I am finally busy for once so blogging may not happen as much as I would like but I will try my best to keep it up.
Last week I was so bored I clicked through the Obama's first 100 days in pictures. I almost had to remind myself that I do not like this guy, it was so memorizing for some reason. A celebrity star he is. So I like this a lot better. Obama can't fool you now. Should we be expecting a list of 200 mistakes in a 100 days? Perhaps more than 200 as making mistakes become habitual? Anyways here is another article to make one disenchanted with Obama, though for many of us its harder not to be. Also, how is Obama going to let something like this happen? Perhaps Obama shared with Ahmadinejad the secret behind his succesful campaing to get on the Iranian leaders good side.
Some may say that we are giving Obama too hard of a time, but that happens when one promises more than can be delivered. In most jobs, he would probably be fired by now.
Wednesday, April 29, 2009
Monday, April 27, 2009
Townhall.com
So I joined Townhall.com today just because I wanted to argue an ignorant comment some liberal made about this article. Sometimes I just cant help myself. There are probably a 100 websites by now that I have forgotten I joined.
Anyways, I thought the article and video were somewhat interesting. If you decide to watch the video it takes you to Liveaction.org. I want to really quickly highlight this organization because it was started by Lila Rose at the age of 15. What a great example of someone seeing a problem and trying to do something about it.
Anyways, I thought the article and video were somewhat interesting. If you decide to watch the video it takes you to Liveaction.org. I want to really quickly highlight this organization because it was started by Lila Rose at the age of 15. What a great example of someone seeing a problem and trying to do something about it.
Great Leader
This country seems to be lacking something recently and that is A Great Leader. I read the following this weekend and it just kind of slapped me across the face. This country has an obsession with self help books on how to lead and be successful. But I feel this says more in less words than those could ever say.
I respect all men, and it is from disrespect for none that I say there are no great leaders in the world today. In fact, greatness itself is laughed to scorn. You should not be great today — you should sink yourself into the herd, you should not be distinguished from the crowd, you should simply be one of the many.
The commanding voice is lacking. The voice which speaks little, but which when it speaks, speaks with compelling moral authority — this kind of voice is not congenial to this age. The age flattens and levels down every distinction into drab uniformity. Respect for the high, the noble, the great, the rare, the specimen that appears once every hundred or every thousand years, is gone. Respect at all is gone! If you ask whom and what people do respect, the answer is literally nobody and nothing. This is simply an unrespecting age — it is the age of utter mediocrity. To become a leader today, even a mediocre leader, is a most uphill struggle. You are constantly and in every way and from every side pulled down. One wonders who of those living today will be remembered a thousand years from now — the way we remember with such profound respect Plato, and Aristotle, and Christ, and Paul, and Augustine, and Aquinas.
If you believe in prayer, my friends, and I know you do, then pray that God sends great leaders, especially great leaders of the spirit.
I respect all men, and it is from disrespect for none that I say there are no great leaders in the world today. In fact, greatness itself is laughed to scorn. You should not be great today — you should sink yourself into the herd, you should not be distinguished from the crowd, you should simply be one of the many.
The commanding voice is lacking. The voice which speaks little, but which when it speaks, speaks with compelling moral authority — this kind of voice is not congenial to this age. The age flattens and levels down every distinction into drab uniformity. Respect for the high, the noble, the great, the rare, the specimen that appears once every hundred or every thousand years, is gone. Respect at all is gone! If you ask whom and what people do respect, the answer is literally nobody and nothing. This is simply an unrespecting age — it is the age of utter mediocrity. To become a leader today, even a mediocre leader, is a most uphill struggle. You are constantly and in every way and from every side pulled down. One wonders who of those living today will be remembered a thousand years from now — the way we remember with such profound respect Plato, and Aristotle, and Christ, and Paul, and Augustine, and Aquinas.
If you believe in prayer, my friends, and I know you do, then pray that God sends great leaders, especially great leaders of the spirit.
A great leader suffers in a hundred different ways, and keeps his suffering to himself.
A great leader survives both his suffering and the fact that nobody knows anything about it.
A great leader loves being alone with God.
A great leader communes with the deepest the ages have known.
A great leader knows there is a higher and there is a lower, and he always seeks the higher, and indeed the highest.
A great leader fights against the spiritual forces of darkness and disintegration, both in his own soul and in the world.
