This, I can safely delegate

It’s part of my job description to be a watchdog, but we watchdogs have to sort of triage the threats and make smart determinations as to which threats deserve the most attention.

Here’s one I’m more than happy to delegate to someone else, and focus all my alertness elsewhere. I refer you to a letter on today’s editorial page:

Keep eye on Bible as Literature class
    The “Bible as Literature” class being taught at Batesburg-Leesville High School is no doubt an excellent resource for students to learn about a book that informs so much of our Western culture, literature and history. I applaud Rev. Teddy Higgins’ method of separating the study of literature and culture from religious indoctrination. However, parents and citizens must be aware of the source of the curriculum.
    Your article stated, “The class uses a curriculum created by the National Council on Bible Curriculum in Public Schools, a group that aims to make state-certified Bible electives the norm nationwide.” The NCBCPS states that it is in cooperation with the American Family Association and the Center For Reclaiming America For Christ. People For The American Way lists the American Family Association in its “Right Wing Watch.”
    Dr. D. James Kennedy of Coral Ridge Ministries, founder of the Center For Reclaiming America For Christ, makes this scary statement: “Our job is to reclaim America for Christ, whatever the cost. As the vice regents of God, we are to exercise godly dominion and influence over our neighborhoods, our schools, our government, our literature and arts, our sports arenas, our entertainment media, our news media, our scientific endeavors — in short, over every aspect and institution of human society.”
    President Elizabeth Ridenour states that she is a member of the Council For National Policy, founded by Left Behind series author Tim LaHaye. The New York Times has described it is a “little-known group of a few hundred of the most powerful conservatives in the country,” that meets behind closed doors at undisclosed locations. Membership is by invitation only, and is kept secret. The NCBCPS Web site further lists endorsements by numerous ultra-conservative individuals and organizations. Many of them want to move children from public to Christian schools and actively work for an American theocracy.
    Our Founding Fathers and mothers were clear in their intent to establish separation of church and state because they had seen the horrors of state religion and theocracy in Europe.
    Perhaps in the near future students will also have the options of studying the timeless Bhagavad-Gita, the beautiful poetry of the Sufis, our great American Theosophical heritage, or the ancient Hermetica, which strongly influenced great leaders, such as Sir Isaac Newton, Thomas More, Leonardo da Vinci and  Milton. Until then, I will be watching Bible As Literature classes carefully.


You go right ahead and do that, Holli. I can assure you that I won’t be sitting up nights worrying about it. One of the reasons I don’t worry about civil liberties in the United States is that I know there are so many people out there — possibly constituting a majority of my fellow citizens — WAY more concerned about them than I am. They are inclined to whoop and holler bloody murder over the slightest suggestion that anyone, anywhere, might be about to contemplate tiptoeing within a light year of a slippery slope. It’s an extremely efficient warning system, as this letter confirms, and I have complete confidence in it.

Take note, I am in NO way suggesting that Ms. Emore’s is an extreme view. It’s fairly close to the mainstream. That’s why I don’t have to worry. If her attention wanders, there are plenty of others who will be watching with all their might, with one hand poised to break the glass on the alarm.

But as for their studying the Bhagavad-Gita in the "near future," don’t hold your breath. One of the main points of studying the Bible is, as you say, "a book that informs so much of our Western culture, literature and history." That’s why you are willing to accept the idea.

What on Earth would be the excuse for their studying something as esoteric as the Bhagavad-Gita? Sure, it’s educational, but as a relevant priority I’d put it somewhere behind their mastering neo-Boulean math, or brain surgery, or early German literature.

88 thoughts on “This, I can safely delegate

  1. Dave

    Emore, in that letter above, repeats the refrain of the secular left, separation of church and state. We need to UN-separate church and state, and the sooner the better. Evolution is the religion of the secular humanists and we study that in school, why not study the history of biblical times too? Also, Dr. Kennedy is one of the best minds and one of the most riveting speakers in America. I wasn’t aware of the Batesburg-Leesville program, bravo to them for their common sense.

  2. Herb Brasher

    Dave, that bit about the Batesburg-Leesville program was on the front page of The State a few days ago. You should read it if you’re going to comment on the blog.

  3. Herb Brasher

    I have to laugh when someone classifies James Kennedy as some kind of conspirator. Knowing Kennedy a bit, I am pretty sure that he is primarily talking about praying for government leaders, etc. I may disagree with him about the “reclaiming” bit–fellow evangelicals Mark Noll and Nathan Hatch have already debunked the idea that America was ever a “Christian country” in that sense–but I can’t see that prayer is going to hurt anybody. If it is, then maybe they need it. I’m doing some praying myself.

  4. Capital A

    I would state to Holli Moore that the reason those other religious works aren’t lifted up so highly is that they lack the consistent complexity-in-its-simplicity that the Holy Bible holds. It is a work that reaches out to the simple-minded on the literal level and to the more mentally nuanced with its allegorical layerings.
    If you read the entirety of the Bible as well as The Illiad and The Odyssey, then you’ve read every story that has been or will ever be written. I only pray that this program doesn’t sacrifice the deeper truths to be learned from the Bible in favor of its seemingly straightforward surface.
    That said, America was founded on the Almighty Dollar, plainly and simply. Southern planters beat northern religious zealots here. Even England didn’t want the Pilgrims or the Puritans.
    Ms. Moore’s time would be better spent watching and guarding against those who would whitewash and reverse-engineer American history and our Founders’ motivations.

