Displaying 871 To 900 Of 13,190 Comments Religion & The U.S. Constitution: The Official Record Zeke, this is really a treasure. There’s nothing in the world like primary sources for history — even though, as you say, there are sometimes eye-glazing sections of tedium. When you finally do find the oyster with the lovely pearl in it, it makes all the eyestrain worth it, no? Contrary to what you say, you really are a fine writer and a fine thinker. It’s hard to believe that being a historian is not your day job, but I gather it’s not. The thing that amazes me is how well the Founders managed to negotiate that narrow little pathway between slipshod, rushed debate just to get something — anything– down on paper, and endless mincing of fine point after fine point to the place where it all just bogs down in the quicksand of endless minutiae. I mean, these Whatever happened to that head? Anyway, it’s pretty obvious that the Founders never did intend this to be a Christian theocracy. And the more you read, the more you realize how serious they were about that. It seemed that one of their main concerns was that it might be atheists who would be the ones to be persecuted. They certainly didn’t express the hysterical paranoia that some modern day “Christians” do about jack-booted federal thugs bursting into their (luxurious) houses of worship to haul them off to FEMA camps. Well,there probably weren’t FEMA camps back then, but you know what I mean. 😉 I do hope that you’ll keep on writing for the Planet. It’s just such a delight to read the wonderful posts that you and other members have contributed — even in just the past few weeks. You help to make the Planet the unique and fascinating place that it is! » Posted By kesmarn On July 3, 2014 @ 10:45 am Is The United States Of America A Christian Nation? Diane, first off, welcome to the Planet! And many thanks for your comments, and for the call to civility. It’s so difficult to take that step back, that deep breath, and to refuse to be drawn to the place where there’s more heat than light, no? » Posted By kesmarn On July 7, 2014 @ 8:01 am I think your contention is absolutely right, SLM! And that will to dominate seem so extend to the environment, to animals and to women as well, don’t you think? » Posted By kesmarn On July 4, 2014 @ 3:10 pm If she were trying to be funny, she couldn’t have come up with anything better. Sadly, we all know she wasn’t… 🙁 » Posted By kesmarn On July 3, 2014 @ 7:12 am Thanks for some amazing quotations, Zeke. Isn’t it sad that some of the very people who really need to read these words are the ones who are the least capable of comprehending them? I was reading an article on that bus full of refugee children that was confronted by an angry group of Tea Party demonstrators today. Here’s an exact transcription of a sign that one of these women was carrying: “US Citiens doNT get FREE PASS Y sHould ILEAGELS.” Is there the slightest hope that she could ever read prose like the comments quoted above and have the slightest clue? Sigh. And yet, we can’t give up on getting those words out there, can we? » Posted By kesmarn On July 2, 2014 @ 8:48 pm A terrific article, Homie! And it should be required reading for all those Dominionists who insist that the Founders were all devout evangelical Christians who intended for the country to be run with a state-established religion, with rules enforced by a sort of Protestant version of Sharia Law. Aren’t you incredibly aggravated by phony historians like David Barton, who’ve never bothered to read any primary sources, have no training in historical research and just make it up as they go along? The amount of damage these revisionists do is hard to calculate. People sometimes think that history is something of an esoteric, peripheral issue, but as you’ve eloquently shown, the way we view it determines the way we think, act and vote in the here and now. » Posted By kesmarn On July 2, 2014 @ 8:39 pm Corporations Are Religious Extremists Too! ‘Tis better to give than to receive… And even better to give twice. » Posted By kesmarn On July 1, 2014 @ 6:11 pm It’s only July, NoMan, but I can feel my balance starting to go already… 😉 » Posted By kesmarn On July 1, 2014 @ 3:55 pm I’m with you, funk. I don’t have a problem with incorporation either. Until they try to play it both ways. “My company and I are two separate “people” if you’re planning to sue.” But: “When it comes to religion, we’re the same person.” Can’t have it both ways. (Well, not until yesterday, anyway.) 🙁 » Posted By kesmarn On July 1, 2014 @ 11:40 am Yes, funk. And of course this one solid for one company is now (no matter what the the fraudulent five say) going to result in some more solids for all the other cases in the pipeline as well. My question is: when I slip and fall in Hobby Lobby this winter (which is looking more and more likely by the day), why can’t I sue Mr. Green personally as well as Hobby Lobby? Since that wall of protection of the owner’s assets — the one that is supposedly guaranteed by the act of corporation — is so very fuzzy and blurry, why not just erase it altogether? After all — there’s no line between Mr. Green’s “beliefs” and the corporation’s… Let’s just take that to its logical conclusion. » Posted By kesmarn On July 1, 2014 @ 10:00 am Welcome to the Planet, Pete! And yes, funny too how those laws that protect the owners of corporations from being sued personally — thus placing a virtual “wall” between the owner and the corporate “person” — no longer seem to matter when the owner wants to mind-merge with the corporation and hold a “sincerely held belief,” which he then wants to inflict on everybody else! » Posted By kesmarn On July 1, 2014 @ 9:51 am Well, so far in our responses here we have lined up axes and pitchforks. I can supply burning torches and a broomstick or