My, my it certainly has been an interesting week has it not? The resulting media blitz surrounding Arizona's tough, new immigration law has brought the raving loonies out of the woodwork. Armed with emotion but with very few facts, even Al Sharpton has committed himself to righting the wrongs this new law will inevitably inflict on poor, unsuspecting immigrants.
Make that illegal immigrants. Let's not forget that one vital component of this discussion. It seems that many of the most vocal opponents to Arizona's right to self determination have lost sight of that annoying, uncomfortable word. Illegal. There's a nasty part to the truth of the argument from the left and the media as to the ultimate constitutional questions that arise when a state finally tires of promises and acts to serve it's citizens. Now, for those of you who will counter with the argument that while 70% of the people might want to legalize drinking and driving, it does not follow that it should be so. Remember that Obama proceeded with heatlthcare reform legislation and passed it with less than a 50% approval, it does not follow that it should have been passed. Talking point one has just been nullified.
In the interest of brevity, I will refrain from much of the hooplah and circus like atmosphere that permeates the evening news and save my own analysis of the state of things in Arizona for another time. For the time being at least, Obama has taken immigration reform off the table to let the anger from healthcare simmer down a bit. Besides, he's got an awful lot of Democrats to get elected in November. Harry Reid and Barbara Boxer in particular are in for nasty re-election fights despite the anointed one's personal campaigning for both.
In a brilliant strategical move, the Obama administration waited a full 8 days before making any sort of move about containing or even minimizing the oil spill from a rig that exploded on April 21st. Since last Thursday, almost every government agency has committed manpower or resources to examining, meeting, assessing, documenting and assigning blame as quickly as possible to avoid being thought of as not quite on the ball about the environmental and financial impact of the 5,000 barrel a day spill. Luckily, even Eric Holder at Justice has dispatched teams of lawyers to apparently question the oil and build a case for a lawsuit against it. Who knows. Maybe his guys were bored of talking nice-nice with terrorists and needed a little distraction.
The only real question that remains is...how long before we get a photo op with either the President or his wife wearing gloves, wiping the oil from a dying bird.
George Stepanopoulus asked the question, "Do you worry that this will be your 'Katrina'" I can answer that question George, the President is busy fomenting hatred and fear of anyone who makes too much money. Of course there's no danger that this will become another 'Katrina' type problem...because you and your fellow leftist robots in the media won't LET it become one. You'll rally around the "dear leader" and help to minimize his risk to the scandal. In fact, he's counting on it. Now be a good boy George and talk about how good things really are in America right now.
Elsewhere, the young scalawag who hacked into Sarah Palin's email account was found guilty of obstruction of justice and unauthorized access to a computer, but was acquitted on a charge of wire fraud Friday to the delight and the cheers of...well, no one really. I'm sure Mrs. Palin and her family were happy but you might not know about it if you're not on her Facebook fan list or you don't have access to The Drudge Report, sorry you folks in the Senate.
A topic close to the Arizona situation for just a moment. Have you notices how many Democrat politicians and media types are comparing it to (gasp) Nazism? Everywhere you turn there's someone talking about "showing your papers, please" in relation to their new immigration law. While it may sound innocuous, it does smack of using the fear of Fascism to denigrate a specific group of people, in this case, those who favor stronger immigration laws. For the record, Americans, whether naturalized or native, are required to carry certain forms of ID on their person to prove who they are. Even as a citizen, I am required to show my "papers" in so many situations throughout a single week and yet I've managed to remain out of a gulag. However, legal immigrants are required by law to carry their green cards or proof of immigration status on their person at all times. It's how we track them after all. We give them an official ID and all we ask is that they keep it handy to hold down on the confusion. The next time any of you are asked by a law enforcement official to show your license or proof of insurance and registration, just tell them that you have the ACLU on your side as you drive away. Let me know how that turns out for ya.
On happy note, it seems the tenets of political correctness are beginning to fray around the edges just a little. All the push back on the immigration issue has many Americans finally speaking their minds and being honest about the basis for the problem. This is a good sign. It's a sign that while you may want to call someone visually impaired because they cannot see, they are still blind. If you want to talk about immigration, you have to acknowledge that the problem is not with immigration, it's with illegal immigration. You also must admit that it's time for someone, including a state legislature, to finally DO something.