  5. Ready to Hurl

    Brad, how can I get a passport to the alternative-universe United States that you live in?
    There’s a well-financed and politically powerful revisionist group (represented by Dave and Lee on this blog) that insist the separation of church and state doctrine is a Liberal Conspiracy. Like the Discovery Institute’s assault on Darwinism, they are making headway in convincing the historically illiterate masses.
    People like Dave and Lee are succeeding because their propaganda finds a receptive audience in the approximately 95% of the country who are at least nominally “Christian.” It just “feels right” and “makes sense” to them.
    The few underfinanced and reviled folks whom you rely on to “kick up a fuss” (like the ACLU in Oconee County) are a weak reed for you to rest our freedom of religion on.
    Is the real reason that you “rest easy” is that you’re unwilling to risk anything of value to yourself to preserve our freedom of religion?

  6. bud

    Brad, as a journalist you should stay awake at night worrying about our freedoms. Your job depends on freedom of the press.

  7. Lee

    Just read the words of those who wrote the US Constitution – almost all of them believed that America was blessed by God, and its government needed to be based on His teachings to mankind, which means a break with all the Old World notions of government, from the Zionist priesthood to the authoritarian monarchies and new socialist ideas coming out of Germany and England.
    A government that seeks to squash all religions is establishing The State as a religion.

  8. Capital A

    You got it, Lee. America was an attempt to escape the Old World idea of CHURCH AND STATE INTERMINGLED AND SUPPORTING EACH OTHER TO THEIR OWN, OFTEN SHARED ENDS.
    Now, which do you not see: the forest or the trees?

  9. Spencer Gantt

    Was not the early European migration to America (in large part) an escape from Henry VIII’s Church of England with a desire to worship God freely without intervention by the state? And was this not addressed in the amendment to our Constitution which states that
    “Congress shall MAKE NO LAW respecting an establishment of religion (like ‘ol Henry’s) or PROHIBITING THE FREE EXERCISE thereof;”.
    Ain’t this whut hit said, you’uns? All this garbage about “separation of church and state” is just that, GARBAGE!!
    As for Herr Seymore’s last paragraph, why not? Study all that stuff she noted, and throw in Buddhism, Hinduism, Deism, whatever. Doesn’t hurt to be exposed to other thoughts. Why not!!

  10. Lee

    Our Constitution is supposed to set up a society that is tolerant of all legitimate religions. The liberals (actually communists who started this in the 1920s) have turned things upside down to create a government that is intolerant of any religion.
    Just study the French Revolution and its attack on the Church to see where the phony liberals ( atheists ) would like to take America.
    Washington warned of this in his farewell address.

  11. Ed

    Holli Emore is a foolish twit. How insecure must one be that it makes one deathly afraid of the Bible and terrified that kids might get exposed to it? Apart from its’ spiritual value, the Bible is a worthy study in literature and world history, and is at least as accurate as other texts being used these days in public schools. Many secular texts have been skewed and slanted so as to rewrite history and advance the agendas of any number of anti-christian zealots. I say up with diversty! Let the kids study the Bible as a literary work. Be not afraid Holli, neither let your heart be troubled…Ed

  12. Randy Ewart

    I find it amusing that some of the biggest self-proclaimed American patriots on this site conveniently disregard the separation of church and state promoted by the Founding Fathers when pushing their theocratic agenda.
    Even Jesus said “give unto Cesar”.

  13. Lee

    I find it sad the our public schools turn out brainwashed children who think the Founding Fathers advocated “separation of Church and State”, when they never mentioned such a thing, much less the intolerance of religion now promoted by socialist, atheists, and other bigots under the guise of religious freedom.

  14. Dave

    Lee, I guess math teachers can’t be expected to have a good grasp of our history. That may help explain one comment above.

  15. bud

    Most religions are, by definition, intolerant of other beliefs. Christianity, for instance, advocates that only persons who believe in the resurection of Christ will be allowed into the kingdom of heaven. Other religions have similar intolerant doctrine. So if we allow one specific religion to dominate government institutions we create an intolerant government. The only answer is to keep religious institutions seperate from government institutions. The founding fathers clearly understood that and wrote the concept of separation of church and state into the constitution.

  16. Mary Rosh

    Gentlemen, — The affectionate sentiments of esteem and approbation which you are so good as to express towards me, on behalf of the Danbury Baptist Association, give me the highest satisfaction. My duties dictate a faithful and zealous pursuit of the interests of my constituents, and in proportion as they are persuaded of my fidelity to those duties, the discharge of them becomes more and more pleasing.
    Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely between man and his God, that he owes account to none other for his faith or his worship, that the legislative powers of government reach actions only, and not opinions, I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should “make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof,” thus building a wall of separation between church and State. Adhering to this expression of the supreme will of the nation in behalf of the rights of conscience, I shall see with sincere satisfaction the progress of those sentiments which tend to restore to man all his natural rights, convinced he has no natural right in opposition to his social duties.
    I reciprocate your kind prayers for the protection and blessing of the common Father and Creator of man, and tender you for yourselves and your religious association, assurances of my high respect and esteem.
    ( Thomas Jefferson, letter to the Danbury Baptist Association, January 1, 1802; from Merrill D. Peterson, ed., Thomas Jefferson: Writings, New York: Library of America, 1994, p. 510. )
    GEE, you’re dumb.

