Sharmuta

Read Monkey Girl, and you'll find out just how much.

What?

705 jaunte  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 8:21:39pm

re: #700 Sharmuta

That must have been mentioned in the Gordy Slack book, but I didn't focus on it.

706 FurryOldGuyJeans  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 8:22:05pm

re: #691 Bobblehead

Oh boy. I just got an email from John McCain asking for my financial support in his bid for Senate re-election. How much should I send him? Hmmm...

If I get one of those I know I will personally be very glad to send him the balance in my 401K that he has done such a good job of protecting.

707 larrysheldon  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 8:22:06pm

What part of "...make no law..." do have the most trouble with?

708 NY Nana  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 8:22:13pm

re: #688 Dustyvet

Amazing watching his arms flailing as he sailed out the door...

/They were arms? I thought I saw a prehensile tail. At any rate, he was ass side up. Or was there also a pitchfork?

709 jcm  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 8:22:18pm

re: #682 GGMac

GITMO? Let me guess - as a prisoner?

Goggle "sorge gitmo" kinda interesting.

710 MandyManners  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 8:22:22pm

re: #695 jorline

Mandy...more rope.

No. We need him in the Senate.

711 Sharmuta  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 8:22:59pm

re: #704 MandyManners

There is an entire chapter of the book that discusses the proponents of theocracy, and it's scary shit.

712 Dustyvet  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 8:23:23pm

re: #708 NY Nana

/They were arms? I thought I saw a prehensile tail. At any rate, he was ass side up. Or was there also a pitchfork?

ROFLMAO...:)(

713 jorline  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 8:23:43pm

re: #698 Dustyvet

I got one of those as well.

Tell him you already voted for him last November...fool me once...........

Hell we have Rick Perry running for Govanor again...he won't get my vote.

714 Salamantis  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 8:23:49pm

re: #454 Sorge

It has been measure two times. But that's private information.

That low, ayy?...;~)

715 J.D.  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 8:24:03pm

Nite Y'all. Time to call it a day.

Play nice.

716 Dan G.  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 8:24:03pm

re: #691 Bobblehead

Send 'em an invoice!

717 MandyManners  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 8:24:12pm

re: #711 Sharmuta

There is an entire chapter of the book that discusses the proponents of theocracy, and it's scary shit.

Well, they can just skeedaddle their little butts to Iran or Saudi Arabia.

718 jorline  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 8:24:20pm

re: #703 MandyManners

I can wash out the old rope.

lol...nasty

719 Dustyvet  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 8:24:26pm

re: #713 jorline

Tell him you already voted for him last November...fool me once...........

Hell we have Rick Perry running for Govanor again...he won't get my vote.

Yes I did.

720 Bobblehead  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 8:25:32pm

re: #710 MandyManners

No. We need him in the Senate.

We may need him but I'm inclined to spend whatever money I may have available for campaign donations(and it ain't gonna be much this year) on real conservatives.

721 jorline  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 8:26:41pm

re: #710 MandyManners

No. We need him in the Senate.

If I was in AZ, I'd a suitable conservative replacement.

722 Dan G.  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 8:26:58pm

re: #717 MandyManners

Sort of like the anarchists... I've suggested that they go live in the "lawless" regions of Afghanistan, but they don't seem to be that interested in anarchy.

723 [deleted]  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 8:27:16pm
724 jorline  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 8:28:48pm

re: #721 jorline

If I was in AZ, I'd a suitable conservative replacement.

PIMF I would find....

The meds are kicking in.

725 NY Nana  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 8:29:03pm

re: #702 MandyManners

The Kid had a cavity once and the dentist used nitrous. I was very uncomfortable seeing what it did to him.

Only my daughter ever was given anything..she was given Novocaine, as she had to have her wisdom teeth removed. I feel the same way re nitrous oxide.

The 8-year old granddaughter just had braces put on, and she grins away! The 6 year old lost her 4 front baby tooth...she loves her 'new look', so help me!

726 republic  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 8:29:12pm

re: #667 Iron Fist

How do you like the 6.8? As a concept, I like the idea. I've never been a big fan of the mousegun round, but 7.62X51 isn't so much a step up as it is a change on order of magnitude. I've considered the .458 SOCOM or .450 Bushmaster, but these still seem too heavy for an "assault rifle" round (although they may make fine hunting rounds).

Of course, all of them are expensive as hell to buy ammo for. I'm just curious for a first hand report on the round. All the gun mags make it sound like the greatest thing since sliced bread, but they did that with the .300 Whisper 10-15 years ago, and it never really went anywhere that I heard of.

I love the 6.8

It pushes a 85 grn Barnes X over 3000 fps, and it pushes a Nosler Accubond 110gr around 2700.

110 gr Barnes X is about right in between. These are "tactical loads", factory are a bit slower around 100 fps.

I spent most of last summer and last fall stocking up on ammo, and I'm glad that I did with sales going through the roof approaching the elections.

I've thought also, about a 458 SOCOM upper, Jeff Cooper called something approaching that, "Thumper".

There is still nothing wrong with a 223/5.56 running premium ammo.

The 6.8 is cool to shoot, to me, it actually has less recoil than the 223/5.56.

727 GGMac  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 8:29:33pm

re: #513 FurryOldGuyJeans

Charles, did you put out the "Morons Welcome" mat again?!?

Reminds me of a "welcome" mat we had years ago:

"Oh No - Not YOU Again!"

Not in use every day - and not at all after we forgot to bring it inside one time - the day my dad died, and all the church-ladies arrived!

728 theheat  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 8:30:22pm

I remember when Huckabilly was running, and the religious peeps were so hopeful... He scared the shit out of me, if only for that reason. My gut told me despite anything coming out of his mouth, he was another slick televangelist in sheep's clothing, and that was as close as I wanted to look. Basically, he reeked of Fundie; there was Fundie dripping from his pores.

With all these wackos coming out of the woodwork, it appears there's a growing group of like-minded Fundies trying to define being a 'conservative' as being a socon Fundie nutjob. Sure, they're for a lot of typically Republican policies, but it doesn't stop there. It goes way, way, so over to the right it's over the edge, and into fanatic territory. Behind every tree they imagine there's someone telling them they can't pray, or they're valiantly fighting the pretend War on Christmas, or shrieking about homosexuals marrying, or telling me what kind of music I shouldn't listen to. To further their agenda, they drag out straw men to justify their whiny arguments.

I'm the first one to admit the Palestinians are some of the most impassioned, delusional, whiners on the planet. But, you know, some of our apple pie religious idiots really give those Palestinians a run for their money. Their straw men are just as straw, their bullshit just as bullshitty.

If it's a Huckabilly, a Jindal, or some other far right lunatic running in 2012, I'm voting for my freakin' parakeet. We already know the Dems have an agenda. Don't be so naive to think the Fundies don't. They're just getting warmed up.

729 Randall Gross  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 8:30:25pm

re: #709 jcm

There were Cuban refugees at Gitmo before it was used as a detainment center. Sorge is common Cuban name.

730 [deleted]  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 8:31:30pm
731 NY Nana  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 8:31:31pm

re: #712 Dustyvet

Now I have to try and get that image out of my mind before bedtime! ;)

/Why do I still get a faint hint of the smell of sulfur? Anyone else?

732 jorline  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 8:31:40pm

I'm fading quickly. Good night, Lizards.

733 Sharmuta  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 8:31:57pm

re: #717 MandyManners

Well, they can just skeedaddle their little butts to Iran or Saudi Arabia.

They're hell bent on doing this to America.

734 tradewind  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 8:32:20pm

re: #254 NY Nana

Huckabee was extremely overweight.... okay, obese, in his early political career, nothing hidden about it. He was scared when he was given his prognosis should he not get in better shape... an early grave... and he did go on a real health kick, strict diet, and exercise program. Then he really became a reformer in his own mind, lecturing the citizens of AR (and every one else) about their eating and exercise habits.
Whatever floats his boat, but he was kind of sanctimonious about it.

735 [deleted]  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 8:34:11pm
736 NY Nana  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 8:34:22pm

re: #727 GGMac

My Dad zt"l would have been 100 years old today....

737 funky chicken  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 8:35:23pm

re: #17 jcm

Hey Huck why to you worry about some real stuff in the Porkulus Bill.

Ruin Your Health With the Obama Stimulus Plan:

Yep. These loonies make it exceedingly difficult to get people to focus on genuine threats.

738 republic  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 8:36:10pm

re: #683 Marvo76

The 30-06 is still the best all around hunting and assault round you are gonna get and the most available outside the 7.62 x 39 and the .243,

Everyone seems to have their favorite. I personally hunt with both the 30-06 and the 6.8, although I am working a 6" long slide 1911 for whitetails.

Mt three favorite guns are my 1911's, my AR's and the M1 garand.

739 Salamantis  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 8:37:17pm

re: #497 osopestoso

The "establishment" clause is overworked by athies and their ilk. The government would not be "establishing" a religion, just allowing funding for an opposing view to the athie religion of the THEORY of evolution, and other ideologies that the Gramsci/Deweyites deem canon.
But then, we all know that THE DEBATE IS CLOSED on Christianity, Man Made Global Warming, etc. dogma of the sec/hum athie socialists and their dupes.

Once again, the word 'theory' in the context of empirical science denotes something much stronger than the meaning of guess, conjecture or hunch accepted in common discourse.

According to the US National Academy of Sciences:

"Some scientific explanations are so well established that no new evidence is likely to alter them. The explanation becomes a scientific theory. In everyday language a theory means a hunch or speculation. Not so in science. In science, the word theory refers to a comprehensive explanation of an important feature of nature supported by facts gathered over time. Theories also allow scientists to make predictions about as yet unobserved phenomena.

"A scientific theory is a well-substantiated explanation of some aspect of the natural world, based on a body of facts that have been repeatedly confirmed through observation and experiment. Such fact-supported theories are not "guesses" but reliable accounts of the real world. The theory of biological evolution is more than "just a theory." It is as factual an explanation of the universe as the atomic theory of matter or the germ theory of disease. Our understanding of gravity is still a work in progress. But the phenomenon of gravity, like evolution, is an accepted fact."

Sal: But good luck with that frequently-seen-here Disco Institute Wedge Strategy document tactic of endeavoring to morph the issue from the presence vs. the absence of empirical evidence (which is why evolutionary theory is a science and belongs in public high school science class, while creationism/ID is not science, but religious dogma, and does NOT belong in public high school science class) into a distracting emotional diatribe against bad Old Secular Humanist Atheists for the sake of Good Old God.

740 NY Nana  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 8:38:26pm

re: #734 tradewind

Yes, he was sanctimonious. When he first ran, I truly thought he was a good candidate, but after reading more? I ruled him out.

He really let a lot of people down. I don't watch him on Fox. He does ♥ the limelight and being a 'celebrity', though.

741 funky chicken  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 8:42:40pm

re: #728 theheat

They are the ones who gave us W instead of McCain for the GOP nominee in 2000. Because of that and the fact that W spent the entire general campaign talking about his BFF Vicente Fox I didn't vote in 2000.

Yeah, I'm glad Gore didn't win.

Which is why I tried so hard to convince people to vote for McCain this time around. He would have been better than Bush or Gore in 2000 and hands down better than Obama this time around. If it's a theocon for the GOP in 2012, I don't know what I'll do....pray for a Blue Dog democrat revolt that might unseat Obamassiah as the dem nominee?

sigh

742 republic  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 8:43:42pm

re: #735 Iron Fist

Cool. It looks interesting. Of course, if I had the money, I'd get one of each. Let's hope that Obama and the Democrats give us the time to get everything that we want before they pass laws that we just can't live by.

I'm pretty sure that you'd like the 6.8. I have anouther 6.8 upper for it, and I am converting both to a gas piston. Then they will both keep up to the AK's.

743 tradewind  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 8:43:48pm

re: #740 NY Nana

Someday the rest of the country will listen when we tell them (about these boys down here that we've watched do the local DA-to-state leg-to-gov thang.....) that we know what varmints they are.
Then again, it's nice to run them outta state and spread the misery.

744 tradewind  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 8:45:33pm

re: #741 funky chicken

I don't think you'll have to resort to that prayer.... I have this knot in my stomach about Teh One, and bet he'll create his own term limit without help from the GOP.

745 Marvo76  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 8:47:19pm

re: #730 Iron Fist

Ah, got you. .223/5.56 is really as small a round as I'm willing to go in a defensive weapon. I know the Russians used a slightly smaller round, but I'm not overly impressed with the .223 (hence the term "mousegun"). A 6.8 is kind of in the middle of the pack, so it would seem to be a good compromise, but I'm not certain about the recoil in the weapon. I've never shot one, don't even know anyone with one that I could shoot to compare.

a buddy had a german preban HK he got from his brother's estate, man do them guys know how to build a gun, almost no kicback at all, smooth action and dead accurate...salty too, I believe it was the nato 7.62

746 Salamantis  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 8:48:50pm

re: #537 Dan G.

Are you sure about Washington being the first? I thought it was Chester A. Arthur.

It seems to be a matter of some debate. Lincoln might have said it, too. There's an interesting discussion of it about halfway down:

[Link: en.wikipedia.org...]

747 Bobblehead  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 8:48:57pm

Can this be true?
Obama to lift sanctions on Syria.

748 NY Nana  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 8:52:31pm

re: #747 Bobblehead

Most likely. There have been articles about it for most of the week. I would not put it past him. Who's next? Iran?

749 dapperdave  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 8:52:51pm

re: #747 Bobblehead

That's Hussain...I mean insane!

750 dapperdave  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 8:54:54pm

BO is going to learn the hard way, unfortunately we're along for the ride.

751 NJDhockeyfan  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 8:55:36pm

re: #748 NY Nana

Most likely. There have been articles about it for most of the week. I would not put it past him. Who's next? Iran?

Cuba?

752 republic  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 8:55:39pm

re: #748 NY Nana

Most likely. There have been articles about it for most of the week. I would not put it past him. Who's next? Iran?

Reminds me of the grandather of islamic terrorism, Jimmy Carter, right after he helped overthrow the Sha and put Khommeni in place.

These leftist kooks never learn from history.

753 NY Nana  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 8:56:27pm

re: #743 tradewind

Will people listen? After seeing how they were hypnotized by The One, I really worry.

An ex-lizard, who was not banned, BTW, but went to another blog, lives in AK, and she really adored him. She is a bright, politically savvy woman. I would love to know what she thinks now.

But after poor AK was stuck with the Billaries? I imagine that anyone else was great.

754 NJDhockeyfan  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 8:58:17pm
755 jcm  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 8:58:51pm

re: #747 Bobblehead

Can this be true?
Obama to lift sanctions on Syria.

Tony Resko was born in Syria.

756 Ojoe  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 9:00:55pm

Worldnetdaily is a nut site anymore.

And the Republicans are not going to be a very big party if they contain people like Huckabee, he will drive many away.

Time for a new party, there needs to be at least three big parties, two on the ends for the wacko extremists, and one sensible one in the center.

Perhaps a new center party might be the modern Whigs, perhaps.

Anyhow, here is the website of the Modern Whig party.

I've been checking them out.

Good Night All.

757 Bobblehead  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 9:01:15pm

re: #748 NY Nana

Most likely. There have been articles about it for most of the . week. I would not put it past him. Who's next? Iran?

I feel like I'm in the path of a speeding train and there is no way to get out of the way.
Elections have consequences.

758 Charles Johnson  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 9:01:55pm

re: #747 Bobblehead

Can this be true?
Obama to lift sanctions on Syria.

Consider the source. World Tribune is not very credible, and everything in that article is attributed to unnamed sources.

It's not impossible. But this article is highly suspect.

759 NY Nana  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 9:02:08pm

re: #751 NJDhockeyfan

Cuba?

Yes! I had forgotten that one...

760 GGMac  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 9:02:29pm

re: #653 CynicalConservative

Never did that one. Sick and wrong, but I like it!

There was a boy in my high school who would sit in the balcony at the movie theater, make awful gagging/wretching sounds - then dump the contents of a vegetable soup over the rail...

55 years back...

761 J.S.  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 9:02:53pm

re: #747 Bobblehead

In a way, it's stupidly amusing...seems that The One wants desperately to build up the Shia...(whether it's giving nuclear technology to the United Arab Emirates -- under the Bush administration; strengthening Syria; or playing "nice" with iran -- it all achieves the effect of weakening the Sunni arabs...)

762 republic  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 9:03:03pm

I wonder why my "Karma" is so low in my user profile?

Does it mean that I have done poorly here?

Anybody?

I accept any and all criticism.

763 Bobblehead  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 9:03:10pm

re: #758 Charles

Consider the source. World Tribune is not very credible, and everything in that article is attributed to unnamed sources.

It's not impossible. But this article is highly suspect.

Thanks for the insight. I feel somewhat better.

764 NY Nana  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 9:04:11pm

re: #754 NJDhockeyfan

Anyone want to send Hillary a suggestion?

Oh, I do, but OTOH, being sent to prison for what I would suggest is just not worth it.

765 NY Nana  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 9:05:59pm

re: #757 Bobblehead

I feel like I'm in the path of a speeding train and there is no way to get out of the way.

Elections have consequences.

I have felt like that for 3 weeks, and the feeling will just not go away.

766 dapperdave  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 9:06:13pm

re: #757 Bobblehead

Hopefully in 2 years the dumbocrats will lose both houses...until then hang on tight it's going to be a bumpy ride.