Friday, April 30, 2010
Tuesday, April 27, 2010
Offensensitivity
Have you ever taken the time to notice how offended most of the left is at any given time? I find it astounding how almost the entire population of leftists can spend their whole day, day in - day out, offended by so many things. Is their a list of things to be offended by that I just don't have access to? The many disparate groups that make up liberal America are so fractured at times that their complaints seem to overlap. I've often wondered what joy must be available to so many people who are so angry all the time. Maybe though, they're not really angry at all. Maybe it's just a way to feel like they're making a difference in this miserable world we live in. A world filled with injustice, inequality and "downright meanness" to quote Michele Obama.
For months the anger was directed at tea party protesters. Now this was a cause you could get behind - denigrating thousands of mostly peaceful, mostly polite people upset with their government and using a public space for redress of their grievances. Who wouldn't be offended by that? A bunch of white men complaining about a black president. It's just so sad that most of them don't know how racist they are. To a liberal, racism is just as bad today as it was during the 60's with no hope for any true racial healing except through the compassionate policies of the government. Dennis Miller once said, "You people who want the government to "fix" your life remember this--Government can't even pave f*cking roads in a timely fashion." True enough.
The latest object of liberal scorn is - the entire state of Arizona. It seems the Governor signed a law making racism the official state pastime. Well, not really but that's what most of the "lead with your heart not your brain" left would have you believe. What's really going on is a state has finally tired of waiting for the federal government to fulfill it's most important role - protecting the citizenry. Precious little reality has been exposed during the heated cries of civil rights violations and racism. It seems you can't have a discussion about curbing illegal immigration without some liberal namby pamby calling you a racist. It's just not possible in these days of political correctness and a rising tide of "social justice".
Now, before I continue, let me state that I have a vested interest in matters concerning immigration. My wife is Canadian so any outcome involving amnesty or any such thing has a direct effect on my life. We've followed the rules as best we can in search of her legal immigrant status. There is nothing so tedious, so infuriating as trying to navigate the choppy, confusing waters of legal immigration. At it's best it's an exercise in futility and at it's worst it's enough to make you want to claw your own eyes out with a spoon. Legal immigration is not an easy process at all which is why so many people choose to simply skip across the border and bypass it completely. There's a well defined process with rules and laws that you have to follow or risk losing your legal status.
I don't believe amnesty is a viable option to curtailing illegal immigration. How does granting citizenship to people who have broken the law prevent future abuses of the system? What kind of message does that send to the millions more who'd like to come in the US? The message it sends is that you can come over illegally and the Americans are so lazy they won't even bother to look for you and don't care if you never leave. (Insert racist label here)
This is the point where you liberals start calling me a racist who just hates people with brown skin. One problem with that label though...I have brown skin. Next insult please. I'm of Italian descent and my skin color has always been a bit darker than most. I grew up in Texas where if you're not white or black, you're Mexican. Notice I didn't say Hispanic there. No one ever asked if I was Hispanic when I was growing up, they asked if I spoke Spanish. Notes from school were sent home in Spanish. Every restaurant I worked at, I started washing dishes because having me out front might have looked bad.
Most people never even bothered to ask what nationality I was. They just made broad assumptions based on my skin color. I know a thing or two about racism too. I've been called "coconut" - brown on the outside, white on the inside, by both sides of the racial spectrum. That is until I started explaining that Italian was different than Mexican. It still happens to this day. I get stupid white people asking me if I speak English at least once a week. I get Hispanics looking for a friendly ally speaking to me in Spanish as if I have a big "I'm Mexican" sign on my back. The most memorable example happened in downtown Atlanta.
I was repairing a door at the Swissotel one sunny afternoon. I was in the parking garage on a ladder when a well dressed woman approached me carrying her bags. Exasperated at having to carry her own luggage, she walked up behind me and asked in a very snooty voice,
"Please tell me you speak English, I need a valet. These bags are killing me."
Instantly fired up, I shot back, in my best Harvard Professor voice,
"Why, yes. I do speak English. I also speak German, Latin and a smattering of Italian."
I turned away from her and continued my work, ignoring the disgusted snuffle she made.
Is that racism? Maybe not but it certainly smacked of bigotry. She made a broad assumption that,
a) I didn't speak English.
b) I must be a member of the staff. and
c) My skin color told her that I was a subordinate, there for her use.
Stupid white people indeed.
So all you lily white liberal do-gooders, you have no clue what real racism is. Racism to you is a rallying cry that you use to quell honest discussion and debate. Racism to you is a poster, a bumper sticker...a sound bite on the news.