  17. Ready to Hurl

    Lee says: The liberals (actually communists who started this in the 1920s) have turned things upside down to create a government that is intolerant of any religion.
    Those of us who follow Jefferson’s dictum of keeping a “wall of separation between church and State” don’t seek to “squash” ANY religion. We seek to follow the U.S. Constitution. Lee, Dave and their ilk openly promote the establishment of a state sanctioned religion– Christianity.
    Dave is free to mistakenly believe that Christianity is the sole and essential underpinning of liberal democracy. He is not free to (sinfully) commit genocide to further that belief.
    Neither he, nor Lee are free to force non-Christians to subsidize religious proselytizing via government endorsement or funding.
    If either could see beyond their fanaticism they would recognize that separating church and state actually serves the best interests of their religion, as well, as the freedoms of non-regligionists.

  18. Randy Ewart

    Dave, I have a pretty good grasp of your skewed version of Christianity and history:
    You stated we should have school prayer and that the Jews should sit quietly aside and maybe learn something (and you dismissed Islam as a cult). This certainly reflects a Christian Theocratic leaning on your part.
    As RTH and Mary have shared, there clearly was an effort on the part of our Founding Fathers to protect the rights of citizens for religious freedom – separation of church and state. This would include our Muslim and Jewish citizens, despite your revisionist suggestion.
    Of course, this Christian Theocracy based on the King Dave version of the Bible would include condemnation as “whores” of women who have sex outside of matrimony.

  19. Dave

    It’s interesting how a couple of letters written by Jefferson, among many thousands that he wrote, have been co-opted by the liberals in an effort to distort the constitution. Further, at the risk of making Laurin and a few other bloggers blush, remember that Jefferson was discovered boinking his best friend (actually a minister who lived next door) wife. He also took the black concubine of 13 years old (Sally Hemings) to France with him as a sort of captive sex slave. He impregnated her multiple times. No wonder the guy wanted some separation from church. Were he Catholic, he would have worn the priest out attending confession 3 times a day. So for you separation freaks out there, remember where Jefferson’s vantage point was coming from, an adulterous scoundrel and a pedophile. But, the left gives him a nice pass on this, after all, Clinton is a hero of the left also.

  20. bud

    Ok, Dave. Since you think it’s ok to intermingle religion and the state here’s my plan. Let’s require all school children to start the day by facing Mecca and giving thanks to Allah.

  21. Spencer Gantt

    “wrote the concept of separation of church and state into the constitution”.
    Would one of you SEPARATIST WHACKOS please quote for me Article, Section and/or Amendment in the Constitution where this concept is written? I’ve read the Constitution many times, studied it, have several copies of it around for reference, but NOWHERE can I find this concept which you say is in there. Please help this poor ol’ dumb Southerner out.

  22. bud

    The first amendment is pretty clear on this:
    Amendment I
    Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.
    The language of the day is a bit confusing but it’s very clear to me what this means. The first clause prohibits a state religion. It also prohibits the state from preventing a citizen from practicing his or her religion.
    The only way to comply with the first part is to separate church and state. When a public official, whether he’s an elected official, a school teacher or a state employee in an authority position foists their personal religious beliefs on persons under their control that is effectively “respecting” a religion and that is unconstitutional. On the other hand, if someone wants to pray on their own at work or school the state cannot interfere in a reasonable exercise of this practice. That is true no matter what type of religion is involved. All must be treated equally.
    Does that clear it up Spencer? I may be a separatist wacko but at least I’m not an idiot.

  23. Capital A

    Please help this poor ol’ dumb Southerner out.
    Posted by: Spencer Gantt | Dec 13, 2006 11:28:30 AM
    You’re just being difficult. Bud et al. have pretty much cleared up any confusion you may have concering this issue.
    Please don’t link the rest of us Sons of the South with your jackanapery, either. Much obliged!
    TJ was a Southerner, so don’t try to make this some sort of sectionalist division. I guess you’re just left with the old right-wing technique of casting yourself as the common sensical, country bumpkin in opposition to our detached illuminati.
    If you wanted to continue to be painfully predictable, that is.

  24. Spencer Gantt

    Let me apologize for saying “wackos”. I sank into the abyss of being stupid, and got the same thrown back at me. I should have said “separatist advocates”.
    However, nothing that you two fine gentlemen said holds water IMHO. You simply gave your interpretation of the words in the first amendment. Very few people agree with your interpretation, but many “people in power” do. Therein lies the problem, again IMHO.
    I agree totally with separation of church and state, but not with the extremes with which it is practiced today. After all, each session of Congress is opened with a prayer. Each house of Congress has a chaplain (don’t know what faith). That doesn’t seem to be causing any problem.
    At any rate may God (any god) bless you both. And, may the South never rise again, speaking of sectionalism.

  25. Dave

    Bud, do I have to explain this again. Islam is a phony cult for the illiterate desert dwellers. It is not a religion, let alone a religion of peace. Every time W says that, I cringe at the politically correct nonsense. But answer this question, why does the American left hate the Jews so much? So much that they now align with the madman running Iran who doesnt believe the holocaust happened and publicly states he will exterminate all the Jews. Nice company you and the other pacifists are in.