767 Ojoe  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 9:07:48pm

re: #766 dapperdave

Bumpy is right, government has become foolish entertainment now.

768 funky chicken  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 9:08:31pm

re: #744 tradewind

I don't think you'll have to resort to that prayer.... I have this knot in my stomach about Teh One, and bet he'll create his own term limit without help from the GOP.

HOPE for CHANGE

769 Ojoe  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 9:09:27pm

re: #728 theheat

Out into the howling political wilderness with Huckabee.

770 Ojoe  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 9:09:46pm

Really Goodnight.

771 funky chicken  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 9:10:15pm

re: #762 republic

hey bucko, don't be a showoff. your karma's better than mine....

772 tradewind  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 9:10:48pm

re: #757 Bobblehead

Read Caroline Glick's article and you'll feel sooo much better.
Oh wait, ......you won't.
[Link: www.jpost.com...]

773 republic  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 9:10:58pm

re: #770 Ojoe

Really Goodnight.

Goodnight Ojoe.

774 Bobblehead  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 9:10:59pm

re: #758 Charles

Consider the source. World Tribune is not very credible, and everything in that article is attributed to unnamed sources.

It's not impossible. But this article is highly suspect.

Charles,
Could you give us your opinion on which sources and news outlets you find most credible?

775 NY Nana  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 9:12:12pm

re: #758 Charles

Charles,

There was an article in the Jerusalem Post about it on Jan. 31...Syria and Iran.

776 republic  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 9:12:24pm

re: #771 funky chicken

hey bucko, don't be a showoff. your karma's better than mine....

Compared to many others, mine looks pretty slim.

What, exactly, does "Karma" mean in our user profiles?

777 Salamantis  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 9:16:28pm

re: #703 MandyManners

I can wash out the old rope.

No, leave it soaked. Serves 'em right.

778 Bobblehead  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 9:17:24pm

Another day ended. Sweet dreams lizards, old and new.

779 Salamantis  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 9:20:59pm

re: #734 tradewind

Huckabee was extremely overweight.... okay, obese, in his early political career, nothing hidden about it. He was scared when he was given his prognosis should he not get in better shape... an early grave... and he did go on a real health kick, strict diet, and exercise program. Then he really became a reformer in his own mind, lecturing the citizens of AR (and every one else) about their eating and exercise habits.
Whatever floats his boat, but he was kind of sanctimonious about it.

Converts do tend to be more fanatical...

780 GGMac  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 9:36:55pm

re: #709 jcm

Goggle "sorge gitmo" kinda interesting.

Yes, yes - in particular, "Babalu Blog: 'Point the Bow Towards Hope'".

Eyebrow raising, head scratching, and hmmmmmmmmmmmmmms.

781 GGMac  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 9:44:33pm

re: #736 NY Nana

My Dad zt"l would have been 100 years old today....

I'm sure you've spent this day with fond memories of your Dad - those special images that time can never fade. I hope you are fortunate enough to see some of him in his great-grandchildren. :)
{NYNana}

782 SaintGeorgeGentile  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 9:45:04pm

re: #452 Sharmuta

Um- your tax money would still be going to public schools via the local property taxes. That's still where most schools get their money.

Agree, and don't think it hasn't pissed me off for years that I've been supporting those incompetence factories (have never attended a government school and have no offspring [a plus in some peoples mind]).

783 GGMac  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 9:56:53pm

re: #735 Iron Fist

Cool. It looks interesting. Of course, if I had the money, I'd get one of each. Let's hope that Obama and the Democrats give us the time to get everything that we want before they pass laws that we just can't live by.

Our family size recently increased with the handsome addition of Sir Taurus Judge. :)

784 katemaclaren  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 10:00:33pm

re: #728 theheat

I like him.

785 NY Nana  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 10:02:54pm

re: #781 GGMac

I did, and there are so many wonderful memories. Yes, my almost 2 1/2 year old grandson is named in his memory.

I have some things of my Dad's to give him, and a lot of photos. My 4 kids also will get photos. They already have things. It is so hard to part with the pictures.

Your door mat gave me the only real laugh of the day...thank you so much.

Isn't it amazing that the memories stay with us so long? For me, it is almost 26 years since I lost my Dad and 15 days later, my Mum zt'l...I was an only, and somehow that made it even harder to deal with.

786 Dustyvet  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 10:03:21pm

Valentines Day More Dangerous Than AIDS, Ebola And Cholera.


787 SanFranciscoZionist  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 10:10:12pm

re: #18 Summer

I dunno, I've never met him. But he does seem genuinely nice whenever I see an interview with him. I just happen to think he's 100% wrong in these issues. I wouldn't ever vote for him, and I wish he'd stay out of the whole debate about reforming the party.

I think he's sincere and charming. He's just wrong about basically everything I've ever heard him speak about. Terrifyingly wrong.

788 Globular Cluster  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 10:12:50pm

The word "substantial" is problematic.

789 SFGoth  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 10:14:01pm

re: #64 ziggyelman

I'm really going to enjoy seeing the republican party split in half on secular and religious lines, and Obama in office for 8 years.
Lets really sweat the small stuff, destroy Palin and Jindal, have some bland middle of the road white guy, you know, someone like John McCain run in 2012, and lose by 20 points!
Just imagine what we have seen in the past 3 weeks, going on til 2016.

I'm not willing to trade "up" to fundamentalist Christianity. I'm not aware of too many small-government Christian theocracies in history. Given that the last Republican in the White House was a pretty religious guy (I'm not denying anyone their right to believe in the mythos of their choice), but he pretty much fucked up the domestic front as soon as his tax cuts got passed. Teaching religious myths as science is small stuff? You're whacko.

790 SFGoth  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 10:17:23pm

re: #61 shanester

It is not unconstitutional to fund a religious program, etc... It is only unconstitutional to prefer one religion over the other. Unless you are a left-wing "living constitution" believer.


Who decides which religions get funded? I just started this really cool new religion.... You going to tell me I'm wrong? *I want my fucking money.* You're probably one of those freaks who worships some fey-looking dude who wore dresses and claimed to be the son of god who rose from the dead. Snicker. No, keep the religion out of it, esp. Islam.

791 tracycoyle  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 10:24:17pm

I am surprised no one has called this clause anti-Moslem. After all, funds can't be used to modify or renovate to all foot baths....

Huckster is HOPEless.

792 GGMac  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 10:33:14pm

re: #785 NY Nana

My heart hurts for your pain is losing your parents so close together. My Dad's been gone nearly 20 years, and Mom 18. No matter their years lived, when those we love go it's always too soon.

Do you see them in yourself? I do - not personality type things, but odd physical things, such as when I'm washing dishes or wiping a baby's face, or petting a cat - it's not my hands I see, but my mother's. Mine look like hers, and the older I get the more they 'move' like hers. And watching my daughters' hands, and their daughters' - I can see this will go on down the line. Small smiles to go with the big ones.

Amazing, isn't it? Our generation has photos to pass down - our grands and g-grands will have "live" memories, thanks to such things as their telephone videos, etc. Just this week our scattered family has started a 3-generation 'web' of Face Book pages, and we've been gleefully jabbering back and forth every day - instantly, and with no "minutes" charges! Wonderful.

793 [deleted]  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 11:19:04pm
794 wiffersnapper  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 11:33:14pm

The only man that would have made me vote for Hussein: Huckabee.

795 fat.elvis  Tue, Feb 10, 2009 11:36:43pm

I agree with wiffersnapper, I'd have pulled the lever for Obama over Huckabee. Obama is a horrible choice, but there is no negative upside to Gomer.

796 Arkay  Wed, Feb 11, 2009 12:00:50am

Apparently we’re supposed to just forget about that pesky old Establishment Clause of the First Amendment of the US Constitution, which states:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion...
>

Apparently we’re supposed to just forget about THE REST OF THAT that pesky old Establishment Clause of the First Amendment of the US Constitution, which states:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, OR THE FREE EXERCISE THEREOF...

What part of "The Free Exercise Thereof" does not the Congress (much less Charles) understand?

If Congress makes money available for education, Congress cannot exclude religious studies from the list of studies that money can be used for, as that would inhibit the "free exercise" of religion. If Congressional money can be used to turn, say, medical studients into exterminationist executioners by requiring them to learn how to murder the unborn in a treatment environment, why can't the same money be used to support those who would oppose that training for religious reasons, even if we disagree with those religious reasons' ultimate basis? Answer: Because those who want to pay for the doctors' transmorgrification are in the driver's seat and those who oppose them are not.

Don't get me wrong. There are certain religions who are clearly, to me, based on abject bullshit. Islam (the belief that a desert barbarian who had sex with children 1400 years ago was a Prophet of God and the model of all humanity), Mormonism (the belief that the Lords of Kobol rule all) (oops, that's Battlestar Galactica; I meant "Lords of Kolob"); Jehovah's Witnesses (the belief that an American preacher with a red pen in 1914 has more authority to hack up the Bible than the Council of Nicaea).... all are largely rooted in obvious falsehoods.

But the purely secular idea that God can be stripped out of our society is equally false. This bill states that only those things from which the Creator (referred to directly in the Declaration of Independence) have been certified to have been bleached can be funded by government. That is a violation of the First Amendment--a violation of the Free Exercise Clause.

Not that it matters what was in that compost pile of a "bailout bill." Ultimately this is but a small fly in a stinking dungheap. But it is the smug and certain belief that Those Chrischuns Ain't Getting My Tax Money that can be imposed (in a way that would be intolerable if they said "Democrats") is the latest step down the road to drive Christianity out of public life.... and (whether Charles likes it or not) Christianity is the underpinning of the Constitution. Remove Christianity from society and the Constitution goes with it, within a generation, and it replacement by sonething secularistically absolutist must follow. (Look at the rest of the world, pal, and read what has happened in the last 100 years!)

797 Salamantis  Wed, Feb 11, 2009 12:21:54am

re: #796 Arkay

To mandate the indoctrination of other peoples' kids in one's own pet religious dogmas in public high school science class interferes with THEIR free exercise of religion - as well as also respecting some establishments of religions over others (for instance, Buddhism, Taoism and Confucianism, which don't include deific creators, and Hinduism and Paganism, which include more than one). It violates the Establishment Clause in two distinct respects.

798 Salamantis  Wed, Feb 11, 2009 12:23:28am

Also, US constitutional democracy owes as much to its Greco-Roman Pagan roots as it does to its Judeo-Christian ones.

799 Arkay  Wed, Feb 11, 2009 12:40:44am

Also, US constitutional democracy owes as much to its Greco-Roman Pagan roots as it does to its Judeo-Christian ones.>

Greco-Roman-Judeo-Christian.

What happens to a chair when you remove two of its four legs? It's not very useful, is it?

And I didn't say a word about "intelligent design." Thank you for not putting words into my mouth.

Mike Huh-ka-beee may be a rayudneck southerner, but I'll take his company over elitist snobs who think that "Christian" means "stupid."

800 Salamantis  Wed, Feb 11, 2009 1:59:26am

re: #799 Arkay

Also, US constitutional democracy owes as much to its Greco-Roman Pagan roots as it does to its Judeo-Christian ones.>

Greco-Roman-Judeo-Christian.

What happens to a chair when you remove two of its four legs? It's not very useful, is it?

And our arrangement of those chair legs is in the shape of a secular constitutional democracy, not a Christian theocracy.

And I didn't say a word about "intelligent design." Thank you for not putting words into my mouth.

Mike Huh-ka-beee may be a rayudneck southerner, but I'll take his company over elitist snobs who think that "Christian" means "stupid."

I live in Pensacola, Florida and was born in Mobile, Alabama to a father from Selma, Alabama and a mother from Louisville, Mississippi; I'm about as Southern as you can get.

And there is no shortage of smart Christians who have no problem accepting evolutionary theory as sound, solid and valid science; the Roman Catholic Church, for example, contains more than a billion of them.

801 freetoken  Wed, Feb 11, 2009 2:49:30am

re: #796 Arkay

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, OR THE FREE EXERCISE THEREOF...

How is the "stimulus package" impacting your freedom to exercise religion?

802 Oh no...Sand People!  Wed, Feb 11, 2009 3:38:53am

That's actually a good one!

"All hail my Lords of Kobol Kolob!"

803 dragonladyalso  Wed, Feb 11, 2009 4:46:52am

First let me say that I am a "fundamentalist Christian." Second let me say that not only is Huckabee a total tool but he is a large part of the reason that the GOP could not field someone actually able to beat Obama. If I were a conspiracy theorist, I would believe that the Huckster was part of the plan to get That One elected and complete the task of destroying America.

804 nanook  Wed, Feb 11, 2009 5:23:47am

re: #50 jcm

Which "God?
Catholics and Episcopalians aren't going to be very happy with my interpetation of God. I won't be happy with theirs.

It a minefield Huck, don't go there.

But Huck's God will let him walk unscathed through that minefield, dontchaknow....

/sarc

805 Aimcifer  Wed, Feb 11, 2009 5:25:32am

This is what I've heard in regard to the religious thing in the bill: say you have a state university, and there's a student group like Campus Crusade or InterVarsity, both Christian groups. The bill would stop the university from getting funding if these groups even meet. Sorry but that is religious discrimination. Perhaps I'm wrong on the bill/wording, but that is what I've seen so far. Groups such as CCC or IV should not be banned from college campuses. I know you don't like religion but banning groups of student fellowship is ridiculous.

806 swisnieski  Wed, Feb 11, 2009 5:53:50am

Uhh, IIRC, the bill originally prohibited funding from being used for the modernization/renovation of buildings merely used by religious groups -- i.e., the "substantial portion" clause was left out.

This was changed to its current reading precisely because it was regarded as being discriminatory.

807 Sharmuta  Wed, Feb 11, 2009 6:30:12am
“I have opponents in this race who do not want to change the Constitution,” Huckabee told a Michigan audience on Monday. “But I believe it’s a lot easier to change the Constitution than it would be to change the word of the living god. And that’s what we need to do — to amend the Constitution so it’s in God’s standards rather than try to change God’s standards so it lines up with some contemporary view.”

It's really the height of arrogance to assume what God's standards are.

808 Arkay  Wed, Feb 11, 2009 6:30:34am

[T]here is no shortage of smart Christians who have no problem accepting evolutionary theory as sound, solid and valid science; the Roman Catholic Church, for example, contains more than a billion of them.
>

Of which I am one. I didn't say a thing about evolution.

Scientific evolution is truth, so far as it goes. The laws of physics dictate that the world is 4.5 billion years old; the universe, 13-17 billion years old; and yes, apes and men descended from protoapes. We are creatures of nature--"formed from the mud in the ground." Next question?

Now that we've killed that turnip ghost, let's talk about why this bill is a bad thing:

"say you have a state university, and there's a student group like Campus Crusade or InterVarsity, both Christian groups. The bill would stop the university from getting funding if these groups even meet. Sorry but that is religious discrimination. Perhaps I'm wrong on the bill/wording, but that is what I've seen so far. Groups such as CCC or IV should not be banned from college campuses. I know you don't like religion but banning groups of student fellowship is ridiculous."

BINGO. It is worse than ridiculous. It is a green light to every secularist extremist on a college payroll to crush every Christian organization that they can reach. "Never let a good crisis go to waste." - R. Emannuel.

(cont'd)

809 Cato  Wed, Feb 11, 2009 6:33:28am

I think there are very good reasons not to fund any sort of religious institution with government funds. However, if funds are available to all religions, I have a hard time seeing how funding constitutes "establishment" since every religion would have equal access. I think a better reason not to fund them -- or much else in the "stimulus" package is Article I Section 8 of the constitution wherein the powers of congress are limited. Much of what government does is prohibited by the constitution, but if it isn't in an amendment, people forget about it.

810 Arkay  Wed, Feb 11, 2009 6:34:25am

It's really the height of arrogance to assume what God's standards are.>

There are prisons and detention camps around the world built by men who assume that there are no standards and there is no God, and that one may therefore do what one pleases without regard for others. THAT is the height of arrogance. Huckabee's is trivial in comparison thereto.

811 DistantThunder  Wed, Feb 11, 2009 6:38:17am

I saw an interview with a local politician from Chicago who described how Obama got the support of the religious community in Chicago.

He claimed that Obama provided a million dollar federal grand to a Chicago church that suffered a devastating fire to rebuild a section of the church that was NOT used for religious purposes but only for administrative purposes.

Not surprised.

812 annar  Wed, Feb 11, 2009 6:40:12am

I guess it is still the case that politicians have to at least fake some level of religious belief to get elected but Huckabee represents the kind of non respect for the freedom of and from religion that is unacceptable. Unless the GOP learns to marginalize this kind of politician and rediscover its roots in true political conservatism we are heading for many years of one party rule.

813 Cato  Wed, Feb 11, 2009 6:49:23am

BTW Charles, I do not see how the teaching of Intelligent Design violates the Establishment Clause. A literal and historically consistent reading of the clause would mean that the government could not choose to support Episcopalians to the detriment of Anglicans. Intelligent Design does not reach the point of "establishment" of any particular religion, although it does smell of some unspecified religion. A better reason not to teach Intelligent Design is that it is not science, not theory and not even intelligible. In short, schools, which act to protect students in the same way as their parents would, should not teach it because it is stupid.