A great leader overcomes himself, rises above himself, daily, minutely.
A great leader is very polite, but he never tones down the truth just to please others.
A great leader never seeks fanfare and publicity- they come to him, and often he rejects them.
A great leader never craves the approval of the world- in fact he often intentionally provokes its disapproval.
A great leader hitches his wagon to the remote, the unattainable, the stars.
A great leader does not worship quantity, multiplicity, perpetual motion- he stubbornly sticks to the one or at most two ultimate truths that there are.
A great leader is very simple, but the moral force of his conviction shines through every tone of his voice and every gesture of his hand.
A great leader lets the oneness of his interest burst forth with endless creativity.
A great leader is absolutely fearless- fearless because he fears only God.
A great leader loves, not sentimentally, not by making an effort, but with the effortless overflow of God's love for him.
A great leader identifies himself with, and is not ashamed of, the deepest in his own tradition.
A great leader is never disturbed by the fact that other traditions too have their own deepest.
A great leader is decisive, yet with the utmost tentativeness and tenderness.
A great leader, under God, does not care if he is crucified- there is something he knows and sees in the distance infinitely more important than to avoid crucifixion.
A great leader knows what the Bible calls "the fullness of the time", I mean the time in which he lives, and God gives him the grace and the power to fulfill that fullness.
You insult a leader if you call him great; he does not want your judgment; he wants only to please God.
A great leader calls forth the most secret and the most sacred impulses of those whom he leads.
A great leader leads those who are not even aware that they follow him, but only rejoice in the fact that he leads them.
A great leader is at the forefront of danger, be it physical or moral danger, when danger strikes.
A great leader heals....
And so I say, my friends, if you believe in prayer, and I know you do, then pray that God sends great leaders, for that is the world's greatest need.
Charles H. Malik, "Forum Address" (18 November 1975), BYU Studies 16, no. 4 (Summer 1976): 54344
And so, if we really believe, my friends, we should pray, and work together, and accept suffering and sacrifice, and we should have the courage of our convictions when it comes to the deepest we know.
For the greatest single evil today is this blanket of fear and intimidation spread all over the world, so that people do not dare to stand up for their convictions.
... I pray you all to consider on your knees how much God has blessed you and how much you therefore owe him.
For you owe him everything. And once we realize how much we owe God, then, since we can never give him anything commensurate in return, we can at least pay him back tears of gratitude and love.
While this speech was made many years ago it couldn't be more relevant to our times. I know not everyone out there is religious but the lesson from this speech is all the same. We are in need of great leaders. People who forget about themselves, people who do not believe they are owed anything, people who represent what they believe in, and who love others. Let us not only pray for great leaders, but lets try to become one ourselves.
Friday, April 24, 2009
My Ideology Is Better than Yours
Random but I ran into this on google and liked it for its simplicity. God Bless the USA.
UN = Uninformed Nicompoops
Well if Obama does not divide the nation the UN will. Now the President is obligated to prosecute Bush administrative lawyers. Lets not forget though that this is the same association that allowed Iran's President Ahmadinejad to speak. Did they forget about all the evidence of abuses in Iran. Maybe they should read this again.
My original plan was to write a whole posting about torture and the UN but because the UN posting is taking me a while I've decided to just post about Torture for today so that you can see the article above. The UN posting will come soon enough. I know I already did a posting just a few days ago about torture, but this has a bit more information.
I have a hard time dealing with abuses against humans. The sex trade is not only saddening but disgustingly immoral. Massacres are horrific. Torture, in almost every case, not okay. But when one thinks about torture what do they think about? Probably broken bones, lots of blood, or perhaps whipping. There are plenty of methods. My point is that we think of methods that cause pain and extreme discomfort, perhaps even death or disfigurement. Out of all the methods that the US has used, I would say waterboarding may be the one form of "torture" to be worried about. The one that would cause the most discomfort and pain. This memo explains the Office of Legal Councils stance they took on the torture that was occurring and I think its worth reading. It is one of the memos that has been making a big uproar but I bet most people have not even read it. Though it has defined torture narrowly, I think it makes many legit points. If used carefully and for short periods of time and not done often, waterboarding would be considered the lesser evil of torture methods. People have their differences of opinion on whether waterboarding is torture. I believe, unless used carefully, and in a certain fashion (some forms of waterboarding are not pretty), it is a form of torture. But I do not believe that some of the other methods used, such as holding their head still, or slapping them once or twice, can be considered torture. If so, we should probably look at our jail systems in America because I am sure there are worse things going on in them every day.
