Belated Happy Mother's Day

It's a bit late, I know. So sue me. (For any lurking litigious whack-jobs and ambulance-chasers, I'm just kidding).

But for what it's worth, happy mother's day to all the many thousands of mothers frequenting my blog, and hanging on my every word. God bless you all.

"God could not be everywhere and therefore he made mothers." -- Jewish proverb

"My mother was the most beautiful woman I ever saw. All I am I owe to my mother. I attribute all my success in life to the moral, intellectual and physical education I received from her." -- George Washington (1732-1799)

16Then came there two women, that were harlots, unto the king, and stood before him.

17And the one woman said, O my lord, I and this woman dwell in one house; and I was delivered of a child with her in the house.

18And it came to pass the third day after that I was delivered, that this woman was delivered also: and we were together; there was no stranger with us in the house, save we two in the house.

19And this woman's child died in the night; because she overlaid it.

20And she arose at midnight, and took my son from beside me, while thine handmaid slept, and laid it in her bosom, and laid her dead child in my bosom.

21And when I rose in the morning to give my child suck, behold, it was dead: but when I had considered it in the morning, behold, it was not my son, which I did bear.

22And the other woman said, Nay; but the living is my son, and the dead is thy son. And this said, No; but the dead is thy son, and the living is my son. Thus they spake before the king.

23Then said the king, The one saith, This is my son that liveth, and thy son is the dead: and the other saith, Nay; but thy son is the dead, and my son is the living.

24And the king said, Bring me a sword. And they brought a sword before the king.

25And the king said, Divide the living child in two, and give half to the one, and half to the other.

26Then spake the woman whose the living child was unto the king, for her bowels yearned upon her son, and she said, O my lord, give her the living child, and in no wise slay it. But the other said, Let it be neither mine nor thine, but divide it.

27Then the king answered and said, Give her the living child, and in no wise slay it: she is the mother thereof.

28And all Israel heard of the judgment which the king had judged; and they feared the king: for they saw that the wisdom of God was in him, to do judgment.--1 Kings 3: 16-28

Guest-Bloggin' Infidel

Here's the guest post I authored for Vox's blog, which originally appeared last saturday. This is for anyone who may have missed it the first time around, or for those who found its literary value so ineffably splendiferous that only a second reading would suffice.

Brief Disclaimer-- For those who hated the post, finding themselves frothing in their beards over its words, smothering themselves with their prayer rugs in frustration, beating themselves over the head with a Koran until senseless, or cleaning their AK-47s in great agitation, I offer this gentle reminder:

The Truth often hurts.

Good to Be Back

Like the swallows of San Juan Capistrano, I've returned, following a brief--and wholly involuntary--hiatus. I had some serious problems with AOL and my wonderful pc; and as a result, I've missed out on quite a lot. It'll take me forever and a day to catch up on my reading, so everyone bear with me.

I've suffered through some terrible internet withdrawal symptoms: restless sleep and insomnia, fits of shaking, intense sweats, blogospheric delirium tremens--you know, the usual. Now I can empathize with Robert Downey, Jr. and Whitney Houston, the poor things.

But for the nonce, all is well. I see no bloodstains in the Haloscan comments section, so it seems everyone comported themselves well, while I was away. Some of the nicest, most civil folks in the Matrix frequent my blog. I hope everyone's safe and sound, and doing just dandy.

It's good to be back.

Not Quite the End of the World

Guys & Gals:

Thanks for all of your great comments. My PC had a nooc-yuh-luhr meltdown, so that's the reason why I haven't commented or posted on my blog. That goes the same for my non-appearance in the discussion on my post over at Vox's. Could this have happened at a worse time?! Arrgh!

As I type these words, I'm sitting at a public PC at my wife's place of employment. Hopefully, I'll have the problems corrected & be back to posting & commenting regularly, in the next few days. I miss the arguing, kidding around, & ranting, so rest assured--I shall return!

Until then, God bless & keep each & every one of you.

High School Political Antics

It seems the ACLU is defending the wrong person for the wrong reason, yet again. Boy, they're good at that.

A kid wears a t-shirt to school, which depicts a picture of Bush with the words "International Terrorist" in the caption.

So here's my question: If around Christmas, a kid wears a t-shirt sporting a picture of Christ, with the caption underneath: "Jesus is the Reason for the Season," will the ACLU be falling all over itself in defense of his religious liberty and freedom of expression?

It'll be a very Merry Christmas in North Korea, before that happens.

Founding Quotes of Note XXVIII

"The foundation of national morality must be laid in private families. ... How is it possible that Children can have any just Sense of the sacred Obligations of Morality or Religion if, from their earliest Infancy, they learn their Mothers live in habitual Infidelity to their fathers, and their fathers in as constant Infidelity to their Mothers?"--John Adams

The Roadmap to Oblivion

Here's a good article demonstrating our government's cluelessness, regarding the Jewish/"Palestinian" conflict:

It is a national disgrace that the U.S. government is spending $350 million more to subsidize the Palestinian Authority, which holds that no Jews are permitted to live within its territory or future nation. It is a national disgrace that the U.S. government would join with the rest of the anti-Semitic world to force Israel to abandon its own security needs and its own Jewish communities on historically Jewish lands. And it is a national disgrace that the U.S. government, while supposedly fighting a global war against Islamist terrorism, is appeasing it in the Arab-Israeli conflict.

Points for pondering.

Castaways

Found floating in cyberspace:


Hut on Fire


The only survivor of a shipwreck was washed up on a small, uninhabited island. He prayed feverishly for God to rescue him, and every day he scanned the horizon for help, but none seemed forthcoming. Exhausted, he eventually managed to build a little hut out of driftwood to protect him self from the elements, and to store his few possessions.

One day, after scavenging for food, he arrived home to find his little hut in flames, with smoke rolling up to the sky. The worst had happened, and everything was lost. He was stunned with disbelief, grief, and anger.

"God, how could you do this to me?" he cried.

Early the next day he was awakened by the sound of a ship that was approaching the island. It had come to rescue him.

"How did you know I was here?" Asked the weary man of his rescuers.

"We saw your smoke signal," they replied.

The Lord works in mysterious ways.

We are all castaways in this world of tragedy and corruption. Pilgrims passing over the cusp of eternity. Strangers in a strange land. But God has not forgotten us. Nor shall He. Someday He'll rescue us and take us all home. In the meantime, we must accept that "For now we see through a glass, darkly; but then face to face: now I know in part; but then shall I know even as also I am known."--1 Corinthians 13:12

Coming to America

I want to relate an interesting back-&-forth I observed, this past saturday.

That afternoon, my wife and I went to I-HOP for supper. For those who think I'm talking about B'rer Rabbit's house, that's an acronym for International House of Pancakes.

Our waiter was a polite man in his mid-to-late twenties, who spoke with a foreign accent. He was very attentive and eager to please.

In a private moment, my wife asked, "Is he Russian, or something?"

"I dunno," I said. "I haven't heard him speak enough to place his accent."

Our meal came. Midway through gorging myself on chicken tenders and a baked potato, I overheard a conversation between our waiter and another family he was serving, just a few booths away.

Turned out my wife was correct. He originally was from Russia. He had emigrated to the U.S. through legal channels, after many difficulties. It took him a year-and-a-half to learn English, and he accomplished this arduous task before stepping foot on American soil. He was well-spoken, and his accent was not thick or garbled.

What's the point of my story, you may ask? Well, I just noticed the glaring contrast between this hard-working guy and many immigrants from Mexico.

I've personally worked with Mexicans. In my experience, most speak either no English, or very little. When I see them out in public, clustered together like a gaggle of hens, they usually speak only Spanish. I see no interest on the majority's part in learning the language of the United States. In fact, just a few days ago, I was sitting in my car in the parking lot, while my wife grabbed a few items inside the nearest store; and I saw a man exit another store with a three or four year old boy in tow. As they crossed the parking lot, the man (presumably his father) gave vent to a staccato rapid-fire of pure Spanish. When children are small, and their brains soak up knowledge like sponges, that is the best time for teaching a language. I just shook my head and wondered at what I beheld. Of course, I don't know their situation. But was he doing his child a favor, by only conversing with him in a language most people in this country don't speak or understand? I overheard the manager of I-HOP complaining along these lines. She mentioned that hiring Mexicans is a nuisance (I'm paraphrasing, here), because none of them know even rudimentary English. She lamented the situation, saying that she's forced to manually take them and show them what must be done, each time she has a task for them.

Lest I be misunderstood, these are not isolated events. I see such things all the time. Nor am I suggesting that all Mexicans or Central Americans fall into this mold. I know that some come here legally, thirsting for the American Dream, as it were. I know some work hard, and become decent upstanding citizens. This isn't a blanket accusation or condemnation. I'm speaking merely of trends I've noticed in the news, and in my own experiences. Furthermore, the influx of Mexicans into my neck of the woods, alone, cannot possibly be explained as a product of legal immigration only. It's statistically impossible. Just a few short years ago, I didn't encounter one-sixth as many Mexicans as I do, now.

The gulf between integration and non-integration is wider than the distance between stars. I'd suggest asking the Romans, for the skeptics, but they're conspicuously absent from the discussion--and contemporary life.

Taxed to the Limit

In honor of income confiscation month, here's a quote from a little-known dead white racist male named Thomas Jefferson:

"To compel a man to furnish contributions of money for the propagation of opinions which he disbelieves and abhors is sinful and tyrannical. ... A wise and frugal government...shall not take from the mouth of labor the bread it has earned. ... Congress has not unlimited powers to provide for the general welfare but only those specifically enumerated. ... Would it not be better to simplify the system of taxation rather than to spread it over such a variety of subjects and pass through so many new hands?"

