Tolerance or Stupidity?

Image by Wonderlane via Flickr

In a statement released Friday night, Bloomberg said: "As I said last week, this proposed mosque and community center in Lower Manhattan is as important a test of the separation of church and state as we may see in our lifetime, and I applaud President Obama's clarion defense of the freedom of religion tonight."

Is the building of a mosque in the shadow of  Ground Zero a test of the defense of religious freedom or testing Americans citizens to see how stupid we are?

It is an insult to any American, let alone the families and memories of the innocent victims of religious intolerance known as Islam, to even suggest a Muslim mosque so close to Ground Zero.  Yet, we have not just a President but an entire party, the Democrats, who believe the "rights" of Muslims to build a mosque at that hallowed site is more important than the memories and ideals of the American way of life.This doesn't surprise me since President  Obama said he would stand with his Muslim brothers.

Vote these nuts out! Are you with me?

Government Intrusion or political illusion?

Image via Wikipedia

We vote. A judge makes a "ruling." A Constitution was beautifully conceived. A judge "interprets" it. All the matters is what the judge believes now.

Listen, I've been a student of the Bible for most of my life and one thing I have seen is that if you don't have some rules for interpretation, some set of guidelines for what is an acceptable form of interpretation, anything goes. If you take things out of context, ignore the cultural-historical background, impose your own presuppositions, you make the Bible appear to say almost anything.

Now, apply that same thinking to the Constitution and  laws, you can do whatever suits you. I am deeply afraid of people who "interpret" the constitution. This is usually judges. In California we voted and the majority, decided that marriage should be what it has been, between a man and a woman. The judge, "ruled" that it was unconstitutional and basic civil rights to gays and homosexuals would be denied if it was allowed to remain.

What "civil rights" are being denied to gays and homosexuals? No one is stopping them from voting. No one is denying them due process or equal protection as individuals. But, they are forcing those who hold to a different moral view to accept theirs and live as if it is absolute truth. See, my earlier post where people are being sued because they do not agree with gay and lesbian lifestyles.

Is this government intrusion or just the illusion that we live in a society where our vote counts?

Help for Teachers or Hurt for Education?

Image by The Library of Congress via Flickr

So the POTUS and the congress pushed through another bill aimed at helping teachers and other civil servants. Although I am an educator I am not sure if this bill is a good thing for education. The bill is aimed at saving teachers jobs and also jobs for police and firefighters. There is even money for Medicare that doesn't have to be spent on Medicare.

Washington, D.C. (Aug 10) – The U.S. House of Representatives closed out its emergency session today finalizing H.R. 1586 authorizing funding for states avoiding massive lay-offs this fall. Nearly, 140,000 educators risked being furloughed at the beginning of the school year if the bill was to fail.
The bill passed the House 247 to 161 with only one Republican voting in favor of the bill, and three Democrats voting against the bill.
The bill authorizes $16 billion for Medicaid funding and $10 billion for education all at the cost of reduction of food stamps for families in need.- WorldNewsVine

Enrollment has been declining in California for the last several years. My question is if we have less students shouldn't we have fewer teachers? If we don't need teachers yet "save" teachers' jobs isn't that a just a form of  welfare? That may seem harsh, but, if education is supposed to be about the students why would spend more on teachers if declining enrollment says we need less? And as a 21 year education vet one thing I know is that if "the the big wigs" can put money in the "general fund" and use it for pet special "projects" they will. Because if the money is not coming every year than it is only a band-aid on a severed limb. Saving teachers jobs just to save jobs does not automatically help student achievement. 

Perhaps someone is trying to buy votes.

No Tax Tuesday!

Image by Seven_Null7 via Flickr

How about a No Tax Tuesday, once a month?
Consumers don't pay taxes on purchases.
Businesses don't pay taxes on sales.
Employees don't have to pay income tax, State or Federal!
For one Tuesday a month you keep what you earn!

