blog Time Hath Found Us: May 2005

May 31, 2005

House Bill HR 2679 - $tops Lawsuit$ Attacking 1st Amendment

I posted about the promise of Rep. John Hostettler (R-Ind.) to introduce a bill which would remove the profit from the ACLU's anti-religion law suits. Rep. Hostettler was true to his word.

HR 2679 was introduced on May 26, 2005. The text of the bill follows.

Public Expression of Religion Act of 2005 (Introduced in House)
HR 2679 IH

109th CONGRESS

1st Session

H. R. 2679

To amend the Revised Statutes of the United States to eliminate the chilling effect on the constitutionally protected expression of religion by State and local officials that results from the threat that potential litigants may seek damages and attorney's fees.


IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

May 26, 2005

Mr. HOSTETTLER (for himself, Mr. WAMP, Mr. NORWOOD, Mr. JENKINS, Mr. PAUL, Mr. DOOLITTLE, Mr. SODREL, Mr. WELDON of Florida, Mr. ALEXANDER, Mr. BACHUS, Mr. PITTS, Mr. INGLIS of South Carolina, Mr. OTTER, Mr. DUNCAN, Mr. JONES of North Carolina, Mr. KINGSTON, Mr. SMITH of Texas, Mr. BARTLETT of Maryland, Mr. POE, and Mr. BARRETT of South Carolina) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary

-----

A BILL

To amend the Revised Statutes of the United States to eliminate the chilling effect on the constitutionally protected expression of religion by State and local officials that results from the threat that potential litigants may seek damages and attorney's fees.

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,


SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

This Act may be cited as the `Public Expression of Religion Act of 2005'.


SEC. 2. LIMITATIONS ON CERTAIN LAWSUITS AGAINST STATE AND LOCAL OFFICIALS.

(a) Civil Action for Deprivation of Rights- Section 1979 of the Revised Statutes of the United States (42 U.S.C. 1983) is amended--

(1) by inserting `(a)' before the first sentence; and

(2) by adding at the end the following:


`(b) The remedies with respect to a claim under this section where the deprivation consists of a violation of a prohibition in the Constitution against the establishment of religion shall be limited to injunctive relief.'.

(b) Attorneys Fees- Section 722(b) of the Revised Statutes of the United States (42 U.S.C. 1988(b)) is amended by adding at the end the following: `However, no fees shall be awarded under this subsection with respect to a claim described in subsection (b) of section nineteen hundred and seventy nine.'.

Contact your representatives and let them know how you feel.

HAT TIP: Jay at Stop The ACLU

May 29, 2005

Sunday Special: Our Digital Universe?

Our universe may not be all it seems. There is evidence that, in spite of what we all learned in school, one can not divide matter or time by half forever. There is a physical limit where time, at least, can not be further divided.

The following is reprinted from an article published at Koinonia House.

Our Digital Universe?
Quantum Teleporting: Part 1
by Chuck Missler

The entire universe is a cryptogram set by the Almighty.
       -  Sir Isaac Newton


Fans of the popular TV science fiction series, Star Trek, are familiar with the "Beam-me-up-Scotty" concept of "teleporting." In an Austrian laboratory, it appears that scientists have now been able to destroy bits of light in one place and make perfect replicas appear about three feet away. They did this by transferring information about a crucial physical characteristic of the original light bits, or photons. The information was picked up by other photons, which took on that characteristic and thus became replicas of the originals.

While broader applications of these techniques still remain rather distant on the horizon of our new 21st century, the experiment raises some basic questions.  Is our universe itself digital?

Our Macro-Boundary

The startling discovery of 20th century science was that our universe is finite. Scientists now acknowledge that the universe had a beginning. They call the singularity from which it all began the "Big Bang." While the details among the many variants of these theories remain quite controversial, the fact that there was a definite beginning has gained widespread agreement.1  This is, of course, what the Bible has maintained throughout its 66 books.

From thermodynamic considerations, it also appears that all processes in the universe inevitably contribute their losses from their inefficiencies to the ambient temperature, and thus the universe ultimately will attain a uniform temperature in which no work - all of which derives from temperature differences - will occur. Scientists call this final ultimate physical destiny the "heat death."

Mankind, therefore, finds itself caught in a finite interval between the singularity that began it all and its inevitable termination. The mathematical concept of infinity - in any spatial direction or in terms of time - seems astonishingly absent in the macrocosm, the domain of the astronomers and cosmologists.

Our Micro-Boundary

In the microcosmic domain, there appears to be an even more astonishing boundary to smallness.  If we take a segment of length, we can divide it in half.  We can take one of the remaining halves, and we can divide it in half again.  We naturally assume that this can go on forever.  We assume that no matter how small a length we end up dealing with, we can always - at least conceptually - divide any remainder in half.  It turns out that this is not true.  There is a length, known as the Planck length, 10-33 centimeters, that is indivisible.

The same thing is true of mass, energy, and even time.  There is a unit of time which cannot be further divided: 10-43 seconds.  It is in this strange world of subatomic behavior that scientists have encountered the very boundaries of physical reality, as we experience it.  The study of these subatomic components is called quantum mechanics, or quantum physics.

The startling discovery made by the quantum physicists is that if you break matter into smaller and smaller pieces, you eventually reach a point where those pieces - electrons, protons, etc. - no longer possess the traits of objects. Although they can sometimes behave as if they were a compact little particle, physicists have found that they literally possess no dimension.  They call this non-locality.

Is Our Reality Only Virtual?

Anyone who has seen the science fiction movie, The Thirteenth Floor, has pondered the question of the substance of our reality. (The plot involves a computer project that created an entire virtual reality - a sort of super "computer game," replicating Los Angeles in 1937 as a software program within a giant supercomputer.  Participants are able to enter that virtual reality for brief periods and return. A murder mystery ensues, the solution of which requires retrieving clues from within the project's virtual reality. A dramatic plot twist involves the discovery that the project participants themselves are only virtual simulations from an even larger reality: Los Angeles in the year 2025!  A stimulating piece of entertainment, but it cleverly raises some provocative questions about our own existence...)

The more we know about quantum physics, the less confidence we can have concerning the nature of our own physical reality.  It seems that it is but a subset of a larger hyperspace we call the spiritual reality.