A few others:

"Government does not tax to get the money it needs; government always finds a need for the money it gets." --Ronald Reagan

"Government cannot make man richer, but it can make him poorer." --Ludwig von Mises

"We contend that for a nation to try to tax itself into prosperity is like a man standing in a bucket and trying to lift himself up by the handle." --Winston Churchill

"The way to crush the bourgeoisie is to grind them between the millstones of taxation and inflation." --Lenin

"The only difference between a tax man and a taxidermist is that the taxidermist leaves the skin." --Mark Twain

Deus Le Volt!

As everyone probably knows, by now, John Cardinal Ratzinger became the new pope, on Tuesday. Speaking to a herd of reporters just after his coronation, he told them: "I chose the name Benedict because I've always been a great fan of eggs benedict. Mmmmmm."

Nah, seriously, I'm glad a person close to the former pope took his place. I hope he's the kind of man John Paul II was, but that's a mighty big beanie to fill. May he not bow to the forces of evil running amok in our world. God bless him.

I was a little disappointed, I must admit. I relished the idea of a new warrior pope, perhaps like Pope Urban II, who preached the first crusade. There're a lot of infidels who need chasing out of our lands, and tons of jihadis in dire need of an arranged meeting with their maker.

Ah, well. What's that old Rolling Bones song say?:

You can't always get whatcha want. . .

Founding Quotes of Note XXVII

"Human government is more or less perfect as it approaches nearer or diverges farther from the imitation of this perfect plan of divine and moral government." --John Adams

Mr. Adams, you poor ol' theocrat. Don't you understand that there's a Wall of Manure separating religion from life?

Treason, Wetbacks, Citizenship, and Minutemen

According to a spokesman for the Minutemen, the ACLU is helping illegal aliens:

Grey Deacon told Joseph Farah's nationally syndicated "WorldNetDaily RadioActive" audience yesterday that ACLU monitors sent to the border to watch Minuteman activity and report civil-liberties abuses to authorities have begun flashing lights, sounding horns and warning off illegals and their "coyote" human smugglers from entering territory patrolled by the volunteers.

"They are actively engaging in criminal activity," said Deacon.

Deacon said the ACLU activists are resorting to new tactics because of the success the Minuteman Project is having in assisting the Border Patrol in spotting illegal aliens and in generating publicity about the insecure U.S.-Mexico border.

"The ACLU's position is that illegal aliens have a right to enter our border and stay in this country as long as they want," said Deacon. "That's what one of the leaders of the group told me personally."

This is putrid, treasonous behavior on the part of this leftist front group. How does aiding illegal aliens in evading apprehension fall under their purview? Do those four letters now stand for "Illegal Civil Liberties Union?" OK, it's the ICLU, then.

These people pose as defenders of freedom and champions of justice. In reality, they've done far more harm to this nation than good. The only freedom they defend is licentiousness, secularism, or treason. They do not champion justice, but leftist causes. As you can see, they've kicked it up a notch, and have no intention of stopping. I find them the most loathesome vandals of our society's mores working today. Like Huns pouring from the steppes, like barbarians clamoring at the gates, they're tearing down our country, one brick or fortress at a time.

As a brief aside, I want to address George W. Bush's characterization of the Minutemen as "vigilantes." This is poppycock. Our Founders formed this nation predicated upon the idea that it entails a government of the people, by the people, and for the people. Is that what we see happening, today? This administration and its many cogs thumbs its nose at the desires of the American people, regarding border security and immigration control. It has absolutely no regard for the will of the people. I truly believe it will take another terrorist attack of equal or greater devastation to 9/11 to awaken our "leaders" to the realities and dangers of loose immigration policies. Even then, I won't be surprised if they do not take the proper curbing actions.

The information I've gleaned in researching the Minutemen is that they embody the ideals once held dear in our country's early years: citizenry is more than simply saying, "I'm an Amurricuhn." It's an act. They've addressed a problem that our government refuses to deal with--and quite effectively, considering their limited range and resources. They're acting like militia members on the frontier; and indeed, that is what the border region is: a frontier between civilization and chaos. It must be strengthened. It must be held. I commend them for their efforts.

If vigilantism is protecting your homeland from foreign invasion, while g-men pick their noses and hang Spanish signs in their windows, then I'm all for the concept. Is it vigilantism for me to form a neighborhood watch? Is it vigilantism for me to hold a man at gun-point, after catching him breaking into my neighbor's house, around midnight?

If the answer is yes, then we need more of it.

Hubris of the Death-Gods

George Felos' ex-wife has involved herself in the Schiavo-Schindler situation, offering to review and analyze findings from the autopsy report.

What are her qualifications for doing such a thing, you might ask?

Well, she's a lawyer (pronounced lie-uhr, in Tennessee), and a licensed massage therapist.

Dunedin, Fla., attorney Constance d'Angelis was married to Felos, who represented Terri's husband Michael Schiavo.

When Terri Schiavo's condition was argued in court, d'Angelis presented a CT Scan and other medical records to assert Terri was in a "persistent vegetative state."

Now, d'Angelis claims she will be available to interpret the anticipated medical examiner's report.

According to a statement, "Upon the release of the autopsy report, [d'Angelis] can analyze the results and weigh in on the important matters of how -- by reason, not emotion -- the 'persistent vegetative state' diagnosis of Terri Schiavo was arrived at, and why."

Can you believe her audacity? That kind of gall would embitter a bottle of vinegar. Highly trained medical doctors--including neurologists--varied widely on Ms. Schiavo's condition; but we're supposed to lend credence to the views of a lawyer?

If you take this idjit seriously, you just might be in a persistent vegetative state.

Founding Quotes of Note XXVI

"History, by apprising [citizens] of the past, will enable them to judge of the future; it will avail them of the experience of other times and other nations; it will qualify them as judges of the actions and designs of men; it will enable them to know ambition under every disguise it may assume; and knowing it, to defeat its views." --Thomas Jefferson

And what better way to keep children nice and ignorant, than teaching "social studies" in schools?

History shows us the errors of humanity's ways. It's a time-spanning "What Not To Do" course, for all of us. Making the right decisions in life, and drawing the correct conclusions about where our country is heading and should be going, is a daunting task without at least a decent grasp of the history of our nation, and the world around us. In fact, it's kinda like a one-legged man trying to win a butt-kicking contest.

All is vanity.

Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it. --George Santayana, The Life of Reason, Volume 1, 1905

Jokes for the Fokes

The Collection plate

Every Sunday, a little old lady placed $1,000 in the collection plate. This went on for weeks until the pastor, overcome by curiosity, approached her.

"Ma'am, I couldn't help but notice that you put $1,000 a week in the collection plate," he stated.

"Why yes," she replied, "Every week, my son sends me money, and what I don't need, I give to the church."

The pastor replied, "That's wonderful. How much does he send you?"

The old lady said, "Oh, $20,000 a week."

The pastor was amazed. "Your son must be a very successful man. What does he do for a living?"

"He is a veterinarian," she answered.

"That is a very honorable profession," the pastor says....... "Where does he practice?"

The old lady says proudly, "Well, he has two cat houses in Las Vegas and one in Reno."


Here's another'n:


A guy walks into a bar with a duck on his head.

The bartender says, "Harry, what the heck happened to you?"

The duck says, "Stan, you wouldn't believe it if I told you. . . "

The Religion of Humanity

“I am convinced that the battle for humankind’s future must be waged and won in the public school classroom by teachers who correctly perceive their role as the proselytizers of a new faith: a religion of humanity that recognizes and respects the spark of what theologians call divinity in every human being. These teachers must embody the same selfless dedication as the most rabid fundamentalist preachers, for they will be ministers of another sort, utilizing a classroom instead of a pulpit to convey humanist values in whatever subject they teach, regardless of the educational level—preschool day care or large state university. The classroom must and will become an arena of conflict between the old and the new—the rotting corpse of Christianity, together with all its adjacent evils and misery, and the new faith of humanism.”– John Dunphy, "A Religion for a New Age," The Humanist, January–February 1983, p. 26.

Gotta love those government-run indoctrination centers, better known as "schools." Don't these comments make you want to find your happy place, and never come back?

Evolutionist Admissions of Bias

‘We take the side of science in spite of the patent absurdity of some of its constructs, in spite of its failure to fulfill many of its extravagant promises of health and life, in spite of the tolerance of the scientific community for unsubstantiated just-so stories, because we have a prior commitment, a commitment to materialism. It is not that the methods and institutions of science somehow compel us to accept a material explanation of the phenomenal world, but, on the contrary, that we are forced by our a priori adherence to material causes to create an apparatus of investigation and a set of concepts that produce material explanations, no matter how counter-intuitive, no matter how mystifying to the uninitiated. Moreover, that materialism is an absolute, for we cannot allow a Divine Foot in the door.’--Richard Lewontin, "Billions and Billions of Demons," The New York Review, p. 31, 9 January 1997.

‘Even if all the data point to an intelligent designer, such an hypothesis is excluded from science because it is not naturalistic’--S.C. Todd, correspondence to Nature, Sept. 1999.

And they call creationists biased and unscientific?

Blogathon for Bane

Bane sure could use a little help. And no, I'm not talking about the psychiatric variety. He's a good guy, and he keeps things interesting--at his blog, and elsewhere. Most of you are already familiar with him, I'm sure. Of late, his family has had many rivers to cross, and they've even overcome a few rapids. Through it all, he's kept his sense of humor and a heartful of love for his fellow man.

So break open your kids' piggy banks, slip a coupla bucks outta your hubby's wallet, or just help yourself to the contents of the offering plate, next Sunday--whatever it takes to help a fellow blogger in his time of need.

Go here for more information.