Let's get back to Arizona for a few final minutes and look more closely at why they made the decision they did regarding illegal immigration.
Did you know that Arizona has the second highest incidence of kidnapping ...in the entire world? Ranchers are forced to let the drug cartels use their land on the border to cross or risk having their families or themselves killed. The same is true in Texas.
70% of Arizonans favor their new immigration law. That includes 30% Hispanic residents. There are upwards of 400,000 illegal immigrants in Arizona that tax the healthcare system, the ability for citizens to get jobs in this tough economy and the ability for law enforcement to hold down the damage from the drug trade.
Now we have weepy, white liberals in New York and DC telling Arizona that they don't have the right to protect their own borders. Obama called the law "misguided" and Al Sharpton is currently ramping up to march in Arizona. Big problem for Al is that when polled, 60%-70% of African Americans favor stricter immigration enforcement. Nasty statistic that eh? An Arizona rancher was killed recently by Mexican drug cartel members as an example of what happens to those who don't "play along". Dozens of law enforcement officers have been killed by the same cartels who don't want their business infringed upon. In the light of no federal help, what else was the state supposed to do? Continue allowing their citizens and police to be murdered so as not to upset the delicate balance of needing the Hispanic vote versus protecting the citizenry?
This is political gamesmanship at it's very lowest. Obama is using this issue as a means to an end. He cares not a whit about the plight of illegals, he cares about getting his party elected. That he even symbolically places the needs of those who have broken the law over the needs of law abiding citizens speaks volumes about what's really important to him.
I say Arizona has a right to protect it's citizens. Owing to the fact that I don't live there means my opinion doesn't really amount to a hill of beans on the grand scheme of things. Just as Obama's opinion means absolutely nothing in the final analysis.
All the rest of you do gooders out there,
"Thou hypocrite, first cast out the beam out of thine own eye; and then shalt thou see clearly to cast out the mote out of thy brother's eye."
For months the anger was directed at tea party protesters. Now this was a cause you could get behind - denigrating thousands of mostly peaceful, mostly polite people upset with their government and using a public space for redress of their grievances. Who wouldn't be offended by that? A bunch of white men complaining about a black president. It's just so sad that most of them don't know how racist they are. To a liberal, racism is just as bad today as it was during the 60's with no hope for any true racial healing except through the compassionate policies of the government. Dennis Miller once said, "You people who want the government to "fix" your life remember this--Government can't even pave f*cking roads in a timely fashion." True enough.
The latest object of liberal scorn is - the entire state of Arizona. It seems the Governor signed a law making racism the official state pastime. Well, not really but that's what most of the "lead with your heart not your brain" left would have you believe. What's really going on is a state has finally tired of waiting for the federal government to fulfill it's most important role - protecting the citizenry. Precious little reality has been exposed during the heated cries of civil rights violations and racism. It seems you can't have a discussion about curbing illegal immigration without some liberal namby pamby calling you a racist. It's just not possible in these days of political correctness and a rising tide of "social justice".
Now, before I continue, let me state that I have a vested interest in matters concerning immigration. My wife is Canadian so any outcome involving amnesty or any such thing has a direct effect on my life. We've followed the rules as best we can in search of her legal immigrant status. There is nothing so tedious, so infuriating as trying to navigate the choppy, confusing waters of legal immigration. At it's best it's an exercise in futility and at it's worst it's enough to make you want to claw your own eyes out with a spoon. Legal immigration is not an easy process at all which is why so many people choose to simply skip across the border and bypass it completely. There's a well defined process with rules and laws that you have to follow or risk losing your legal status.
I don't believe amnesty is a viable option to curtailing illegal immigration. How does granting citizenship to people who have broken the law prevent future abuses of the system? What kind of message does that send to the millions more who'd like to come in the US? The message it sends is that you can come over illegally and the Americans are so lazy they won't even bother to look for you and don't care if you never leave. (Insert racist label here)
This is the point where you liberals start calling me a racist who just hates people with brown skin. One problem with that label though...I have brown skin. Next insult please. I'm of Italian descent and my skin color has always been a bit darker than most. I grew up in Texas where if you're not white or black, you're Mexican. Notice I didn't say Hispanic there. No one ever asked if I was Hispanic when I was growing up, they asked if I spoke Spanish. Notes from school were sent home in Spanish. Every restaurant I worked at, I started washing dishes because having me out front might have looked bad.