The Dual Nature of Particles

Another discovery of the physicists is that a subatomic particle, such as an electron, can manifest itself as either a particle or a wave.  If you shoot an electron at a television screen that has been turned off,  a tiny point of light will appear when it strikes the phosphorescent chemicals that coat the glass.  The single point of impact which the electron leaves on the screen clearly reveals the particle-like side of its nature.

But that is not the only form the electron can assume. It can also dissolve into a blurry cloud of energy and behave as if it were a wave spread out over space.  When an electron manifests itself as a wave, it can do things no particle can. If it is fired at a barrier in which two slits have been cut, it can go through both slits simultaneously. When wavelike electrons collide with each other they even create interference patterns. 

It is interesting that in 1906, J. J. Thomson received the Nobel Prize for proving that electrons are particles. In 1937 he saw his son awarded the Nobel Prize for proving that electrons were waves. Both father and son were correct. From then on, the evidence for the wave/particle duality has become overwhelming.

This chameleon-like ability is common to all subatomic particles. Called quanta, they can manifest themselves either as particles or waves.

Quantum Teleporting

The first actual teleporting experiment has now been reported in the scientific journal, Nature, by Anton Zeilinger and colleagues at the University of Innsbruck in Austria.2 (Another research team, based in Rome, has done similar work and submitted its report to another journal.)  The work is the first to demonstrate "quantum teleportation," a bizarre shifting of physical characteristics between nature's tiniest particles, no matter how far apart they are.

"Scientists might be able to achieve teleportation between complete atoms within a few years and molecules within a decade or so," Zeilinger has speculated.

The technique is still a long way away from the Star Trek process of beaming people around, but it raises the question, "Could teleportation be used on people?"  Could scientists extract information from every tiny particle in a person, transfer it to a bunch of particles elsewhere, and then assemble those particles into an exact replica of the person? There's no theoretical problem with that, several experts have suggested.  But get real: "I think it's quite clear that anything approximating teleportation of complex living beings, even bacteria, is so far away technologically that it's not really worth thinking about it," claimed IBM physicist Charles H. Bennett. He and other physicists had proposed quantum teleportation as early as 1993. "There would just be too much information to assemble and transmit," he and others have said.

Well, we'll see.  (Is it just a question of bandwidth?) But there are other applications.

Computer Applications

It is much more likely, experts suggest, that teleportation between tiny particles might facilitate quantum computers.  Such devices would use teleportation to transfer data around, and they could solve certain complex problems much faster than today's machines. In the recent experiment, scientists transferred the trait of "polarization" between photons.  A light wave has peaks and troughs like an ocean wave, and polarization refers to the directions in which these peaks and troughs point. Photons retain this trait. To transfer the polarization between photons, the researchers used a phenomenon called entanglement. When two photons are entangled, "they have opposite luck," said IBM's Bennett.  Whatever happens to one is the opposite of what happens to the other.  In particular, their polarizations are the opposite of each other.  This binary phenomenon could be exploited in an advanced processor design.

A Glimpse of Hyperspace

Current cosmological conjectures assume a universe of more than three spatial dimensions-mathematically called a hyperspace.  Current views envision a universe of ten dimensions: four directly measurable (three spatial dimensions, plus time) and six that can only be determined indirectly. This is precisely what the ancient Hebrew sage, Nachmonides, writing in the 12th century, concluded from his study of Genesis!

The Bible is unique in that it presents a universe of more than three dimensions,3  and reveals a Creator that is transcendent over His creation.4   It is the only "holy book" that possesses such contemporary insights.

**NOTES**
  1. For a more complete discussion, see The Creator Beyond Time and Space, by Chuck Missler and Mark Eastman, The Word for Today, Costa Mesa CA, 1996.
  2. Nature, Dec 10, 1997.
  3. Ephesians 3:18.
  4. Eastman & Missler, The Creator Beyond Time and Space, The Word for Today, Costa Mesa CA, 1996.

May 26, 2005

The Roots of the ACLU

Roger Nash Baldwin along with Norman Thomas, Jane Addams, Chrystal Eastman, Clarence Darrow, John Dewey, Abraham Muste, Elizabeth Gurley Flynn and Upton Sinclair founded the ACLU in 1920. All of the founding members were committed pacifists and socialists.

Roger Baldwin became the first director of the ACLU and held that post for some 35 years. The year before founding the ACLU Baldwin joined the Industrial Workers of the World (IWW), a radical socialist trade union.

Baldwin and company had one primary goal: the formation of a Communist state modeled after the Soviet Union.
Industrial Workers of the World

"I am for socialism, disarmament, and ultimately for abolishing the State itself as an instrument of violence and compulsion. I seek the social ownership of property, the abolition of the propertied class, and sole control of those who produce wealth. Communism is the goal."
--Roger Baldwin --

"The class struggle is the central conflict of the world, all others are coincidental."
--Roger Baldwin --

"When the power of the working class is once achieved, as it has been in the Soviet Union, I am for maintaining it by any means whatsoever"
--Roger Baldwin --

With the ACLU, the more things change, the more things stay the same.

 

This was a production of Stop The ACLU Blogburst! If you would like to join, it is very simple.

Go to our new portal at Protest The ACLU , click where it says "sign up now", and fill out a simple form. This will enable us to send you a weekly newsletter with information, and keep your email private. Current members who have not registered, please do so. There are additional advantages and features that will be available for you there...you can opt to use them, or not. Thank you!

Sites Already on Board:

Stop The ACLU
Freedom Of Thought
Mad Tech
Respublica
The Wide Awakes
Angry Republican Mom
Kender's Musings
American Patriots
What Attitude Problem?
Life Trek
Gribbit's Word
Def Conservative
An American Housewife
A Tic In The Mind's Eye
Cao's Blog
Regular Ron
Freedom Of
Is This Life?
Patriots For Bush
California Conservative 4 Truth
NIF
Obiter Dictum
PBS Watch
Xtreme Right Wing
Daily Inklings
Miss Patriot
Jack Lewis.net
Conservative Dialysis
Conservative Angst
Kill Righty
American Warmonger
Birth Of A Neo-Con
The Nose On Your Face
The View From Firehouse
Ogre's View
Fundamentally right
Conservative Rant
My Political Soap Box
Common Sense Runs Wild
Redstate Rant
Time Hath Found Us
American Dinosaur
Merri Musings
And Rightly So
Sweet Spirits of Ammonia
Smithereen's Files
Pulpit Pounder
Ravings of J.C.B.
Is It Just Me?
Blogtalker
Parrot Check
Stuff You Should Know
Rancher Blog
Christmas Ghost
Vista On Current Events
Musing Minds
Pirate's Cove
Mr . Minority
The Lesser Of Two Evils
RAGE
The Life And Times


We are trying to raise money for full page ads and eventually commercials exposing the ACLU's radical agenda. Help us out! Buy a bumper sticker!
Click Here To See Our Store!