Not Neutral About God

From Meet the Press, 3/27/05:

"Look, I want to say generally, very briefly, that the mix of God and government, of religion and politics, is quintessentially American, and it was there at the beginning. The fact is that in the first American document, the Declaration of Independence, the founders of our country said that they were forming the new government to secure the rights to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness that they saw as the endowment of our Creator. So this government, this country was not neutral about God right at the outset.

"One, accepting that there is a Creator, so our existence here is not accidental. And secondly, that as a result of the creation, we have an inherent unity. We are all equal. We have equal opportunity for those rights. We are a country based on a vision, a belief in creationism. And part of that is not only the humans, who were created on the sixth day, but the natural Earth…America itself is a faith-based initiative….

"I think that the public square is greatly strengthened and enriched when people are prepared to speak, not just about secular notions of justice, but about the moral sense that our faith gives us. And again, I want to say that to me that is not un-American, that is very American. We are--our Constitution says we don't establish a religion, but it also says everybody has freedom of religion, and everybody has the right to speak their mind. And if your mind is faith-based, God bless you. Speak your mind."

"So though this is a nation that--the majority of which is Christian, I will say to you as a Jewish American that I believe in the 5,765 years of Jewish history, there has never been a country, other than Israel during certain times of its history, which has given Jews more freedom….That's the glory of this country and, frankly, the grace and gift of the Christians who founded the country and who continue to be the majority within it.

"And incidentally, I think this is an important message for us to convey to the rest of the world, because when--those rights that were in the Declaration of Independent, we didn't say that only Americans got this endowment from our Creator. That's a universal declaration of human rights….

"So, you know, I say to the--you can't separate God from America. You go right back to the Declaration of Independence. We have to always remember that the Constitution, in my opinion, promises freedom of religion, not freedom from religion. Washington reminded us in his farewell address that religion in a democracy is one of the sources of values we need, because in a democracy the state won't tell everybody what to do every moment."

In the main, this is a pretty remarkable commentary, considering its source: Joe Lieberman

Do Not Go Gibbering Into That Long Night

From a letter to World Net Daily:

What is it with you guys? Pushing your own agenda on god, evolution and religion. Do you have any balance in the editorial room? The evidence for evolution is overwhelming, but the evidence for a manmade god is not. The earth is but a speck in the cosmos, and there are probably tens of millions of planets with life forms. There are probably tens of million of other universes. Use your god-given brain and stop trying so hard to convince the masses, which are vulnerable because they are scared of death and need a reason for their brief existence on this planet.

Urk! The horror! Actually having an opinion on God, evolution, and religion! Why can't we all set aside our biases, like this enlightened guy?

WND always has been open about its agenda, with no subtleties involved. It's pro-God, pro-Constitution, and pro-Christian. That said, there's more diversity of thought at WND than within any other newspaper I've ever read.

This is funny. Evidence for evolution is "overwhelming," yet he cannot give one definitive example in his diatribe? And what is this gobbledegook about a "man-made" god? That's not the God Christians worship. If the evidence for "tens of millions" of other universes--peopled with sundry life forms--is so weighty, let's see a wee bit of it.

Whew! I'm glad we have such intellects to set us sheep in the "masses" straight. Oh, one final question: How does atheism bring comfort to those who "need a reason for their brief existence on this planet."?

Hear that sound? It's a vortex, sucking his brain into one of those ten million universes.

Good luck finding it.

The Devil Went Down to Georgia

Remember all the scoffing at the "slippery slope" arguments of pro-lifers? Remember all the pshaws at the idea that the Schiavo case foreshadowed worse things to come? Well, golly-gee, turns out those anti-death fanatics were right.

In a situation recalling the recent death of Terri Schiavo in Florida, an 81-year-old widow, denied nourishment and fluids for nearly two weeks, is clinging to life in a hospice in LaGrange, Ga., while her immediate family fights desperately to save her life before she dies of starvation and dehydration.

Mae Magouirk was neither terminally ill, comatose nor in a "vegetative state," when Hospice-LaGrange accepted her as a patient about two weeks ago upon the request of her granddaughter, Beth Gaddy, 36, an elementary school teacher.

The dehydration is being done in defiance of Magouirk's specific wishes, which she set down in a "living will," and without agreement of her closest living next-of-kin, two siblings and a nephew: A. Byron McLeod, 64, of Anniston, Ga.; Ruth Mullinax, 74, of Birmingham, Ala.; and Ruth Mullinax's son, Ken Mullinax.

In her living will, Magouirk stated that fluids and nourishment were to be withheld only if she were either comatose or "vegetative," and she is neither. Nor is she terminally ill, which is generally a requirement for admission to a hospice.

"Grandmama is old and I think it is time she went home to Jesus," Gaddy told Magouirk's brother and nephew, McLeod and Ken Mullinax. "She has glaucoma and now this heart problem, and who would want to live with disabilities like these?"

Isn't that nifty? Little Bethie gets to decide when Grandma dies, whether she likes it or not. The above statement from the "granddaughter" is one of the most chilling, morally depraved regurgitations of Hell that I've ever had the displeasure of reading. Satan's probably clapping his hands with delight, about now, and kicking up his cloven hoofs.

No Comprende Consensus?

A Poll from AOL (Association of Leftists) News:


How much of a priority should curbing illegal immigration be?

High
83%

Medium
10%

Low
7%

Are you surprised that 10 million U.S. residents are undocumented?

No
71%

Yes
29%


Total Votes: 25,524


Now, I don't put much stock in polls. But the ones AOL produces on this issue intrigue me, since most of their "news" coverage is sympathetic to illegal aliens. Yet there is a uniformity of thought throughout these polls: Americans are sick unto death of illegals sneaking into our country and engorging themselves on our largesse, while we're left sucking hind teat. Rattlehead government officials whine about how "Americans are too compassionate to deport people who've been here for a long time, milking the system."

I wouldn't be surprised if Asa de Guadaloupe de las Hutchinson wears an "Aztlan Forever" t-shirt to work, every day.

Bulldozing the Innocent

Remember Rachel Corrie? She died in Israel, protesting the demolition of "Palestinian" homes, after being run down by a bulldozer.

Now, her family is suing Caterpillar, the manufacturer of the bulldozers used in the demolition.

The complaint alleged Caterpillar was a party to "war crimes; aiding and abetting extrajudicial killing; cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment or punishment; wrongful death; and negligence."

In its investigation, Israel concluded Corrie's death was an accident and that the driver of the bulldozer did not see her. The probe said a slab of concrete slid down a mound of earth and crushed her.

Ms. Corrie went to Israel by choice. She involved herself in the "Palestinians' plight" by choice. She went to a dangerous place and waded knee-deep into the thick of things, by choice. She was negligent of her own safety, and acted in an extremely stupid and irresponsible fashion, by choice. And she lost her life not in protecting the lives of peaceful people. No, she threw her life away while protesting the destruction of buildings. I'm not aware of any actual evidence pointing toward foul play in her death.

I understand her family is grief-stricken. I understand that they are angry. But suing Caterpillar is asinine. There's no justice in it. It's just like suing Smith and Wesson, when a criminal shoots someone with a weapon the company manufactured. It's just like suing cigarette companies, after the death of a loved one who smoked two packs a day for twenty-five years. It's just like suing Little Debbie, after a relative eats a box of oatmeal cream pies each day for years, until his heart literally explodes from the cholesterol overload.

This is drawing a bead on whoever happens to make a nice target. Besides hurting those who were not complicit in Ms. Corrie's death, it accomplishes nothing. Oh, sure, they might pick up a nice hefty wad of cash, in the settlement. But they've traded principle and justice for the greenbacks.

Personal responsibility has gone the way of the dinosaur. It's abdication very well may lead to an extinct nation.

Moral Black Hole

“Christianity has fought, still fights, and will fight science to the desperate end over evolution, because evolution destroys utterly and finally the very reason Jesus’ earthly life was supposedly made necessary. Destroy Adam and Eve and the original sin, and in the rubble you will find the sorry remains of the son of god. Take away the meaning of his death. If Jesus was not the redeemer that died for our sins, and this is what evolution means, then Christianity is nothing.”– G. Richard Bozarth, The Meaning of Evolution, American Atheist, p. 30, Sept. 20, 1979.

He's right. So here's the question: Why on earth would a Christian want to get sucked into such a worldview as evolution?

Thinking Outside the Evolutionary Shell

From AnswersInGenesis:

In North West Queensland, Australia, scientists found some fossils of turtles that they thought had become extinct during the so-called Pleistocene period. This was about 50,000 years ago, according to the evolutionary time scale. Then about 90 kilometers, or 56 miles away, they found a new species of a living turtle. It turns out that this turtle appears to be the same as the fossils they found!

The remarkable thing was that the living turtles showed absolutely no signs of any evolutionary changes over the supposedly 50,000 years since the fossils were formed.

And what will be the reaction of evolutionists to this revelation, you might ask?

Ah. . .well, that's easy. They'll hunker down and contract into their shells and hide, just like the Galapagos tortoises probably did, when they first saw Darwin.

You Go First, Abdullah

Muslims are demanding an apology for the Crusades:

The world's highest Sunni Muslim authority has demanded an official apology from the pope for the medieval Christian crusades.

Thomas F. Madden, author of "A Concise History of the Crusades," contends the Crusades "were in every way a defensive war."

"They were the West's belated response to the Muslim conquest of fully two-thirds of the Christian world," he wrote in a National Review column. "While the Arabs were busy in the seventh through the tenth centuries winning an opulent and sophisticated empire, Europe was defending itself against outside invaders and then digging out from the mess they left behind. Only in the eleventh century were Europeans able to take much notice of the East. "
Madden said the event that led to the crusades was the Turkish conquest of most of Christian Asia Minor, modern Turkey.