Most people never even bothered to ask what nationality I was. They just made broad assumptions based on my skin color. I know a thing or two about racism too. I've been called "coconut" - brown on the outside, white on the inside, by both sides of the racial spectrum. That is until I started explaining that Italian was different than Mexican. It still happens to this day. I get stupid white people asking me if I speak English at least once a week. I get Hispanics looking for a friendly ally speaking to me in Spanish as if I have a big "I'm Mexican" sign on my back. The most memorable example happened in downtown Atlanta.
I was repairing a door at the Swissotel one sunny afternoon. I was in the parking garage on a ladder when a well dressed woman approached me carrying her bags. Exasperated at having to carry her own luggage, she walked up behind me and asked in a very snooty voice,
"Please tell me you speak English, I need a valet. These bags are killing me."
Instantly fired up, I shot back, in my best Harvard Professor voice,
"Why, yes. I do speak English. I also speak German, Latin and a smattering of Italian."
I turned away from her and continued my work, ignoring the disgusted snuffle she made.
Is that racism? Maybe not but it certainly smacked of bigotry. She made a broad assumption that,
a) I didn't speak English.
b) I must be a member of the staff. and
c) My skin color told her that I was a subordinate, there for her use.
Stupid white people indeed.
So all you lily white liberal do-gooders, you have no clue what real racism is. Racism to you is a rallying cry that you use to quell honest discussion and debate. Racism to you is a poster, a bumper sticker...a sound bite on the news.
Let's get back to Arizona for a few final minutes and look more closely at why they made the decision they did regarding illegal immigration.
Did you know that Arizona has the second highest incidence of kidnapping ...in the entire world? Ranchers are forced to let the drug cartels use their land on the border to cross or risk having their families or themselves killed. The same is true in Texas.
70% of Arizonans favor their new immigration law. That includes 30% Hispanic residents. There are upwards of 400,000 illegal immigrants in Arizona that tax the healthcare system, the ability for citizens to get jobs in this tough economy and the ability for law enforcement to hold down the damage from the drug trade.
Now we have weepy, white liberals in New York and DC telling Arizona that they don't have the right to protect their own borders. Obama called the law "misguided" and Al Sharpton is currently ramping up to march in Arizona. Big problem for Al is that when polled, 60%-70% of African Americans favor stricter immigration enforcement. Nasty statistic that eh? An Arizona rancher was killed recently by Mexican drug cartel members as an example of what happens to those who don't "play along". Dozens of law enforcement officers have been killed by the same cartels who don't want their business infringed upon. In the light of no federal help, what else was the state supposed to do? Continue allowing their citizens and police to be murdered so as not to upset the delicate balance of needing the Hispanic vote versus protecting the citizenry?
This is political gamesmanship at it's very lowest. Obama is using this issue as a means to an end. He cares not a whit about the plight of illegals, he cares about getting his party elected. That he even symbolically places the needs of those who have broken the law over the needs of law abiding citizens speaks volumes about what's really important to him.
I say Arizona has a right to protect it's citizens. Owing to the fact that I don't live there means my opinion doesn't really amount to a hill of beans on the grand scheme of things. Just as Obama's opinion means absolutely nothing in the final analysis.
All the rest of you do gooders out there,
"Thou hypocrite, first cast out the beam out of thine own eye; and then shalt thou see clearly to cast out the mote out of thy brother's eye."
Friday, April 9, 2010
An Agnostic looks at religion in modern times.
Agnostic (a-, without + gnÅsis, knowledge) This is a literal translation of the word.
I am agnostic. There are several different meanings to the term but I am, what would most aptly be called, a pragmatic agnostic. It is "the view that there is no proof of either the existence or nonexistence of any deity, but since any deity that may exist appears unconcerned for the universe or the welfare of its inhabitants, the question is largely academic". I will say that I find very little in the way of "divinity" in everyday life apart from the overall randomness of it. Life's ability to be completely random but at the same time rigidly ordered never ceases to amaze me. I still believe that if Einstein had lived long enough, he would have boiled down the mysteries of life to one unifying and beautiful mathematical equation.