May 22, 2005

Sunday Special: Lincoln's Second Inaugural Address (1865)

Dedicated to those who claim that this nation has no foundation in Judeo-Christian values.

Fellow Countrymen

At this second appearing to take the oath of the presidential office, there is less occasion for an extended address than there was at the first. Then a statement, somewhat in detail, of a course to be pursued, seemed fitting and proper. Now, at the expiration of four years, during which public declarations have been constantly called forth on every point and phase of the great contest which still absorbs the attention, and engrosses the enerergies of the nation, little that is new could be presented. The progress of our arms, upon which all else chiefly depends, is as well known to the public as to myself; and it is, I trust, reasonably satisfactory and encouraging to all. With high hope for the future, no prediction in regard to it is ventured.

On the occasion corresponding to this four years ago, all thoughts were anxiously directed to an impending civil-war. All dreaded it -- all sought to avert it. While the inaugeral address was being delivered from this place, devoted altogether to saving the Union without war, insurgent agents were in the city seeking to destroy it without war -- seeking to dissole the Union, and divide effects, by negotiation. Both parties deprecated war; but one of them would make war rather than let the nation survive; and the other would accept war rather than let it perish. And the war came.

One eighth of the whole population were colored slaves, not distributed generally over the Union, but localized in the Southern half part of it. These slaves constituted a peculiar and powerful interest. All knew that this interest was, somehow, the cause of the war. To strengthen, perpetuate, and extend this interest was the object for which the insurgents would rend the Union, even by war; while the government claimed no right to do more than to restrict the territorial enlargement of it. Neither party expected for the war, the magnitude, or the duration, which it has already attained. Neither anticipated that the cause of the conflict might cease with, or even before, the conflict itself should cease. Each looked for an easier triumph, and a result less fundamental and astounding. Both read the same Bible, and pray to the same God; and each invokes His aid against the other. It may seem strange that any men should dare to ask a just God's assistance in wringing their bread from the sweat of other men's faces; but let us judge not that we be not judged. The prayers of both could not be answered; that of neither has been answered fully. The Almighty has His own purposes. "Woe unto the world because of offences! for it must needs be that offences come; but woe to that man by whom the offence cometh!" If we shall suppose that American Slavery is one of those offences which, in the providence of God, must needs come, but which, having continued through His appointed time, He now wills to remove, and that He gives to both North and South, this terrible war, as the woe due to those by whom the offence came, shall we discern therein any departure from those divine attributes which the believers in a Living God always ascribe to Him? Fondly do we hope -- fervently do we pray -- that this mighty scourge of war may speedily pass away. Yet, if God wills that it continue, until all the wealth piled by the bond-man's two hundred and fifty years of unrequited toil shall be sunk, and until every drop of blood drawn with the lash, shall be paid by another drawn with the sword, as was said f[our] three thousand years ago, so still it must be said "the judgments of the Lord, are true and righteous altogether"

With malice toward none; with charity for all; with firmness in the right, as God gives us to see the right, let us strive on to finish the work we are in; to bind up the nation's wounds; to care for him who shall have borne the battle, and for his widow, and his orphan -- to achieve and cherish a lasting peace among ourselves and with the world. to do all which may achieve and cherish a just, and a lasting peace, among ourselves, and with the world. all nations.

[Endorsed by Lincoln:]

Original manuscript of second Inaugeral presented to Major John Hay.

A. Lincoln

April 10, 1865

100 Milestone Documents

May 19, 2005

ACLU Policy 211

The ACLU's Policy 211 is straightforward. "The ACLU supports the decriminalization of prostitution and opposes state regulation of prostitution". They base their argument on several points, including that existing laws are discrimination against women, and the right of individual privacy. They argue that what two consenting adults in private do is their own business.

Prostitution is private? But isn't the prostitute engaging in business, isn't she providing a service? Would we not regulate and license a business? You wouldn't want a general contractor to work on your house without a license would you? That would be unsafe as is an unregulated prostitute.

However, the ACLU doesn't believe in that philosophy. The question of privacy comes in if the government is allowed to regulate the oldest profession.

As for it being a privacy issue, it seems a contradiction to me when they also state that the "public" solicitation of prostitution is "entitled to the protection of the First Amendment". "It's not just the bedroom that the ACLU wishes to make off-limits to public censure, but also the local street corner, presumably even if that corner is regularly used by school children crossing the street." Source

Privacy applies to two consenting adults when no contract is involved; a date with no expectation of performance is a far cry from paying for a service.

And what good would it do for women's rights to decriminalize this? One could argue that women should not be punished for their own exploitation. But how does decriminalizing pimps, buyers, procurers, brothels or other sex establishments offer any solution to this? Decriminalization would do nothing but expand the sex industry and send a message to society that it is acceptable. And a system unregulated would do nothing for women's health, and would only promote the spread disease.

The more I learn about the ACLU, the more I am convinced that they want to establish a new society based on everything immoral. They are blinded by their elitist ideology to the point they can't even conceive of the possible consequences that will result if they are enacted. The scary thing is that they hold so much power, and lack so much responsibility. They must be stopped.


This was a production of Stop The ACLU Blogburst! If you would like to join, it is very simple.


Go to our new portal at Protest The ACLU , click where it says "sign up now", and fill out a simple form. This will enable us to send you a weekly newsletter with information, and keep your email private. Current members who have not registered, please do so. There are additonal advantages and features that will be available for you there...you can opt to use them, or not. Thank you!