  26. Randy Ewart

    Bud, citing the Constitution falls on blind eyes with Dave. This is the same person who dismisses the Jews as inconsequential and believes they should be subjected to Christian prayer in schools yet characterizes democrats as the “anti-semetic” group.
    He also belittles Kerry’s service and injuries in Vietnam, especially when compared to his own distinguished service training on American bases and suffering a chipped tooth.
    Point of fact, Muslims pray to the same God as Dave and believe Jesus is a prophet. They deviate from Christianity as do the followers of the King Dave version of the Bible.

  27. Lee

    The Danbury Baptists wanted New England to secede from the Union so they could set up a state religion and run the public schools as religious schools. That was, and is, unConstitutional.
    Today, we have atheists and others who are intolerant of any religion,and seek to have the state establish their agnosticism as the official religion.
    Muslims worship the God of Abraham, but they believe the Jews and Christians are infidels. Look at the vicious centuries of fighting among Sunni and Shiite factions over disagreement on whether their is a direct succession of the priesthood.
    The bottom line is that as long a any Muslims think their religion tells them to murder Christians, Jews, Hindus and Buddhists, those Muslims are sociopaths who must be eliminated by armed force of law.

  28. Ready to Hurl

    Dave says:why does the American left hate the Jews so much? So much that they now align with the madman running Iran who doesnt believe the holocaust happened and publicly states he will exterminate all the Jews.
    Please provide the evidence that backs up this statement. I’m sure that a number of active liberal Jews– like Norman Lear, George Soros, Rob Reiner, Richard Holbrooke, Felix G. Rohatyn, Jon Stewart, Katrina vanden Heuvel, Russ Feingold, Chuck Schumer, Barbara Boxer, Tom Lantos, Debbie Wasserman, and Ruth Bader Ginsburg– would be very interested in your proof.
    The Washington Post would probably like your exclusive tip. In a 2004 article WaPo reporter Thomas Edsall wrote: “As in past Democratic campaigns, the Jewish community is playing a major role in raising money for Kerry, despite aggressive GOP efforts to woo Jewish voters and donors. One official at a leading Jewish organization estimated that one-third of Kerry’s vice chairs are Jewish, compared with about 10 percent of Bush’s major fundraisers. Among the leading donors with an interest in Jewish issues, particularly U.S.-Israeli relations, is Haim Saban, the chief executive of Saban Capital Group and creator of the Mighty Morphin Power Rangers.”
    You know, listening to Rush has been proven to lower your IQ.

  29. Dave

    RTH – Schumer, Feingold, Boxer, Feinstein just to name a few are selling out their fellow Jews. Are you deaf and dumb and blind to this. The NY Times and CNN are owned by Jews. Need you have more proof.

  30. bud

    Lee writes:
    “Muslims worship the God of Abraham, but they believe the Jews and Christians are infidels. Look at the vicious centuries of fighting among Sunni and Shiite factions over disagreement on whether their is a direct succession of the priesthood.”
    How soon we forget. Until very recently the protestants and catholics were killing each other in droves in Northern Ireland. Millions have died because of religious fanatacism. Christians have certainly done their share.
    Dave, you’ve crossed the line into anti-semitism. I suggest you re-think your last disgusting post.

  31. Ready to Hurl

    Yes, Dave, I need “more proof” because I haven’t seen you provide the slightest justification for your statement.
    Your standard of proof seems to be either:
    (1) “They don’t agree with my wingnut world view so they’re, ipso facto, an auxiliary to the axis of evil.”
    (2) “NewsMax, American Thinker, Jewish World Review and Rush publish this stuff so it must be true.”
    I’m constantly amazed at the chameleon-like ability of wingnut propagandists to shape-shift. The current effort is turning inside out the anti-semitic conspiracy beliefs of such rightwing stalwarts as the John Birch Society and Richard Nixon.
    Apparently neo-conservative Jews like Bill Kristol, Norman Podhoretz, and Jonah Goldberg recognize the propaganda power of falsely alleging anti-semitism. Unfortunately for them history is shows the rightwing to be far more likely to be anti-semitic.

  32. Capital A

    And there you have it, folks, Dave’s Michael Richards Moment of the Week!
    The worst part? He doesn’t even realize what he just did.
    What could be even more terrible than the worst part? He’ll next try to spin it that his critics are being overly sensitive and/or…wait for it…politically correct.
    Just throw those last two words out there, kids, and you can say any disgusting, racially or culturally insulting comment you want! Or, at least, you’ll think you can…
    Let’s watch the fun ensue…

  33. Dave

    More proof that Jewish leftists are selling out Israel. Wolf Blitzer is a Jew on CNN. He wont cover the Iranian Holocaust didnt Exist Conference. Can anyone with any common sense believe this? Now just imagine for a minute if the RNC decided to host a Holocaust is a Myth conference. Now Wolf would be all over that. So, in effect, Wolf is aligned along with CNN with the madmen running Iran. CNN will cover Spears sans panties and every kidnapped baby in America, but is ignoring the modern day Hitlerism of Iran. Reuters referred to David Duke as an American Academic. Unbelievable. Bud, Cap A, et. al.,,, open your eyes and see truth, at least try.