"The Christian emperor in Constantinople, faced with the loss of half of his empire, appealed for help to the rude but energetic Europeans. He got it. More than he wanted, in fact," wrote Madden, associate professor and chair of the Department of History at Saint Louis University.

This is not a defense of the crusades. Personally, I have a lot of problems with the way they were carried out. But Madden is dead-on in his assessment. In fact, I don't think he's harsh enough. Read his book, though, if you have a chance. It's a great general overview of why the crusades were launched.

When drawing a judgment on the crusades, one should keep in mind that when the First Crusade was preached, Islamic conquests of Christian territories had been in full swing for over 450 years. The Jihad against the West was a long and bloody affair. It never truly has ended. The crusades were a complex series of wars. But foreign excursions purely for the slaking of imperialistic lust they were not.

As for apologies, I think the papacy should apologize for the crusades when the Muslims apologize for the jihad. Apologies should be extended, when they account for:

1. The taking of the Holy Land, at great loss of life.

2. The conquest of the largely Christian (at the time) populace of North Africa.

3. The toppling of the Byzantine Empire.

4. The conquest and subsequent raping of the Balkans.

5. Further, persistent invasions of Eastern Europe.

6. The invasion and occupation of Spain, which led to a centuries-long counterpunch by the Europeans, known as La Reconquista.

7. Other assorted mass slaughters, pillaging, and hostile forays into Christian territory.

The list goes on, ad nauseum. It would not be a difficult task to write a book merely numbering the unwarranted atrocities commited by Islamic invaders.

After centuries of unprovoked aggression before the Christians made their first moves, I think the apology needs to start with Islam. Not the papacy.

Posing for the Cameras

Here are Jebby and Georgie's reactions to Ms. Schiavo's death, as reported in the media:

"Many across our state and around the world are deeply grieved by the way Terri died. I feel that grief very sharply as well," his statement said. “After an extraordinarily difficult and tragic journey, Terri Schiavo is at rest,” Bush said. “I remain convinced, however, that Terri’s death is a window through which we can see the many issues left unresolved in our families and in our society. For that, we can be thankful for all that the life of Terri Schiavo has taught us."--Jeb Bush

"Today, millions of Americans are saddened by the death of Terri Schiavo. Laura and I extend our condolences to Terri Schiavo's families. I appreciate the example of grace and dignity they have displayed at a difficult time.

"I urge all those who honor Terri Schiavo to work together to build a culture of life where all Americans are welcomed, valued and protected, especially those who live at the mercy of others. The essence of civilization is that the strong have a duty to protect the weak. In cases where there are serious doubts and questions, the presumption should be in the favor of life."--George W. Bush

It's funny, but though I used to be a staunch Republican and have a conservative outlook in many areas, my contempt for these two increases daily. This is the worst kind of political charlatanry. Both men held the power in their grasp to stop this murderous injustice. Both stood by and did nothing, with folded hands, and lied to the nation about the nature of their influence. Now we're supposed to believe they're grief-stricken about the outcome? Please. This is a simple case of playing politics. They understand that the populace expects some word from them, some statement of "closure." They realize that many are ticked off and looking for a means of expending their anger. So they come out and provide a little speech about how deeply tragic and sorrowful this set of circumstances is.

Reread Jeb's reaction. For the most part, it's gobbledygook. If Terri's life is a "window," I suggest we make the good governor walk the two-inch ledge just outside it on a windy day. I saw a video clip of some of his words on the subject, a couple of days ago. He had a smirk on his face, the whole time--as if he were speaking to foolish children. This was the famous "my hands are tied" moment. His apologies seemed as sincere as a Democrat promise. I know it's not exemplary of proper Christian behavior; but if I'd been in the crowd, that day, I would've been hard put not trying to put my fist through his grinning teeth.

I officially nominate Jeb as the Cop-Out King.

As for the President, he was perfectly willing to extend his condolences, just not his aid. And what's that nonsense about sympathies to her "families"? What garbage. I'm sure Michael Schiavo needs him to feel his pain. Shoot, the jerk probably danced a jig, as they carted Terri's body away. G.W.'s more of an enigma than his brother. He talks about the importance of building a culture of life. Then when he has a chance of putting his money where his mouth is, he balks, waves his hands in defeat, tucks tail, and runs.

When I heard his speech on Fox News, it sounded canned and emotionless, like a robot reading from a cue-card.

"The essence of civilization is that the strong have a duty to protect the weak." It's also the essence of presidential obligation. Too bad he rejects this basic duty of his office.

He condemns himself with his own words.

Without Excuse

For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse:--Romans 1:20

Pope John Paul II (1920-2005)

Less than half an hour ago, Fox News reported an announcement from the Vatican that the pope's journey in this world has ended. He was the longest sitting pope of the 20th century, and his was the second longest papacy in history--second only to that of Pius IX, whose papacy lasted 31 years (1846--1878).

Karol Wojtyla held the distinction as the first non-Italian pope in 455 years. The last non-Italian was Adrian VI (1522-1523), who was born in the Netherlands. Also, he was the first Polish pope in history.

Personally, I have strong disagreements with many teachings of the Catholic Church. Nor have I always agreed with this pope's actions and words. But his strong stance against abortion and euthanasia--which he labeled components of a "culture of death"--cannot be denied. He took a powerful stand against communism, as well, encouraging the Solidarity movement in Poland, which eventually led to the fall of its oppressive government. He further supported Reagan's fight against communism, during the Cold War.

My differences with the Catholic Church aside, I believe he was a man of strength and integrity, holding uncompromising moral clarity on a number of issues. He will be missed. His passing is a moment of great historical importance. Finding someone of his calibre for a replacement will be a difficult task.

I hope he resides in Heaven, now; and I hope his final moments were without pain.

Rest in peace.

Hear Ye, Hear Ye! New Blog Roll Additions!

These fall into various places between the "new kids on the block" category, and that of the "salty, crusty veteran of the blogosphere."

I've visited, read, and commented on some of them for a long time, without proper linking credit (to my everlasting shame). Others, I've discovered only in the past few weeks. But all of these nice folks have interesting, worthwhile views on a wide assortment of issues. So if you haven't done so, check each one out. You won't be disappointed.

Do not castigate me for my procrastinations. Do not upbraid me for my inexcusable laziness. Do not cast stones, or I shall launch them back. . .ten-fold. . .with a trebuchet. You get the picture.

Here's the list, in no particular order of importance:

Will

Threeway

Love Is Tough Enough

Elshell

Difster

Redneck's Corner

Derech Shalom

Darlin' Joy

Insert-Blog-Here

Flicka Spumoni

The Ranting Room


Now go catch up on your reading.

UPDATE!! I forgot one! How forgetful and clumsy of me. My apologies, Amigo.

Amigo's Place

Terri Schiavo, Rest in Peace

Today is a historical day, my friends. Ms. Schiavo passed away this morning. I hope she's resting comfortably in the arms of our Lord. I hope she heard "Well done, my good and faithful servant," when she met Him for judgment.

This case has affected me like few others. I've followed it for a long time, perplexed and horrified at its ramifications.

There is a reason for the importance of this story. Our government no longer recognizes an unalienable right to life bestowed by God, as propounded by our Founders. A state court has shown great disdain for truth or justice, mocking both in a series of kangaroo court hearings presided over by a man linked to the right-to-kill-you movement. The chief medical testimony he relied upon in his decision-making process was that of one of the most vocal pro-death advocates in the nation. The whole case dangled from the rusty hinges of hearsay evidence provided by that paragon of marital fidelity and compassion, Michael Schiavo. Since when is the unsubstantiated word of one man given such weight?

In the eyes of our entire nation, this court rubber-stamped the premeditated murder of an irrefutably innocent woman, neither accused nor guilty of any crime.

Equally disturbing was the behavior of representatives elected to fight for the public's interests and serve as a restraint on unlawful actions of the other branches of government. They responded by doing nothing, or very little, in thwarting the rulings of an activist judge. When the chips were down and a quick decision was needed, Jeb Bush borrowed Pontius Pilate's basin and washed his hands of the whole affair. As if shirking his sworn obligations wasn't bad enough, he added insult to injury by lying, saying his "hands were tied." We should give him credit in one regard, perhaps: when he shovels it, he uses both hands.

This case is not about states' rights, as some have suggested. I'm a very strong proponent of federalism. Ask anyone who knows me. But we're dealing with human rights, in this instance--a human being's right to live, hindered and ended by her "husband" with the government's consent and aid.

Noting what differentiates this case from others is important: 1. It was a very public story, played out on our tv screens, the internet, radio, and in print media. Information was obtained easily, and from a wide assortment of venues. 2. Almost every aspect of the case was in dispute, as I've stated here, and elsewhere. No clear and convincing evidence existed as to Ms. Schiavo's wishes. The Michael Schiavo creature held one version of events; the Schindler family offered another version diametrically opposed to his.

One of the things that has struck me about Ms. Schiavo's ordeal is the colossal stupidity, ignorance, or just plain evil of many commenters on the subject. I could wax eloquent on this topic alone all night, so I'll limit myself to one example. How many people have you heard say this?: "Terri's gone. She died long ago, leaving only a husk behind. We should extract the feeding tube, and let nature take its course."

The first two sentences constitute pure speculation, the likes of which would make the most imaginative fantasist proud. Since no proper testing has been done, no one has any conclusive idea about her state of mind.