How about a visit to the gasoline pump? Nationwide we pay about 62 cents per gallon (cpg)of taxes. If you buy 10 gallon of gas that's about $6.20. In California it is more like 63.9 cents per gallon or $6.40. My family owns two vehicles and it takes more like 30 gallons to fill up which means about $20.00 in taxes. No Tax Tuesday means I pay about $20 less.

Now, I have two school aged children and it's back to school shopping time. Here in the formerly great state of California we pay 9.75% sales tax. So, for every $100 I actually only buy $90.25 of clothes. Spending $400 is not that hard for back to school stuff. The breakdown on $400 is $39 for the government and $361 for my children.

Now, if No Tax Tuesday includes my income for that day...well now we're talking. If I was only in the 25% tax bracket (state and federal) that would be $25 for every $100 dollars earned. If I make $200 a day that's $50.

So, if I save $20 on gas, $39 on clothes, and $50 on taxes that comes out to $109. Now, I can do a lot more for my family with that money than the government waste plans can do.

What about you? What do you think about a NO TAX TUESDAY?

Gas Taxes Info
http://www.californiagasprices.com/Tax_Info.aspx

The United States of America or The Americas

Image by Bearman2007 via Flickr

The other day I read a comment to a article in my local newspaper about immigration deform, opps I mean immigration reform. Well, at first I just sort of shrugged it off as another post by someone geographically challenged. But, the more I thought about it, the more it sort of irritated me.

What my geographically challenged neighbor had said (in a "nut" shell) was that Mexico was part of the Americas too. You know that great country called "The Americas." This was of course his argument to why people crossing the border should be allowed to cross at will.

As an educator for the past 21 years in the Southern California area I have a few observations that may shed some light on the struggle for some people to understand why illegal is not legal and why open  borders are like none barred windows in South Central LA. 

First, I have always been aware that many students are not taught, by my fellow educators, geography. Frighteningly, by shear ignorance many grow up not knowing how many states there are, what continent we live on and what other countries are around the USA. 

Second, there has been something called "multiculturalism" taught in most schools, especially in Southern California. The whole idea is to respect other cultures and allow students to feel like their culture has value and that stuff. My observation: we have created "culturally aware" illiterates. 

Third, when the young impressionable minds get to high school they are bombarded by revisionist teachers who teach their version of US History. When the young mind is hit with this lethal combo of multiculturalism and  usually socialist revisionist crap they grow up thinking that America is the great evil and since people have "migrating" back and forth across the border for centuries borders and not real.

The truth is Canada borders the United States of America to the north (on the continent) and Mexico to the south. Mexico is a separate sovereign country. Mexico did not want the southwest. When the governor of   California asked Mexico if they wanted to govern California, Mexico said no.

There is a border. Mexico has northern and southern borders. Illegal is not legal no matter if one is ignorant or not.

Men Are Just Happier People

What do you expect from such simple creatures?   

 Your last name stays put. The garage is all yours. Wedding plans take care of themselves. Chocolate is just another snack. You can be President. You can never be pregnant. You can wear a white T-shirt to a water park. You can wear NO shirt to a water park. Car mechanics tell you the truth. The world is your urinal. You never have to drive to another gas station restroom because this one is just too icky. You don't have to stop and think of which way to turn a nut on a bolt. Same work, more pay. Wrinkles add character. Wedding dress $5000. Tux rental-$100. People never stare at your chest when you're talking to them. New shoes don't cut, blister, or mangle your feet. One mood all the time.
Phone conversations are over in 30 seconds flat. You know stuff about tanks.. A five-day vacation requires only one suitcase. You can open all your own jars. You get extra credit for the slightest act of thoughtfulness. If someone forgets to invite you, he or she can still be your friend.

Your underwear is $8.95 for a three-pack. Three pairs of shoes are more than enough. You almost never have strap problems in public. You are unable to see wrinkles in your clothes. Everything on your face stays its original color. The same hairstyle lasts for years, maybe decades. You only have to shave your face and neck. 