two. [img]https://fbcdn-sphotos-a-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-xpf1/t1.0-9/s851x315/10414522_725036294224579_2778562795245267684_n.png[/img] » Posted By kesmarn On June 30, 2014 @ 2:09 pm Hobby Lobby, Contraception and Bearing False Witness Polly, from what I’m hearing there are some GOP guys who believe that women just stop by at the local Target and pick up an over-the-counter birth control pill whenever they’re planning that naughty “recreational” sex (that annoys them so much). Then they pop that pill and they’re good to go. That seems to be the extent of their real-world knowledge. Who knew that there were so many 60+ year old virgins in the GOP? » Posted By kesmarn On July 1, 2014 @ 12:22 pm Cyndi, there’s also the issue of Hobby Lobby’s owners wanting to have it both ways, legally. The main point of incorporating a business is to protect the owner from having his personal assets threatened in the event of a lawsuit against the company. Its goal is to draw a line of separation between the “person” that is the corporation and the “person” who is the owner. But when it comes to imposing their religious quirks on others, Hobby Lobby’s owners suddenly want that line of separation to vanish. In that case they want to be the corporation and hold opinions and “beliefs” on behalf of it. And to force them on other people. Sorry, that doesn’t fly with logical people. Unfortunately for American women, five men on the SCOTUS are obviously not logical. (As a side note — the morning after pill prevents ovulation. It does not cause an abortion. And fortunately it is available on line, so that religious bullies now have fewer opportunities to harass women who need it.) Also I would argue that it is not the case that “many Americans” regard IUDs as immoral little abortion machines. I think that opinion is in reality held by a small minority of genuine fanatics — mostly male. But I will grant that they are exceptionally noisy and give the impression of being more numerous than they are. I say all this as a life-long Catholic. But not one who feels she has the right to shove the orthodox Catholic point of view (which is incidentally not the view I personally hold) down other people’s throats. When one is wealthy it’s easy to say that co-pays — or even bearing the entire expense of an IUD (which is a whole month’s salary for a minimum wage worker)– shouldn’t be a big deal. But for struggling women, it is. I’d love to know how many unwanted babies the owners of Hobby Lobby have personally adopted. That would say more to me about their alleged religious beliefs than anything else. I suspect this is much less about religion than it is about wanting to attack Obamacare and damage this President. But then, what else is new? » Posted By kesmarn On July 1, 2014 @ 6:04 am EX, birth control pills may be cheap in Europe, but here they can be a significant part of a minimum wage earner’s take home pay. And an IUD costs the equivalent of one whole month’s income for a minimum wage worker. Needless to say, having a baby is even more expensive, though. Hence the President’s desire to spare women unwanted pregnancies. » Posted By kesmarn On July 1, 2014 @ 5:41 am What Can Be Done to Stop Children From Crossing Our Borders? Murph, for starters: The message to corporations should be: you outsource jobs at starvation wages? When you bring those products back into the country there is a massive tariff on them. I mean huge. That money can be spent on improved, streamlined court systems to handle these immigration cases. You’re caught with an underage Honduran prostitute? Your name is published in large print in the local paper and you will need to register as a pedophile sex offender for the rest of your life. No exceptions. If you happen to be president of the local bank, so be it. And there should be massive fines in these cases too — both for the pimps and for the johns. That’s a hard choice, but a more just one. The funds collected from the above programs can also be used for inpatient drug treatment. You’re caught with “user amounts” of drugs, you go into inpatient treatment, court ordered. Yes, even if you are the president of the PTA. If you’re a dealer, you go to prison. What I’m not hearing from the right are the “hows” of what is to be done when you have children that have been turned away from the schoolhouse door. What does a country do with uneducated children, whose cases may drag out in the court system for long periods? We need the “practical” answers for that. And what do you do with sick refugees when the “hard” choice is that you deny them medical care in the name of practicality? I would venture to say that it is not the high-minded or the bleeding hearts that haven’t thought things though. It is the right that hasn’t thought through the ramifications of what the policies they’re proposing will result in. Nor the logistics of dealing with a group of people who have suffered from poor health care and no education due to our choices. As Choicelady has said many times: people will not simply roll over and die. They will do what they have to do to survive. It will be to our shame if we treat them like stray animals who shouldn’t be given anything, lest they stick around too long. » Posted By kesmarn On July 7, 2014 @ 7:23 pm Murph, see my response directly above your comment. Thanks! » Posted By kesmarn On July 7, 2014 @ 8:27 am Murph, with all due respect, why are “hard” choices that involve requiring ethical behavior by (largely) white American males considered “not realistic,” while “hard choices” that involve denying medical care and schooling to helpless people — including children — “realistic”? That sounds highly subjective to me. What I proposed (and Sue affirmed) is simply applying economic principles to this situation. Dry up the market for a “product,” and the producers