As for the last, we should "let nature take its course?" Are they serious? What does proactive starvation and dehydration have to do with letting nature take its course? It's akin to shooting someone in the chest, watching them slump to the floor, then when someone runs up and asks what's going on, the shooter shrugs and says: "Aw, just letting nature take its course." The thought process, alone, behind this statement deserves an award for logical absurdity of the worst sort. Lest it be lost in the mirage of lies shimmering over our heads, this woman was not terminally ill. She was not being kept alive through extraordinary efforts. It took the direct action of those who sought her life to bring it to an end.

I think our Founding Fathers would be disgusted and mortified over what was done to this poor lady.

I keep hearing that we'll have forgotten all about this case in a few weeks. That may be true for some, but not for me. Here's one person who will never forget Terri Schiavo, or what her death means to the future of this nation.

Speaking of the future, I wonder what's in store for us in ours? If this case is any indication, it won't be pretty, when it comes.

Congratulations, Nate!

Well, I'll be dern-tootin'! It seems that Nate & his wife have just ushered a new bouncing baby Southron boy into the world, on wednesday night. He was 7 pounds, 3 ounces, so that sounds pert near ripe enough.

God bless all of you, my friend. Hold that young'un high!

I wonder if he was born with a Confederate flag in his hand?

Creation Scientists of the Past

I've engaged in numerous discourses with evolutionists, most of whom claim that a belief in God's act of creation is "stupidity." Anyone who isn't a rabid evolutionist is a superstitious, ignorant, imbecilic, knuckle-dragging, drooling, cross-eyed moron. Anyone who doesn't kiss Darwin's gnarled simian feet is anti-scientific. They would have the rest of the world believe that we're proud charter members of the Flat-Earth Society, we believe the sun goes 'round the earth, and a good bleeding will cure the common cold.

Of course, not only is this wrong, but it's also consciously deceitful, as even a cursory examination of history reveals. Below is a partial list of some creation scientists of the past. For a much more extensive listing, go here.

1. Francis Bacon--generally credited with establishing the scientific method, 16th &17th centuries

2. Johann Kepler--astronomer, 16th & 17th centuries

3. Blaise Pascal--mathematician, 17th century

4. Robert Boyle--chemist, 17th century

5. Increase Mather--astronomer, 17th & 18th centuries

6. Isaac Newton--mathematician, astronomer, a man for all seasons, 17th & 18th centuries

7. Cotton Mather--physician, 17th & 18th centuries

8. Johnathan Edwards--physicist, meteorologist, 18th century

9. Carolus Linneaus--taxonomist, established biological classification system, 18th century

10. William Herschel--astronomer, 18th & 19th centuries

11. Jedidiah Morse--geographer, 18th & 19th centuries

12. Samuel F. B. Morse--inventor of the telegraph, 18th & 19th century

13. James Joule--one of the first to study thermodynamics, 19th century

14. Louis Pasteur--bacteriologist, biochemist, established pasteurization process, microbiology, immunization and sterilization techniques, disproved spontaneous generation, 19th century

15. Joseph Lister--antiseptic surgical techniques, 19th & 20th centuries

16. George Washington Carver--inventor, 19th & 20th centuries

Kooks extraordinaire, every one!

Pretzel Logic

I found this letter in the "Muddled Thoughts" section on World Net Daily:

You folks amaze me with your pretzel logic. Kudos to Bush for flying back to D.C. to grandstand on the Schaivo case when he couldn't be bothered to disturb his vacation when over 130,000 people died (most women and children) in the tsunami. Oh, that's right, they weren't white, Christian and didn't have oil.

Ah, the typical left-loon baseless charge of racism. How strikingly original. Apparently, our dear author is incapable of distinguishing between American citizens, and citizens of foreign countries. I don't mean to sound callous, but is the president somehow responsible to people in India? Ms. Schiavo is a U.S. citizen, which means Mr. Bush has obligations to her, as her elected representative in the executive branch.

Do any of you know or care about the law that Bush signed as governor of Texas that allows a care facility to refuse or stop care to a patient (such as Schaivo) regardless of the families wishes? The only factor in their right to live or die is the families' ability to pay. This subjugates the patients' lives to the corporate bottom line. In the past month, a baby was pulled from life support despite his mother's wishes as a result of this law.

Assuming this information is correct, I'm thoroughly against such a law. But so what? This case doesn't involve G.W. Bush's capacity as governor, but as president. Nor are we talking about Texas, but Florida.

This is the America that you want? This is the compassionate Christian conservatism that you signed up for? To me this is the height of hypocrisy and shows how morally bankrupt these supposed Christian leaders truly are.

Now I agree with this part. These leaders are, indeed, morally bankrupt, for the most part. Furthermore, it's obvious that most are neither Christian nor conservative. So what is this guy saying? That we shouldn't get involved in Ms. Schiavo's murder by the state? If he has an actual point or counter solution, I don't see it.

"Compassionate conservative" is a nonsensical term, anyway, since it implies conservatives are cold-hearted monsters, without the qualifying adjective.

Jeb Bush: Chief Coward of Florida

Jeb Bush is whining like a little girl:

Florida Gov. Jeb Bush, the man said to be the last hope for Terri Schiavo, says he's powerless to help the brain-injured woman who has been without nourishment for more than nine full days.

"I cannot violate a court order," Bush told CNN following Easter church services. "I don't have powers from the United States Constitution or – for that matter from the Florida Constitution – that would allow me to intervene after a decision has been made."

To Terri's parents, Bush said, "I can't. I'd love to, but I can't."

Mr. Bush, not only are you a coward, but you're also a filthy liar. You have taken an oath of office, in which you have sworn to carry out your duties as an elected offical. As chief executive in the state of Florida, you have a moral, constitutional, and legal obligation to protect the innocent from murder. If this makes you feel queasy, and gives you a bad case of the wonky britches, you should resign, immediately. I refer you to the Florida Constitution, which states in Article 1, Section 2: that "all natural persons, female and male alike, are equal before the law, and have inalienable rights, among which are the right to enjoy and defend life ... ." & "no person shall be deprived of any right because of ... physical disability."

So you are in violation of your oath as governor, the Florida Constitution, and the United States Constitution. You are not bound by the unconstitutional, indecent decision of an activist court. When a judge makes a ruling, you are bound to adhere to it, if it is in harmony with the Constitution. If it conflicts with said document, the Constitution trumps the judicial decision, every time. So all your sniveling about how your hands are tied is a crock, and you know it.

I long for a real man in a position such as that of Jeb Bush. I look wistfully back upon the time when a few people took a stand, making political expediency subservient to goodness and justice. How refreshing it would be for a politican to step forward and say: "I don't care if my actions entail political suicide. I don't care if I'm summarily voted out of office, in the next election cycle. I am more interested in what is right than I am in political calculation. I am more interested in justice than I am in not being controversial. " How refreshing, and how rare.

Why concern yourself with not rocking the boat, when it already has sunk?

Mr. Bush, you make me sick. You exemplify the worst sort of politician: the kind who fears for his own hide above all else. If you have no control over something as onerous as state-sanctioned murder, then you are worthless to the good people of Florida.

Oh, and as for your future aspirations of running for the B.S. Artist-in-Chief, you can forget about my vote.

Our Lord Lives!

I know some folks dispute which days of the week Christ's crucifixion and resurrection took place. I respect those arguments, but I'm not entirely sure what I think about the whole discussion. I admit that I'm not well-informed enough--on this particular issue--to make a concrete decision in the matter.

But what I do know is this: My Saviour lives, and his resurrection should be remembered and celebrated. On that, I think we all can agree.

He's not in a sepulchre or a hole in the ground. He's not a myth or a phantasm of the human mind.

He's alive, He's watching, He's involved--and someday, He will return, physically, and set up his kingdom on earth.

Something amazing happened on that long ago day in the city of Jerusalem. Something transformed a ragtag group of eleven men--considered malcontents and troublemakers by the local rulers--into lions of God who fearlessly gave their lives to the task of evangelizing His people. What changed this gaggle of cowards and misfits? What molded their shame from abandoning Christ when He needed them most into a tool for His glory?

The resurrection. And it is His resurrection that resurrects us all.

Jesus said: I am the resurrection and the life: he that believeth in me, though he were dead, yet shall he live.--John 11:25

Dying with "Dignity"

I keep hearing this mantra: "We should all just step out of the way, and let Terri die with dignity."

Besides the requirement of ignoring many of the questions in the Schiavo case, this comment is nonsensical for another very simple reason.

Let me pose this as a challenge:

Raise your hand if you think starvation and dehydration is a dignified way to go.

"Give Me Your Tired, Your Filthy Stinking Rich. . ."

From The Federalist Patriot:

. . .this month's "Legal Lotto" Award is bestowed upon a Bronx day laborer who was injured on the job in 2001. The Bronx Superior Court recently awarded $4 million to the worker. Problem is, he's an illegal immigrant, living in the Bronx with his wife and three kids. Apparently, the man worked for 15 years, most recently making $18/hour off the books, before sustaining severe injuries by falling from a scaffold.

Wow, so that's what they mean by a "legal windfall."

Just file this under the "Stupid Is As Stupid Does" category.

Branded a Big Spender

"The first destroyer of the liberties of a people is he who first gave them bounties and largess." --Plutarch

I think we should have this tatooed--nay, branded--on the buttocks of every member of Congress.

Build a fire and heat the irons!

Quotes For the Times

"There are those who believe that a new modernity demands a new morality. What they fail to consider is the harsh reality that there is no such thing as a new morality. There is only one morality. All else is immorality." --Theodore Roosevelt


"If we abide by the principles taught in the Bible, our country will go on prospering and to prosper; but if we and our posterity neglect its instruction and authority, no man can tell how sudden a catastrophe may overwhelm us and bury all our glory in profound obscurity." --Daniel Webster

You Can't Pull the Plug On Justice

I know I've posted on the Terri Schiavo case several times, now. For those of you tiring of my rants, I'm sorry. I have no desire to bore anyone. I do ask you to bear with me, though. I see this as an important, pivotal time in our nation's history. Never has such a case been so widely publicized, with such emotion, vitriol, and facts interwoven with fantasies. Here are two quotes that I think pertain to the subject at hand.