814 Sharmuta  Wed, Feb 11, 2009 6:53:41am

re: #813 Cato

I do not see how the teaching of Intelligent Design violates the Establishment Clause

Take it up with Judge Jones, who considered it religion, and take it up with the SCOTUS who considered religious philosophies in science class violate the Constitution.

815 Arkay  Wed, Feb 11, 2009 6:58:19am

We are a monotheistic race whether we know it or not. We can't help it; we were wired that way by the one that made us (SLOWLY). God exists. He does not not exist. I'll leave aside the question of whether it is "blasphemy" to ignore Him explicitly; more specifically, to ignore Him in our public life and moral decisionmaking is to expose ourselves to destruction at our own hands. The fallenness of man is one truth you can get off of the front page of any newspaper. Knowledge of an afterlife and eternal judgment is the ONLY thing that restrains a significant portion of us from becoming little Stalins (or little Mansons).

To exclude that which acknowledges God from the public square is to kill the one thing restraining the great and powerful from exterminating its enemies. Even Christians, at their worst--say, the Spanish inquisition--subjected their victims to something that vaguely resembled due process of law. Didn't help the victims much, but it still restrained the torchbearers from going after others as they still had to attend to all that bothersome trial stuff. And they attended to it because they believed that it would have pissed God off had they not.

The abomination (and it was and abomination!) we call the Spanish Inquisition is known to have killed about 4000 people.

In 150 years.

Compare that to a good afternoon under Stalin. Or one week's business-as-usual at America's abortion clinics.

I note one of the respondents above yeowled about "Christian theocracy" being some sort of threat to the Republic. That makes the head shake. Can anybody point ANYWHERE in this sad planet in the last 100 years which is ruled by a Christian theocracy (other than Vatican City of course)? Anyone? Bueller? Bueller? Bueller? That's a turnip ghost of a far greater order. Christian theocracy is no more a threat to our freedoms in this country than neo-prohibitionism or fanatical bi-metallism. Forget it.

However we can point at a LOT of places where religion in general and Christianity et al. in particular have been driven underground and out of public life and far away from the circles of power. Like, oh, say, a certain Central European country until 1945 (Godwin's law forbids my naming it). Or Stalinist Russia. Or Maoist China. Or Pol Pot's Cambodia. Or Enver Hoxha's Albania. Or, for that matter, revolutionary France, 1792-1799. Or any of a number of horrible lesser examples in Europe, Asia, Africa.

Find for me a single concentration camp set up by the Catholic Church or Protestant fundamentalists in the last 100 years and I'll gladly dine on my hat. Please. I'd love to know about it.

We need Christianity et al. in our public life (properly limited and understood) like we need air and water. No, we don't need to be ruled by the Pope. (He's on the wrong side of the render-unto-Caesar-that-which-is-Caesar's division.) But. We DO need to acknowledge in our law and decisionmaking that we are ultimately ruled by God, and that one day each of us will face His justice, one way or another. (We al swear an oath when giving testimony: what worth is that oath if there is no God? And who can stop what follows then?)

And keeping God in mind politically, in practice, requires that Christianity (et al!) be at least part of the decisionmaking process both high and low. Failure to do that exposes us all to endless horrors. QED.

816 Sharmuta  Wed, Feb 11, 2009 7:01:06am

It was pretty obvious to Judge Jones that ID was the same creationist pig, just with a new shade of lipstick. And creationism, as it was proposed in the past for science classes and as demonstrated by ID's own history that it is creationism, favors the view of a particular religion. So unless all religions are offered an opportunity to present their ideas on creation, and not just the version of the Biblical literalists, then allowing ID into the classrooms would be favoring one religion over others.

817 Yashmak  Wed, Feb 11, 2009 7:01:13am

Huck & DeMint's position is rather ridiculous, but to take the stance of the Devil's Advocate here. . .

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion..."

Ok, Charles point is valid. But because this legislation explicitly mention's religion, technically speaking, it's a law "respecting an establishment of religion". . . .even if only in a kind of negative manner.

818 Born_to_lose  Wed, Feb 11, 2009 7:02:32am

My personal opinion, as a Chrisitian is this:

Thank the Judeo-Christian GOD that there are no funds from this monster being doled out to educational programs concerning my faith. Seriously. Considering the way of this administration and even the general consensus around the country, that daily and at an ever rapid rate we are seeing their true socialist colors revealed (and the language Obama uses frequently about one universal faith), I find that there is freedom in the fact that there are no funds that will enslave Jews and Christians to this new government. It is a shame that Huckabee cannot see the same truth in this matter. Also, I find relief in knowing that some of these more questionable organizations that opperate under the guise of Muslims for America will not be recieving any of my hard earned tax dollars. It's bad enough that the Obama administration wants us to reach out verbally, aka fall to our knees at their feet, to the even the questionable muslim communities around the nation; no need to pay them out of our pockets, too!

819 Arkay  Wed, Feb 11, 2009 7:04:16am

re: #814 Sharmuta

Take it up with Judge Jones, who considered it religion, and take it up with the SCOTUS who considered religious philosophies in science class violate the Constitution.>

Ah. SCOTUS. The same organization that dictated that the black man has no rights that the white man need respect, the same organization that sentenced 50 million unborn to death since 1973 in an act of "raw judicial power."

I for one don't exactly look to them for political authority.

re: #806 swisnieski

Uhh, IIRC, the bill originally prohibited funding from being used for the modernization/renovation of buildings merely used by religious groups -- i.e., the "substantial portion" clause was left out.

This was changed to its current reading precisely because it was regarded as being discriminatory.

*Has* it been changed? Last I heard the amendment yanking that language was voted down by the Dems. I hope to be wrong on this, but I think that language remained.

820 Yashmak  Wed, Feb 11, 2009 7:04:47am

re: #815 Arkay

We are a monotheistic race whether we know it or not. We can't help it; we were wired that way by the one that made us (SLOWLY).

Uh, YOU may be 'wired' that way, but you shouldn't presume to tell others how they're 'wired'.

821 Sharmuta  Wed, Feb 11, 2009 7:05:24am

re: #810 Arkay

It's really the height of arrogance to assume what God's standards are.>

There are prisons and detention camps around the world built by men who assume that there are no standards and there is no God, and that one may therefore do what one pleases without regard for others. THAT is the height of arrogance. Huckabee's is trivial in comparison thereto.

No- that is the height of nihilism. To assume one could fully know the mind of God is arrogant.

822 YY  Wed, Feb 11, 2009 7:05:30am

Charles, if you really are an attorney, that's really neat. It would explain why you write so well.

I am also an attorney, and while my practice is not devoted to constitutional law full-time, I do "dabble" in the area for pro bono matters and my first legal publication was on a conlaw issue. (My way of saying--please don't just disregard this as the opinion of an idiot, though you still may do so--it's a "free" country, or at least it used to be).

At any rate, the exact meaning of the establishment clause is not settled. At this point, the establishment clause has been construed as covering almost any religious expression in public. This would tend to support your position.

However, the Supreme Court has not, to my knowledge, really addressed the establishment clause since the lineup changed drastically a year or two back. Furthermore, Justice Ginsburg has been a reliable vote for the position you are taking (going so far as to not recuse herself from the ACLU case in Kentucky (McCreary?) even though she was former head counsel--5-4 opinion, by the way). There appear to be at least four justices who believe the establishment clause prohibits Congress from "establishing" a national religion, or prohibiting practice of a religion (let's not get into how you define religion). I say "at least" because Justice O'Connor was typically a swing vote on this issue and she has been replaced by Justice Alito.

In other words, I believe you are correct at this time, but I have a feeling that the Supreme Court could scale back on this if a new case is taken up some time soon.

Constitutional literalists, e.g., Justices Scalia and Thomas, have made clear that they interpret the Constitution much more literally (See Thomas' opinion in the Michigan University case (discrimination is never okay, even to enforce the 14th amendment) and Scalia's recent opinion in the Heller case (2nd amendment)). I think they may have 5 votes right now to address the establishment clause.

Keep in mind, this lineup has considered free speech and has made clear that the expansive reading that really began with the Warren court is not going to continue flying.

That's just one opnion, and the other lawyers reading can (and most certainly will) disagree. I can take it.

Be well.

823 Sharmuta  Wed, Feb 11, 2009 7:07:09am

re: #819 Arkay

Nice- a bunch of red herrings.

824 Yashmak  Wed, Feb 11, 2009 7:07:25am

re: #813 Cato

BTW Charles, I do not see how the teaching of Intelligent Design violates the Establishment Clause.

Doesn't matter anyway, it violates the "it needs to qualify as SCIENCE to be taught in a science classroom" rule.

825 Arkay  Wed, Feb 11, 2009 7:09:00am

*Someone above cited "Rushdoony," an otherwise obscure Protestant nutjob taken seriously only by militant atheists, as if he were some sort of authority figure in the Christian world instead of being (as he is) a sort of theological Jack T. Chick, blocking 2'' x 1'' of your theological windshield until removed and trashed.

826 Sharmuta  Wed, Feb 11, 2009 7:09:08am

re: #822 YY

But ID also would be violating the rights of parents in the Free Exercise clause.

827 Yashmak  Wed, Feb 11, 2009 7:09:13am

re: #824 Yashmak

Just noted that you said as much later in your comment Cato. My bad:)

828 leww37334  Wed, Feb 11, 2009 7:09:29am

Why is it that everyone who quotes the first amendment statement about religion leaves off the last part:

or prohibiting the free exercise thereof

Have you also noticed that denying federal funds to abortion is prohibiting abortion,
while denying federal funds to religious activities does not rise to the level of prohibiting.

829 [deleted]  Wed, Feb 11, 2009 7:11:30am
830 Sharmuta  Wed, Feb 11, 2009 7:11:52am

re: #825 Arkay

Howard Ahmanson, the man who gave the DI their first big chunk of money, has ties to Christian Reconstructionists.

831 Arkay  Wed, Feb 11, 2009 7:19:53am

Red herring. n. A crucial point made by your opponent that you don't want to address so you hand-waive it away.

832 Arkay  Wed, Feb 11, 2009 7:22:24am

Uh, YOU may be 'wired' that way, but you shouldn't presume to tell others how they're 'wired'.>

Actually it is my duty to tell others how they're wired. Google the term "The Great Commission" to find out why.

833 Cato  Wed, Feb 11, 2009 7:24:35am

re: #814 Sharmuta

Sharmuta,

I believe Judge Jones mistaken. Establishment, in my view, requires a particular religion to be established or advocated, not just a quasi-religious expression. For example, I have no problem with creches, Stars of David or other religious symbols on public land. I do, however, have big problems with exemption from taxation some religions get for real estate owned. For example, it isn't often noted that the Catholic Church owns vast amounts of land in Pennsylvania and all their land, whether used for religious practice or not, is exempt. In NY, only land used for prayer is exempt. This is troubling to me.

834 Arkay  Wed, Feb 11, 2009 7:24:57am

Howard Ahmanson, the man who gave the DI their first big chunk of money, has ties to Christian Reconstructionists.

And Jack T. Chick draws annoying little cartoon books. So what? I hardly see how this matters concerning the exclusion of Christianity from public life which is what Huckabee was really complaining about.

835 Sharmuta  Wed, Feb 11, 2009 7:26:04am

re: #833 Cato

Judge Jones also ruled ID wasn't science!

836 Cato  Wed, Feb 11, 2009 7:27:34am

re: #824 Yashmak


True enough.

837 Cato  Wed, Feb 11, 2009 7:28:32am

re: #835 Sharmuta


There we agree. We disagree on "establishment" clause construction.

838 Sharmuta  Wed, Feb 11, 2009 7:30:29am

re: #834 Arkay

You're right. Who cares if these people want to overturn the Constitution and establish a theocracy?

And some wonder why the democrats keep winning elections when these people present themselves as the face of the republican party.

839 Sharmuta  Wed, Feb 11, 2009 7:34:40am

re: #833 Cato

I believe the Church recently came out in favor of waiving their tax exempt status.

840 Sharmuta  Wed, Feb 11, 2009 7:37:02am

re: #837 Cato

I still think ID in science classrooms would violate parental rights to Free Exercise.

841 Arkay  Wed, Feb 11, 2009 7:41:53am

You're right. Who cares if these people want to overturn the Constitution and establish a theocracy?

Maybe because the statement that these people want to overturn the Constitution and establish a theocracy is a lie.

842 Cato  Wed, Feb 11, 2009 7:42:31am

re: #839 Sharmuta

That would shock me. Where did you find this out? Anyway, it doesn't affect the principle involved.

843 Arkay  Wed, Feb 11, 2009 7:43:03am

BTW, who do you mean by "these people"? Rushdoony? The ID crowd? Christians in general? Me? Inquiring minds want to know.

844 nccanuck  Wed, Feb 11, 2009 7:43:05am

What I think Huckabee and DeMint are referring to is the cutting off funds to places which allow religious services, teaching to happen. In many areas, public schools rent out facilities to churches to supplement the budget which is a win win for the school and church. I don't see any government establishment of religion being mentioned or pushed by Huckebee or DeMint as they are not picking out just one religion as the one being affected and the rhetoric of changing the constitution to be Gods law means only establishing a solid standard of morals, ethincs not based on man, who'se standard of morals and ethics continue to change based on how we feel.

845 Sharmuta  Wed, Feb 11, 2009 7:44:21am

re: #842 Cato

[Link: newsinfo.inquirer.net...]

846 Sharmuta  Wed, Feb 11, 2009 7:45:01am

re: #843 Arkay

You've shown to me repeatedly now that you're not an honest debater. GAZE

847 [deleted]  Wed, Feb 11, 2009 7:49:12am
848 Sharmuta  Wed, Feb 11, 2009 7:59:13am
“I have opponents in this race who do not want to change the Constitution,” Huckabee told a Michigan audience on Monday. “But I believe it’s a lot easier to change the Constitution than it would be to change the word of the living god. And that’s what we need to do — to amend the Constitution so it’s in God’s standards rather than try to change God’s standards so it lines up with some contemporary view.”

Yeah- I'm the one lying.

849 Cato  Wed, Feb 11, 2009 8:00:36am

re: #845 Sharmuta

The EU isn't PA. I think they protect their turf more aggressively in PA.

850 Sharmuta  Wed, Feb 11, 2009 8:04:50am

re: #844 nccanuck

Umm- hello!

“I have opponents in this race who do not want to change the Constitution,” Huckabee told a Michigan audience on Monday. “But I believe it’s a lot easier to change the Constitution than it would be to change the word of the living god. And that’s what we need to do — to amend the Constitution so it’s in God’s standards rather than try to change God’s standards so it lines up with some contemporary view.”

851 Sharmuta  Wed, Feb 11, 2009 8:06:25am

re: #849 Cato

Well- it could spread here. I had seen it in passing, and didn't read the entire piece at that time.

852 Charles Johnson  Wed, Feb 11, 2009 8:11:53am

Interesting. So we've found that there are actually people who not only see nothing wrong with violating the Constitution, they want special treatment for their religion, and exclusion for all others.

Isn't that lovely?

853 Charles Johnson  Wed, Feb 11, 2009 8:12:53am

re: #833 Cato

I believe Judge Jones mistaken.

That's why he's a judge and you're not.

854 Sharmuta  Wed, Feb 11, 2009 8:20:42am

re: #852 Charles

Interesting. So we've found that there are actually people who not only see nothing wrong with violating the Constitution, they want special treatment for their religion, and exclusion for all others.

Isn't that lovely?

More like creepy. Is it me, or is there a similarity in some euros mistaking their culture to mean their ethnicity and some Americans mistaking our culture to mean Christianity? In neither case do they seem to grasp the ideals of the Enlightenment.

855 Cato  Wed, Feb 11, 2009 8:22:29am

re: #853 Charles

As they say about the Supreme Court, "They are right because they are final, they aren't final because they are right."

856 Cato  Wed, Feb 11, 2009 8:34:50am

re: #854 Sharmuta

Actually, I heard a really interesting speech on this yesterday by Amy Chua based on her book "Day of Empire". She is interesting because she is an authentically pro-American leftist who realizes that the US is the most just and open society in the world. She believes that American "hyperpower" derives from that, and that growing intolerence to other ethnic and religious views imperil that.

857 Charles Johnson  Wed, Feb 11, 2009 8:35:37am

re: #855 Cato

As they say about the Supreme Court, "They are right because they are final, they aren't final because they are right."

Coming from someone who thinks it would be a dandy idea to teach children pseudo-science, that's rich.

858 Cato  Wed, Feb 11, 2009 8:43:25am

re: #857 Charles

Which one? I oppose, and have consistenly opposed, the teaching of both global warming and intelligent design. But just because I oppose teaching intelligent design, it does not mean I should see it as unconstitutional. I support abortion rights, but I oppose Roe v. Wade because abortion rights are enshrined nowhere in the constitution.

859 Charles Johnson  Wed, Feb 11, 2009 8:48:19am

re: #858 Cato

Which one? I oppose, and have consistenly opposed, the teaching of both global warming and intelligent design. But just because I oppose teaching intelligent design, it does not mean I should see it as unconstitutional. I support abortion rights, but I oppose Roe v. Wade because abortion rights are enshrined nowhere in the constitution.

Go ahead and "see it as constitutional" all you like -- the simple legal fact, borne out by numerous decisions, is that teaching creationism in science class is unconstitutional. You may have a problem accepting reality, but it's no less real.