Sites Already on Board:

Stop The ACLU
Freedom Of Thought
Mad Tech
Respublica
The Wide Awakes
Angry Republican Mom
Kender's Musings
American Patriots
What Attitude Problem?
Life Trek
Gribbit's Word
Def Conservative
An American Housewife
A Tic In The Mind's Eye
Cao's Blog
Regular Ron
Freedom Of
Is This Life?
Patriots For Bush
California Conservative 4 Truth
NIF
Obiter Dictum
PBS Watch
Xtreme Right Wing
Daily Inklings
Miss Patriot
Jack Lewis.net
Conservative Dialysis
Conservative Angst
Kill Righty
American Warmonger
Birth Of A Neo-Con
The Nose On Your Face
The View From Firehouse
Ogre's View
Fundamentally right
Conservative Rant
My Political Soap Box
Common Sense Runs Wild
Redstate Rant
Time Hath Found Us
American Dinosaur
Merri Musings
And Rightly So
Sweet Spirits of Ammonia
Smithereen's Files
Pulpit Pounder
Ravings of J.C.B.
Is It Just Me?
Blogtalker
Parrot Check
Stuff You Should Know
Rancher Blog
Christmas Ghost
Vista On Current Events


We are trying to raise money for full page ads and eventually commercials exposing the ACLU's radical agenda. Help us out! Buy a bumper sticker!
Click Below To See Our Store!


May 17, 2005

Mae Magouirk Leaves This World for a Better One

This is Death With Dignity.

Although Mae survived only an extra month after being rescued from the same horrific fate which befell Terri, she was able to leave this world in the company of her family and not at the hands of a self appointed executioner.

Here is the text of an email message from Ken Mullinax (Mae Magouirk's nephew.)

Subject: Fw: Mae Magouirk dies (Ken Mullinax)

PLEASE POST ANYWHERE SO ALL OUR FRIENDS WHO LOVE LIFE MAY KNOW Of MAE MAGOUIRK'S PASSING ON TO SALVATION AND REWARD BY GOD'S HAND AND NOT BY THE HAND OF MAN!

Mae Magouirk died this morning at the Bryan Nursing Home in LaGrange Ga. of a stroke. Her vital signs had been causing concern since last Wednesday and by Sunday, an apparent stroke hit her, causing her difficulty to speak, her BP was only 60/30 and by this morning she died surrounded by family.

She was 81 years old.

Since the friends of Terri and the readers of World Net Daily and Glenn Beck had helped save her from starvation, she had responded to treatment by the University of Alabama Medical Center doctors , had then been transferred for convalescent treatment at the Bryan Nursing Home in LaGrange, Ga where her church family had surrounded her after learning of her ordeal in the media and from her Alabama family.

Although she was cognizant, speaking, sitting up, eating-drinking and communicating until her last day alive, her family had decided not to tell her of the terrible ordeal she had endured at Hospice LaGrange until she had been discharged from the nursing home. She was spared this final pain by GOD.

WE, her closest living next of kin, her Alabama family feel Mae was blessed to have died without being thirsty and having food in her stomach..we thank God for moving all the people of the United States for their phone calls, prayers and active participation in saving her life!

We encourage any of the friends of Terri, radio listeners or readers to show our Aunt Mae and Ga. relations how much you cherish life by sending cards and flowers to the funeral home or church.

Her arrangements are:

Visitation:
On Tuesday between 6:00 -8:00PM EST
Hunter, Allen, MayHand Funeral Home
506 Hill Street
LaGrange, Ga. 30241 (706) 884-5626

Funeral:
Wednesday at 11:00AM EST
Oakside Baptist Church
1921 Hamilton Street
LaGrange, Ga.

Thanks Sarah for caring and WorldNet Daily for helping save Mae for God's divine fate and not man's hand!


Cross Posted from Straight Up with Sherri

May 15, 2005

Sunday Special: "Break Their Teeth, O God"

Judeo-Christian beliefs and values are under assault. The most hated countries on earth are Israel and America.

Israel is surrounded by the unholy creatures of Palestine whose sole aim is to murder every last Jew. Internally, the Israeli leadership vainly believes that they can buy peace by trading the land which God gave to them forever.

In America, the ACLU has gone ape attacking the religious foundation of our country, Planned Parenthood bulldozes it way toward its eugenic utopia and Hollywood packages all that is vile and obscene in alluring packages. All for the sake of a few bucks.

Before he was crowned king, David spent years hiding and avoiding the armies of King Saul. David was well acquainted with hardship and persecution. During those years he wrote many of the psalms. Most of my favorite psalms were written during that time. David did not want to personally harm Saul but he surely prayed for God to punish those who tormented him. Here is one such psalm, one which fits our time very well.

Psalm 58 (NIV)
For the director of music. To the tune of "Do Not Destroy." Of David. A miktam .

Do you rulers indeed speak justly?
Do you judge uprightly among men?

No, in your heart you devise injustice,
and your hands mete out violence on the earth.

Even from birth the wicked go astray;
from the womb they are wayward and speak lies.

Their venom is like the venom of a snake,
like that of a cobra that has stopped its ears,

that will not heed the tune of the charmer,
however skillful the enchanter may be.

Break the teeth in their mouths, O God;
tear out, O LORD, the fangs of the lions!


Let them vanish like water that flows away;
when they draw the bow, let their arrows be blunted.

Like a slug melting away as it moves along,
like a stillborn child, may they not see the sun.

Before your pots can feel the heat of the thorns --
whether they be green or dry--the wicked will be swept away.

The righteous will be glad when they are avenged,
when they bathe their feet in the blood of the wicked.

Then men will say,
"Surely the righteous still are rewarded;
surely there is a God who judges the earth."

Here is another translation which I like because it makes David's wishes clear as to what he would like to see done to the wicked and unjust.

Psalm 58 (easyenglish.info)
(This is) for the music leader. He must use (the music called) Do Not Destroy. (It is) a miktam of David.

Do you rulers really say what is fair?
Do you say what is right when you judge people?

No! You do not! You think of evil in your heart.
Your hands weigh out cruelty to the land.

Wicked people are bad from their birth.
From the womb, they start doing wrong and saying lies.

Their poison is like the poison of a snake.
They close their ears like a deaf cobra.

It does not hear the voice of the charmer, however well he charms!

God, break their teeth in their mouths!
LORD, destroy the teeth of those lions
!