"I tremble for my country when I reflect that God is just: that his justice cannot sleep forever. . ."--Thomas Jefferson

"The God who gave us life, gave us liberty at the same time; the hand of force may destroy, but cannot disjoin them." --Thomas Jefferson

Ms. Schiavo has an unalienable right to life. Unfortunately, our court system doesn't comprehend the Constitution or the intent of our Founders. Just as our government puts squabbling parents' rights above their children's welfare, so have they put Michael Schiavo's "rights" as a husband above Terri's welfare, and her rights as a human being are subordinate to his, apparently.

We live in a time of rampant "no-fault divorce" for vague "irreconcilable differences." Obtaining a divorce for any reason at all is a snap. If I don't like the way my wife chews her food, I can draw up divorce papers. If I don't like the way she looks at me when I belch in public, I can draw up divorce papers. If she turns the channel during the premere episode of Desperately Stupid Housewives, I can draw up divorce papers. I can divorce my wife for legitimate reasons, or for no reason at all. The terms of marriage form the most dissoluble contract in existence. Spouses are an easily traded commodity.

And yet Michael Schiavo should be the arbiter of life and death over his spouse--a woman with whom he no longer lives--while indulging in a relationship with another woman, which includes children? That is the height of absurdity. This "man" has shirked his responsibilities as a husband. He has violated and spat upon his marital vows. He has disowned any entitlement to a voice in the matter, whatsoever.

The measure of a society is how it treats the least of its citizens. By "least," I mean the least in ability, or prospects, or tangible usefulness to the aforementioned society. I speak of the poor, the infirm, the crippled, the mentally impaired, the unwanted. The United States' citizens have a history of compassion for such people. Are they not as human as the rest of us? Are they not just as much children of God?

"And the King will answer and say to them, 'Assuredly, I say to you, inasmuch as you did it to one of the least of these My brethren, you did it to Me.' Then He will also say to those on the left hand, 'Depart from Me, you cursed, into the everlasting fire prepared for the devil and his angels: for I was hungry and you gave Me no food; I was thirsty and you gave Me no drink'." --Matthew 25:40-42

A nation that kills the innocent--or stands by and washes its hands of their deaths--is a nation not long for this world. If God is, indeed, just--and I believe that He is--then we're heading into dire straits, full-speed.

Don't Be Grillin' Our Chillun'

"In a 5-4 Supreme Court decision [last week], the United States removed itself from the axis of evil nations that execute juveniles. ... Until [this] majority opinion...the U.S. was part of an exclusive club -- the others are China, Democratic Republic of Congo, Iran, Pakistan, Yemen, Nigeria, and Saudi Arabia -- that are known to have formally executed kids since 1990." --The Village Voice

Yes, because it's for the children.

Please.

First off, I think it's debatable whether someone who murders another person in cold blood should be viewed as a child in a court of law. Then there's the whole appeals process, which frequently ends with the killer gumming his food, wearing Depends, and going for a ride in Ol' Sparky after hobbling down the long hall with the aid of a walker. How many of these people still can be classified as "kids," by the time sentencing is carried out?

As for the moral equivalency argument, let's execute that in its tracks. China is a communist country. I know we've been led to believe that China's our big ol' cuddly trading partner, and that the American economy will sink like a gangster with a new pair of concrete boots without their porcelain knicknacks and other trinkets; but economic considerations aside, the rulers of China are monsters. People are executed for fraud, political dissent, drug abuse, and other non-violent crimes. Organs are harvested from the slain. The Congo is a backward, chaotic place. Iran is an Islamic theocratic dystopia. Pakistan has large areas that are out of control. Yemen is a place that persecutes Christians and tortures people for adultery--sometimes to the death. Nigeria's a failed state, where corruption is an art form. Saudi Arabia is a Sharia wonderland, where people are snuffed out for apostasy from the "religion of peace." In addition, it is one of the worst terrorist spawning grounds in the world.

Lumping the U.S. in with cesspools like these is disingenuous and idiotic. In fact, it's evil, because it shows no clarity of thought on what terms like "good" and "evil" even mean.

I realize some are concerned about any government having the power to execute criminals, since opportunities for corruption abound, and the human systems are inherently flawed. We can have a respectful debate on that. But notice that most of the outrage and horror directed at capital punishment ignores such reasoning. Rather, it oozes from a morally relativistic mentality, in which no one should be put to death for any reason, anywhere, anytime. I also think it's worth pointing out that most people whom I've run into who "think" like this have no problem with the wanton murder of unborn children, or the termination of patients with brain injuries; but I suppose that's a whole 'nother ball of wax.

One final open question: If it really is "for the children," how many children will we save by ending these vicious killers' death sprees with a nice lethal injection, a necktie party, or by sending them on a magic lightning ride?

In the Beginning

How do theistic evolutionists explain these verses?:

And he answered and said unto them, Have ye not read, that he which made them at the beginning made them male and female--Matthew 19:4

Then shall the King say unto them on his right hand, Come, ye blessed of my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world--Matthew 25:34

Biblically speaking, it seems pretty obvious that God made humans at the beginning of the creation, when he made everything else.

Starvation

WARNING! READERS MAY FIND THE FOLLOWING INFORMATION UPSETTING.

I didn't want to spring it on anyone.


The Process:


Day One:

The percutaneous endoscopic gastrotomy tube, which is placed through the skin and into the stomach, is removed in a simple surgical procedure. Patients who do not have mental cognition to have a sense of thirst or hunger will not be uncomfortable.

Days Three to Four:

Urine output decreases and patients begin to lose normal body secretions. The mouth begins to look dry and the eyes appear sunken. Patients will look thinner because the body tissues have lost fluid. Their heart rate gradually goes up and their blood pressure goes down. In some patients, dehydration releases endorphins in the brain that create a state of euphoria.

Days Five to Ten:

People who are alert have a marked decrease in their alertness. Respiration becomes irregular with periods of very fast and then very slow breathing. Some patients will become restless, while others will be less active. For patients in a persistent vegetative state, there may be no discernible change in their movements.

Days Ten to Death:

Patients do not appear to respond to their environment at all and may appear to be in a coma. Length of death process is determined by how well-nourished patient was and how much body fat and fluid they had when procedure began. May be outward signs of dehydration, such as extremely dry skin. Kidney function declines and toxins begin accumulating in the body. Toxins cause respiratory muscles to fail. Multiple organ systems begin to fail from lack of nutrition.

Source: LifePath Hospice.

Even this rather clinical description cannot mask the horror of such a fate. Please keep Terri Schiavo in your prayers. God can do anything, and it's not over, yet.

A Little Political Humor

"As long as greed, stupidity and cowardice remain a part of the human condition, there will be a constituency for Democrats." --Jack Kelly

"Jackie Robinson was honored in the U.S. Capitol Wednesday. What a ceremony. It doubled the number of statues in the rotunda because when it was mentioned that he was a lifelong Republican and Richard Nixon supporter, the Democrats turned to stone." --Argus Hamilton

"[T]he [Supreme] Court lives by a commandment of its own: 'Thou shalt make no sense.' Long ago it rejected any clean standard for interpreting the establishment clause, opting for a confusing morass instead." --Rich Lowry

Those elicited a snicker or two. Especially the first one.

Cubanism

A Cuban representative to the U.N. human rights panel (a contradiction in terms, I know) condemns the U.S.:

"Cuba," he said, "comes to promote the noblest causes, and also to throw lies out the window, combat the impunity of the powerful and expose the hypocrisy of their lackeys."

He pointed the finger directly at the U.S. government.

Speaking of windows, somebody throw this guy through one--preferably from the top floor, if you please. Cuba blasting the U.S. on the Human Rights Commision is like Hitler chiding Margaret Sanger over eugenics.

The Separation of People from Their History

"Let the pulpit resound with the doctrine and sentiments of religious liberty. Let us hear of the dignity of man's nature, and the noble rank he holds among the works of God. ... Let it be known that...liberties are not the grants of princes and parliaments." --John Adams

Whew! It's a good thing our Founders didn't let religious whack-jobs like this one interfere with the separation of Church & State.

Ur. . .um. . .I mean. . .

Legislating from the Little Pink Bench

A judge in Californy has ruled that limiting marriage to a man and woman is unconstitutional.

"It appears that no rational purpose exists in limiting marriage in this state to opposite-sex partners," Judge Kramer wrote. "The state's protracted denial of equal protection cannot be justified simply because such constitutional violation has become traditional."

Judge, please show me the "Rainbow Clause" in the Constitution. I've read the document numerous times, and I don't remember it.

This is why we need to get the gummint out of the marriage business.

Those Evil Americans

"Cuba recognizes that there are violations of human rights in our country, but they are at the Guantanamo Naval Base, in territory occupied against Cuba's will." --Cuba's Communist Foreign Minister Felipe Perez Roque de las fullacrapos

Uh-huh. And Che Guevara worked with Mother Teresa in the streets of Calcutta, before he got out of the habit.

The "Religion of Peace" Strikes Again

A Muslim convert to Christianity is threatened with violent death (online) for his change:

The target of the threat, Ahmed Mohamed, a convert to the Coptic Christian Church, uses the moniker "Ahmed_love_Jesus" on PalTalk.

The message sent March 6 reads:

Know this, Ahmed_love_Jesus, we tracked you and being in America will not help you. Your blood is lawful and we will kill you soon.