860 Capoftex  Wed, Feb 11, 2009 8:49:50am

I have heard, and have not verified something else that is supposedly in the bill. And it is "Anti-Religion". If a school takes money from the bill, they cannot let a group meet, say FCA (Fellowship of Christian Athletes" in an empty room NOT during school hours. They are basically banning religion from schools.

What's the probelm here? That isn't establishing anything.

861 Charles Johnson  Wed, Feb 11, 2009 8:52:37am

re: #860 Capoftex

I have heard, and have not verified something else that is supposedly in the bill. And it is "Anti-Religion". If a school takes money from the bill, they cannot let a group meet, say FCA (Fellowship of Christian Athletes" in an empty room NOT during school hours. They are basically banning religion from schools.

What's the probelm here? That isn't establishing anything.

That is not in the bill.

862 Charles Johnson  Wed, Feb 11, 2009 9:00:23am

re: #841 Arkay

You're right. Who cares if these people want to overturn the Constitution and establish a theocracy?

Maybe because the statement that these people want to overturn the Constitution and establish a theocracy is a lie.

You should try reading what's right there in front of you. Mike Huckabee explicitly said he wanted to amend the Constitution "so it's in God's standards."

Yes, they DO want to overturn the Constitution. It's right there in black and white. You're the one who's lying.

863 beholden  Wed, Feb 11, 2009 9:04:19am

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion"

Forgive my ignorance, but doesn't this simply mean that congress shall not mandate a single religion?

How is funding for divinity schools the "establishment of religion"?

864 Claire  Wed, Feb 11, 2009 9:10:55am

re: #828 leww37334

or prohibiting the free exercise thereof

Have you also noticed that denying federal funds to abortion is prohibiting abortion,
while denying federal funds to religious activities does not rise to the level of prohibiting.


If Federal funds are given to religious activities, which ones should it be given to? All of them? Some of them? Which ones? If money is only given to one area, like Christian charities, then this is promoting one religion over another, also a prohibition of the Establishment Clause.

How do you suggest giving Federal money to religion without violating this clause?

865 martinsmithy  Wed, Feb 11, 2009 9:16:07am

If Huckabee doesn't like the U.S. Constitution, don't tell him about Oregon's Constitution. He REALLY won't like this provision:

ARTICLE I, SECTION 4: No money shall be drawn from the Treasury for the benefit of any religious or theological institution, nor shall any money be appropriated for the payment of any religious services in either house of the Legislative Assembly.

Written in 1859, back in the days when God supposedly ruled this land, according to people like Huckabee.

866 Claire  Wed, Feb 11, 2009 9:24:08am

re: #863 beholden

from Wiki:

The establishment clause has generally been interpreted to prohibit 1) the establishment of a national religion by Congress, or 2) the preference of one religion over another or the support of a religious idea with no identifiable secular purpose. The first approach is called the "separationist" or "no aid" interpretation, while the second approach is called the "non-preferentialist" or "accommodationist" interpretation. The separationist interpretation prohibits Congress from preferring one religion over another, but does not prohibit the government's entry into religious domain to make accommodations in order to achieve the purposes of the Free Exercise Clause.

What "establishes" a religion? A priest and a building, usually. How could funding the education of priests and the building they will be preaching in not be considered funding religion? If that wouldn't be, what on earth would be?

Also, give me an example of a religious organization that by NOT recieving Federal money resulted in a prohibition of its free exercise? I can't think of any off the top of my head.

867 Cato  Wed, Feb 11, 2009 9:32:08am

re: #859 Charles

I hate to say it, but you are right. Aguillard vs Edwards 482 U.S. 578, 1987 clearly establishes there is an Establishment Clause argument. Brennan's majority opinion certainly makes the argument, but more importantly to your point, Scalia and Renquist, acknowledge the establishment issue in their dissent but reject the majority on another basis. Note: I find NO distinction in a must teach creation science law and intelligent design argument.

I still believe the establishment clause should be more narrowly construed, but there is ample evidence in the decision that it is not.

868 MPH  Wed, Feb 11, 2009 9:42:59am

The stimulus bill is perfectly religious -- entirely dependent on Faith in Centralized Power. Faith in the State's ability to rescue the economy.

State = God
Obama = Jesus
"Stimulus" = Holy Spirit


What makes Huckabee the worst kind of politician is that he'd be fine with this bill so long as it threw his kind of religious organizations some bones. He has no moral opposition to this disgraceful theft, except that the money is going to the wrong people.

869 damnyanqui  Wed, Feb 11, 2009 10:38:00am

It seems an awful lot of people want to forget the second part of the "Establishment Clause"
the part about ...nor prohibiting the free exercise thereof."
Specifically excluding religious oriented programs from benefits offered to everyone else is anti-religious religious discrimination.
QED Anti religious
Yup.

870 Charles Johnson  Wed, Feb 11, 2009 10:43:55am

re: #869 damnyanqui

It seems an awful lot of people want to forget the second part of the "Establishment Clause"
the part about ...nor prohibiting the free exercise thereof."
Specifically excluding religious oriented programs from benefits offered to everyone else is anti-religious religious discrimination.
QED Anti religious
Yup.

It's not "prohibiting the free exercise" of religion to exclude religious organizations from government funding. No one is stopping anyone from practicing their religion. Your argument is absurd.

871 beholden  Wed, Feb 11, 2009 10:46:23am

re: #866 Claire

from Wiki:
What "establishes" a religion? A priest and a building, usually. How could funding the education of priests and the building they will be preaching in not be considered funding religion? If that wouldn't be, what on earth would be?

Thank you, Claire.

872 kellymac  Wed, Feb 11, 2009 11:14:38am

If the money is directed at a public, taxpayer supported college or university, how would use be determined? For instance, if the Student Center is used by student groups of all faiths for gatherings and meetings, would the Student Center then be excluded from use of funds for repairs/maintenance?

873 damnyanqui  Wed, Feb 11, 2009 11:28:33am

Oh yes, by all means let's talk about 19th century triumphs like this one from the Oregon constitution quoted above:

ARTICLE I, SECTION 4: No money shall be drawn from the Treasury for the benefit of any religious or theological institution, nor shall any money be appropriated for the payment of any religious services in either house of the Legislative Assembly.

This is actually a vintage example of a popular religious discrimination initiative known widely as the "Blaine Amendment." It was not meant to prevent public funds from going to "religous" institutions. It was meant to prevent public funds from going to Catholic religious institutions. The public schools of the time were themselves Christian religious institutions already, Protestant ones.
The sponsors of Blaine amendments in states around the country had no problem with public funds going to them. Back then, "religious" school meant "a religion other than contemporary Protestant Christian."
Today, the debate is not whether religious institutions should get funds but whether religious institutions should be denied funds available to everyone else.
No one is saying "support religious institutions only and support no others"
This proposal denies support to religious institutions only, while offering it to all others. That is very specifically discrimination against the religious institutions because they are religious institutions.

874 Yashmak  Wed, Feb 11, 2009 12:36:06pm

re: #832 Arkay

Uh, YOU may be 'wired' that way, but you shouldn't presume to tell others how they're 'wired'.>

Actually it is my duty to tell others how they're wired. Google the term "The Great Commission" to find out why.

Well, I for one am NOT wired that way, and neither are many folks I know. Anyone who tells you that I am, is lying to you.

875 Eclectic Infidel  Wed, Feb 11, 2009 12:40:41pm

World Net Daily is good at fanning hysteria and otherwise focusing on non-issues. I'm not sure what's wrong with the folk on that site but they make conservatives look VERY bad.

876 Yashmak  Wed, Feb 11, 2009 12:45:12pm

re: #864 Claire

If Federal funds are given to religious activities, which ones should it be given to? All of them? Some of them? Which ones? If money is only given to one area, like Christian charities, then this is promoting one religion over another, also a prohibition of the Establishment Clause.

How do you suggest giving Federal money to religion without violating this clause?

I wanted to quote this, because it's a critically important point. Claire is absolutely right, there's virtually NO way to accomplish giving Federal money to religion in a manner that doesn't promote one religion over another. . .which would bring us right back to being opposed to the establishment clause.

877 MJBrutus  Wed, Feb 11, 2009 1:04:41pm

Scalia wrote a fascinating opinion on the applicability of the 1st in this area. Initially, I thought that I would disagree with him, but as is so typical of his work, he convinced me to change my mind.

The case involved whether a student at Ganzaga, IIRC, who wanted to apply his scholarship to a religious curriculum. Scalia wrote that the scholarships were awarded as a general benefit. Any student could obtain such a grant. It wasn't as though he were awarded a grant for the purpose of studying religion, that was simply how he wanted to apply it and a neutral stance towards religion would allow him to apply it to religious study. He went on to say that the scholarship grant is akin to building roads or providing police and fire protection to a church. It would be wrong to build a road or firehouse specifically for a church, but a church may benefit from the building of a road without the 1st being violated. One need build the road to avoid the church so as not to stay true to the 1st. I thought his analogy and reasoning to be very apt.

In the case of the stimulus, it is a completely different animal, in that the funds are doled out by the government with a specific purpose in mind and are not a "general" benefit to society.

Even though it's a different case, I found Scalia's opinion to be extremely useful in finding where the line is drawn.

878 rudytbone  Wed, Feb 11, 2009 1:39:04pm

This language is aimed at groups like Boy Scouts. Boy Scouts/Cub Scouts use public school facilities and part of their core values is service to God. In the extreme (and don't think it won't be used this way), Public schools can be denied funds because the let Scouts use their facilities, thereby promoting religious activities.

879 MJBrutus  Wed, Feb 11, 2009 1:43:44pm

re: #878 rudytbone

This language is aimed at groups like Boy Scouts. Boy Scouts/Cub Scouts use public school facilities and part of their core values is service to God. In the extreme (and don't think it won't be used this way), Public schools can be denied funds because the let Scouts use their facilities, thereby promoting religious activities.

I'm having a hard time seeing that, based on the language of the bill that Charles quoted.

880 rudytbone  Wed, Feb 11, 2009 1:59:19pm

re: #879 MJBrutus
No funds awarded under this section may be used for - (C) modernization, renovation, or repair of facilities (Public Schools) - (i) used for sectarian instruction, religious worship, or a school or department of divinity; or (ii) in which a substantial portion of the functions of the facilities are subsumed in a religious mission.(Scouting)

Scout Oath
On my honor I will do my best
To do my duty to God and my country
and to obey the Scout Law;
To help other people at all times;
To keep myself physically strong,
mentally awake, and morally straight.

881 drbob1988  Wed, Feb 11, 2009 3:30:23pm

If Huckabee hadn't screwed Romney in the primaries we wouldn't be facing this dilemma. He is such a disingenuious jerk. Romney would be running this country. Screw Huckabee!

882 Arkay  Wed, Feb 11, 2009 5:17:11pm

With respect, Charles--

--there is a radical difference from expressing a desire to AMEND the constitution and the desire to OVERTURN it. As long as the desire to AMEND the constitution does not have the support of the people, what is the harm to it? At no time has Huckabee advocated destroying or extirpating or abolishing the Constitution.

I for one think that "making the Constitution more Godly" (as a general principle) is not a dishonorable desire: after all, the Constitution WITH the 13th Amendment is *more Godly* (figuratively AND literally) than one WITHOUT it. Or, if you prefer (to use a Constiutionally safer phrase) it makes "a more perfect Union." Whether Huckabee's desired change is anything but the fevered wish of a Protestant nut is immaterial: he has a right to his opinion and a right not to have his "stated wish" equated with violent revolutionary activity.

But to state his wish for a "more Godly" constitution is morally indistinguishable from the active desire to violently overthrow it (which is what "OVERTURN" really means, isn't it?) is, ahem, a bit extreme, don't you think?

I respectfully aver that your righteous outrage about the "intelligent design" nuts sometimes carries over into areas where the outrage is not called for, and leading you to make false equations between apples and oranges.

I am certainly not interested in a Constitution that makes Christianity an established religion. I am intensely interested in a Constitution that makes it illegal to kill children in utero because that activity is objectively evil (literally evil, as in where-the-guy-with-the-pitchfork-does-his-business kind of evil). Does that make me beyond the pale? Does that make me one who wants to "overturn" the constitution? If so, perhaps I should go elsewhere... which would be a shame. I like it here, even if I sometimes state opinions, er, not held by the local majority.

But it's your playground.

883 Arkay  Wed, Feb 11, 2009 5:30:57pm

Well, I for one am NOT wired that way, and neither are many folks I know. >

I know a guy by the name of Whittaker Chambers who believed exactly as you do. Then he saw his newborn daughter's ears. You might want to read about it--it's in his book Witness.

884 Salamantis  Wed, Feb 11, 2009 5:33:07pm

re: #810 Arkay

It's really the height of arrogance to assume what God's standards are.>

There are prisons and detention camps around the world built by men who assume that there are no standards and there is no God, and that one may therefore do what one pleases without regard for others. THAT is the height of arrogance. Huckabee's is trivial in comparison thereto.

The German and Serbian concentration camps were built by believers.

885 Sharmuta  Wed, Feb 11, 2009 5:33:32pm

re: #882 Arkay

I'm going to repost this from another thread:

People on the right, who advocate banning this or that particular issue, be it islam or abortion or what have you, are actually show a high level of ignorance intellectually. It's as though they think a Constitutional ban is a simple matter, when in fact, it's quite a difficult hurdle to clear.

A proposed amendment needs two separate super majorities to pass and become part of the Constitution. It is proposed by a 2/3 vote by both houses of Congress or 2/3 of the state legislatures.

It then needs 3/4 of the state legislatures or 3/4 of the states in convention to be incorporated into the Constitution.

If people honestly think they can achieve both super majorities to get a Constitutional ban on any social or religious issue, I think they are utterly deceiving themselves. It will never happen, as the electorate will not put into power the number of people needed to see such knee-jerk solutions to these issues. Never. Quit deluding yourself by espousing such nonsense. Not only is it wrong, it's embarrassing.

886 Salamantis  Wed, Feb 11, 2009 5:38:04pm

re: #813 Cato

BTW Charles, I do not see how the teaching of Intelligent Design violates the Establishment Clause. A literal and historically consistent reading of the clause would mean that the government could not choose to support Episcopalians to the detriment of Anglicans. Intelligent Design does not reach the point of "establishment" of any particular religion, although it does smell of some unspecified religion. A better reason not to teach Intelligent Design is that it is not science, not theory and not even intelligible. In short, schools, which act to protect students in the same way as their parents would, should not teach it because it is stupid.

It violates the Establishment Clause in two different ways. First, it entangles civil government in the advocacy of some religious dogmas over others, thus respecting some establishments of religion over others, by mandating that some religious dogmas embraced by some religions, but not other religious dogmas embraced by other religions, be taught to public high school students. Second, in so doing, it violates the religious freedom of public high school students and their parents who do not subscribe to the particular religious dogmas selected to be taught.

887 Salamantis  Wed, Feb 11, 2009 5:43:52pm

re: #815 Arkay

We are a monotheistic race whether we know it or not. We can't help it; we were wired that way by the one that made us (SLOWLY). God exists. He does not not exist. I'll leave aside the question of whether it is "blasphemy" to ignore Him explicitly; more specifically, to ignore Him in our public life and moral decisionmaking is to expose ourselves to destruction at our own hands. The fallenness of man is one truth you can get off of the front page of any newspaper. Knowledge of an afterlife and eternal judgment is the ONLY thing that restrains a significant portion of us from becoming little Stalins (or little Mansons).

To exclude that which acknowledges God from the public square is to kill the one thing restraining the great and powerful from exterminating its enemies. Even Christians, at their worst--say, the Spanish inquisition--subjected their victims to something that vaguely resembled due process of law. Didn't help the victims much, but it still restrained the torchbearers from going after others as they still had to attend to all that bothersome trial stuff. And they attended to it because they believed that it would have pissed God off had they not.

The abomination (and it was and abomination!) we call the Spanish Inquisition is known to have killed about 4000 people.

In 150 years.

Compare that to a good afternoon under Stalin. Or one week's business-as-usual at America's abortion clinics.

I note one of the respondents above yeowled about "Christian theocracy" being some sort of threat to the Republic. That makes the head shake. Can anybody point ANYWHERE in this sad planet in the last 100 years which is ruled by a Christian theocracy (other than Vatican City of course)? Anyone? Bueller? Bueller? Bueller? That's a turnip ghost of a far greater order. Christian theocracy is no more a threat to our freedoms in this country than neo-prohibitionism or fanatical bi-metallism. Forget it.

However we can point at a LOT of places where religion in general and Christianity et al. in particular have been driven underground and out of public life and far away from the circles of power. Like, oh, say, a certain Central European country until 1945 (Godwin's law forbids my naming it). Or Stalinist Russia. Or Maoist China. Or Pol Pot's Cambodia. Or Enver Hoxha's Albania. Or, for that matter, revolutionary France, 1792-1799. Or any of a number of horrible lesser examples in Europe, Asia, Africa.

Find for me a single concentration camp set up by the Catholic Church or Protestant fundamentalists in the last 100 years and I'll gladly dine on my hat. Please. I'd love to know about it.

We need Christianity et al. in our public life (properly limited and understood) like we need air and water. No, we don't need to be ruled by the Pope. (He's on the wrong side of the render-unto-Caesar-that-which-is-Caesar's division.) But. We DO need to acknowledge in our law and decisionmaking that we are ultimately ruled by God, and that one day each of us will face His justice, one way or another. (We al swear an oath when giving testimony: what worth is that oath if there is no God? And who can stop what follows then?)