May they:
become weak and flow away like water
be like grass that dies after people walk on it
be like an abortion that people forget
be like a child born dead that does not see the sun.


Before their pots can feel (the heat of burning) wood
I want God to blow them away, like the wind would in a bad storm.

Righteous people will be very happy when (God) punishes (the wicked).
They will wash their feet in the blood of the wicked!

People will say, "There is a reward for the righteous.
There is a God that judges what happens on earth".


Hat Tip: Sue Bob's Diary.

May 14, 2005

David Hill: "Filibuster polls bias empty heads"

GIGO: Garbage In, Garbage Out.

The MSM mavens of popular culture, whose expiration date passed somewhere in the 1970's, heavily rely on public opinion polls in order to generate news where there is no news and to justify their pathetic east-of-the-Hudson-River views of America. Polls, they say, are an accurate reflection of the beliefs of our society. Oh really?

David Hill has written a scathing article for The Hill in which he blasts the recent filibuster polls so adored by the party of NO.

Reading the latest public polling on filibusters convinces me that media polling is becoming something like blogging, only without the wit and delightful cynicism.

Public polls and political blogs both purport to be about facts and information, but they're mainly editorials. I was reminded of these thoughts this week when reading Dr. Frank Newport's dismal treatise "Public Favors Keeping Filibuster Rule in U.S. Senate: Majority of Americans not Following Issue Closely, However."

[...]

The only point that Newport makes convincingly is that Americans consistently oppose changing the filibuster as described by pollsters. The problem with his analysis is that the pollsters' descriptions are hopelessly inadequate and often biased in favor of the filibuster. By inadequate, I mean that polls try to explain "filibusters" in 50 words or fewer to people who are generally uninformed and disinterested.

The phrase: "people who are generally uninformed and disinterested" oozes with deep ramifications. Polls have come to be used by politicians as a primary source upon which to base important policy decisions. Witness the entire left wing of congress. Such behavior should be considered shameful. As I mentioned in my last post about polls (about which I really do hate posting,) we live in a constitutional republic not a democracy. Our representatives have the responsibility to study the issues of state and make informed decisions based on facts, not on the zephyrs of uninformed public opinion.

The MSM which commission such polls should be equally ashamed. What kind of world view must rely on deceit, misdirection and Clintonesque parsing of common words to advance itself? It is certainly not the world view held by most Americans or, for that matter, most of the population of the planet.

Polls can be useful tools but like other useful tools, such as the Constitution, they can be twisted and misused to advance subversive ideologies -- GIGO.

As the mantra says, read the whole thing.

Update: Here is an apropos quote from a letter by Thomas Jefferson written in 1787: "...the good sense of the people will always be found to be the best army ...European gov'ts have divided their nations into wolves and sheep. ...Cherish, therefore, the spirit of our people, and keep alive their attention. ...If once they become inattentive to the public affairs, you and I, and congress and Assemblies, Judges and governors, shall all become wolves."

May 13, 2005

Doctor: 'I have never seen this happen in my career'

In the world of should'a, could'a, would'a one is immediately compelled to draw an obvious comparison. A Kansas woman, Tracy Gaskill, suffered critical head injuries in September, 2002 when her pickup overturned. Two and a half years later she is speaking again. On the night of the accident doctors told her family that she would not live past noon of the next day. Since the accident she has been fed through a feeding tube.

Then, about three weeks ago, she spoke for the first time since the accident, about the same time she began to swallow on her own.

Feeding tube, swallow on her own, sounds familiar.

"It's amazing, isn't it?" Dr. David Schmeidler told the local paper. "I have never seen this happen in my career. I've read about it happening, the severely brain damaged recovering suddenly, but never seen it – until now."

Continued Schmeidler: "She is actually able to speak and to speak coherently. In light of all this stuff on Terri Schiavo ... it makes you pause and think. For three years or so, (Tracy) was fed through a tube, then she swallowed a little bit and now she speaks."

What is a major difference between Tracy's care that the shameful treatment of Terri?

Tracy received what Schiavo did not – at least in the last several years – therapy.

According to the report, in the last few months, nurses worked with her to get her to hum. Eventually, she started to speak clearly.

In spite of wonderful advances in medical knowledge and technoloy, the medical profession still has little understanding of the incredible complexity of the human brain. Based on our limited understanding anyone who dogmatically proclaims that a person has no hope of recovery is only displaying a willful foolishness.

Read the whole story at WND.

Hat Tip: The Black Kettle.

May 12, 2005

Mystery Poll: Republicans Back Embryonic Stem Cell Research

I hate commenting on polls, but somebody has to do it. An AP report issued on Tuesday May 10, states that a poll shows that 57% of Republicans support embryonic stem cell research while 40% oppose it. The poll was conducted by David Winston, a Republican pollster, using a sampling of 800 Republicans nationwide.

Being an AP report, the usual "maverick" Republican was quoted.
"Anytime you see a poll like that, that's a strong preference," said Rep. Mike Castle, R-Del., the leading supporter of stem cell research. "Members of Congress understand polls. I think the other thing that's important is who takes polls."

Dyuuhh Yup! Who takes the polls is important, but then again, where they shove them afterward is more important. It makes me feel warm and fuzzy that members of congress understand polls. What makes me nervous are the ones who base their decisions on the polls they so thoroughly understand instead of using their own heads and knowledge. We are a constitutional republic not a democracy. The original idea was that we elect people to congress so they can make decisions on issues they've had time to study. Things which the average Joe and Jane can't bone up on themselves. But I digress.

The reason I hate commenting on polls is that, like statistics, poll results can be interpreted in many different ways, see: Mystery Pollster. What set off alarms about this poll was the absence of any references to the actual poll. Things like what kind of republicans were polled - were they self-identified, registered voters, likely voters, what? This probably isn't a major issue but I was not able to find any info on the poll. Also, what questions were asked? That is always nice to know. Were the poll respondents young, old, middle aged, white, black, rich poor, educated, doctors, lawyers or Indian Chiefs? No info whatsoever. I couldn't even access the Winston Group web page. I'm sorry, when the AP reports, with glee, on something which elates the left I just get suspicious.