  34. Ready to Hurl

    Funny, I saw plenty of coverage of the Iranian conference on cable news. I can’t be positive but I’d bet that Blitzer covered it.
    BTW, most accounts mentioned David Duke as the former REPUBLICAN candidate for LA Governor.
    Too bad that I missed Britney’s crotch flash.

  35. Dave

    Hurl – Has Schumer called a press conference to condemn this meeting in Iran? Normally you cant shut Boxer up on anything. What has she said about it.? The leftist Jews in America are selling out Israel. And the Iraq Study Group is selling out Israel. As I said, the pre-WW2 pattern is repeating itself, except it isnt Hitler, instead its the Muslims ready to begin the Jewish genocide.

  36. Spencer Gantt

    Congress shall make no LAW ….. !!!
    ” ….. thus building a wall of separation between church and state.”
    So, Congress has to PASS LAWS “respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;”
    What are these laws? Name them.

  37. Ready to Hurl

    Dave, the rightwing obsession with the two day freak side show in Iran is a manifestation of Fox News’ search for sensationalism.
    No significant American politician– least of all Jewish pols– is “selling out” Israel. Most nationally prominent pols depend heavily on contributions from pro-Israel individuals and organizations. American pols are not going to endanger Israel.
    And, that’s what the war mongers among the rightwing are counting on.
    This whole “sellout Israel” campaign is just the neo-cons’ propaganda buildup to justify attacking Iran. If the wingnuts mobilize useful idiots like yourself to become hysterical about Israel’s safety then the Bush Administration will have political cover to either attack Iran directly or encourage Israel to attack.
    How is the ISG “selling out Israel?”
    You wingnuts are such easy marks for spin.
    On the one hand you endlessly tell us that we face WW III, the “clash of civilizations;” a threat to Christianity, western civilization, democracy and freedom. Yet, I don’t see any mass movement or personal initiative on the part of wingnuts to join the U.S. Armed Forces or organize some sort of armed force to join Israel in fighting these forces.
    In WW I Americans joined the Canadian and French armed forces to fight in Europe before 1917. Before WW II Americans fought in Spain against the Nazis. Heck, today the Minutemen vigilantes have organized to protect the southern border against illegal immirgrants.
    According to you, we’re in a titanic struggle against a threat comparable to Nazi Germany in 1939. Yet you and the Fightin’ Keyboarders aren’t willing to volunteer to defend the homeland and Jesus.
    Why? Probably because your propanganda puppet masters just want your political support. They want you babbling about the “imminent threat” so that they can have political capital to put us in yet another war that will bankrupt us for generations, at best.

  38. bud

    RTH, we never have enough of anything when it comes to the war-mongers. We spend more on the military than the next 20 nations combined. But it’s not enough. We fight a war in Afghanistan. But it’s not enough. We fight a war in Iraq. But it’s not enough. We kill thousands in a bunch of backwards nations 6,000 miles away. But it’s not enough. We strip our national guard units, our reserves, our police departments of valuable resources to assist in the fight. This comes at the cost of fighting crime and assisting with disaster relief. But it’s not enough.
    The Chairborne Rangers (or Fightn’ Keyboarders) never lift a finger to help. Brad yacks on and on about how important the cause is but apparently is too busy writing editorials about the DOT to actually do anything. Dave and Lee find plenty of time to call the left-wingers all kinds of names. Yet never a hint of a sacrifice. Nada, zippo.
    It’s really become quite a disgusting spectacle. A few foolish souls provide just enough cover for our imperialist leaders to waste more lives, money and prestige in a failed cause to obtain a little cheap oil.
    Only 12% of the American people actually want to escalate this effort. Yet those 12% appear unwilling to provide any tangible support. Quickly doing the math, 12% of 300,000,000 gives a pool of about 36 million American who want to increase the troop levels in Iraq. Perhaps 1/4 of those would be fit enough and of the right age. So we should have no trouble raising 9 million soldiers to fight this war. So where are they?

  39. Ready to Hurl

    So, Spencer, I guess your reading of the Second Ammendment only guarantees the right of people in militias to bear arms.

  40. Spencer Gantt

    On the first amendment, a blogger from a foreign state was kind enough to post Jefferson’s letter of 01/01/1802 regarding same. I’d heard of this for a long time, but never actually read it. It was very enlightening as it makes clear to me the principle of “the wall”.
    TJ states that “the whole American people … declared that their legislature should MAKE NO LAW respecting an establishment … or prohibiting free exercise … thereby building a wall of separation …”. I interpret that to mean that as long as no laws are passed by Congress forming a religion nor stopping anyone from practicing a religion, then the wall is up there. Make such laws and the wall comes crumbling down. Well, we don’t have such laws so Merry Christmas, menoras, nativity scenes and The Bible as Literature courses are A-OK. Right?
    Second amendment? I think everyone should have the right to own one handgun, one rifle and one shotgun whether they’re in a militia or not. Registered, of course. Any quantities above this, any other types could not have firing pins, and you’re a collector.
    How’d we get onto the 2nd amendment?