And keeping God in mind politically, in practice, requires that Christianity (et al!) be at least part of the decisionmaking process both high and low. Failure to do that exposes us all to endless horrors. QED.

Monotheistic race? Tell that to billions of Buddhists, Taoists and Confucians whose faiths are nontheistic, and to billions of Hindus and Pagans, whose faiths are polytheistic.

It sounds to me like you possess a theocratic bent, and are quite willing to save souls against their will. Priests did that in Central America; they baptized Native American infants, then immediately grasped their heels and swung their heads into stone walls, so that their souls would go to Heaven rather than being condemned by being raised in their parents' heathen ways.

888 Arkay  Wed, Feb 11, 2009 5:48:06pm

If people honestly think they can achieve both super majorities to get a Constitutional ban on any social or religious issue, I think they are utterly deceiving themselves. It will never happen, as the electorate will not put into power the number of people needed to see such knee-jerk solutions to these issues. Never. Quit deluding yourself by espousing such nonsense. Not only is it wrong, it's embarrassing>

"Of course, we can never abolish slavery. The south will secede before they'll ever let that happen." Or, to quote Bruce Hornsby and the Raiders, "That's just the way it is."

For now.

889 Salamantis  Wed, Feb 11, 2009 5:53:59pm

re: #819 Arkay


Take it up with Judge Jones, who considered it religion, and take it up with the SCOTUS who considered religious philosophies in science class violate the Constitution.>

Ah. SCOTUS. The same organization that dictated that the black man has no rights that the white man need respect, the same organization that sentenced 50 million unborn to death since 1973 in an act of "raw judicial power."

I for one don't exactly look to them for political authority.

Their reversal of the first ancient decision has supported the civil rights of blacks, and the second decision has prevented coercive theocrats from abrogating womens' individual decisions over their own reproduction and warping their wombs into jails with which to imprison them in a reproductive chattelhood that differs in degree, but not in essence, from what Islamofascist theocrats perpetrate upon Muslim women. In America, women can choose to either carry a pregnancy to term or to abort it. You should choose for yourself, and they should choose for themselves. Unlike in China, abortions are not mandated in the US. In a constitutionally democratic open society, we have to permit a plethora of personal choices, including many we would not ourselves choose, since others choose differently from ourselves, and should have the right to do so. Only in totalitarianisms and theocracies are all human choices either mandated or forbidden.

890 Arkay  Wed, Feb 11, 2009 5:58:02pm

Monotheistic race? Tell that to billions of Buddhists, Taoists and Confucians whose faiths are nontheistic, and to billions of Hindus and Pagans, whose faiths are polytheistic.>

I shall. I'm commanded to do so.

It sounds to me like you possess a theocratic bent, and are quite willing to save souls against their will. >

It seems to me that you haven't the slightest clue as to what I'm talking about. But that's okay. That comes with the territory, as we were warned pretty much from Day 1. "Blessed are ye when men say false things about you for My sake...."

Priests did that in Central America; they baptized Native American infants, then immediately grasped their heels and swung their heads into stone walls, so that their souls would go to Heaven rather than being condemned by being raised in their parents' heathen ways.>

Dates, places and names please to support what you're saying. Until you offer same I will regard this last paragraph as a nullity. At best.

I don't worry about it though, you can't offer anything like the catalogue of crimes I can offer on the radical-leftist-secularist side of the tracks which are (a) established beyond any doubt and (b) all occurred within living memory to (c) people I know personally. (See above: Russia, China, Cambodia, etc).

My godson is the child of a Chinese math professor and a Jewish convert to Christianity. His mother's relatives all died at Auschwitz. His father's father died at the hands of the Red Guards during the "Proletarian Cultural Revolution."

If my citing his inheritance makes me a violent theocrat, well, it just means that words have lost all meaning in this day and age.

891 Charles Johnson  Wed, Feb 11, 2009 5:59:52pm

re: #888 Arkay

Another fanatic weighs in to advocate violating the Establishment Clause. You're just a-wishin' and a-hopin' that you're going to be able to get enough like-minded Luddites to change the Constitution so it won't be a problem any more.

Thanks for clarifying that.

892 Salamantis  Wed, Feb 11, 2009 6:00:00pm

re: #828 leww37334

Why is it that everyone who quotes the first amendment statement about religion leaves off the last part:

or prohibiting the free exercise thereof

Have you also noticed that denying federal funds to abortion is prohibiting abortion,
while denying federal funds to religious activities does not rise to the level of prohibiting.

No federal funds are spent to pay for abortions, and they should not be spent to pay for sectarian religious actions, either. There is a vast and massive difference between permitting free exercise and financially subsidizing.

893 Salamantis  Wed, Feb 11, 2009 6:09:39pm

re: #832 Arkay

Uh, YOU may be 'wired' that way, but you shouldn't presume to tell others how they're 'wired'.>

Actually it is my duty to tell others how they're wired. Google the term "The Great Commission" to find out why.

I just hope that you leave people the fuck alone when they make it crystal clear that they prefer their own beliefs, and don't wanna endure your proselytization. Some of them have things that they could teach YOU.

894 jaunte  Wed, Feb 11, 2009 6:13:42pm

re: #890 Arkay

Monotheistic race? Tell that to billions of Buddhists, Taoists and Confucians whose faiths are nontheistic, and to billions of Hindus and Pagans, whose faiths are polytheistic.>

I shall. I'm commanded to do so.

If you're commanded to tell billions and billions, you'd better get busy.
One billion seconds is around 31 years.

895 Salamantis  Wed, Feb 11, 2009 6:17:18pm

re: #844 nccanuck

What I think Huckabee and DeMint are referring to is the cutting off funds to places which allow religious services, teaching to happen. In many areas, public schools rent out facilities to churches to supplement the budget which is a win win for the school and church. I don't see any government establishment of religion being mentioned or pushed by Huckebee or DeMint as they are not picking out just one religion as the one being affected and the rhetoric of changing the constitution to be Gods law means only establishing a solid standard of morals, ethincs not based on man, who'se standard of morals and ethics continue to change based on how we feel.

Buddhist, Taoist and Confucian ethical systems are no less moral than are those embraced by monotheisms. And neither are contemporary secular understandings:

[Link: pinker.wjh.harvard.edu...]

Besides which, all faiths have gleaned their moral stances from either the societies in which they arose, or from prior faiths which appropriated their ethical precepts from the cultures in which THEY emerged. And many of those ancient scriptural pronouncements - approval of slavery, for instance - would be anathema to people were they applied today.

896 Arkay  Wed, Feb 11, 2009 6:17:59pm

Charles: how abjectly do I have to say it? I am against teaching intelligent design and believe in evolution. Period. I am in full agreement with you on this point. If you still find my statements to that end insufficiently convincing and still find me some sort of crypto-Rushdoony.... ((shrugs)) well, what can I say?

897 Salamantis  Wed, Feb 11, 2009 6:25:15pm

re: #873 damnyanqui

Oh yes, by all means let's talk about 19th century triumphs like this one from the Oregon constitution quoted above:

This is actually a vintage example of a popular religious discrimination initiative known widely as the "Blaine Amendment." It was not meant to prevent public funds from going to "religous" institutions. It was meant to prevent public funds from going to Catholic religious institutions. The public schools of the time were themselves Christian religious institutions already, Protestant ones.
The sponsors of Blaine amendments in states around the country had no problem with public funds going to them. Back then, "religious" school meant "a religion other than contemporary Protestant Christian."
Today, the debate is not whether religious institutions should get funds but whether religious institutions should be denied funds available to everyone else.
No one is saying "support religious institutions only and support no others"
This proposal denies support to religious institutions only, while offering it to all others. That is very specifically discrimination against the religious institutions because they are religious institutions.

It is not discrimination against religions to refuse to federally fund them due to constitutional issues. They're already getting enough of a break by being not subject to federal taxation.

898 Arkay  Wed, Feb 11, 2009 6:26:52pm

I just hope that you leave people the fuck alone>

"There once was a man on his way to Jericho, when he was set upon by robbers...."

Would you have me leave HIM "...alone"? Remember the guy who took him to a metaphorical hospital was a Samaritan--a heretic who didn't abide by the rules of the local majority. Would you rather be the judge, the priest, the scribe?

899 Salamantis  Wed, Feb 11, 2009 6:28:24pm

re: #878 rudytbone

This language is aimed at groups like Boy Scouts. Boy Scouts/Cub Scouts use public school facilities and part of their core values is service to God. In the extreme (and don't think it won't be used this way), Public schools can be denied funds because the let Scouts use their facilities, thereby promoting religious activities.

Boy Scouts will still be allowed to use public school facilities as they always have, and as student-organized religious clubs do - after hours.

900 Arkay  Wed, Feb 11, 2009 6:29:05pm

If you're commanded to tell billions and billions, you'd better get busy.
One billion seconds is around 31 years.>

Well, that's why we have a First Amendment with a free exercise clause. That way I can use Mass Communication, which Israel in 4 BC had no.

901 jaunte  Wed, Feb 11, 2009 6:34:21pm

re: #900 Arkay

Or, you could ignore the command, and just chat on the internet.

902 Arkay  Wed, Feb 11, 2009 6:34:52pm

they make it crystal clear that they prefer their own beliefs, and don't wanna endure your proselytization>

11 outa 12 apostles each suffered martyrdom--the ultimate STFU (tradition says that St. John lived to 90 and was the only exception).

Remember, whenever the commies come to power, the preachers get shot first. (The Metropolitan of St. Petersburg was executed in 1919.) It's an old story. Maybe there's a reason for that. A reason you should think about.

903 Sharmuta  Wed, Feb 11, 2009 6:35:07pm

re: #901 jaunte

ZING!

904 Sharmuta  Wed, Feb 11, 2009 6:35:33pm

Martyr points?

905 Salamantis  Wed, Feb 11, 2009 6:35:35pm

re: #898 Arkay

I just hope that you leave people the fuck alone>

"There once was a man on his way to Jericho, when he was set upon by robbers...."

Would you have me leave HIM "...alone"? Remember the guy who took him to a metaphorical hospital was a Samaritan--a heretic who didn't abide by the rules of the local majority. Would you rather be the judge, the priest, the scribe?

I once lived in the country in the Deep South, and the rural Deep South can be a very coercively fundamentalist Christian social environment. Since I am Pagan, have been for 30+ years, and have no desire whatsoever either to change my faith or to endure witnesses trying to change it for me, I had a sticker on my front door that said No Proselytizing. Nevertheless, this one guy knocked on my door saying he wanted to spread his Good News.

I told him through the door that I was uninterested in what he had to say, having heard it all before until the cows came home and laid down and died, and that I wished him to leave my property . He replied that it was very hot out there, that he had no intention of leaving, and that he and his two very young children, who were with him, would stand outside in the blazing sun until I relented.

I called the police and reported him for trespassing after a warning and for possible child abuse, They came and took them away.

You sound like just such a guy.

906 Salamantis  Wed, Feb 11, 2009 6:41:55pm

re: #882 Arkay

With respect, Charles--

--there is a radical difference from expressing a desire to AMEND the constitution and the desire to OVERTURN it. As long as the desire to AMEND the constitution does not have the support of the people, what is the harm to it? At no time has Huckabee advocated destroying or extirpating or abolishing the Constitution.

I for one think that "making the Constitution more Godly" (as a general principle) is not a dishonorable desire: after all, the Constitution WITH the 13th Amendment is *more Godly* (figuratively AND literally) than one WITHOUT it. Or, if you prefer (to use a Constiutionally safer phrase) it makes "a more perfect Union." Whether Huckabee's desired change is anything but the fevered wish of a Protestant nut is immaterial: he has a right to his opinion and a right not to have his "stated wish" equated with violent revolutionary activity.

But to state his wish for a "more Godly" constitution is morally indistinguishable from the active desire to violently overthrow it (which is what "OVERTURN" really means, isn't it?) is, ahem, a bit extreme, don't you think?

I respectfully aver that your righteous outrage about the "intelligent design" nuts sometimes carries over into areas where the outrage is not called for, and leading you to make false equations between apples and oranges.

I am certainly not interested in a Constitution that makes Christianity an established religion. I am intensely interested in a Constitution that makes it illegal to kill children in utero because that activity is objectively evil (literally evil, as in where-the-guy-with-the-pitchfork-does-his-business kind of evil). Does that make me beyond the pale? Does that make me one who wants to "overturn" the constitution? If so, perhaps I should go elsewhere... which would be a shame. I like it here, even if I sometimes state opinions, er, not held by the local majority.

But it's your playground.

Anit-abortionism is a political position. it should not be morphed into a religion. When that happens, cryptochristian jihadism results, like the domestic murders of abortion doctors and firebombing of clinics by true believers.

I have some personal familiarity with people who march around abortion clinics blowing trumpets like Joshua did in the Battle of Jericho. I am quite certain that they are also aware of what happened next; Joshua and his forces entered the city and killed every man, woman and child they found.

907 Salamantis  Wed, Feb 11, 2009 6:43:20pm

re: #883 Arkay

Well, I for one am NOT wired that way, and neither are many folks I know. >

I know a guy by the name of Whittaker Chambers who believed exactly as you do. Then he saw his newborn daughter's ears. You might want to read about it--it's in his book Witness.

A single anecdote does not establish a maxim for billions of people.

908 Salamantis  Wed, Feb 11, 2009 6:45:18pm

re: #902 Arkay

they make it crystal clear that they prefer their own beliefs, and don't wanna endure your proselytization>

11 outa 12 apostles each suffered martyrdom--the ultimate STFU (tradition says that St. John lived to 90 and was the only exception).

Remember, whenever the commies come to power, the preachers get shot first. (The Metropolitan of St. Petersburg was executed in 1919.) It's an old story. Maybe there's a reason for that. A reason you should think about.

When clerics come to power, they historically tend to execute a lot of people, too.

909 Arkay  Wed, Feb 11, 2009 6:51:56pm

I called the police and reported him for trespassing after a warning and for possible child abuse, They came and took them away.>

They broke the law, trespassing on your property after you told them to leave. And he was an asshole. On these points I agree with you. 'K?

Still. I will not blame him for doing what he was doing--only for not leaving when asked. But still, I'd rather have a bible toting dolt knock on my door than secret police. The century has shown us that the price of the absence of the secret policeman is the tolerance of the bible toting dolt. It's not a high price, really. (You can't call the police on the secret police--to quote Susan Pevensey, "they are the police.")

910 Arkay  Wed, Feb 11, 2009 6:58:08pm

When clerics come to power, they historically tend to execute a lot of people, too.>

Specific examples of Christian clerics acting as you say within the last 200 years, please. Even better, within living memory. (Citing Muslim jihadonazis doesn't count, as they are, by definition, not Christians.)

Besides, I'm not advocating rule by clerics, not for a second. There is a dramatic difference between rule by clerics and seamless and un-objected-to participation in government by religious believers (as we had in this country up until, oh, about 1968 or so). If religious believers are to be driven to the sidelines, silenced, told to STFU under all circumstances, not to participate in public life, .... well, the remainder would get the government that ALWAYS follows in such circumstances. You may not like that very much.

911 Salamantis  Wed, Feb 11, 2009 7:01:58pm

re: #909 Arkay

I called the police and reported him for trespassing after a warning and for possible child abuse, They came and took them away.>

They broke the law, trespassing on your property after you told them to leave. And he was an asshole. On these points I agree with you. 'K?

Still. I will not blame him for doing what he was doing--only for not leaving when asked. But still, I'd rather have a bible toting dolt knock on my door than secret police. The century has shown us that the price of the absence of the secret policeman is the tolerance of the bible toting dolt. It's not a high price, really. (You can't call the police on the secret police--to quote Susan Pevensey, "they are the police.")

People in a constitutional democracy are free to advocate whatever faith they wish, on public property (like a soapbox in the town park), and other people are free to either criticize or ignore them. They are NOT free to wield a governmental mandate for coerced religious indoctrination of other peoples' children. And they are NOT free to advocate their religious positions on the provate property of others once they have been asked to leave.

Clerics ruling theocracies historically have had their snitches and secret police, too, and have used execrable means to coerce religious agreements from unwilling others. Torquemada and the Spanish Inquisition, for one. The Saudi Muttawa is another example. And the Salem Witch trials, and subsequent hangings, drownings, and burnings, are a third.

912 Salamantis  Wed, Feb 11, 2009 7:04:22pm

re: #910 Arkay

When clerics come to power, they historically tend to execute a lot of people, too.>

Specific examples of Christian clerics acting as you say within the last 200 years, please. Even better, within living memory. (Citing Muslim jihadonazis doesn't count, as they are, by definition, not Christians.)

Besides, I'm not advocating rule by clerics, not for a second. There is a dramatic difference between rule by clerics and seamless and un-objected-to participation in government by religious believers (as we had in this country up until, oh, about 1968 or so). If religious believers are to be driven to the sidelines, silenced, told to STFU under all circumstances, not to participate in public life, .... well, the remainder would get the government that ALWAYS follows in such circumstances. You may not like that very much.

Within the last 200 years? I think the religious persecution and mass slaughter of Bosnian Muslims and Croatian Roman Catholics by the Serbian Russian Orthodox qualifies. And that happened within the last quarter century.