Finally, maybe the poll is on the up and up - it very well may be. If so, then it tells me that the differences between embryonic and adult stem cell issues has not been well communicated. I am an optimist about the people of this country and I know they value human life. There are big ethical, moral and practical differences between the two types of stem cells.

Here is a version of the news report by LIFENEWS.COM which is not so left leaning.

May 09, 2005

Parallels of Abortion and Slavery in American History

Unborn child and Dred Scott. Both ruled by Supreme Court to be non-human.

Every once in a while one encounters a work which precisely expresses a long held but subconscious knowledge which never quite gelled into expressible, concrete form. I have just had such an encounter.

In an insightful yet remarkably simple piece, Dr. Brian Melton has written about the striking similarities between the pre-Civil War slave system and the modern pro-abortion movement. The essay is:
"A House Divided: Abortion and Slavery in America."

[...] Yet, as a student of America's Civil War, a number of historical similarities present themselves between the arguments over abortion and slavery that could possibly point to another, disturbing conclusion.

[...]

Then the specter of slavery reared its head again. Slavery was a moral evil upon which there could really be no compromise. Either slavery would exist, or it would not. Either the government would allow one group of men to deprive another of their unalienable rights, or it would acknowledge that it was its purpose to guarantee those rights to all. This contradiction is one of the main influences that set the two sides irreconcilably against one another, resulting in the pressures that led to secession and over 600,000 deaths by 1865.

In light of recent events, it is interesting that issues like this have already exploded onto the American stage, and abortion is clearly one of them. Either a baby is human, and therefore enjoys the same right to life as the mother, or it is nothing more than a mass of cells and the mother has a right to have it cut out, burned off, or flushed away. There is no middle ground between these two positions that either side would feel comfortable in occupying.

[...]

Southerners employed, and abortionists still do, sham science to justify their crimes, even as honest science makes the reality of their victim's humanity all the more clear. [...] The primary difference between the two is that while the former stole lives a day at a time, the latter snatches away an entire life when it is most innocent and helpless. At least Nat Turner and Denmark Vesey could revolt.

Like their Nineteenth Century abolitionist counterparts, Pro-lifers are left with only one real choice: they must oppose abortion. ...

I've just thrown some bones, the real meat of Dr. Melton's argument is in the article. Please read it.

From a personal perspective, as one who has actively joined the pro-life cause at this late date, I find myself referring back to pre-Civil War abolitionist writings quite often. The abolitionist biographies are shining examples of moral fortitude and perseverance in the face of unjust and immoral laws. Their correspondence and published works exhibit clearness of thought and unflinching conviction. One of my favorite writers of that period is Lysander Spooner - a Nineteenth-Century lawyer, abolitionist, entrepreneur, legal theorist and political radical. Click on the link and bookmark the site.

May 08, 2005

Sunday Special: Henry V - St. Crispin's Day Speech

St. Crispin's Day Speech
"Henry V" by William Shakespeare, 1599


*** Enter the KING ***

WESTMORELAND.
O that we now had here
But one ten thousand of those men in England
That do no work to-day!

KING.
What's he that wishes so?
My cousin Westmoreland? No, my fair cousin;
If we are mark'd to die, we are enow
To do our country loss; and if to live,
The fewer men, the greater share of honour.
God's will! I pray thee, wish not one man more.
By Jove, I am not covetous for gold,
Nor care I who doth feed upon my cost;
It yearns me not if men my garments wear;
Such outward things dwell not in my desires.
But if it be a sin to covet honour,
I am the most offending soul alive.
No, faith, my coz, wish not a man from England.
God's peace! I would not lose so great an honour
As one man more methinks would share from me
For the best hope I have. O, do not wish one more!
Rather proclaim it, Westmoreland, through my host,
That he which hath no stomach to this fight,
Let him depart; his passport shall be made,
And crowns for convoy put into his purse;
We would not die in that man's company
That fears his fellowship to die with us.
This day is call'd the feast of Crispian.
He that outlives this day, and comes safe home,
Will stand a tip-toe when this day is nam'd,
And rouse him at the name of Crispian.
He that shall live this day, and see old age,
Will yearly on the vigil feast his neighbours,
And say 'To-morrow is Saint Crispian.'
Then will he strip his sleeve and show his scars,
And say 'These wounds I had on Crispian's day.'
Old men forget; yet all shall be forgot,
But he'll remember, with advantages,
What feats he did that day. Then shall our names,
Familiar in his mouth as household words-
Harry the King, Bedford and Exeter,
Warwick and Talbot, Salisbury and Gloucester-
Be in their flowing cups freshly rememb'red.
This story shall the good man teach his son;
And Crispin Crispian shall ne'er go by,
From this day to the ending of the world,
But we in it shall be remembered-
We few, we happy few, we band of brothers;
For he to-day that sheds his blood with me
Shall be my brother; be he ne'er so vile,
This day shall gentle his condition;
And gentlemen in England now-a-bed
Shall think themselves accurs'd they were not here,
And hold their manhoods cheap whiles any speaks
That fought with us upon Saint Crispin's day.

Source: Chronique.com.

May 07, 2005

Return of the Jedi: Profit Out of Anti-Religion Law Suits?

The reconquista of morals in America may have begun. Next week, Rep. John Hostettler (R-Ind.) is expected to introduce a bill which would remove the profit from the ACLU's anti-religion law suits.

Source: WorldNetDaily.com.
An Indiana congressman plans to curb the ACLU's appetite for filing suits targeting religion in the public square by introducing a bill that denies plaintiff attorneys the right to collect attorneys fees in such cases.

[...]

"Every other civil right case, there is some injury to somebody," American Legion attorney Rees Lloyd of Banning, California, told a Thursday rally in front of ACLU's Los Angeles offices. "Somebody lost their job ... somebody got beat up by authorities – they have some physical, mental, economic injury. But in an Establishment Clause case, it is someone who says, 'I take offense,' and the offense is based on religions, politics, philosophy, but there is no injury."

[...]

"The issue is about the absolute fanaticism of the ACLU and the absolute arrogance of a judiciary that says we have to wipe out of history all the evidence of our heritage," Lloyd told the Los Angeles Daily Journal, a legal newspaper.

Contact your congress person and show your support for this measure.

Sign a petition to get the ACLU off of the taxpayer's dole.

Read much, much more about the ACLU here.