Now with that out of the way, is this "torture" used by the US okay? As I said, I am not a fan of torturing people usually. But times have changed also. We are fighting a new type of enemy. One with no boundaries and one with new methods of fighting (computer warfare anyone? sounds kind of fun to me). Torture may be our only chance in saving the lives of thousands of people. It may be our only way to get any information out of terrorists that believe they are fighting for a great cause which they will be greatly honored for. Do I think we should use methods that in most cases cause pain, mental problems, extreme discomfort? No, I do not.
Using torture is definitely walking a fine line. But the benefits of using it has outweighed the negatives. One terrorist in discomfort and perhaps a bit of pain vs thousands of deaths. Not a hard choice. And its not like we asked for those terrorist to try and destroy our country.
Obama, if you feel its bad and immoral of us, then put a stop to it. If we get hit, it will be on your head but at least you did what you felt was right. Just don't prosecute those who were simply trying to help save American lives. And don't try to take the higher moral ground by releasing important documents. Its not working. Oh and if we do get it, don't even try to blame it on Bush. I know your already thinking of trying that.
Anyways here are a few last thoughts to end Friday on (TGIF right?). If there's so much room left open to debate about whether something is torture or not, its probably not worth prosecuting over. Just saying...And we all know that the UN would never do anything to the US if we don't prosecute Bush's people. They are an association of threats and no action. Just look at the UN's history. Obama probably hasn't so can someone please point that out to him. Plus with all the money we pay to the UN why don't we own that sucker yet?
My original plan was to write a whole posting about torture and the UN but because the UN posting is taking me a while I've decided to just post about Torture for today so that you can see the article above. The UN posting will come soon enough. I know I already did a posting just a few days ago about torture, but this has a bit more information.
I have a hard time dealing with abuses against humans. The sex trade is not only saddening but disgustingly immoral. Massacres are horrific. Torture, in almost every case, not okay. But when one thinks about torture what do they think about? Probably broken bones, lots of blood, or perhaps whipping. There are plenty of methods. My point is that we think of methods that cause pain and extreme discomfort, perhaps even death or disfigurement. Out of all the methods that the US has used, I would say waterboarding may be the one form of "torture" to be worried about. The one that would cause the most discomfort and pain. This memo explains the Office of Legal Councils stance they took on the torture that was occurring and I think its worth reading. It is one of the memos that has been making a big uproar but I bet most people have not even read it. Though it has defined torture narrowly, I think it makes many legit points. If used carefully and for short periods of time and not done often, waterboarding would be considered the lesser evil of torture methods. People have their differences of opinion on whether waterboarding is torture. I believe, unless used carefully, and in a certain fashion (some forms of waterboarding are not pretty), it is a form of torture. But I do not believe that some of the other methods used, such as holding their head still, or slapping them once or twice, can be considered torture. If so, we should probably look at our jail systems in America because I am sure there are worse things going on in them every day.
Now with that out of the way, is this "torture" used by the US okay? As I said, I am not a fan of torturing people usually. But times have changed also. We are fighting a new type of enemy. One with no boundaries and one with new methods of fighting (computer warfare anyone? sounds kind of fun to me). Torture may be our only chance in saving the lives of thousands of people. It may be our only way to get any information out of terrorists that believe they are fighting for a great cause which they will be greatly honored for. Do I think we should use methods that in most cases cause pain, mental problems, extreme discomfort? No, I do not.
Using torture is definitely walking a fine line. But the benefits of using it has outweighed the negatives. One terrorist in discomfort and perhaps a bit of pain vs thousands of deaths. Not a hard choice. And its not like we asked for those terrorist to try and destroy our country.
Obama, if you feel its bad and immoral of us, then put a stop to it. If we get hit, it will be on your head but at least you did what you felt was right. Just don't prosecute those who were simply trying to help save American lives. And don't try to take the higher moral ground by releasing important documents. Its not working. Oh and if we do get it, don't even try to blame it on Bush. I know your already thinking of trying that.
Anyways here are a few last thoughts to end Friday on (TGIF right?). If there's so much room left open to debate about whether something is torture or not, its probably not worth prosecuting over. Just saying...And we all know that the UN would never do anything to the US if we don't prosecute Bush's people. They are an association of threats and no action. Just look at the UN's history. Obama probably hasn't so can someone please point that out to him. Plus with all the money we pay to the UN why don't we own that sucker yet?