In simple terms, there may in fact be a God in the traditional sense of the word however, I think he views the Earth and it's inhabitants in much the same way that I view an anthill and it's inhabitants. While I may not have bestowed life on the anthill, I can certainly take it away with very little effort. What most religious people call miracles, I call the wonder and splendor of nature. Conversely, what is typically termed evil seems no more than the deviant behavior of just another animal with a diminished ability to reason. I believe in the theory of evolution but have not completely discounted the concept of intelligent design. I think the two can exist as equals and could, in all actuality, work together to further enhance the splendor of life. Could not God, in his infinite wisdom, have come up with evolution as a way to allow nature to decide which of his creations would survive and which would not? It seems plausible to me but I make no proclamations as to my theological knowledge.
If God exists, He gave me the intellect to question his very existence as a way for growth as a human. If He does not exist, then intellect and reasoning are simply evolutionary constructs. I do not claim to have the answers but I do admit that even as an agnostic, I have my own occasional crises of faith.
It's a common misconception that agnostics and/or atheists have no faith. Nothing could be further from the truth. Although I cannot speak for atheists, I can say that agnosticism requires faith of a different sort. Whereas Christians place faith in God and His son, I place faith in myself and those around me. I tend to see divinity in the people around me through philanthropy, charity and their own personal beliefs regarding religion. If believing in God makes you a decent human with compassion for your fellow man, I say more power to you. Keep on believing. I am somewhat comforted by the knowledge that many of those around me live their lives by religious tenets. On the other hand, I see evil in the horrific acts of men every day. I tend to attribute the brutality of man to the obvious weaknesses that all humans possess. Deviant behavior in modern times is no longer thought of as being influenced by Satan or some dark force preying on the weak of spirit but rather, it's now chalked up to chemical imbalances, brain defects or other genetic weirdness. It all comes down to the simple principle of free will.
If I choose to, I can buy a gun, load it and go shoot someone. Satan does not tempt me to do this nor does God prevent me from doing it. It is my own free will and my ability to reason (that killing is wrong) that prevents me from murdering someone. Free will is the closest thing to divinity that I see on a daily basis. It is, in my own opinion, the greatest of all the human attributes. The opposable thumb is nice and being able to harness fire is certainly handy when grilling out but without free will, we are all simply automatons with no chance of avoiding the inevitable "sameness" of life.
Having said all that, too much as I am beginning to suspect, I find the ever increasing crescendo of "separation of church and state" from many on the left to be a growing symptom of what is truly wrong with our country as it exists today. We have cut God from the public square as if He were a cancer to be excised. Christmas vacation is now called "winter break" in most schools. Books have been written by college professors that sought to downplay the role that religion played in the founding of this great nation. Removing the Ten Commandments from a courtroom is vastly different from attempting to remove Him from our history. I tend to place the latter in the "great crimes in history" category.
Let me clarify a point or two from that last paragraph before I continue. The current trend of removing God from the public square in all actuality is really removing Christianity. The progressive left has tolerance for nearly every religion on Earth apart from Christianity. The ACLU may well sue to have morning prayers in public schools stopped in a misguided effort to "defend the constitution" but will turn a blind eye towards Christian children adopting Muslim names as an exercise in "diversity". The nativity may not be displayed in the confines of any building that gets even a nickel from the federal government but a menorah is perfectly acceptable. I am uncertain if this behavior is the result of malice or guilt. Whatever the case may be, it must be stopped. Removing God from public view in these modern times is akin to the Romans driving Christianity underground after Jesus' crucifixion.
Our founding fathers were deeply religious men who felt called by God to change what they saw as a monarchy that sought to supplant His divinity with it's own. To believe that George Washington or Thomas Jefferson were atheists or "Deists" as as is more commonly associated with them, is to deny our own history. To deny it is to forget it and to forget it will allow yet another despot to trample on the liberties that those hallowed men fought and died to secure for us.
I believe there will be a "push back" from the Christian community as a whole that will rival the civil rights movement in it's ferocity and it's justification. Just as the Jews were persecuted for thousands of years, so too is Christianity suffering it's own modern persecution at the hands of "secular humanists" who seem hell bent on removing all things "Christian" from view.
Pun fully intended.
I am agnostic. There are several different meanings to the term but I am, what would most aptly be called, a pragmatic agnostic. It is "the view that there is no proof of either the existence or nonexistence of any deity, but since any deity that may exist appears unconcerned for the universe or the welfare of its inhabitants, the question is largely academic". I will say that I find very little in the way of "divinity" in everyday life apart from the overall randomness of it. Life's ability to be completely random but at the same time rigidly ordered never ceases to amaze me. I still believe that if Einstein had lived long enough, he would have boiled down the mysteries of life to one unifying and beautiful mathematical equation.