  41. Lee

    It never fails. Those who do not understand current events always cite their misunderstanding of other history to justify their ignorant position.
    There has not been, “until recentcl, Protestants and Catholics killing each other in Norhern Ireland.” In fact, most of the killing was done by a handful of Catholic terrorists, who were aligned with the Soviet Communists, going back to Lenin. That’s the only valid comparison to Iraq – a few terrorists, communist trained, killing civilians to break the will of those seeking to bring peace and stability.
    The original trouble in Ireland was caused by a few greedy lower-level English gentry trying to acquire land in Ireland, and using the fact that some Irish partisans were conspiring with France as the spark to acquire Queen Elizabeth’s authorization for them to clean out the Irish lords.

  42. Ready to Hurl

    Spencer, re-read the Second Ammendment with the same literalness that you give to reading the First Ammendment above.
    Then please explain why anybody outside of a “militia” has the “right” to possess firearms.

  43. bud

    Lee is a world class champion of revisionist history. His recent post on Northern Ireland is the mother of all non-sequetors. What difference does it make whether the Catholics were aligned with the French or the communists? Nor is it relevant whether the trouble had anything to do with Irish Lords or English Gentry. The important point, which flew right over Lee’s head, is that Catholics were, for decades, killing Protestants and visa-versa. And they were doing so in the name of religion. What’s wrong with acknowledging the truth about something without all this pointless spin?

  44. Lee

    That’s my point, Hurl. You find history irrelevant because you are ignorant of it. So please stop misapplying random citations of your factoid histories.

  45. Ready to Hurl

    Lee, please note the last sentence of the following citation from Wikipedia.
    I find history very instructive. I just don’t try to make it fit my biases, prejudices and ideology, like you.
    Militia Act of 1792
    The Militia Act of 1792 was a series of statutes enacted by the second United States Congress in 1792. The act provided for the organization of state militias under the command of the President of the United States.
    There were, in fact, two Militia Acts passed by the U.S. Congress in 1792. The first Act, passed May 2, 1792, provided for the authority of the President to call out the militias of the several states, “whenever the United States shall be invaded, or be in imminent danger of invasion from any foreign nation or Indian tribe.”[1] The law also authorized the President to call the militias into Federal service “whenever the laws of the United States shall be opposed or the execution thereof obstructed, in any state, by combinations too powerful to be suppressed by the ordinary course of judicial proceedings, or by the powers vested in the marshals by this act”.[2] This provision likely referred to risings such as Shay’s Rebellion or the Whiskey Rebellion in opposition to the judicial collection of debts and taxes.
    Militia Act of 1792
    The second Act, passed May 8, 1792, provided for the organization of the state militias. It conscripted every male citizen between the ages of 18 and 45 into the several militias of the states. Militia members were required to arm themselves at their own expense with “a good musket or firelock, a sufficient bayonet and belt, two spare flints”, a powder horn, and various other weapons and military hardware.[3]
    The militia forces were divided into “divisions, brigades, regiments, battalions, and companies” as the state legislatures would direct.[4] The provisions of the first Act governing the calling up of the militia by the President in case of invasion or obstruction to law enforcement were continued in the second Act.[5] Court martial proceedings were authorized by the statute against militia members who disobeyed orders.[6]
    These Militia Acts were amended by the Militia Act of 1862, which allowed African-Americans to serve in the militias of the United States. They were replaced by the Militia Act of 1903, which established the United States National Guard as the chief body of organized military reserves in the United States.

  46. Dave

    Hurl – In 1916 the government recognized the “Unorganized militia” which does NOT include the National Guard. The 3.62 Sections of the 1916 National Defense Act
    “Section 57. COMPOSITION OF THE MILITIA: The militia of the United States shall consist of all able-bodied male citizens of the United States.. who shall be more than 18 years of age and…not more than 45 years of age, and said militia shall be divided into 3 classes, the National Guard, the Naval Militia, and the Unorganized militia.

  47. bud

    So I guess what Dave is saying is that able-bodied males between 18-45 are allowed to own and carry firearms but the rest of us (including old men and all women) are not. So Dave on your 46th birthday turn that Smith and Wesson in or you’ll be unconstitutional.

  48. Ready to Hurl

    It’s odd that I’ve never noticed the NRA mentioning that the Second Ammendment doesn’t apply to people over 45 years of age, Dave.

  49. Dave

    Hurl, they need to update that part of the Act. When first written, males probably had a lifespan of only 46 years old. And Bud, back in those days women were not yet the feminist hags as we see today. But that is a whole nuther topic. The point is, Lee is 100% correct about the militia.

  50. Capital A

    Wait, Dave, didn’t people in the Bible live to be say…900 years old? What happened there? De-evolution? Oh wait, you couldn’t believe in that. It was probably just “Jesus sprinkles” which allowed such an occurence.
    Also, way to offend the female population… What do you do for an encore– kick a puppy?
    You’re about as much of a man (much less a Southern man) as is Marvin the Martian…and about as close to our orbit!
    (See, Herb, you can tell an author’s intentions, motivations, and meaning based on what they write. Was that so hard?)

  51. Lee

    RTH –
    The National Guard was created in 1903 along with the authorization for federal drafting of solders, sailors and Marines in a legal manner. Lincoln had drafted soldiers, and recruited foreigners into the Yankee army during the War Between the States.
    At the same time, Congress also created a federal income tax, which Lincoln had also imposed illegally.
    The Militia Act of 1792 is still in force, as evidenced by governors calling up individuals in emergency, by the State Guards, which originally were ceded to national command, as in the Mexican War and the Spanish American War, and by former military officers and noncomms being called up at ages 57-63 for Bosnia and Iraq.
    No federal laws have, or can, overturn the Constitutional guarantee that everyone be armed, because America was founded on the idea of universal military service, just as England and Germany had for centuries before, codified in law.