Thursday, April 23, 2009
I Take Naps At Work Too
So Hilarious. If only we could all just sleep this administration off.
When Obama ran for office saying that he believed in a bipartisan government I am not positive he knew exactly what he was talking about. Prosecuting officials from the previous administration is not trying to be bipartisan. And how can he choose who to prosecute or not? Couldn't Democrats be considered accessories to the "crime" because they knew what was happening? Is it worth pursuing and making such a scene when there are bigger and more important things happening? I think my dad was correct when he said it is possible that this country will have another civil war. We could have another one and it would be about exactly the same thing as it was before, Freedom. Freedom that each and everyone of us deserves. Freedom to express our views, freedom to do what is right, freedom from fear that someone will crucify you because you said something they don't believe in. I almost feel like I am living in an episode of 24 where someone is fighting for this country and all it stands for and someone else to trying to prosecute him for it. But even with the threat of prosecution on him, Jack continued to do what was right. Continued to save this country. And I hope all those involved have the same gusts and nerve.
If everything does get worse, if people continued to get crucified for simply stating their beliefs, if socialism continues to get closer, if our freedoms are continue to get challenged, I pray that we would have the guts to stand up and start a war. I pray that we would not chicken out and let this country fall to ruins. I hope we never just give up on this country.
When Obama ran for office saying that he believed in a bipartisan government I am not positive he knew exactly what he was talking about. Prosecuting officials from the previous administration is not trying to be bipartisan. And how can he choose who to prosecute or not? Couldn't Democrats be considered accessories to the "crime" because they knew what was happening? Is it worth pursuing and making such a scene when there are bigger and more important things happening? I think my dad was correct when he said it is possible that this country will have another civil war. We could have another one and it would be about exactly the same thing as it was before, Freedom. Freedom that each and everyone of us deserves. Freedom to express our views, freedom to do what is right, freedom from fear that someone will crucify you because you said something they don't believe in. I almost feel like I am living in an episode of 24 where someone is fighting for this country and all it stands for and someone else to trying to prosecute him for it. But even with the threat of prosecution on him, Jack continued to do what was right. Continued to save this country. And I hope all those involved have the same gusts and nerve.
If everything does get worse, if people continued to get crucified for simply stating their beliefs, if socialism continues to get closer, if our freedoms are continue to get challenged, I pray that we would have the guts to stand up and start a war. I pray that we would not chicken out and let this country fall to ruins. I hope we never just give up on this country.
Why Allie Doesnt Agree with Democrats
I have this friend name Allie. She is amazing and is a very interesting and talented writer. She is also very politically smart. She wrote an excellent article that everyone should read. I cant get the link to work to the actual article but the article is titled "Specific Reasons for Feeling the Way I Do."
Wednesday, April 22, 2009
I Feel Homesick Without Jericho
I finally looked into an event that's occurring this weekend. I almost wish I had spent the money and gone to this event. Its called Welcome Home to Jericho Charity Event. First let me say that Jericho was an amazing television show. Probably one of my favorite all time television shows. Unfortunately its run time did not last very long but within its short life it managed to not only make me feel like I belonged in the show but accurately represented and taught what being a patriot is and what freedom and love of ones country is really about. If only we had more shows like that on television. It might actually be worth watching.
Though it seems the Welcome Home Jericho event was originally more of a reunion for fans and those who associated with the show, they took their idea one step further and made it into a charity event. How simple yet amazing. The following video is pretty good and at the end it gives a quick synopsis of the charity portion of the event.
Operation Home Front is about support; support to soldiers and their families. It was started on a small scale by some military family members. But then it grew and I am sure what it has done and can do is far beyond the wildest dreams of the creators of this organization. I highly recommend checking this charity out. They even have a page that lists specific needs of soldiers that need to taken care of soon. I know the economy is tight but there has never been a better time to do an act of service.
I think I will try to put up information about legit charities up every one in a while. Could be the best use of space yet.
Though it seems the Welcome Home Jericho event was originally more of a reunion for fans and those who associated with the show, they took their idea one step further and made it into a charity event. How simple yet amazing. The following video is pretty good and at the end it gives a quick synopsis of the charity portion of the event.