913 Salamantis  Wed, Feb 11, 2009 7:09:53pm

Remember that Galileo was forced to recant by the Roman Catholic clerisy because his astronomical discoveries contradicted the religious dogmas of the time. And Giordano Bruno was burned at the stake earlier for refusing to recant his discovery of relativity theory more than 300 years before Einstein (he claimed that the Universe lacked an absolute center, while the Church embraced geocentrism), so the clerical threat had teeth.

914 Arkay  Wed, Feb 11, 2009 7:11:46pm

A single anecdote does not establish a maxim for billions of people.>

A single statement sometimes does establish a maxim for billions. The statement "water is wet" is true wherever temperature lies between 0 deg and 100 deg C at sea level. The statement "man is a created being and sometimes it's really cool experience when he realizes that" is also true under precisely the same circumstances. Has there been no example in your life--the day you proposed to your spouse, the day you lost your virginity, the day you graduated from college, the day you stood on some mountaintop somewhere and contemplated a sunset--where you just felt thankful? Even if you didn't know Who to thank? Of course you have. Everyone who has lived beyond infancy has had that precise experience at least once.

Sometimes we knock and are answered. And sometimes the knock comes to us in a form we don't really appreciate at the time.

("heheheheh beevis he said 'created'! He must be one of THEM! heheheh") ((shrug)) I believe we ARE created--through 17 billion years of purely scientifically verifiable post-big-bang physics and evolution. As St. Michael (Mothersbaugh) put it in Jocko Homo, "God made man and he used the monkey to do it."

915 Arkay  Wed, Feb 11, 2009 7:25:58pm

I think the religious persecution and mass slaughter of Bosnian Muslims and Croatian Roman Catholics by the Serbian Russian Orthodox qualifies. And that happened within the last quarter century.>

Nice try. Unfortunately for you, I was a peacekeeper in Bosnia for 2.5 years and know a little bit about the subject. I helped (in a very small way) to build the cemetery for those killed at Srebrenica.

The Serb fascists who killed the Srebrenica victims and carried out the mass executions and ethnic cleansing were an aggluteration of communists (The "SDS" or "Serbian Democratic Party"), Nazis (The "SRS" or "Serbian Republican Party") and mafia gangsters primarily interested in plunder, theft, and resale of stolen goods ("Arkan's Tigers").

The V Corps, Army of the Republika Srpska ("VRS") that carried out the massacre at Srebrenica was ordered to do so by the President of Serbia, Radovan Karadzic, who was a psychiatrist by training (a 'sports psychiatrist', he trained soccer players for the olympic team to keep them in top form), and was a whole souled atheist and Communist with nationalist fanaticisms.

In 2001 I stood in a rainstorm in Bijeljina, northern Bosnia, and saw the local patriarch dedicate a restored monastery. He was only allowed to preside there after he was closely investigated by the International Criminal Court for the Former Yugoslavia, who looked into accusations that he actively participated in the seige of Tuzla. All charges were found by (British) war-crimes investigators to be baseless. (And believe me, they WANTED to nail him!)

The whole Yugoslavian civil war was nothing more than an attempt by the Serbian communist party to delay free elections and keep them in power. And it worked....for an additional ten years. But eventually they were thrown out of power and Slobodan Milosovic died in prison, as he so richly deserved.

But sorry, no. Christians had nothing to do with the Bosnian civil war.

916 rudytbone  Wed, Feb 11, 2009 7:35:22pm

re: #899 Salamantis

Salamantis,
I would hope you are correct. But the language (as I understand it) is vague and open to interpretation. A School District/School Board can take this language to be a threat to funding and cut ties with the organization. I'm certain that the ACLU and similar organizations would press the issue if possible. It would be better if they had used more precise, concrete language and explained the intent in detail. But, that would be good lawmaking and not possible with this bunch in Congress.

917 Arkay  Wed, Feb 11, 2009 7:37:13pm

re: #891 Charles

Right, so you weren't really being honest when you said you didn't see how teaching ID violates the Establishment Clause.>

Where did I say that? Citation please. I DO believe teaching ID violates the Establishment clause.

918 Salamantis  Wed, Feb 11, 2009 7:38:06pm

re: #915 Arkay

I think the religious persecution and mass slaughter of Bosnian Muslims and Croatian Roman Catholics by the Serbian Russian Orthodox qualifies. And that happened within the last quarter century.>

Nice try. Unfortunately for you, I was a peacekeeper in Bosnia for 2.5 years and know a little bit about the subject. I helped (in a very small way) to build the cemetery for those killed at Srebrenica.

The Serb fascists who killed the Srebrenica victims and carried out the mass executions and ethnic cleansing were an aggluteration of communists (The "SDS" or "Serbian Democratic Party"), Nazis (The "SRS" or "Serbian Republican Party") and mafia gangsters primarily interested in plunder, theft, and resale of stolen goods ("Arkan's Tigers").

The V Corps, Army of the Republika Srpska ("VRS") that carried out the massacre at Srebrenica was ordered to do so by the President of Serbia, Radovan Karadzic, who was a psychiatrist by training (a 'sports psychiatrist', he trained soccer players for the olympic team to keep them in top form), and was a whole souled atheist and Communist with nationalist fanaticisms.

In 2001 I stood in a rainstorm in Bijeljina, northern Bosnia, and saw the local patriarch dedicate a restored monastery. He was only allowed to preside there after he was closely investigated by the International Criminal Court for the Former Yugoslavia, who looked into accusations that he actively participated in the seige of Tuzla. All charges were found by (British) war-crimes investigators to be baseless. (And believe me, they WANTED to nail him!)

The whole Yugoslavian civil war was nothing more than an attempt by the Serbian communist party to delay free elections and keep them in power. And it worked....for an additional ten years. But eventually they were thrown out of power and Slobodan Milosovic died in prison, as he so richly deserved.

But sorry, no. Christians had nothing to do with the Bosnian civil war.

I notice that you didn't mention the religious predispositions of Slobodon Milosevic and Ratko Mladic. All three of these leaders (including Radovan Karadzic) cynically manipulated both religion and nationalism, and intertwined them, in order to get rank and file believing Serbs to do what they did. And what they were doing was not strictly speaking ethnic cleansing; it was religious cleansing. Being Serb did not save Muslims from massacre.

919 Salamantis  Wed, Feb 11, 2009 7:42:10pm

re: #914 Arkay

A single anecdote does not establish a maxim for billions of people.>

A single statement sometimes does establish a maxim for billions. The statement "water is wet" is true wherever temperature lies between 0 deg and 100 deg C at sea level. The statement "man is a created being and sometimes it's really cool experience when he realizes that" is also true under precisely the same circumstances. Has there been no example in your life--the day you proposed to your spouse, the day you lost your virginity, the day you graduated from college, the day you stood on some mountaintop somewhere and contemplated a sunset--where you just felt thankful? Even if you didn't know Who to thank? Of course you have. Everyone who has lived beyond infancy has had that precise experience at least once.

Sometimes we knock and are answered. And sometimes the knock comes to us in a form we don't really appreciate at the time.

("heheheheh beevis he said 'created'! He must be one of THEM! heheheh") ((shrug)) I believe we ARE created--through 17 billion years of purely scientifically verifiable post-big-bang physics and evolution. As St. Michael (Mothersbaugh) put it in Jocko Homo, "God made man and he used the monkey to do it."

Physical attributes and religious pronouncements are quite distinct, and should not be intermixed (the logical description of this fallacy is Category Error). As to feeling glad that I am alive, yes, I have frequently had that feeling. But it would make more sense to me to thank my parents.

920 Arkay  Wed, Feb 11, 2009 7:47:53pm

Being Serb did not save Muslims from massacre.>

Sure it did.

35 km north of Srebrenica is a little town called Zvornik. It was 98% Muslim before the Bosnian Civil War. It's now 99% Serb. Every mosque in the town was flattened by the VRS on orders from the government.

100 yards away is another town, called Malij Zvornik ("Little" or "Lesser Zvornik"). It was 48% Muslim before the Bosnian Civil War. It was 47% Muslim in 2001, when I was there last. Not a single mosque in that town was flattened or even touched.

Why was Zvornik ethnically cleansed and Malij Zvornik untouched, even though they were less than 50 yards apart? Simple: Malij Zvornik is on the Serbian side of the Drina. The Muslims there were left alone. Why? The town was already (by definition) Serb controlled and the Serbs had nothing to gain by "cleansing" it.

Sure, the Serbs manipulated the common troops to carry out the massacre. But the manipulators were not Christians or clerics. They were Nazis and Communists (same difference at that time and place). And their manipulations had a certain, obscene military logic to it. The Serbs wanted to conquer the territory and they viewed the Muslims living there as a "military threat" to their conquest. Furthermore, the Muslims had lots of kewel stuff (TVs, fridges, cars) that the Serbs could steal.

They weren't motivated by Christian religious zeal. Not for a minute. They were thieves and cutthroats ruled by Commies and Nazis. End of story.

921 Arkay  Wed, Feb 11, 2009 7:50:32pm

But it would make more sense to me to thank my parents.>

Your parents are not your creators. They are your begettors. There is a difference, a profound difference, and I'm willing to bet that that feeling of thankfulness in your mind didn't bring Mommy or Daddy to mind for a second....

922 Arkay  Wed, Feb 11, 2009 8:04:23pm

The V Corps, Army of the Republika Srpska ("VRS") that carried out the massacre at Srebrenica was ordered to do so by the President of Serbia, Radovan Karadzic, who was a psychiatrist by training (a 'sports psychiatrist', he trained soccer players for the olympic team to keep them in top form), and was a whole souled atheist and Communist with nationalist fanaticisms. >

Correction, Radovan Karadzic was the President of the "Republika Srpska", the so-called "Serb Entity" in Bosnia that the Serbs controlled. He surely would have loved to have been President of Serbia one day, but the folks at the ICTY have something else much more appropriate in store for him. Thank Christ.

And on that note, I am striking the colors for the evening. Time to watch John Adams arrange for a revolutionary statement to be issued, one that says that Man "was endowed by his Creator with certain unalienable rights, among which are the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness."

And if that statement is unconstitutional, then the Constitution has lost all meaning. Good night.

923 Arkay  Wed, Feb 11, 2009 8:16:05pm

One last remark.

Remember that Galileo was forced to recant by the Roman Catholic clerisy because his astronomical discoveries contradicted the religious dogmas of the time. >

Actually he was put on trial for insulting one Maffeo Barbarini, for many years his best friend and patron, in one of his writings, calling him a "fool." Barbarini was rather annoyed at this, having dined at Gallileo's table and given him funding for his research for several years. At the time the insult came out, Barbarini had recently gotten a promotion and changed his name to His Holiness Pope Urban VIII. Discretion, Gal baby, discretion!

Of course, you can take two astronomers 500 years ago and put him on your side of the scale; I'll take the tens of thousands of religious Christians killed by "scientific socialists" in recent decades on my side, and weigh them by comparison.

I think the applicable phrase is "Mene, mene, tekel....."

Good night. Really.

Good night.

924 Salamantis  Wed, Feb 11, 2009 8:53:01pm

re: #922 Arkay

The V Corps, Army of the Republika Srpska ("VRS") that carried out the massacre at Srebrenica was ordered to do so by the President of Serbia, Radovan Karadzic, who was a psychiatrist by training (a 'sports psychiatrist', he trained soccer players for the olympic team to keep them in top form), and was a whole souled atheist and Communist with nationalist fanaticisms. >

Correction, Radovan Karadzic was the President of the "Republika Srpska", the so-called "Serb Entity" in Bosnia that the Serbs controlled. He surely would have loved to have been President of Serbia one day, but the folks at the ICTY have something else much more appropriate in store for him. Thank Christ.

And on that note, I am striking the colors for the evening. Time to watch John Adams arrange for a revolutionary statement to be issued, one that says that Man "was endowed by his Creator with certain unalienable rights, among which are the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness."

And if that statement is unconstitutional, then the Constitution has lost all meaning. Good night.

Actually, that statement is found not in the US Constitution, but in the Declaration of Independence, which was addressed not to the American colonists, but to King George II. The Declaration of Independence is one of our most cherished historical documents, but it possesses no legal force.

As to the actual status of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, Robert A. Heinlein spoke quite eloquently to that, through the mouth of one of his fictional characters:

"Ah yes, [life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness]... Life? What 'right' to life has a man who is drowning in the Pacific? The ocean will not hearken to his cries. What 'right' to life has a man who must die to save his children? If he chooses to save his own life, does he do so as a matter of 'right'? If two men are starving and cannibalism is the only alternative to death, which man's right is 'unalienable'? And is it 'right'? As to liberty, the heroes who signed the great document pledged themselves to buy liberty with their lives. Liberty is never unalienable; it must be redeemed regularly with the blood of patriots or it always vanishes. Of all the so-called natural human rights that have ever been invented, liberty is least likely to be cheap and is never free of cost. The third 'right'?—the 'pursuit of happiness'? It is indeed unalienable but it is not a right; it is simply a universal condition which tyrants cannot take away nor patriots restore. Cast me into a dungeon, burn me at the stake, crown me king of kings, I can 'pursue happiness' as long as my brain lives—but neither gods nor saints, wise men nor subtle drugs, can insure that I will catch it."

Source: Lt. Col. Jean V. Dubois (Ret.), Page 119, Starship Troopers

925 Salamantis  Wed, Feb 11, 2009 9:01:32pm

re: #923 Arkay

One last remark.

Remember that Galileo was forced to recant by the Roman Catholic clerisy because his astronomical discoveries contradicted the religious dogmas of the time. >

Actually he was put on trial for insulting one Maffeo Barbarini, for many years his best friend and patron, in one of his writings, calling him a "fool." Barbarini was rather annoyed at this, having dined at Gallileo's table and given him funding for his research for several years. At the time the insult came out, Barbarini had recently gotten a promotion and changed his name to His Holiness Pope Urban VIII. Discretion, Gal baby, discretion!

Of course, you can take two astronomers 500 years ago and put him on your side of the scale; I'll take the tens of thousands of religious Christians killed by "scientific socialists" in recent decades on my side, and weigh them by comparison.

I think the applicable phrase is "Mene, mene, tekel....."

Good night. Really.

Good night.

If you want to compare scalps, consider this:

Perhaps the combined body count of Hitler, Stalin, Mao and Pol Pot was a hundred million (and Hitler told his chief of staff Werner Gerhard in 1941 that he would always remain a committed Catholic, and the very first treaty that the fledgling Reich signed was a concordat with the Holy See, so perhaps he doesn't belong on the list, but I digress). All that would have has to have happened in the last two millennia would be for 50 thousand people to have been killed per year in the name of one faith or another to equal that figure, and who can credibly deny that the global annual religious body count has been vastly higher for most of our recorded history? And that's not even counting all the masses of people who killed or died for their faiths before that...

926 Salamantis  Wed, Feb 11, 2009 9:06:04pm

re: #921 Arkay

But it would make more sense to me to thank my parents.>

Your parents are not your creators. They are your begettors. There is a difference, a profound difference, and I'm willing to bet that that feeling of thankfulness in your mind didn't bring Mommy or Daddy to mind for a second....

Begettors are creators, or what is insemination and gestation all about? But you are right about one thing; that feeling of gladness and gratitute was not addressed to my parents, but neither was it addressed to any deity; rather, it was addressed to the universe at large, without any illusion that that universe could receive and comprehend it.

927 Arkay  Wed, Feb 11, 2009 9:24:34pm

So you agree with the Southern slavers and Senator Douglas? That the Declaration of Independence is a mere scrap of paper and its sentiments are BS, to be ignored when inconvenient?

I'll take Lincoln's view, sir. To the death.

As for Robert Heinlein, I am well familiar with him--I was a big Heinlein fan until I realized that his science fantasies were written to justify his sex habits.

The "Dubois refutation" itself is BS; an exercise in the justification of pure power without any divine restraint. "What right does a man at sea have?" Please. A man may not have a right to life from raw naturewhen a storm at sea comes, but he surely has it when approached by a butcher with a knife (and that obtains whether the butcher is a British soldier with a bayonet or a doctor wielding a scalpel).

Liberty is certainly a right that only exists if fought for, but a right it is nonetheless--it is an eternal state of being for all who breathe, and those who deprive you of it take your rights. To take the "Dubois refutation" is to say, well, I can rape you, dear lady, for since nobody defends your virtue, you don't have any right not to be raped. It is to reduce freedom to something that the strong are free to take away from the weak without consequence. To which I say, poppycock!

And at last, the right to "pursue happiness" is itself a right, the man who pursues it exercises his right, and the man who keeps the first man from pursuing his natural happiness (within his natural rights) commits a grave evil. To take the "Dubois position" is to say that I have a perfect right to destroy your happiness in pursuit of my own: a statement that raises naked power and greed to a virtue.

Heinlein, a very entertaining writer, I'll grant you, wrote abject BS, and none more seductive than Starship Troopers, a novel I love for literary entertainment but utterly reject morally. The Heinein "republic" was indeed a "fascist republic," exactly as his critics said it was when the book was published.

Truth is, Heinlein hated Christianity and all it stood for and his stories increasingly reflected that POV. The abominable "Stranger in a Strange Land," which advocated free love ten years before Charles Manson clearly demonstrated how group sexual actually manifests itself in reality--"Time Enough for Love," the biography of a goat who literally sexes up every female in the story, with only the exception of one political figure--"I Will Fear No Evil", the less said of the better--

--and throughout his works an obsession with the most obscene incest fantasies, including, in "Time Enough," a work where the lead character commits incest (with his own mother!), he encourages twin-sex, and also has endless sex with his own descendants... gah.