If you were with me I would have killed you.

I will know where you are and kill you someday.

Ahmed_Love_Jesus, by the life of your mother's [obscenity deleted], your blood is lawful. We know where you are in America and we will slaughter you like the lamb that you worship.

This message brought to you by the Anti-PCBS Network.

The Ten Commandments: A Firm Foundation

A judge is hearing arguments over the placement of a Ten Commandments monument in Fargo, North Dakota.

"My clients should not have to avert their eyes" when walking past the monument, said Tiffany Johnson, a third-year University of North Dakota law student who represents five Fargo men seeking to remove the monument.

This played paddywhack on my funny-bone. "Avert their eyes?" Please. Which one of these commandments offends you, oh masters of melodrama?

Here's a difinitive list, from Exodus 20: 2-17:

1. "I am the LORD thy God, which have brought thee out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage. Thou shalt have no other gods before Me."

2. Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image, or any likeness of any thing that is in heaven above, or that is in the Earth beneath, or that is in the water under the Earth. Thou shalt not bow down thyself to them, nor serve them: for I the LORD thy God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth generation of them that hate Me; and shewing mercy unto thousands of them that love Me, and keep My Commandments.

3. Thou shalt not take the Name of the LORD thy God in vain; for the LORD will not hold him guiltless that taketh His Name in vain.

4. Remember the Sabbath Day, to keep it holy. Six days shalt thou labour, and do all thy work: but the seventh day is the Sabbath of the LORD thy God: in it thou shalt not do any work, thou, nor thy son, nor thy daughter, thy manservant, nor thy maidservant, nor thy cattle, nor thy stranger that is within thy gates: for in six days the LORD made heaven and Earth, the sea, and all that in them is, and rested the seventh day: wherefore the LORD blessed the Sabbath Day, and hallowed it.

5. Honour thy father and thy mother: that thy days may be long upon the land which the LORD thy God giveth thee.

6. Thou shalt not kill.

7. Thou shalt not commit adultery.

8. Thou shalt not steal.

9. Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbor.

10. Thou shalt not covet thy neighbour's house, thou shalt not covet thy neighbour's wife, nor his manservant, nor his maidservant, nor his ox, nor his ass, nor anything that is thy neighbour's.

Man, that is some obnoxious stuff--especially number 1 & 6-8. How can one be a murderous, lecherous, thieving divinity, with such restrictions around!

I submit that folks who feel the need to hide their eyes are the ones with the problem, not those who wish to see the Commandments--the basis for American law--honored.

Dose Wascally Wabbits

I received this in a weekly newsletter from Answers in Genesis. I thought it might interest some of you:

Q: Do rabbits chew their cud?

A: For many years, scientists used the rabbit or “hare” to prove the Bible supposedly wrong because in Leviticus 11:6 we read, “And the hare, because he cheweth the cud, but divideth not the hoof; he is unclean unto you.” They claimed that the rabbit didn’t chew its cud or have the same stomach system as other cud chewers like cows, and therefore the Bible was wrong.

Then about 20 years ago, it was discovered that rabbits do indeed—in a sense—chew their cud. When a rabbit first eats something, the food passes through its digestive system rapidly, undergoing very little digestion. These are the green pellets one finds when raising rabbits! The rabbit will then eat these green pellets, which are actually their cud, and finish chewing and digesting them. They then pass on out as brown waste pellets. So rabbits really do chew their cud. (For a more thorough answer, see Do rabbits chew their cud? by Dr. Jonathan Sarfati.)

This is just one of many examples of how the Bible has been proven to be right and so-called science wrong. We must remember to start all of our learning and understanding of science with the Bible, and of course, the foundational book of Genesis.

Pretty neat, huh, Doc?

Democrat + Republican = Big Government

From Michael Peroutka's website:

The Senate recently voted down two proposals to raise the minimum wage. One proposal was by Sen. Edward Kennedy (D-Mass.) who wanted to raise it to $7.25-an-hour. The other proposal was by Sen. Rick Santorum (R-Pa.), supposedly a conservative, who wanted to raise it to $6.25-an-hour.

The Santorum minimum wage increase proposal was supported by an overwhelming majority of GOP Senators (37) --- though there was a time not that long ago when the Republican Party opposed a Federal minimum wage. The 1988 Republican Party Platform called increasing the minimum wage "inflationary" and "job-destroying."

The 1984 GOP Platform said: "There are still Federal statutes that keep Americans out of the work-force. Arbitrary minimum wage rates, for example, have eliminated hundreds of thousands of jobs and, with them, the opportunity for young people to get productive skills, good work habits, and a weekly paycheck."

A major problem with the Republican Party is that for the GOP, and the Democrats, the Constitution is a dead letter. The Preamble of the 1992 Republican Party Platform said, in part:

"Abraham Lincoln, our first Republican President, expressed the philosophy that inspires Republicans to this day: 'The legitimate object of Government is to do for a community of people whatever they need to have done, but cannot do at all, or cannot so well do, for themselves in their separate and individual capacities. But in all that people can individually do as well for themselves, Government ought not to interfere.’"

But, this view is a prescription for unlimited, un-Constitutional, tyrannical Government, precisely the kind of Government we have today under the control of the Republicans.

In the debate about his amendment to increase the Federal minimum wage, Sen. Santorum said, according to the "Associated Press" (3/8/05): "I have not had any ideological problem with the minimum wage." He added that he voted for the last increase to clear Congress, in 1996.

But, Sen. Santorum, and all the GOP Senators who voted for his measure to hike the Federal minimum wage, SHOULD have had a problem with the minimum wage because it is un-Constitutional! Instead of voting to raise the minimum wage, they should have been voting to repeal it. As I say, please forgive me, but I can’t help pointing out that the Republicans are actually a more dangerous threat to Constitutional government than are the Democrats.

I don't agree with that last line, but I do see eye-to-eye with the general sentiment of Mr. Peroutka's words. Keep in mind, too, that Mr. Santorum is considered by many as one of our most conservative senators. And the question is, why does he have no ideological problem with the minimum wage?

Founding Quotes of Note XXV

"It is much to be wished that slavery may be abolished. The honour of the States, as well as justice and humanity, in my opinion, loudly call upon them to emancipate these unhappy people. To contend for our own liberty, and to deny that blessing to others, involves an inconsistency not to be excused." --John Jay

I guess this just further proves the revisionist notion that our Founders were all racist slave-owners, doesn't it?

Kicking Evolution to the Curb

This is a follow-up to yesterday's post, in which I barely touched upon evolution. There are many reasons for rejecting this religion of origins--contradictory or inconclusive evidence, its speculative quality, etc. And though I agree with lots of different arguments against it, there is one primary reason that I reject evolution as an origins explanation.

Evolution conflicts with the biblical account of the Creation. After God had finished with His masterpiece, Genesis 1:31 tells us: And God saw every thing that he had made, and, behold, it was very good. And the evening and the morning were the sixth day.

Later, God laid down one restriction for Adam and Eve to follow. Genesis 2:16-17: 16--And the Lord God commanded the man, saying, Of every tree of the garden thou mayest freely eat; 17--But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die.

Pretty straightforward, huh? He apprised them of the restriction, and He explained the consequence of disobedience.

But that's not the end of the story. Adam and Eve ignored God's command, thus committing the first sin of humanity. Being a just and truthful God, the Lord had no choice but to carry through with their punishment.

He cursed the creation and all of its parts--including mankind. This is known as the Fall. Among other things, a major element of the Curse was death. Genesis 3:19: In the sweat of thy face shalt thou eat bread, till thou return unto the ground; for out of it wast thou taken: for dust thou art, and unto dust shalt thou return.

This is a classic case of cause and effect. The key to understanding this event is twofold: 1. God made His pronouncement as a response to Adam and Eve's sin. 2. Death entered the world as a direct result of Adam and Eve's disobedience. I cannot over-stress this point.

In summary:

1. God created.

2. The creation was good.

3. Humans disobeyed God's command.

4. Death resulted from their disobedience.

Since we're not in Sunday School, you may be asking yourself "So, what's your point?" right about now. Fair enough.

My point is that this is in direct, irreconcilable opposition to evolutionary theory as currently propagated and understood in the scientific realm. Evolutionists believe that the cycle of life (or circle of life, for The Lion King fans) had been in motion for hundreds of millions of years, before the first near-human creature clambered down out of its tree and began contemplating itself and the universe. Birth, infancy, adolescence, adulthood, dotage, and death had played itself out on the world scene over and over ad nauseum before the first human evolved. A brief chronology of evolution looks something like this:

1. The world coalesced out of the solar system's particles.

2. Millions of years later, life spontaneously erupted on the earth. Inanimate matter became animate.

3. Life arose in the seas and eventually emigrated to land, evolving into higher forms of life as it did so. This took millions of years.

4. Life, death, and the survival of the fittest finally produced mankind, after countless millennia.

Death was an active part of this process, from the beginning. It was death itself that filled the geological record to overflowing. This is the selfsame record of which evolutionists claim an unfettered understanding. And it is the backdrop they use for making the evolutionary case.

Now come the questions: If death was a by-product of Adam and Eve's sin, then how does this fit the evolutionist's notion of a continuous line of pain, suffering, death, and decay reaching all the way back to the beginning of this planet's existence? Would God dub such a state of being "good?" Giving evolutionists the benefit of the doubt for argument's sake, two logical possibilities come to mind: Either there is no God, or God exists, but He's evil. For the atheistic evolutionist, the answer is elementary, Dear Watson: "I know there is no God," he proclaims, quite comfortable in his own demigodhood. But for the theistic evolutionist, this poses a conundrum for the ages; how to reconcile evolution and Genesis? I would not wish such cognitive dissonance on anyone.