  52. Dave

    CAP A – You obviously havent taken a close look at the hags in the NOW organization. NOW standing for Nagging Old Women. I would never insult all the fine, and beautiful, “feminine” women of South Carolina or the nation. But nags, yes. They need to be insulted.

    As for your mockery of the scriptures and Biblical teaching. John the Baptist said that one will come who is far greater than he ever could be, and that God would harvest the wheat, but the chaff would burn forever. If I were you, I would be working on getting off the chaff side, don’t you think?

  53. Capital A

    No, Dave, I’m not too worried about it. I’m looking forward to having a cup of mead with Hercules, Thor and Siegfried. You know, “real men.” Of course you do since you constantly remind us of your faculties in judgement where that topic is concerned.
    Besides, those guys are a livelier crowd than those stiffs the Heroes of the Bible. Except for Noah…that guy can party. If he could only keep his robe closed…
    Dave, who wins in a fight: Eve or Lilith? Since both never really existed (though one was conveniently edited from the KJV), you may let your imagination run wild. The writers who created them did, after all.
    I’m only asking since you’ve lately become an expert on what a “real woman” is which, if a poll were taken, I’d suspect many of us here are glad to read that your ogling has jumped genders.

  54. Ready to Hurl

    Dave offers the “life insurance argument” for believing in Christianity.
    “Sure there’s no real, verifiable way to determine what happens after death. BUT! But, if there is a Hell– which we’re sure there is because we have faith in our Faith– then you’ll forever regret not believing in our version of life-after-death.”
    The life insurance agent: “Sure there’s no way to predict whether you’ll die before your wife. BUT! But, do you really want to take the chance? Just think about your widow working as a Wal-Mart greeter. You’d regret not buying this policy, wouldn’t you?”

  55. Lee

    I’ll bet you liberalcrats would load up with life insurance if you could get the state to force the rest of us to pay for it.

  56. Dave

    Hurl – Hillary claims she communicates with Eleanor Roosevelt. Doesnt that convince the moonbat leftists that there is life after death. I know they wont believe the Pope but Hillary, yes.

  57. Capital A

    Hillary is just a woman who has provided no measurable political benefit to America.
    The pope is just a man in a silly hat that makes him look like a walking, talking posthole digger and who, along with all his predecessors, has provided no measurable benefit (though much detriment) to humanity.
    Hope that makes clear what I believe.

  58. Dave

    CAP A – You can insult the Pope all you want but the rest of the world recognizes him as the single most important symbol of peace and hope on this planet. As in many things, you are way off by yourself in a small minority.

    Damnant quad non intelligent which means you condemn what you dont understand.

  59. Capital A

    Hyperbole much, Dave?
    World history tells another story from what you suggest. I wonder which I’ll believe? Hmmm…
    Maybe we should move on rather than go down the laundry list of terrors spread by popes throughout human experience…

  60. Lee

    Which world would that be, Cap A?
    Your knowledge of this world’s history is sorely lackling. Perhaps you should sue your public school.

  61. Dave

    Lee, Cap gets his history from comic books. But I like him nonetheless. He probably has watched History of the World by Mel Brooks too. That counts.

  62. Ready to Hurl

    The last series of posts almost makes me regret my suggestion that we encourage posts from Dave.
    But, really, what better demonstration of idiocy than his own words.

  63. Capital A

    I guess getting my history from comics beats gaining my worldview from Chick tracts. You two, Knave and Leest, could be his co-writers when he finally heads into the great wide open.
    Start your reading with the Crusades. Once you ingest that, I can point you to other fairly obvious news and nuggets to feast upon.
    You have been served.

  64. Lee

    Liberals hate religion because they hate morality, and any discussion of the social costs of liberal amoral behavior. Secular critics come in for the same hatred – they just cannot be smeared as a group with buzzwords the way Christians and Jews can be smeared.

  65. Dave

    Hurl – Cap A lives in a world of his own and has his own interesting but sometimes unintelligible lingo. As for the crusades, the Muslims want to refight the crusades. I say lets do it and the sooner the better. Iran should be next after we clear the scum out of Iraq.

  66. Capital A

    Hurl, after you read these, your name will never be more appropriate. Imagine Lee and Dave sitting in a room, one drawing and the other writing cartoon booklets designed to present their view of the world and Christianity.
    They are hilarious to read on the one hand but sickening when you consider the young minds poisoned by their ostensibly “Christian” messages.
    Yes, I know, it’s Scary Larry, to say the least. Without further adieu, I give you…
    CHICK TRACTS! (Knave never taught me to post proper links, I know.)

  67. Capital A

    Oh, might I suggest two of my personal “faves” from this American master: Are Roman Catholics Christians? and Allah Had No Son?
    Keep tissue and/or a trash can nearby to catch vomitous upon reading.

  68. Lee

    The socialistic liberals just hope to postpone the collapse of the West until they collect all their welfare freebies. They could care less about the future generation, and they don’t believe in Heaven or Hell. It’s all here and now for those greedy slobs.