As for the real reason for Heinlein's hatred of Christianity, I leave it for the enterprising reader to find it rooted in RAH's true biography. Hint: how many times was he married? And why? Answer: He had a fly problem and could not keep his closed.

So please, don't quote Robert Heinlein in defense of the denegration of the Declaration of Independence. Too many people died for that document to take that lying down.

In short, Robert A. Heinlein is a science-fiction children's author, not to be quoted by grownups.

928 Arkay  Wed, Feb 11, 2009 9:27:13pm

how group sexual actually manifests itself in reality>

Corxn: group sexual activity actually manifests itself in reality....

929 Arkay  Wed, Feb 11, 2009 9:34:15pm

Begettors are creators,>

No they are not. I make a hammer. I make an essay. I make a hamburger. My wife and I do not beget any of those. We beget children. We cannot beget mice (sorry, Stuart Little!). We may choose not to beget, but that which we beget are what we are. Human beings, "endowed by their Creator etc."

That which we create, we own, until sold. That which we beget, we cannot own, we cannot sell.

Otherwise our children are our slaves, our property, to do with what we please, to kill if we feel like, with impugnity in utero because the curious laws of our primitive tribe allow it, or afterward, if we can get away with it.

If our children are mere "blobs of cells," well, so are you. Which you are not, I gather, you will admit, at least to the extent of your own right to life, liberty, and the happiness of pursuit.

930 Arkay  Wed, Feb 11, 2009 9:39:05pm

All that would have has to have happened in the last two millennia would be for 50 thousand people to have been killed per year in the name of one faith or another to equal that figure, and who can credibly deny that the global annual religious body count has been vastly higher for most of our recorded history?

Would you really prefer a second century just like the one ending, or would you prefer 50,000 dead a year? Your call.

931 Salamantis  Wed, Feb 11, 2009 9:41:24pm

re: #927 Arkay

My point is that no cosmic deity is going to intervene to preserve, protect or defend the life, liberty, and right to pursue happiness that Americans enjoy. We have to do that job ourselves, and it is by means of the government-enforced rights and freedoms guaranteed in our Constitution that we do it. Such a position has nothing to do with sympathy for antebellum slavers, but nice try at a gratuitous smear.

As for your apparently all-encompassing animus to all things Heinlein, do you feel the same way towards, for instance, TANSTAAFL? If you re-read all of the plethora of Heinlein quotes that people routinely reference, you might rediscover some modicum of insight and value there. Nevertheless, an ad hominem attack upon an author does not debunk an argument, which stands or falls on its own merits and deserts, regardless of its source.

932 Salamantis  Wed, Feb 11, 2009 9:43:18pm

re: #929 Arkay

Begettors are creators,>

No they are not. I make a hammer. I make an essay. I make a hamburger. My wife and I do not beget any of those. We beget children. We cannot beget mice (sorry, Stuart Little!). We may choose not to beget, but that which we beget are what we are. Human beings, "endowed by their Creator etc."

That which we create, we own, until sold. That which we beget, we cannot own, we cannot sell.

Otherwise our children are our slaves, our property, to do with what we please, to kill if we feel like, with impugnity in utero because the curious laws of our primitive tribe allow it, or afterward, if we can get away with it.

If our children are mere "blobs of cells," well, so are you. Which you are not, I gather, you will admit, at least to the extent of your own right to life, liberty, and the happiness of pursuit.

if you don't think that making love makes kids, try refraining from it and see how many kids you get.

933 Salamantis  Wed, Feb 11, 2009 9:45:19pm

re: #930 Arkay

All that would have has to have happened in the last two millennia would be for 50 thousand people to have been killed per year in the name of one faith or another to equal that figure, and who can credibly deny that the global annual religious body count has been vastly higher for most of our recorded history?

Would you really prefer a second century just like the one ending, or would you prefer 50,000 dead a year? Your call.

I would prefer neither. Can't we just get people to stop oppressing, exploiting, coercing, torturing and killing each other for politics OR religion?

934 Arkay  Wed, Feb 11, 2009 9:49:14pm

If our children are mere "blobs of cells," well, so are you. Which you are not, I gather, you will admit, at least to the extent of your own right to life, liberty, and the happiness of pursuit.>

"I've noticed that everyone who supports abortion appears to already have been born." - Ronald Reagan

935 Arkay  Wed, Feb 11, 2009 9:51:36pm

I would prefer neither. Can't we just get people to stop oppressing, exploiting, coercing, torturing and killing each other for politics OR religion?>

Because one of our ancestors took an apple and munched it without asking permission first.

Metaphorically of course.

More concretely: as stated above, "the fallenness of man is one Christian doctrine proven on the front page of the daily paper." - C.S. Lewis

936 Arkay  Wed, Feb 11, 2009 9:55:22pm

But you are right about one thing; that feeling of gladness and gratitute was not addressed to my parents, but neither was it addressed to any deity; rather, it was addressed to the universe at large, without any illusion that that universe could receive and comprehend it.>

"Luke, you have taken your first step into a larger world."

(Now I'M quoting childrens' fantasies. Gah. I'm going to bed.)

937 Arkay  Wed, Feb 11, 2009 9:58:05pm

Last question: Have you ever considered the possibility that the story of Cain and Abel is an obscure race-memory of our extermination of the Neandertals?

938 Salamantis  Wed, Feb 11, 2009 9:58:30pm

re: #934 Arkay

If our children are mere "blobs of cells," well, so are you. Which you are not, I gather, you will admit, at least to the extent of your own right to life, liberty, and the happiness of pursuit.>

"I've noticed that everyone who supports abortion appears to already have been born." - Ronald Reagan

The Fundamentals

"Abortion is murder!", the witch-burners bray
As they kneel on their hard wooden floors to pray
That all the damned heathens will see the light
And be saved from Hell's bondage by bonfire bright
And Cain's crosses glowing in southern night.

Our mothers and sisters and daughters and wives
Are reduced to receptacles, their whole lives
Possessed by one purpose: to nurture cells
More worthy of life, for they might be male
Like Jesus - thus wombs are warped into jails.

Poor Eve is the pattern primordial, damned
By gender, as race consigned sons of Ham
To servitude, their God-burned cross their coal
Complexion, and if one should flee their fold
Love says, "Scourge the body to save the soul."

If knowledge of ethics is primal sin
Then 'teaching all nations' commits again
The error, but teach they must, for their bane
Is difference; they're driven to all souls train
For Heaven, where all seraphs sing the same.

939 Salamantis  Wed, Feb 11, 2009 9:59:28pm

Pastoral Counseling

Her weeping is a tiny, tinny sound
Crawling from the fallen receiver.
Precautions have failed us. We have
A Situation to address. She
Came to me for consolation
A troubled teen unable to
Handle her desires: nor I mine.
Her flesh was firm and ripe
And mine weak.
I have betrayed faith, flock, family
And the trust they and this girlchild
Placed in me. Unable to
Bear this revelation spreading further
I choose my sole recourse, to betray anew
And to embrace iniquity and
Lie with abomination.
I lift the receiver and speak to her
In practiced tones, both balming and commanding.
Go to the clinic, I tell her; I'll pay for it.
And shiver as ghost nails
Rake my back like a lover's clutches:
A dead hare crossing the grave of my convictions.

940 Salamantis  Wed, Feb 11, 2009 10:00:12pm

Lenses

We are wanderers all
In the shapeshifting dunes of our days
Seeking amidst the sandstorms
The sight of a sheltered course
So we sift our pasts to cast our futures
And grind lenses to focus our lives.
Most are less than original
But each has its own eccentricities
Fitted for one eye, one terrain;
No lens is universal, and no path.

Most of us hide our quirks of vision
From others, and even from ourselves
Lest some fatal slip should betray us
And hew to some hard line or other
Packed by souls of similar stripe
Who confuse the safety of numbers
With the security of a way well chosen
And who, fearing the very existence
Of the walkers of other ways
As challenges to their own the wisdom of their own decisions
Strive to herd those they must consider misled
Back to the 'proper' route, or failing that
Seek to end their journeys.

But some crazed few of us
Too honest for our own damned good
Craft our lenses from every gritty grain
Of the wide beach of experience
Fusing them carefully in insight's crucible
Until they crystallize clean and true
And then we wave them radiantly
Before the wandering world.

These folks or followed, or killed, or both.
Poets and messiahs are the glaziers
Of living visions, and well wrought lenses
May powerfully concentrate the common gaze
Promising pathfinding clarity.
But- remember this:
Art is metaphor, and metaphors are chameleons.
They are colored by our journeys
As surely as they shape them.
Empty and aimless are those who lack lenses
If such pathless ones exist
But stumbling blind are those who
Given the lenses of others
Wear them as if they were windowpanes
And polish them not with their lives.

941 Arkay  Wed, Feb 11, 2009 10:01:53pm

As for your apparently all-encompassing animus to all things Heinlein, do you feel the same way towards, for instance, TANSTAAFL?

The stopped-clock principle, sir, applies here.

If you re-read all of the plethora of Heinlein quotes that people routinely reference, you might rediscover some modicum of insight and value there. Nevertheless, an ad hominem attack upon an author does not debunk an argument, which stands or falls on its own merits and deserts, regardless of its source.>

Well, there is a pattern to Heinlein's BS, and it is his endless desire to justify his schtuppery. He is worth reading: just not worth quoting in a serious political debate. "The errors of great men are sometimes more instructive than their successes." - Nietzsche, referring to himself (for good reason), 1888.

942 Salamantis  Wed, Feb 11, 2009 10:02:49pm

re: #935 Arkay

I would prefer neither. Can't we just get people to stop oppressing, exploiting, coercing, torturing and killing each other for politics OR religion?>

Because one of our ancestors took an apple and munched it without asking permission first.

Metaphorically of course.

According to scripture,

More concretely: as stated above, "the fallenness of man is one Christian doctrine proven on the front page of the daily paper." - C.S. Lewis

[Link: www.sanfords.net...]

943 Arkay  Wed, Feb 11, 2009 10:03:14pm

Aristotle said it best. "People will accept the most abject nonsense if it rhymes and is set to music." Goo goo goo joob.

944 Salamantis  Wed, Feb 11, 2009 10:04:33pm

re: #941 Arkay

As for your apparently all-encompassing animus to all things Heinlein, do you feel the same way towards, for instance, TANSTAAFL?

The stopped-clock principle, sir, applies here.

If you re-read all of the plethora of Heinlein quotes that people routinely reference, you might rediscover some modicum of insight and value there. Nevertheless, an ad hominem attack upon an author does not debunk an argument, which stands or falls on its own merits and deserts, regardless of its source.>

Well, there is a pattern to Heinlein's BS, and it is his endless desire to justify his schtuppery. He is worth reading: just not worth quoting in a serious political debate. "The errors of great men are sometimes more instructive than their successes." - Nietzsche, referring to himself (for good reason), 1888.

Actually, Heinlein is a great source of libertarian thinking. And Nietszche also said "All great truths are simple; is that not doubly a lie?"

945 Salamantis  Wed, Feb 11, 2009 10:06:43pm

re: #943 Arkay

Aristotle said it best. "People will accept the most abject nonsense if it rhymes and is set to music." Goo goo goo joob.

Snideness does not constitute rebuttal.

946 Arkay  Wed, Feb 11, 2009 10:10:05pm

Actually, Heinlein is a great source of libertarian thinking. >

Libertarianism is Republicanism minus Republican regard for human rights, or in other words, naked greed and (in certain settings) xenophobia. It tries to create a world on GOP principles while ignoring the basic truth of the fallenness of man. IOW, intellectual flat-earthism, rooted in falsehood; its "roots were formed by twisted roots."

A "libertarian" is an intellectual teenager. No matter how old.

947 Salamantis  Wed, Feb 11, 2009 10:11:17pm

re: #937 Arkay

Last question: Have you ever considered the possibility that the story of Cain and Abel is an obscure race-memory of our extermination of the Neandertals?

No; if it is a memory of anything, it is a memory of the warfare between nomadic hunter gatherers and settled farmer ranchers.

948 Salamantis  Wed, Feb 11, 2009 10:13:16pm

re: #946 Arkay

Actually, Heinlein is a great source of libertarian thinking. >

Libertarianism is Republicanism minus Republican regard for human rights, or in other words, naked greed and (in certain settings) xenophobia. It tries to create a world on GOP principles while ignoring the basic truth of the fallenness of man. IOW, intellectual flat-earthism, rooted in falsehood; its "roots were formed by twisted roots."

A "libertarian" is an intellectual teenager. No matter how old.

Exactly the opinion that I would expect from people who would flee the moors of their frightening freedom into the comforting pens of circumscribing dogma.

949 Salamantis  Wed, Feb 11, 2009 10:15:27pm

re: #936 Arkay

But you are right about one thing; that feeling of gladness and gratitute was not addressed to my parents, but neither was it addressed to any deity; rather, it was addressed to the universe at large, without any illusion that that universe could receive and comprehend it.>

"Luke, you have taken your first step into a larger world."

(Now I'M quoting childrens' fantasies. Gah. I'm going to bed.)

I've been inhabiting that larger world for many years now.

950 Arkay  Wed, Feb 11, 2009 10:16:06pm

If you're going to quote bad poetry, why not go for the gold with some Nietzschean "From High Mountains" or some such? That would be more impressive than witches and abortions and burnings--oh my! (BTW, they never burned witches; they burned heretics. Witches were hanged.)

951 Arkay  Wed, Feb 11, 2009 10:20:18pm

Exactly the opinion that I would expect from people who would flee the moors of their frightening freedom into the comforting pens of circumscribing dogma.>

It's not the moors of frightening freedom to comforting pens: it is fleeing barbarian hinterlands ranged with bandits for a fairly orderly civillization.

"Have you read any Milton, Captain?" - Khan

952 Salamantis  Wed, Feb 11, 2009 10:20:29pm

re: #950 Arkay

If you're going to quote bad poetry, why not go for the gold with some Nietzschean "From High Mountains" or some such? That would be more impressive than witches and abortions and burnings--oh my! (BTW, they never burned witches; they burned heretics. Witches were hanged.)

Actually, I wrote that 'bad poetry.' A good deal of my work has been published. And, afaik, the last recorded example of a witch-burning was in Mexico, in 1954.

953 Salamantis  Wed, Feb 11, 2009 10:21:38pm

re: #951 Arkay

Exactly the opinion that I would expect from people who would flee the moors of their frightening freedom into the comforting pens of circumscribing dogma.>

It's not the moors of frightening freedom to comforting pens: it is fleeing barbarian hinterlands ranged with bandits for a fairly orderly civillization.

"Have you read any Milton, Captain?" - Khan

Yeah, and Mussolini made the trains run on time. But at what cost to freedom?

954 Arkay  Wed, Feb 11, 2009 10:22:16pm

No; if it is a memory of anything, it is a memory of the warfare between nomadic hunter gatherers and settled farmer ranchers.>

I'll buy that. Good night.

955 cantrecant  Wed, Feb 11, 2009 11:24:47pm

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion...

The religions of Secular Humanism, Materialism, and Hyper-rationalism are evident exceptions. And every effort is expended by the zealots of those religions to tinker the constitution away from its Judeo-Christian basis as though that corner stone is rather an accidental unsightly outdated stucco that needs to be removed from the edifice instead of what it is: the worldview that gave birth to the US constitution. Or perhaps I'm too naive: perhaps many of them really are only intent on destroying as quickly as possible the most successful nation in history. If anything, it's time for the US constitution to become more Christian rather than less to counteract the relentless detrimental effects of those ungodly religions in recent decades. They tinkered the ten commandments out of the court room, prayer out of the schools, permission for infanticide and euthanasia into the law books. How's that working? I haven't noticed that American culture has slowed its degeneration. Perhaps I need to give it more time. Or could it be that those tinkerings were not improvements but part and parcel of degeneration? Is there a nation whose greatness has not eventually degenerated and passed away?

Why would anyone be so sure that moving away from Christianity, from which the constitution sprang, is good for the nation? Or has any other worldview produced a better constitution?

Or perhaps obsessing over evolutionary theory will lead back to greatness.

956 Salamantis  Wed, Feb 11, 2009 11:43:57pm

re: #955 cantrecant

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion...

The religions of Secular Humanism, Materialism, and Hyper-rationalism are evident exceptions. And every effort is expended by the zealots of those religions to tinker the constitution away from its Judeo-Christian basis as though that corner stone is rather an accidental unsightly outdated stucco that needs to be removed from the edifice instead of what it is: the worldview that gave birth to the US constitution. Or perhaps I'm too naive: perhaps many of them really are only intent on destroying as quickly as possible the most successful nation in history. If anything, it's time for the US constitution to become more Christian rather than less to counteract the relentless detrimental effects of those ungodly religions in recent decades. They tinkered the ten commandments out of the court room, prayer out of the schools, permission for infanticide and euthanasia into the law books. How's that working? I haven't noticed that American culture has slowed its degeneration. Perhaps I need to give it more time. Or could it be that those tinkerings were not improvements but part and parcel of degeneration? Is there a nation whose greatness has not eventually degenerated and passed away?