Operation Home Front is about support; support to soldiers and their families. It was started on a small scale by some military family members. But then it grew and I am sure what it has done and can do is far beyond the wildest dreams of the creators of this organization. I highly recommend checking this charity out. They even have a page that lists specific needs of soldiers that need to taken care of soon. I know the economy is tight but there has never been a better time to do an act of service.
I think I will try to put up information about legit charities up every one in a while. Could be the best use of space yet.
My Hate For Hollywood Leads to Extreme Blogging Day
Sorry about yet another posting today. I just can't get enough of all the liberal junk that's going on this week.
I love 24 this season. Its amazing. Originally I was really excited to have Garofalo on 24. I didn't know much about her but she was hilarious in a Lifetime movie I had seen. Now I am so sick of her that I just wish she would die, or perhaps just stick to Lifetime. Anyways this article pretty much sums up what I have been thinking for the last few days. There is no need for me to repeat in my own words what has already been said. I especially love the Doug Powers quote so please take note of it.
I love 24 this season. Its amazing. Originally I was really excited to have Garofalo on 24. I didn't know much about her but she was hilarious in a Lifetime movie I had seen. Now I am so sick of her that I just wish she would die, or perhaps just stick to Lifetime. Anyways this article pretty much sums up what I have been thinking for the last few days. There is no need for me to repeat in my own words what has already been said. I especially love the Doug Powers quote so please take note of it.
Caution : Stupidity Ahead
Thanks to Gateway Pundit (strongly recommend following this blog) I got the link to this video:
This has to be the dumbest video I have ever seen. It makes me want to stop watching every single show any of these celebrities are in, including Heroes. Hollywood has to have the highest percentage of just pure ignorant people. People who only care about that they believe and feel is right. People who only care about freedom and opinions as long as it agrees with everything they believe. People who obviously have no morals or principles in their life. To go after a girl that was forced to answer a question, a question that probably should not have been asked in the first place. To to respond to it with so much immaturity. They make me sick!
I was in good spirits coming to work today and was tempted to celebrate Earth Day just because I love nature. But that is what Hollywood will be doing today and I don't plan to follow in their footsteps ever so no Earth Day Today!!!
This has to be the dumbest video I have ever seen. It makes me want to stop watching every single show any of these celebrities are in, including Heroes. Hollywood has to have the highest percentage of just pure ignorant people. People who only care about that they believe and feel is right. People who only care about freedom and opinions as long as it agrees with everything they believe. People who obviously have no morals or principles in their life. To go after a girl that was forced to answer a question, a question that probably should not have been asked in the first place. To to respond to it with so much immaturity. They make me sick!
I was in good spirits coming to work today and was tempted to celebrate Earth Day just because I love nature. But that is what Hollywood will be doing today and I don't plan to follow in their footsteps ever so no Earth Day Today!!!
A Beauty Queen with Brains
This has to be my favorite news video of all time. I hope that we can all be like her when it counts. That we can all stand up for what we believe without shame and rely on the Lord that everything will be okay. And at the same time loving our enemies and those who spite us. I wish her all the best of luck and hope she does get a career where she could use her talents and make a difference because I know she could.
How Dare You Piss Castro Off Obama
It looks like Obama's apologies and over eagerness for friendship with the world dictators has not changed anything. I am not exactly why he had such high expectations that somehow within the time Bush left office and he entered, the dictators somehow became good people and good leaders. I guess it cant hurt to try. Unfortunately I see this becoming the pattern in Obama's foreign relationships.
If this surprises you than perhaps you should start watching 24. Jack teaches some good lessons about torture in it. Now torture is not something to take lightly. It it something that should not be retorted to just because its there. It can and does harm people and our country is thankfully above using many methods of torture. But if it between allowing a terrorist plot to succeed or using a form of torture that does not have a high chance permanently harming someone, than I say go with the torture. How else are you going to get info out of people who are convinced they are doing Alla's work and will get blessed for all they do. Also, while in school I went to a speech made by a guy who I believe used to interrogate prisoners in Iraq. I wish I knew his name or more about him but it was about 4 years ago and my memory can be horrible at times. But what I do remember is how he told us that compared to every other country, including the UK, we treated our prisoners far better. In fact we treated them so well that we were not allowed to simply hood them while transporting them. Yes America should stand on a high moral ground (especially if we decide not to be friends with those lovely Dictators) but that may not mean we should not use any methods of torture at all. War sucks. Torture sucks. But allowing our country to be destroyed and trampled on is even worse.