  69. Dave

    Cap A – I like that Allah had no Son. Good link we can all use. So when YuckmidgetinGrab of Iran says publicly that The US, UK, and Israel will all be destroyed and perish, you take that as just the Iranian midget yucking it up for the Mullahs. The little Hitler like midget believes that and plans to make it a reality. Needless to say, the Muslims will kill the comic book readers first, along with the gays, and the truly atheistic and unholy. Get yourself ready pal, because when the surrender crowd ever takes over this nation, we don’t have a chance.

  70. Mary Rosh

    Lee, we just want the West to survive until you have spent a day paying your own way, rather than depending for your support on handouts paid for by the taxes of liberals. That’ll mean that the West will endure forever.
    As for the “social costs of amoral liberal behavior,” I’m happy to pay those costs. I’m happy to tolerate our better educated, wealthier, more productive population, along with our lower rates of illiteracy, infant mortality, crime, divorce, child abuse, spouse abuse, out of wedlock births, teen pregnancy, abortion, drunkenness, smoking, and obesity, compared to those found in states in which the population exhibits “moral conservative behavior.”

  71. Lee

    How do you pay the costs, Mary?
    What do you do for a living?
    How much taxes do you pay?
    Why have all the liberal programs you so love, created more illiteracy, infant mortality, crime, divorce, child abuse, spouse abuse, out of wedlock births, teen pregnancy, abortion, drunkenness, smoking, and obesity?

  72. Mary Rosh

    So, Lee, we’re supposed to understand that liberal policies produce all these bad results in CONSERVATIVE STATES, and ONLY IN CONSERVATIVE STATES? The failures of conservative states to perform as well as liberal states are due not to the conservative policies adopted by those states, but by some strange effect caused by the liberal policies in practice in liberal states?
    How do you then explain your own personal failures? You are a steadfast conservative; how have liberal policies of states you don’t live in and have never visited made you the failure that you are today? How has the fact that other people are liberals kept you a failure dependent on handouts?
    As I’ve said before, if conservative policies are incapable of producing satisfactory results, why does it matter that they don’t produce satisfactory results? Who cares if the failures of conservative states result from the inherent failures of conservative policies or the fact that conservative policies are so fragile that it is impossible to implement them satisfactorily? Who cares if the failures of conservative states are caused by the failures of conservative policies, or by some strange field effect of the liberal policies that make the people of liberal states so productive, wealthy, prosperous and moral?
    The facts remain the same. Conservatives in conservative states practicing conservative policies are failures, and liberals in liberal states practicing liberal policies are successful.
    Why shouldn’t the failed conservative states at least try the liberal policies practiced by so many successful liberal states?

  73. Lee

    We don’t need to speculate about pseud “Mary Rosh”. We KNOW she can’t defend the failures of liberalism, and its elitist, racist attitudes. Just post a fact here, and watch her and other socialists spin into another subject, usually a fifth-grade personal insult.

  74. Ready to Hurl

    Lee wouldn’t know a “fact” if it bit him.
    Lee claims that Dubya’s administration has prevented 150 terrorist attacks since 9/11. This is a “fact” in Lee’s world because in Lee’s world a fact doesn’t have to be proven. It’s true because he believes it.
    For Lee to label liberals as racists is the ultimate example of what psychiatrists term projection. Ask your therapist about it, Lee.

  75. Ready to Hurl

    The First Christo-Fascist Candidate for President
    “[W]e are leaving ourselves vulnerable to infiltration by those who want to mold the United States into the image of their religion, rather than working within the Judeo-Christian principles that have made us a beacon for freedom-loving persons around the world.”
    — Rep. Virgil Goode (R-VA), in an op-ed published in USA Today, explaining why he believes the United States should refuse immigrants from the Middle East.

  76. Ready to Hurl

    Fact #1
    The 2006 London airport arrests were accomplished by BRITISH law enforcement agencies– not the Bush Administration. The Brits had infiltrated an agent into the group of alleged terrorists.
    Fact #2
    At least one terrorism expert has cast doubt as to whether the alleged method of blowing the planes up was practical. None of the alleged hijackers had bought tickets and some of them didn’t have passports.
    Fact #3
    Once again Lee demonstrates his innumerancy. (This trait must be very disconcerting to his employers who presumably expect engineers to understand numbers.) Just as Lee is incapable of documenting the 70+ Clinton Administration folks he alleges to be in prison, so he offers a single alleged terror incident to back up his statement of 150 plots allegedly foiled by the Bush Administration.
    Of course, we all know that the Bush Administration was curiously lax when it came to preventing 9/11 despite excited warnings in the 8/01 PDB.
    That’s a fact that Lee and his pals prefer to ignore.

  77. Dave

    Hurl, predictably you do not give credit to the Bush administration for anything. And actually, Goode may be onto something there. Keep an eye on Obama. I read where he actually used to be a Muslim. Leaving the Muslim religion is punishable by death, unless he never left it.

  78. Ready to Hurl

    Dave, I expected that you would offer Goode’s nominating speech. Be sure to clean your white sheet and pointy hat.

  79. Ruth

    I recently came accross your blog and have been reading along. I thought I would leave my first comment. I don’t know what to say except that I have enjoyed reading. Nice blog. I will keep visiting this blog very often.

Comments are closed.