The good news is that death has not been with us always. It is not a natural part of God's good creation. And someday, this malignant intruder will be expelled.

Forever.

Defining Origins Beliefs

Many of you are familiar with my views on this topic; but it dawned on me that I've never actually set down an unambiguous definition of what I believe, regarding the world's origins. So for newer visitors, or for those who think I've been muddled in explaining myself, in the past, here's the simple version:

I consider myself a creationist. One humorous note: I've used this term over at Vox's, before, only to have people distance themselves by saying: "Well, I'm not a creationist," then proceeding to describe their beliefs as almost a mirror-image of my own. This brings me no end of amusement, and a little frustration. Why fear the term? I don't. I think it accurately describes me.

1. I belief in God Almighty. He is real, not a figment of my imagination, or a "crutch" for the weak-minded.

2. I believe He created the universe and everything in it--including humans. Nothing exists without his efforts. He sustains everything.

3. I believe the biblical account of creation is inerrant. Literally. So yes, I accept that there really was a serpent--which was Satan--in the Garden of Eden. I believe that God spoke the creation into existence. I do not think the Genesis story is a fairy-tale, or a metaphorical account.

Those are the three big ones. Elucidating further, I reject the Theory of Evolution as described by secular scientists. In fact, I believe this pseudo-science is one of the worst evils ever foisted upon humanity. Embracing this atheistic religion often leads to a devil-may-care attitude about one's life--or the lives of others. It even foreshadows mass murder and racism.

I think acceptance of Genesis as literally true is crucial. If one fails to do so, isn't this opening a doorway into questioning the veracity or accuracy of the rest of the Bible? And if not, why not?
Or in other words, if the book is open to interpretation, how can we agree on its meaning?

So that's where I stand, in a nutshell--and I think it's a pretty darned firm foundation.

Where do you stand?

Modern "Art"

Whatever happened to the great artists? What became of the Rembrandts, the Michaelangelos, the da Vincis? Even as recently as the 19th century, we had masterful artists at their canvasses, such as Winslow Homer, who painted some of the most dramatic seascapes and idealized pictures of contemporary life that I've ever seen.

Where are their successors?

Now, we have the privilege of looking upon the mighty works of the modern. . .and despairing. Pictures of Mary the mother of Jesus spattered in dung; crucifixes in jars of urine; framed ink blots the likes of which would make a two-year-old snicker in derision--these are the examples of the bilge passing for the elevated and enlightening, today.

Don't get me wrong. I know artists of great merit exist, painting their masterpieces, composing their concertos and operettas, sculpting their supple statues. But unless the works in discussion are profane, blasphemous, or just downright vomit-inducing, don't expect their accolades on the nightly news or in well-known museums.

It's time to bring back standards. It's time for art to elevate, not denigrate; time for enlightenment, not besmirchment.

It's time to discard the politically correct NEA--the National Endowment for Abomination.

Art once freed the mind and stoked the imagination. It may do so, again, if we glorify that which is beautiful, not that which is ugly.

And the first and best step is ending the government's involvement, period.

Pro-Death To Pro-Life

A euthanasian has second thoughts in the Terri Schiavo case:

John Grogan said in a column published today, "I no longer so blithely believe Schiavo's feeding tubes should be pulled and her life allowed to end. I'm no longer so sure her parents do not deserve a say in their daughter's future. I no longer am totally comfortable assuming her husband, Michael, who now has two children by another woman, is acting unselfishly."

But Grogan points out Terri Schiavo's heart and lungs function on their own, and she requires only a feeding tube that might not be necessary if she were given physical therapy.

The columnist notes Michael Schiavo, as her legal guardian, has forbidden any therapy.

What more needs be said about the doting "husband?"

Terri Schiavo cannot eat without help. This is the foundation upon which the case for her termination has been built. Since this is the apparent criterion for killing the helpless, why not kill all quadraplegics? And if not, why not?

When it comes to who is best to decide, Grogan wrote, it's clear that Terri Schiavo's parents "have proved themselves nothing if not fiercely loyal, utterly committed parents. They might be misguided. They might be in denial. But no one can argue their devotion. They have not given up. They have not stopped caring. They have not stopped loving. Who are we, as a society, to tell them they must?

Grogan concluded:

Clearly, Schiavo's husband has moved on to a new life, and who can blame him? It's been 15 long years. But parents cannot move on. Parents cannot give up. Their child will always be the precious gift they brought into the world.

If the Schindlers want to dedicate the rest of their lives and resources to caring for their brain-damaged daughter, if they want to shower her with attention and affection she likely will never recognize, who among us will tell them they cannot

It won't be me.

God bless you, Mr. Grogan. I think Michael Schiavo is a monster with ulterior motives. His singleminded determination to see his wife's death sentence carried out, alone, makes me question his actions and words. The Scriptures speak of a man and woman coming together as husband and wife, and becoming "one flesh." Biblically speaking, then, isn't this a case of self-mutilation? Of course, this "man" is a husband in name only. What astounds me most about the case is the lengths to which the court system will go to grant his death-wish.

Let me share a personal story. My cousin, Michael, was born a seemingly normal child. He ran and played and dreamed, just as normal children do. But at about age eight, he began exhibiting symptoms of the dreaded genetic disorder, Muscular Dystrophy. His control of his body rapidly degenerated, and in just a few short years, he was wheelchair-bound. The doctors' prognosis was not good: he would live only into his late teen years.

My cousin lived into his late thirties. He lived the last two decades of his life as a quadraplegic. He was forced to utilize an artificial device in stimulating his vocal cords for speech.

In spite of his infirmities, Michael loved life. He had a brilliant, razor-sharp mind and was a master at chess. He worked toward and received a college education through corresspondence courses from a Bible college. He had a great sense of humor and brought a lot of joy to everyone who knew and loved him. Best of all, he loved God with all his heart, mind, and soul.

In a broken world, sometimes people are born with broken bodies. But unlike a toy soldier with a missing limb, or a Tonka truck with no wheels, we do not discard people. That's part of what makes us in God's image. That's what differentiates us from mere animals.

We Just Wanna Be loved, Is That So Wroooooong?

Here's an eye-opening account of the metamorphosis of the homosexual rights movement, from a mental disorder to a civil rights cause.

What you're left with are human beings, no different than you or me, who are, of course, sexual beings. Like you and me, their sexuality is broken in a broken world. The notion that "homosexuals" are in effect a "different species" (different genes) is ludicrous beyond belief. There is not the slightest evidence for that as anyone who actually reads the studies (not reports on the studies) knows.

Of course as one grows and changes, one "grooves" a pathway that becomes embedded and increasingly difficult to alter. Of course a different innate disposition places one at a different "risk profile" for all sorts of different paths in life. So what else is new? It is also true that people do sometimes want to change, and some do and some don't. This is true of everything. It's also true that few good things in life are easy, and no achievement is ever perfect.

Good For a Laugh. . .and Not Much Else

From The Federalist Patriot:

"To call it Islamic terror is discriminating, it's bigoted, it is not the right thing to say. ... We just take for granted that there is an Islamic terror movement because we do have some fanatic people who come from Islamic countries. ... When we had the Ku Klux Klan we didn't call them Baptist terrorists. When Hitler was killing Jews, we didn't call it Christian terrorists." --Rep. Charlie Rangel when asked why France refuses to designate Hezbollah as an Islamic terror group

This is perhaps the most ignorant, mentally arrested quote I've read in a long time; and that's saying a lot, coming from this daffy snob.

Ok, utterly justifiable ad hominem attacks aside, I have some questions for Chuckles: Is it discriminating? Sure it is. So what? There's nothing wrong with that. I discriminate every day, over all sorts of things. This isn't a four-letter word, folks. Bigoted? Nonsense. It is the religion of Islam that motivates Hezbollah and other charity groups to behave like animals, commiting terrorist acts, linking the Jews with subhuman beasts, and denouncing the West as the devil incarnate, while finding no troubles in the day-to-day, typical monstrosities of Islamic culture. In short, Islam motivates such actions. Hezbollah's worldview is not in discord with Islamic teaching. It is Muslims who denounce all forms of violence and religious coercion who stray from "The Straight Path." And as I've asked before, are we to believe it is pure coincidence that the only terrorism affecting the United States in a serious way is Islamic in nature?

His remark about the Klan is just stupid. All Klansmen are not Baptists; and the ones who are harbor a distorted view of God's word that would be the envy of most contortionists.

But Chuckles' cognitive dissolution shines for all to see, when he mentions Hitler in the same breath as Christians. Hitler was not a Christian. He loathed Christianity, seeing it as his worst enemy. The Nazis were not Christians, but neo-pagan butchers, having more in common with the New Age movement than Christianity. In fact, Naziism is about as far from following the teachings of Christ as one can get, in this world.

Isn't it frightening that we have such historically blind people in high public office?

Hey, Chuck, given your defensive pronouncement about France's motives, who's the real bigot, here?

Southern by the Grace of God

Just how much of a Southron are you? If mashed taters, cawnbread, peas an' corn, a mess o' greens, fried okry an' squash are whut you call delicacies--well, join the club!

Take the Yankee or Dixie? quiz. I scored 78%. (I gallantly stole this link from Let's Try Freedom. )

Yeeeeeeeee-haw!

Dahmer's Worldview

‘If a person doesn’t think there is a God to be accountable to, then—then what’s the point of trying to modify your behaviour to keep it within acceptable ranges? That’s how I thought anyway. I always believed the theory of evolution as truth, that we all just came from the slime. When we, when we died, you know, that was it, there is nothing…’

Jeffrey Dahmer, culinarian, in an interview with Stone Phillips, Dateline NBC, Nov. 29, 1994.