Why would anyone be so sure that moving away from Christianity, from which the constitution sprang, is good for the nation? Or has any other worldview produced a better constitution?

Or perhaps obsessing over evolutionary theory will lead back to greatness.

Actually, the US has always been a secular constitutional democracy that enshrined freedom for all faiths, and favoritism towards none. It is as solidly rooted in Greco-Roman Paganism as it is in Judeo-Christianity. And when you find the lobby striving to have atheism taught in public high school science classes the way the creationists are pushing for their own pet religious dogmas to be shoehorned into the naive and pliable minds of other peoples' kids in public high school science classrooms, you be sure and let me know.

957 Arkay  Thu, Feb 12, 2009 4:07:27am

And when you find the lobby striving to have atheism taught in public high school science classes the way the creationists are pushing for their own pet religious dogmas to be shoehorned into the naive and pliable minds of other peoples' kids in public high school science classrooms, you be sure and let me know.
>

They don't worry about the science classes. They've got that covered.

They concentrate on where it's important: political science, sociology, teaching, social work, journalism. And the arts. Try declaring yourself a Republican as a teaching or arts major in any major university and see how long you last. Really, in the arts, all you have to do to arouse their hatred and ire is have a love for the human form instead of--what was it Heinlein called it?--"A catastrophe in a junkyard". (To see what I mean, check into the career of Fredrick Hart, creator of the sculpture "Ex Nihilo" on the National Cathedral in Washington. See what those who hated his art were willing to do to it.... far worse than vandalism, IMHO.)

958 Arkay  Thu, Feb 12, 2009 4:11:51am

PS no mo "no mo pomo" postings from me today. This website is 'NSFW'--the screening program in use at my place of employment blocks access.

959 Arkay  Thu, Feb 12, 2009 4:16:40am

And, afaik, the last recorded example of a witch-burning was in Mexico, in 1954.>

The mob has simply switched targets. The last example of witchburning I know of was Sarah Palin in the recent campaign. ("Well we did do the nose." "And the hat!")

960 archer50  Thu, Feb 12, 2009 4:44:20am

Wow, where to begin...

Let us try to keep this simple. The establishment clause is not about spending money on a hundred different religious schools to improve a building or a road to that building, and trying to connect the two shows your bias. Worse it shows your TOTAL lack of historical knowledge.

In addition, if you are serious about separating the two completely, you should be first in line to protest any threats made by the government to tax a church because the GOVERNMENT doesn't like what it says politically. If there is a bright line, then there is a bright line for all.

Clearly, history has shown the issue over whether the government should be involved in "establishing a religion" is what the founders were worried about, and rightly so. I think common sense should prevail when trying to decide whether or not giving money for construction or repair of a building is really "establishing a religion" especially if the money is available for all religion or non-religion based institutions. I would guess the majority of the taxes that will be collected over the next two generations to pay for this nightmare will be from those of some kind of faith.

Is it OK to take from the religious to pay for the non-religious exclusively?

RW/Fla

961 Arkay  Thu, Feb 12, 2009 5:57:21am

And, afaik, the last recorded example of a witch-burning was in Mexico, in 1954.>

Leaving aside the above snarky remark--the last recorded example of witch-killing was January 26, 2009 in Malawi.

([Link: www.dailytimes.bppmw.com...]

Witch-killings happen *all the time* but they do not happen where Christianity is strong, for Christians cheerfully disregard "pagan magic" as such as the harmless BS it is. Witch-killings happen where Christianity is weak and paganism is strong. Someone above claimed to be a Pagan. Well, good on you. Just remember that the mob coming to kill you for witchcraft will not be made up of Minnesota Lutherans--it will be made up of fellow believers, because they believe (foolishly) that you can actually harm them with sprinkled herbs and lighted candles. A Christian is not so stupid as that.

962 Arkay  Thu, Feb 12, 2009 6:00:58am

Is it OK to take from the religious to pay for the non-religious exclusively?>

To hear a lot of folk in the neighborhood, it is not only OK, it is required by law.

963 Yashmak  Thu, Feb 12, 2009 8:20:56am

re: #883 Arkay

I know a guy by the name of Whittaker Chambers who believed exactly as you do. Then he saw his newborn daughter's ears. You might want to read about it--it's in his book Witness.

So now you presume not only to know how I'm 'wired', but also what I believe. You're a real piece of work.

964 Arkay  Thu, Feb 12, 2009 10:03:18am

So now you presume not only to know how I'm 'wired', but also what I believe. You're a real piece of work.>

Indeed I am! And so are you.


What a piece of work is a man, how noble in reason, how
infinite in faculties, in form and moving how express and
admirable, in action how like an angel, in apprehension how like
a god! the beauty of the world, the paragon of animals—

I don't think THAT qualifies as "bad poetry." Normally I'm no judge, but in this case, it's the Bard, so I think it will do.

965 Yashmak  Thu, Feb 12, 2009 12:15:08pm

re: #964 Arkay

Normally I'm no judge,

Uh huh, except when telling people how they're wired, and what they think.

966 Arkay  Thu, Feb 12, 2009 12:28:24pm

...no judge of good poetry. (Bad poetry is easy to spot, as further above.)

Actually only you have a choice on how you want to be judged. You can be judged as being among Paragon of Animals, with an inherent right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, or in the alternative, its negation--that is, you can take a heavily armed thug who judges you have none of those things but wants your life, freedom, and wife. I have a funny feeling that if you were being judged by the aforesaid thug, you'd be thinking much better of the alternative.

967 Arkay  Thu, Feb 12, 2009 12:31:22pm

"Everyone must judge in order to live. He who refuses to judge is a moral coward--with a short life span." -- not Lazarus Long

968 Arkay  Thu, Feb 12, 2009 12:44:56pm

I notice that you didn't mention the religious predispositions of Slobodon Milosevic and Ratko Mladic. >

I'll mention it now. Mladic was an atheist thug; Slobo, an autotheist.

969 Arkay  Thu, Feb 12, 2009 12:53:12pm

Yeah, and Mussolini made the trains run on time. But at what cost to freedom?>

Tell ya what. I'll take the metaphorical alabaster city with streets paved with gold; you can have the metaphorical stone knives and bearskins. Deal?

970 Yashmak  Thu, Feb 12, 2009 2:25:41pm

re: #967 Arkay

"Everyone must judge in order to live. He who refuses to judge is a moral coward--with a short life span." -- not Lazarus Long

Matt. 7:1 "Do not judge, or you too will be judged."

I doubt the apostle Matthew was a coward.

971 Arkay  Thu, Feb 12, 2009 3:42:08pm

Actually, Matthew didn't say that. It was a certain unnamed Son of the Living God. The Matthew in question was just taking notes at the time.

972 Arkay  Thu, Feb 12, 2009 3:52:02pm

Come to think of it, if the standard is, "judge not lest ye be judged," and I judge you to be a marvellous creature of immeasurable worth who is immortal and made to stand in the light of God..... I'm quite willing to be judged by that standard myself.

973 Salamantis  Thu, Feb 12, 2009 6:17:29pm

re: #961 Arkay

And, afaik, the last recorded example of a witch-burning was in Mexico, in 1954.>

Leaving aside the above snarky remark--the last recorded example of witch-killing was January 26, 2009 in Malawi.

([Link: www.dailytimes.bppmw.com...]

Witch-killings happen *all the time* but they do not happen where Christianity is strong, for Christians cheerfully disregard "pagan magic" as such as the harmless BS it is. Witch-killings happen where Christianity is weak and paganism is strong. Someone above claimed to be a Pagan. Well, good on you. Just remember that the mob coming to kill you for witchcraft will not be made up of Minnesota Lutherans--it will be made up of fellow believers, because they believe (foolishly) that you can actually harm them with sprinkled herbs and lighted candles. A Christian is not so stupid as that.

I should have said the last recorded witch-burning in the Western Hemisphere. And the burners were rural Mexican Catholics (I don't think they asked their priest's permission).

I myself am more concerned with Biblical Literalists, and whether they'll feel an obligation to act upon their convictions regarding Exodus 22:18.

974 Salamantis  Thu, Feb 12, 2009 6:22:00pm

re: #969 Arkay

Yeah, and Mussolini made the trains run on time. But at what cost to freedom?>

Tell ya what. I'll take the metaphorical alabaster city with streets paved with gold; you can have the metaphorical stone knives and bearskins. Deal?

I'd rather live in the shining city on a hill, where freedom and responsibility, rights and obligations, are evenly leavened. They are, after all, correlative.

975 Salamantis  Thu, Feb 12, 2009 6:23:44pm

re: #971 Arkay

Actually, Matthew didn't say that. It was a certain unnamed Son of the Living God. The Matthew in question was just taking notes at the time.

The Matthew in question was long dead before the gospel that bears his name was ever written. And the same with Mark, Luke and John.

976 Salamantis  Thu, Feb 12, 2009 6:25:50pm

re: #966 Arkay

...no judge of good poetry. (Bad poetry is easy to spot, as further above.)

Actually only you have a choice on how you want to be judged. You can be judged as being among Paragon of Animals, with an inherent right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, or in the alternative, its negation--that is, you can take a heavily armed thug who judges you have none of those things but wants your life, freedom, and wife. I have a funny feeling that if you were being judged by the aforesaid thug, you'd be thinking much better of the alternative.

In theocracies, those thugs are frequently clerics.

977 cantrecant  Thu, Feb 12, 2009 10:43:27pm

re: #956 Salamantis

Actually, the US has always been a secular constitutional democracy that enshrined freedom for all faiths, and favoritism towards none. It is as solidly rooted in Greco-Roman Paganism as it is in Judeo-Christianity. And when you find the lobby striving to have atheism taught in public high school science classes the way the creationists are pushing for their own pet religious dogmas to be shoehorned into the naive and pliable minds of other peoples' kids in public high school science classrooms, you be sure and let me know.

By Zeus and Jupiter, that's an interesting assertion. If it's at least as solidly grounded in Paganism as Judeo-Christianity then I would expect about half the founding fathers must have been Pagans; Greco-Roman no less. Which of the founding fathers were Greco-Roman Pagans? On the contrary the founding fathers were overwhelmingly Christian, and they produced a constitution accordingly.

Actually, the facts are clear that the US is the best example to date of a Christian constitutional democracy -- i.e. a constitution informed by Christian principles. The subtle thing is that in order to be authentically Christian it can't explicitly legislate belief in Christ since that must be an individual free choice. The hallmarks of a Christian government are recognition of the inalienable rights of the individual conferred by the Creator (not the government), and compassion for the weak.

978 Salamantis  Fri, Feb 13, 2009 12:06:45am

re: #977 cantrecant

By Zeus and Jupiter, that's an interesting assertion. If it's at least as solidly grounded in Paganism as Judeo-Christianity then I would expect about half the founding fathers must have been Pagans; Greco-Roman no less. Which of the founding fathers were Greco-Roman Pagans? On the contrary the founding fathers were overwhelmingly Christian, and they produced a constitution accordingly.

Actually, the facts are clear that the US is the best example to date of a Christian constitutional democracy -- i.e. a constitution informed by Christian principles. The subtle thing is that in order to be authentically Christian it can't explicitly legislate belief in Christ since that must be an individual free choice. The hallmarks of a Christian government are recognition of the inalienable rights of the individual conferred by the Creator (not the government), and compassion for the weak.

Actually, a lot (perhaps most) of the Founding Fathers were Deists, and were not overly fond of some of the repressive hijinx indulged in by colonial Christian clerics of the day, who apparently had fled European religious persecution only to establish their own version of it when they arrived on American shores.

979 Yashmak  Fri, Feb 13, 2009 7:28:46am

re: #971 Arkay

Actually, Matthew didn't say that. It was a certain unnamed Son of the Living God. The Matthew in question was just taking notes at the time.

Uh, yeah, that was the whole point.

980 Arkay  Fri, Feb 13, 2009 1:52:23pm

And the burners were rural Mexican Catholics (I don't think they asked their priest's permission).>

Not very good Catholics, I should say....

Actually, a lot (perhaps most) of the Founding Fathers were Deists, and were not overly fond of some of the repressive hijinx indulged in by colonial Christian clerics of the day, who apparently had fled European religious persecution only to establish their own version of it when they arrived on American shores.>

Well, just know that the witchcraft trials you're citing tended to happen after particularly rainy harvest seasons. That tends to encourage the growth of ergot, a grain fungus that grows on rye. Ergot is the source of lysergic acid diethylamide. In that context, the witch trials make a little more sense. (If you were a 17th century colonist and didn't know what LSD was and had a very limited education, ... well, how would YOU react to a bad acid trip?)

OTOH, the Mormons, for their faults, never burned witches, so you can't explain a witch burner by saying (pace James Kirk): "I think he did a little too much LDS."

981 Arkay  Fri, Feb 13, 2009 2:03:13pm

Actually, a lot (perhaps most) of the Founding Fathers were Deists, >

Well, they didn't exactly bar religious believers from office, did they? (And one could profitably note that not a few of these "agnostics" (say, Ben Franklin* or Thomas Jefferson) suffered from Robert A. Heinlein's Disease.... :0))

(In my experience, it's funny how many loud and aggressive anti-Christian secularists have sex lives that they'd rather not have examined too closely, particularly by a confessor or equivalent.)

(As for my own sex life? I'd tell you but then I'd have to wake you.)

But don't get me wrong. I'm not arguing for a theocracy. Risen Christ forbid! The only theocracy I want to live in is in the next world. So long as I have to live under men, my freedom is guaranteed ONLY by a secular democratic republic--but a secular democratic republic that gives me (a) the elbow room to practice my faith and (b) which doesn't kick me to the curb when participating in the public square. Otherwise it ceases to be a democratic republic and becomes in the end a thugocracy.

*The best line in the JOHN ADAMS miniseries is when Abigail Adams in-politically and deliberately mentions "Mrs. Franklin" in front of Mr. Franklin and his French mistress.....

982 Salamantis  Fri, Feb 13, 2009 5:25:59pm

re: #980 Arkay

And the burners were rural Mexican Catholics (I don't think they asked their priest's permission).>

Not very good Catholics, I should say....

Actually, a lot (perhaps most) of the Founding Fathers were Deists, and were not overly fond of some of the repressive hijinx indulged in by colonial Christian clerics of the day, who apparently had fled European religious persecution only to establish their own version of it when they arrived on American shores.>

Well, just know that the witchcraft trials you're citing tended to happen after particularly rainy harvest seasons. That tends to encourage the growth of ergot, a grain fungus that grows on rye. Ergot is the source of lysergic acid diethylamide. In that context, the witch trials make a little more sense. (If you were a 17th century colonist and didn't know what LSD was and had a very limited education, ... well, how would YOU react to a bad acid trip?)

OTOH, the Mormons, for their faults, never burned witches, so you can't explain a witch burner by saying (pace James Kirk): "I think he did a little too much LDS."

Ergotism is also known as St. Anthony's Fire:

[Link: www.medicinenet.com...]

Europe at the time was quite familiar with it; apparently, the Salem Puritans were not.

983 Arkay  Sat, Feb 14, 2009 2:06:20am

In theocracies, those thugs are frequently clerics.>

The nub of the argument is this. You fear theocrats. I fear atheocrats. The latter rule in this century; the former do not.

984 Arkay  Sat, Feb 14, 2009 2:07:23am

Correction: the former do not in historically Christian regions. (Islamic theocracy is not to be borne.)

985 SalsaNChips  Sat, Feb 14, 2009 5:42:09am

I disagree with the subject of this thread.

“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion”

does not mean

“Congress shall make a law censoring or preventing the practice of religion”

This applies to everybody – Christians, Jews, Muslims, Hindus, etc. The fact that a Christian (Huckabee) chose to say something about it does not make it strictly a Christian issue.

It’s easy to throw stones at WND, but if you read the article, all they are saying is this is a “deliberate attempt to censor religious speech and worship on school campuses”.

Hardly government endorsement of religion, a violation of the First Amendment, IMHO.


This article has been archived.
Comments are closed.

Jump to top

Create a PageThis is the LGF Pages posting bookmarklet. To use it, drag this button to your browser's bookmark bar, and title it 'LGF Pages' (or whatever you like). Then browse to a site you want to post, select some text on the page to use for a quote, click the bookmarklet, and the Pages posting window will appear with the title, text, and any embedded video or audio files already filled in, ready to go.
Or... you can just click this button to open the Pages posting window right away.
Last updated: 2023-04-04 11:11 am PDT
LGF User's Guide RSS Feeds

Help support Little Green Footballs!

Subscribe now for ad-free access!Register and sign in to a free LGF account before subscribing, and your ad-free access will be automatically enabled.

Donate with
PayPal
Cash.app
Recent PagesClick to refresh
The Pandemic Cost 7 Million Lives, but Talks to Prevent a Repeat Stall In late 2021, as the world reeled from the arrival of the highly contagious omicron variant of the coronavirus, representatives of almost 200 countries met - some online, some in-person in Geneva - hoping to forestall a future worldwide ...
Cheechako
2 days ago
Views: 104 • Comments: 0 • Rating: 1
Texas County at Center of Border Fight Is Overwhelmed by Migrant Deaths EAGLE PASS, Tex. - The undertaker lighted a cigarette and held it between his latex-gloved fingers as he stood over the bloated body bag lying in the bed of his battered pickup truck. The woman had been fished out ...
Cheechako
2 weeks ago
Views: 270 • Comments: 0 • Rating: 1