In simple terms, there may in fact be a God in the traditional sense of the word however, I think he views the Earth and it's inhabitants in much the same way that I view an anthill and it's inhabitants. While I may not have bestowed life on the anthill, I can certainly take it away with very little effort. What most religious people call miracles, I call the wonder and splendor of nature. Conversely, what is typically termed evil seems no more than the deviant behavior of just another animal with a diminished ability to reason. I believe in the theory of evolution but have not completely discounted the concept of intelligent design. I think the two can exist as equals and could, in all actuality, work together to further enhance the splendor of life. Could not God, in his infinite wisdom, have come up with evolution as a way to allow nature to decide which of his creations would survive and which would not? It seems plausible to me but I make no proclamations as to my theological knowledge.
If God exists, He gave me the intellect to question his very existence as a way for growth as a human. If He does not exist, then intellect and reasoning are simply evolutionary constructs. I do not claim to have the answers but I do admit that even as an agnostic, I have my own occasional crises of faith.
It's a common misconception that agnostics and/or atheists have no faith. Nothing could be further from the truth. Although I cannot speak for atheists, I can say that agnosticism requires faith of a different sort. Whereas Christians place faith in God and His son, I place faith in myself and those around me. I tend to see divinity in the people around me through philanthropy, charity and their own personal beliefs regarding religion. If believing in God makes you a decent human with compassion for your fellow man, I say more power to you. Keep on believing. I am somewhat comforted by the knowledge that many of those around me live their lives by religious tenets. On the other hand, I see evil in the horrific acts of men every day. I tend to attribute the brutality of man to the obvious weaknesses that all humans possess. Deviant behavior in modern times is no longer thought of as being influenced by Satan or some dark force preying on the weak of spirit but rather, it's now chalked up to chemical imbalances, brain defects or other genetic weirdness. It all comes down to the simple principle of free will.
If I choose to, I can buy a gun, load it and go shoot someone. Satan does not tempt me to do this nor does God prevent me from doing it. It is my own free will and my ability to reason (that killing is wrong) that prevents me from murdering someone. Free will is the closest thing to divinity that I see on a daily basis. It is, in my own opinion, the greatest of all the human attributes. The opposable thumb is nice and being able to harness fire is certainly handy when grilling out but without free will, we are all simply automatons with no chance of avoiding the inevitable "sameness" of life.
Having said all that, too much as I am beginning to suspect, I find the ever increasing crescendo of "separation of church and state" from many on the left to be a growing symptom of what is truly wrong with our country as it exists today. We have cut God from the public square as if He were a cancer to be excised. Christmas vacation is now called "winter break" in most schools. Books have been written by college professors that sought to downplay the role that religion played in the founding of this great nation. Removing the Ten Commandments from a courtroom is vastly different from attempting to remove Him from our history. I tend to place the latter in the "great crimes in history" category.
Let me clarify a point or two from that last paragraph before I continue. The current trend of removing God from the public square in all actuality is really removing Christianity. The progressive left has tolerance for nearly every religion on Earth apart from Christianity. The ACLU may well sue to have morning prayers in public schools stopped in a misguided effort to "defend the constitution" but will turn a blind eye towards Christian children adopting Muslim names as an exercise in "diversity". The nativity may not be displayed in the confines of any building that gets even a nickel from the federal government but a menorah is perfectly acceptable. I am uncertain if this behavior is the result of malice or guilt. Whatever the case may be, it must be stopped. Removing God from public view in these modern times is akin to the Romans driving Christianity underground after Jesus' crucifixion.
Our founding fathers were deeply religious men who felt called by God to change what they saw as a monarchy that sought to supplant His divinity with it's own. To believe that George Washington or Thomas Jefferson were atheists or "Deists" as as is more commonly associated with them, is to deny our own history. To deny it is to forget it and to forget it will allow yet another despot to trample on the liberties that those hallowed men fought and died to secure for us.
I believe there will be a "push back" from the Christian community as a whole that will rival the civil rights movement in it's ferocity and it's justification. Just as the Jews were persecuted for thousands of years, so too is Christianity suffering it's own modern persecution at the hands of "secular humanists" who seem hell bent on removing all things "Christian" from view.
Pun fully intended.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