If this surprises you than perhaps you should start watching 24. Jack teaches some good lessons about torture in it. Now torture is not something to take lightly. It it something that should not be retorted to just because its there. It can and does harm people and our country is thankfully above using many methods of torture. But if it between allowing a terrorist plot to succeed or using a form of torture that does not have a high chance permanently harming someone, than I say go with the torture. How else are you going to get info out of people who are convinced they are doing Alla's work and will get blessed for all they do. Also, while in school I went to a speech made by a guy who I believe used to interrogate prisoners in Iraq. I wish I knew his name or more about him but it was about 4 years ago and my memory can be horrible at times. But what I do remember is how he told us that compared to every other country, including the UK, we treated our prisoners far better. In fact we treated them so well that we were not allowed to simply hood them while transporting them. Yes America should stand on a high moral ground (especially if we decide not to be friends with those lovely Dictators) but that may not mean we should not use any methods of torture at all. War sucks. Torture sucks. But allowing our country to be destroyed and trampled on is even worse.
Blogget
I am trying to become a better blogger and to learn a few things about layout. So if my blog is constantly changing over the next few months or whatever please deal with it. I just want to have some fun and see what works and does not work.
On the other hand, can anybody guess where the picture of the flag was taken?
On the other hand, can anybody guess where the picture of the flag was taken?
Tuesday, April 21, 2009
CNN = Communist News Network
After the tea parties were bashed so often by the leftist media and by news reporters on CNN I have decided to not read CNN. Now it may be shocking that I ever read CNN in the first place but I read it solely because it was fast, simple, and the website was very organized. Now I am trying to totally switch over to other news sources but sometimes I catch myself reading CNN by accident. Its almost like a bad dream. Somehow I just always end up at CNN. So if anybody has any good ideas other than Drudge Report please share. I like having multiple sources and I need help to be successful at this goal.
Monday, April 20, 2009
The Thought Of Someone Marrying Their Animal Makes Me Ill
Some days I wish the issue of gay marriage would just disappear. But the reality is that it will not, especially as more and more states make it legal. It's in the news this time thanks to one young lady who believed in telling the nation what she felt was right. Unfortunately, though as brave and amazing as she was, it was not appreciated by all.
I can understand how someone would feel that marriage should not be dictated by the government and that it does seem more appropriate for marriage to be dictated by religion. But the issue is not as simple as that and America was not set up in such a fashion that allows marriage to remain purely a religious issue.
First I would like to simply state that I do not believe in marriage between anyone or anything except for between a man and a woman. I do not believe God sanctions any other form of marriage. Thus, I do not support gay marriage by principle.
Now that that is out of the way lets move on to the more complicated political issue.
Marriage is the legal status or condition that results from a contract by which one man and one woman, who have the capacity to enter into such an agreement, mutually promise to live together in the relationship of Husband and Wife in law for life or until the legal termination of the relationship. The U.S. Supreme Court has given the right to regulate marriage by prescribing who can marry and in what manner the marriage can be dissolved to the states. An annulment or divorce is granted on terms put forth by the state. States have the power to put forth conditions for marriage, to regulate marriage for the mentally ill, and to put age limits on marriage. State may also regulate the right to marriage between blood relatives. The States do not have all the power to regulate marriage though. In 1878 the Supreme Court ruled that polygamous marriages are illegal. In Reynolds V. United States, the court concluded that a State may outlaw Polygamy for everyone, regardless of whether it is a religious duty. The requirement that marriage is between a man and a woman was held to be essential.
From this we learn that state can regulate who marries. If they are allowed to regulate so much with marriage, why is it not okay that they regulate gender? Also note that marriage is not a FREEDOM. It is a right. We are not taking anything away from the gays because we are not allowing them to married. They do not have the right yet and since its not a freedom we are not taken a freedom away from them. I think because it seems to easy to get married we take for granted this right. We assume we have the right and freedom to marry how what and where we want. But we don't. The right has to be given to us.