California Senate Passes Bill to Ban Online Hunting

What the...?

Here is a persuasive argument for having a part-time legislature.

California state senators voted 25-6 to prohibit online hunting websites, with the threat of a $1,000 fine and six months of jail time as a deterrent to anyone who kills animals with a gun fired over the internet.

Ooookaaaay. The senate was concerned about the spread of this.

Read more here.

May 06, 2005

Living Wills are a Joke

During the height of the Terri travesty there were innumerable pontificating pundits droning on about the importance of living wills. According to the National Right to Life Committee, 40 states allow physicians and hospitals to disregard advance directives when they call for patients to be provided with treatment food or fluids. Do you get that? Food and water are "treatments" which can be legally denied at the whim of a doctor or a hospital.

Read: "Most States Don't Make Doctors Enforce Advance Directives"

Read: "Advance directives: Useless in most states"

Update: There is no good in just grousing without an alternative so here it is, a Will to Live.

Fresh Air at UNICEF

Clinton appointee Carol Bellamy, has stepped down after 10 years of promoting abortions and feminist causes through her directorship of the United Nations Children's Fund (UNICEF). The new head is outgoing U.S. Agriculture Secretary Ann Veneman. Veneman says she wants to turn UNICEF back to focusing on "an agenda of helping children, particularly in the areas of education and health and to address the issues of hunger and malnutrition." Veneman adds that she will shift the agency's attention away from making sure teenagers can get abortions.

LIFENEWS.COM's Steven Ertelt writes about the change.

Carol Bellamy was the director of the United Nation's Children's Fund (UNICEF) for ten years and pro-life groups were frequently concerned at the pro-abortion positions the agency took under her direction.

"She has taken UNICEF in the radical feminist direction of promoting abortion rights," Austin Ruse, president of the Catholic Family & Human Rights Institute, told Family News in Focus. "It is her feeling and the feeling of the people she brought into UNICEF that children will not get their rights until women can get their rights first."

[...]

Veneman said at a press conference that she wants UNICEF to champion "an agenda of helping children, particularly in the areas of education and health and to address the issues of hunger and malnutrition."
Asked by a reporter about "reproductive health" issues, she responded: "I don't believe that these issues are relevant to the missions of UNICEF."

Adults are back in charge. It will take Ann Veneman some time to fully reform the agency since Bellamy had 10 years to appoint like-minded bureaucrats.

May 05, 2005

ACLU's Hypocritical Anti-Christian Attacks

hy·poc·ri·sy n.
1. The practice of professing beliefs, feelings, or virtues that one does not hold or possess; falseness.
2. An act or instance of such falseness.

I wish there were a stronger word to describe the ACLU's love-of-civil-rights-except-for-Christians stance. If there is such an adjective, I can't come up with one which doesn't begin with the letter: F.

Let's look at some examples of the ACLU's Christians Need Not Apply hypocrisy.

ACLU Opposes Tax Exemption of All Churches... Except They Support It For Satanists.

The ACLU's official policy #92, "Religious Bodies' Tax Exemption", states: "The ACLU opposes the tax-exemption of all churches..." Source - Twilight of Liberty/The Legacy of The ACLU

For Christians:
"In 1970, the year after the ACLU issued its first policy opposing the tax exempt status for churches, it accepted the advice of church and state extremist Leo Pfeffer and drafted a brief opposing tax exemptions in Waltz v. Tax Commission. In 1987, the ACLU Foundation and the New York Civil Liberties Union filed an amicus brief in support of Abortion Rights Mobilization to secure standing in a suit challenging the tax exempt status of the Catholic Church. The Catholic Church was charged with violating its tax-exempt status by taking a stand against abortion." Source
How dare the Catholic Church take a stand against the most sacred sacrament of abortion! Off with their tax exemption!

For Satanists:
"While the ACLU was taking aim at the Catholic Church's tax exempt status, the Union affiliate in Providence, Rhode Island, came out in favor of a tax exemption for Satanists ." Source
Satanists, on the other hand, honor the most holy Moloch who only demands child sacrifice.

Hypocrisy, thy name is ACLU!
..................................

ACLU Opposes the Teaching of Religion in Public Schools... Except They Support It For Islam.

Since the landmark Engle decision in 1962 (in which the Supreme Court Christian removed prayer from the public schools' classrooms), the ACLU has been doggedly pursuing the complete elimination of all references to the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob from America's classrooms and universities.

For Christians:
In its recent lawsuit against Louisiana's Tangipahoa Parish School, the ACLU is calling for the fining and imprisonment of the school's Board "for their calculated un-American and immoral conduct to embarrass, hinder or obstruct the court in the administration of justice." To the ACLU, God is now "un-American" and "immoral". The first reason for this latest ACLU contempt charge is due to Shane Tycer (not a school employee) broadcasting a prayer (Christian of course-not Muslim) over the school's public address system, before a basketball game. This flew in the face of a prior ACLU obtained court order (it's easy for the ACLU to get these "court orders" when judges are in its pockets), which disallows Christian prayer anywhere and anytime at the schools.

The initial ACLU lawsuit against the Louisiana school, which was precipitated by one parent complaint (no doubt an ACLU "plant"), included a suit against an elementary school student for reciting the Lord's Prayer before a school board meeting. Guess it's time for our children to spend a stint in jail, for their disallowed Christian religious beliefs! Source

Do not mistake the ACLU's position as one of wanting to remove all references to religion from the public arena, it is only all references to Christianity they want erased and expunged.

For Islam:
Mainstream America is reeling with absolute shock from the politically correct decision of the University of North Carolina requiring incoming freshmen to read "Approaching the Qu-ran: The Early Revelations."

The book clearly is a defense of Islam that conveniently leaves out verses that call for the murder of infidels. UNC Chancellor James Moeser, defended his position of assigning the book saying, "It helps us from demonizing a whole group of people with being an enemy simply by practicing the same religion."

Apparently the sacred American Civil Liberties Union doctrines of the separation of church and state only apply to Christians and Jews. How else can you explain why the North Carolina ACLU went to court to support the University of North Carolina's mandatory reading assignment of the pro-Islam book for incoming freshmen? Source

... Or ...