and transporters of that product are economically starved to death. I would think any conservative would recognize and applaud that approach. So when no one buys that heroin or uses those prostitutes, the gangs and drug lords who fuel this problem are in trouble. And forcing American companies who outsource jobs to Central American countries to pay a living wage is equally based in economic principles. When you can make a living at home, why migrate? So this isn’t all “girly emotional stuff” (not that you used those words but some other conservatives do). This is rooted in solid economic cause and effect. Paul Ryan also uses the term “hard choices.” Maggie Thatcher did too. But I never see Paul Ryan asking multi-billionaires to do anything “hard.” Ever. Economic discipline is great. I don’t think anyone would want to live in a society without it. But maybe it’s time to “redistribute the pain” a bit. When you want to get rid of a weed, you don’t just pull off the top leaves, you yank it up by the roots. And the roots of this migration are drugs, poverty, prostitution and violence. » Posted By kesmarn On July 7, 2014 @ 8:25 am Awesome, Nirek! Thanks for posting. » Posted By kesmarn On July 5, 2014 @ 3:56 pm 😆 Sally, you never fail to make me laugh! Especially when I need it the most. » Posted By kesmarn On July 5, 2014 @ 2:21 pm Bush and his cronies are going to have to move “Academi” (Blackwater) down there with them, if they plan on living there, Sally! » Posted By kesmarn On July 5, 2014 @ 9:56 am And of course their sadly misspelled and hateful signs give the real picture of their mentality. » Posted By kesmarn On July 5, 2014 @ 9:53 am Sue, this is such valuable info. Thanks so much for posting it. Sherlock is on the case, as usual! » Posted By kesmarn On July 5, 2014 @ 9:51 am Sally, I’m beginning to think that “Libertarian” is now code for “Fascist.” » Posted By kesmarn On July 5, 2014 @ 9:44 am The irony — of wanting to be hateful and wanting to be loved at the same time. Incredible isn’t it, Sue? » Posted By kesmarn On July 5, 2014 @ 9:42 am Well said, Sally and Sue. Too often the “hard choices” of the right are only “hard” for poor women and children. They never seem to do anything that’s “hard” on themselves. Funny how that happens, no? » Posted By kesmarn On July 5, 2014 @ 6:34 am Murph, the White House has put out some good info on ideas for dealing with the immigration situation in order to fix the system. The description of the program(s) proposed are too lengthy to copy and paste here, but can be found at this link: http://www.whitehouse.gov/issues/immigration There’s also another good resource that debunks a lot of the misinformation coming from the right about this situation. It’s from the Sisters of Mercy who have “boots on the ground” (and have had for decades) in Central America. I don’t think anyone on the right or the left would say we have a wonderful immigration system and it couldn’t possibly be improved. But I will say — straight up — that there is no way I would ever advocate denying children who are already here medical care, food, clothing, shelter or education. In fact, to be totally candid — I think that is brutal. And whether or not it’s considered “practical” to take care of them is something I could hardly possibly care less about. If this country can afford unwanted and unneeded military planes, if it can bail out crooked bankers, if corporations can stash $21 trillion dollars in offshore accounts and not be held accountable, we can take care of 70,000 children. They are here. They are real humans. And they deserve better from a country that gets all weepy about calling itself “A Shining City on a Hill.” It is American economic habits and American personal habits that have had a large hand in turning Mexico and Central America into some of the most violent places on earth. So– here are several “practical things” we can do right away. American men can stop using prostitutes that are the result of human trafficking. Americans can stop drugging themselves 24/7 because life is just too dreadful for them to endure without heroin and other substances, the sale of which funds these violent gangs that these kids are trying to get a away from. And American corporations can stop paying starvation wages when they outsource jobs down there. Truth be told — although this is not a popular thing to say — the solution to a lot of this problem can be laid at the doorstep of one demographic: white, American males. It’s time to stop making women and children the ones who have to pay for their sins. » Posted By kesmarn On July 4, 2014 @ 7:58 pm Friends, I just can’t imagine being the person who stands in the schoolhouse door and says no to a kindergartener. I can’t imagine being the doctor who sees a pregnant woman in need of prenatal care and says no. Yes, we do need to work on immigration reform. But not at the expense of our own humanity. » Posted By kesmarn On July 4, 2014 @ 11:54 am Mop, I found this image of that incident. There’s wasn’t a lot more info available at this point, but the visual itself is so sad: [img]https://fbcdn-sphotos-c-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-xpa1/t1.0-9/10426893_724809774228174_6787465144572268245_n.jpg[/img] » Posted By kesmarn On July 2, 2014 @ 10:32 am The Court Ruling that Could Kill ACA Yes, in a ‘burb a bit away from Toledo, but close enough to be affected by the “malarkey” as Joe Biden calls it! » Posted By kesmarn On July 13, 2014 @ 8:25 pmComments Posted By kesmarn
debates could have gone on until — well, they could STILL be going on. But at some point rational heads prevailed and they said — in effect — okay we have to compromise and hammer out some sort of workable language and move on. We have work to do, and we can’t afford to dither or endlessly bicker.
«« Back To Stats Page
Home Stats