In 1993, the decision of the Hawaii Supreme Court in Baehr V. Lewin revived the possibility of homosexual marriage. The court held that the state restricting legal marriage to parties of the opposite sex establishes a sex based classification, which is subject to constitutional scrutiny when challenged on equal protection grounds. Though they were not recognizing a constitutional right they did indicate that the states would have a hard time providing that gay and lesbian couples were not being denied equal protection under the laws. The Circuit Court than found that the state had not met its burden and it enjoined the state from denying marriage applications based on the sex of the applicants. The decision was stayed pending an appeal. Because of this a number of states prepared legislation to ban same sex marriage and to prohibit recognition of such marriages performed in other states. However, this decision was stayed pending another appeal to the Hawaii Supreme Court. In 1996, Congress enacted the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) which defines marriage as a legal union between one man and one woman and permits states to refuse to recognize same-sex marriages performed in other states. This act also prohibited the federal government from treating the same sex relationships as marriage even if it was recognized by the states (interesting side note liberals: it was signed into law by President Clinton).
In 2008, Proposition 8 in California continually made headline news. For any who happened to have their head in a hole or were to busy fighting a socialist from taking over the country, Prop 8 was a statewide ballot concerning the issue of same sex marriage. Proposition 8 added a new amendment to the CA Constitution which says, "only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California." Before this time, the Supreme Court has affirmed that same sex marriage was a constitutionally protected right. While that phrase is not official a part of the Constitution, 3 lawsuits have been filed and are being heard which have the potential to change this. I can not remember any issue in recent elections that has caused such a fuss nationwide. Millions from both sides were poured into this issue. In the end 52.5 % of those that voted, voted Yes to Prop 8.
What made this issue hit so close to home was 2 things. First my gay friend decided I could not be his friend because I supported Prop 8. Apparently its a-okay to be gay but not a-okay to believe that marriage is between a man and a woman. Secondly, my church, The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints came out in support of the proposition. This was significant to me because it does not often voice its support for or against an issue. Also, the backlash against my church was not pretty, in fact in some ways I found it horrific. Especially because it was not our church's support that got the amendment passed. It may have helped but it was not what did it. One of the key events in the passage of Prop 8 was the increased turnout of black voters. Voters who came out to vote for their beloved President Obama. 70% of them voted in support of Prop 8. Woops President Obama! Asians and Latinos also voted yes for Prop 8 at a higher percentage than whites, but no percentage was as high as the black vote. Because of the strong Christian background in many black families, they voted heavily in support of Prop 8.
As of now, 4 states have or are on their way to allowing gay marriages, many have passed amendments blocking gay marriage, and some allow civil unions. Civil unions is a legal union similar to marriage. While it is not recognized as a marriage per say it allows the couple to receive all the benefits, rights, and responsibilities of a married couple. Civil unions are not recognized by the federal government, thus other states are not forced to recognize them either. Prop 8 would not have outlawed civil unions, or as they are known in CA, Domestic Partnerships.
Would it not seem ideal if religion had all the say in marriage if marriage suppose to be sanctified of God? Why has it become political issue?
For some the issue of same sex marriage is as simple as their religious beliefs. They do not believe in it, and feel that it could be destructive to society, so they will not support it. It is always important to stand up for ones beliefs so I strongly support this. I would not expect someone to vote in support of legalizing drugs if they felt that drugs were bad for individuals and for society. I support this reason for not voting for Prop 8 and it played a large role in why I supported Prop 8. The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints explained their position regarding this very well and I see no need to explain it further as I fully support all that is said in this document.
But because of my belief in freedom, individual choice (within certain bounds and as long as there are no harmful effects to anyone else due to your actions), and small government, there is more to the issue than simply that I do not believe in same sex marriage.
First, it could, and already has taken away the right for adoption agencies to not place children in homes run by a gay couple. Some adoption agencies, especially those run by religious organizations feel that it is in the kids best interest to have a mother and a father. If gay marriage became legal adoption agencies could be forced to place children with same-sex couples or shut down completely. This has already happened in Massachusetts and California. In 2004 same-sex couples were given the right to marry. In 2006 Catholic Charities of Boston was forced to abandon its adoption work because of religious objections to the new stat law requiring that same-sex couples be allowed to adopt. In 2004, after being sued by a California couple, an Arizona Internet based adoption agency had to stop posting profiles of Californians because they would not adopt to same sex couples in California.