You can play with toys all your life. One wallet and one pair of shoes -- one color for all seasons. You can wear shorts no matter how your legs look. You can 'do' your nails with a pocket knife. You have freedom of choice concerning growing a mustache. 
You can do Christmas shopping for 25 relatives on December 24 in 25 minutes. 
No wonder men are happier. 

Bad Call by the Judge on Prop. 8

Image via Wikipedia

This article by Craig Huey was so good I just had to share it. Thanks Craig for a rational discussion.

Ruling labels sexual orientation as a “civil right”

A historical ruling by U.S. District Court Chief Judge Vaughn Walker said Proposition 8 was unconstitutional…again overturning two votes by the people of California showing that they want marriage to be between one man and one woman only.

This historic case is now on its way to the liberal 9th Circuit Court of Appeals and could eventually go to the U.S. Supreme Court.

No other political decision to change American society even comes close to the impact of this one.

This decision affects every marriage law in America. All 45 states that uphold traditional marriage are now in danger of having this institution overturned by judges.

By overturning the people’s vote, the judge has declared that this is not a republic—it is an oligarchy ruled by judges. More specifically, it is ruled by judges who create law regardless of the will of the people.

The Proposition 8 trial was biased from the start, beginning with Judge Walker…a homosexual himself…creating a circus in his courtroom, where Christianity and the church were on trial.

The judge’s decision is redefining same-sex marriage as a civil right; this new definition will radically change our society.

This is not a civil rights issue; it’s an issue of choice. Judge Walker based his decision on a distorted view of civil liberties.

Just as you can’t discriminate against people based on their race, you also can’t discriminate against people based on their sexual orientation.

But choosing one’s personal sexual behavior isn’t the same as what defines one’s race.

Redesigning society based on this confusion—that a chosen sexual orientation is no different from the unchosen, unchangeable characteristic of race—is based on faulty and dangerous reasoning.

There are some things we don’t choose. No one can choose his or her race or height—any more than he or she can choose any gene.

Whom we enter into a relationship with, however, is voluntary—it’s a matter of free will.

Homosexual behavior is a choice, not a civil right. Race is not a choice, and is a civil right.

Now, because of the court’s decision based on newly created civil rights, our religious liberty and freedom of speech are in danger.

If this decision is not overturned, watch for costly lawsuits to mount against churches if they don’t allow homosexual weddings.

And, watch out for more churches, religious organizations and pastors to grow increasingly reluctant to speak out against what they call the sin of homosexuality for fear of accusations of hate speech, discrimination and civil rights violations.

Plus, this will affect religious employees, Christian schools and bookstores, photographers, wedding-cake bakers, rental agencies and other businesses—all of them could be targets of ruinous lawsuits.

In New Mexico, Elaine Huguenin, a professional wedding photographer, was fined and found guilty of discrimination for not wanting to photograph a lesbian wedding.

And two doctors in San Diego were sued for refusing to inseminate a lesbian woman. They referred her to another doctor. After she had the child, she sued, winning her civil rights case that would force the doctors to act against their own freedom of conscience.

In the coming months, expect the media, politicians, various experts and the homosexual lobby to frame the decision as a civil rights issue, not an issue to protect our society and our kids, or to uphold the benefits and value of marriage.

For example:

* We’ll be labeled divisive, intolerant and hateful.
* Opposition to the sin of homosexuality will be called bigoted.
* Celebrities and well-known politicians will grab media attention to denounce us.
* Christian love and the Bible’s truth will be distorted and questioned.
* We’ll be accused of being mean-spirited for not letting two people who are in love get married.

Our response must be patient, loving and focused on being pro-Biblical marriage. We must not hesitate to tell the truth about the sin of homosexuality. But the issue is being pro-marriage.

As Christians, we must reject the media’s stereotyping of us as angry and hateful towards homosexuals.

Craig Huey can be read at www.ElectionForum.org