For Islam:
In California, a "mandate" has been put in place in the public school system that Islam shall and must be taught to students. Some have argued that this mandate does not exist. But, it does. Melanie Morgan (a California talk-show host) advises that when her son was in 7th grade he was not allowed to graduate to the 8th grade until he could recite and explain the Seven Pillars of Islam. If that is not a mandated public school requirement, nothing is. Although the command is that the Islamic religion must be studied, references to the Christian religion are not allowed. The ACLU has not objected to this. Source

Hypocrisy, thy name is ACLU!
..................................

SIGN THE PETITION TO GET THE ACLU OFF THE TAXPAYER'S DOLE

This was a Stop The ACLU Blogburst. If you would like to join please Email here!

Sites already on board:
Stop The ACLU
Freedom Of Thought
Mad Tech
Respublica
The Wide Awakes
Angry Republican Mom
Kender's Musings
American Patriots
What Attitude Problem?
Life Trek
Gribbit's Word
Def Conservative
An American Housewife
A Tic In The Mind's Eye
Cao's Blog
Regular Ron
Freedom Of
Is This Life?
Patriots For Bush
California Conservative 4 Truth
NIF
Obiter Dictum
PBS Watch
Xtreme Right Wing
Daily Inklings
Miss Patriot
Jack Lewis.net
Conservative Dialysis
Conservative Angst
Kill Righty
American Warmonger
Birth Of A Neo-Con
The Nose On Your Face
The View From Firehouse
Ogre's View
Fundamentally right
Conservative Rant
My Political Soap Box
Common Sense Runs Wild
Redstate Rant
Time Hath Found Us
American Dinosaur
Merri Musings
And Rightly So

May 03, 2005

And Ye Shall be as Gods

The title of this post is from Genesis 3:5. It was spoken by satan to Eve. This is the passage is where the serpent deceives Eve and tricks her into eating of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. The desire to be as God is the oldest and most virulent rebellion of humanity.

Today's most graphic manifestation of the ancient rebellion is exhibited by the proponents of abortion and euthanasia. In their twisted thinking they lay claim to godhood by their ability to control the ending of life. One of the characteristics of satan is that he is a pathological counterfeiter. Since he unable to do the creative works of God, he settles on the cheap imitation of destruction. True to their father the "right to die" crowd tries to usurp God's position by choosing when to end life. In Frank Herbert's epic "Dune" books, the enigmatic Paul Atreides says: "He who can destroy a thing, controls the thing."

Brian Melton a contributor to ChronWatch.com has written a thought provoking piece: Spiritual Imperialism, Abortion, and Euthanasia

One of the reasons why the euthanasia crowd reacted so violently to calls to save Terri’s life, I think, is that for many of them it was a battle they thought they had already won, and they feared a possible counter-revolution.

[...]

Issues surrounding life and its beginning are the real “Bloody Angle” or Rubicon if you want to become a god. Why? For the simple reason that, right or wrong, all creatures have the power to cause the death of another. Committing a murder is not something that distinguishes man from beast. Creating life? Now that’s something only divinity can do.

May 01, 2005

Sunday Special: Jefferson's Wall of Separation Letter

"A wall of separation between church and State"

We hear the term so much. Contrary to what many believe, it is not in the Constitution nor in the Declaration of Independence nor in any other official writ or decree. The term quotes a phrase from a letter written by then President Thomas Jefferson to the Danbury, Connecticut Baptist Association in response to a letter they had written him.

Read the exchange, as written, for yourself. There will be no further commentary.

From: The Danbury Baptist Association
To: President Thomas Jefferson
Oct. 7, 1801

Sir, Among the many millions in America and Europe who rejoice in your Election to office; we embrace the first opportunity which we have enjoyed in our collective capacity, since your Inauguration, to express our great satisfaction, in your appointment to the chief Majestracy in the United States; And though our mode of expression may be less courtly and pompious than what many others clothe their addresses with, we beg you, Sir to believe, that none are more sincere.

Our Sentiments are uniformly on the side of Religious Liberty -- That Religion is at all times and places a matter between God and individuals -- That no man ought to suffer in name, person, or effects on account of his religious Opinions - That the legitimate Power of civil government extends no further than to punish the man who works ill to his neighbor: But Sir our constitution of government is not specific. Our ancient charter together with the Laws made coincident therewith, were adopted on the Basis of our government, at the time of our revolution; and such had been our Laws & usages, and such still are; that Religion is considered as the first object of Legislation; and therefore what religious privileges we enjoy (as a minor part of the State) we enjoy as favors granted, and not as inalienable rights: and these favors we receive at the expense of such degrading acknowledgements, as are inconsistent with the rights of freemen. It is not to be wondered at therefore; if those, who seek after power & gain under the pretense of government & Religion should reproach their fellow men -- should reproach their chief Magistrate, as an enemy of religion Law & good order because he will not, dare not assume the prerogatives of Jehovah and make Laws to govern the Kingdom of Christ.

Sir, we are sensible that the President of the United States, is not the national legislator, and also sensible that the national government cannot destroy the Laws of each State; but our hopes are strong that the sentiments of our beloved President, which have had such genial affect already, like the radiant beams of the Sun, will shine and prevail through all these States and all the world till Hierarchy and Tyranny be destroyed from the Earth. Sir, when we reflect on your past services, and see a glow of philanthropy and good will shining forth in a course of more than thirty years we have reason to believe that America's God has raised you up to fill the chair of State out of that good will which he bears to the Millions which you preside over. May God strengthen you for the arduous task which providence & the voice of the people have cald you to sustain and support you in your Administration against all the predetermined opposition of those who wish to rise to wealth & importance on the poverty and subjection of the people.

And may the Lord preserve you safe from every evil and bring you at last to his Heavenly Kingdom through Jesus Christ our Glorious Mediator.

Signed in behalf of the Association.

Nehh Dodge
Ephram Robbins The Committee
Stephen S. Nelson

From: President Thomas Jefferson
To: The Danbury Baptist Association
January 1, 1802

Gentlemen:

The affectionate sentiments of esteem and approbation which are so good 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 the 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 man to all of his natural rights, convinced he has no natural right in opposition to his social duties.

I reciprocate your kind prayers for the protection and blessings of the common Father and Creator of man, and tender you and your religious association, assurances of my high respect and esteem.

Thomas Jefferson