The next issue if the tax exemption status of Churches. Would they be able to keep that status if they publicly oppose same-sex marriages or refuse to allow same-sex marriage ceremonies in their religious buildings? In 2007, a church refused to allow a same-sex civil union ceremony in its facility. The New Jersey Division on Civil Rights revoked the church's property tax exemption although New Jersey Law exempts from property tax all buildings used in the work of associations organized expressly for religious purposes. In 1999, a San Fransisco Supervisor sought to initiate legal action to revoke the Mormon Church's tax exempt status because the church had encouraged its members to support a 2000 initiative that defined marriage as between a man and a woman.
In California 98% of California school districts provide comprehensive sexual health education. The school districts must teach respect for marriage and committed relationships and that the instruction should be appropriate for pupils of all sexual orientations and no bias can be showed towards or against any person based on specific categories. Also, if Prop 8 had or still does fail, parents would not have the right to excuse their children from instruction. Massachusetts parents recently sued because their young children were going to be taught about same-sex marriage and they were not only not going to be notified but they were not going to be given the opportunity to excuse their children despite the statue given them that right. Some of the biggest sponsors for No on Prop 8 had filed briefs urging the court to reject the parents claims and to deny their rights. The parents lost and the same organizations moved onto CA telling parents their children will not be taught about same sex marriage in schools. If Prop 8 is said to be unconstitutional, California schools would be required to teach same-sex marriage on the same footing as traditional marriage would effectively take even more rights away from the parents, than the government has already taken away.
Now let me state that some say that these potential effects will not occur. Some pro gay marriage organizations state that forcing agencies to adopt to same-sex couples will not be the outcome. They say that what happened in Massachusetts was because of anti discriminatory laws and that The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints would not be effected due to their private status. Some claim that the tax exemption status would not be changed. And they have promised parents that their kids would not be forced to be taught about same-sex marriage in school. But are they saying that because they want votes or because its true? Because based on history, I for one to not believe them. Legal scholars can't even agree whether tax exemption policies would be effected. If they can't decide, should the churches just forget about that issue? Legalizing gay marriage could not only effectively open up the way for the moral decapitation of society but would churches even continue to have rights? Those for same-sex marriage say that they just want the right to marry. That's it. But no one is every satisfied once they get what they have been wanting. They always want something else. They always feel that they deserve more; that their rights are still being infringed. Is it okay to give people more rights by taking the rights of others away?
There are so many issues that can be discussed. So many potential consequences and outcomes but I have written enough for now. My head is spinning already. Let me just state a few more opinions though before I close. I love all my gay friends(even if they hate me) and relatives and I want the best for them. But I do not see how being able to get the legal title of being Married is going to do that for them and thus I do not feel that I am harming them in any way. I also do not feel that we need to change the structure of society to fit into every persons choice and lifestyle. If you feel like the title of Marriage will complete you then something else in your life is probably lacking.
What I do know is that society is getting destroyed. That we need to stop focusing so much on who has the right to get married and start focusing more on how to fix this Institution in America. How to get America to not forsake marriage and how to keep families together. Why should we be allowing others to take part in an Institution and a right that we can not even completely handle?
Also I hate comparing the gay-rights movement to the civil rights movement. They are not nor will they ever be the same thing. But perhaps the gays should take note of how peaceful protests and peaceful actions work better than violence and loud disruptive protesting. And perhaps they should stop calling us hate mongers until they stop hating those who do not believe the way they do.
And for Goodness Sakes America get off this girls back. She only spoke up for what she believes is right. Are we now forcing everyone to support the gay lifestyle or is it that we want everyone to lie so that gays think we are all in support of them? If anything she should have won the crown because it showed her integrity and honesty.
I can understand how someone would feel that marriage should not be dictated by the government and that it does seem more appropriate for marriage to be dictated by religion. But the issue is not as simple as that and America was not set up in such a fashion that allows marriage to remain purely a religious issue.
First I would like to simply state that I do not believe in marriage between anyone or anything except for between a man and a woman. I do not believe God sanctions any other form of marriage. Thus, I do not support gay marriage by principle.
Now that that is out of the way lets move on to the more complicated political issue.
Marriage is the legal status or condition that results from a contract by which one man and one woman, who have the capacity to enter into such an agreement, mutually promise to live together in the relationship of Husband and Wife in law for life or until the legal termination of the relationship. The U.S. Supreme Court has given the right to regulate marriage by prescribing who can marry and in what manner the marriage can be dissolved to the states. An annulment or divorce is granted on terms put forth by the state. States have the power to put forth conditions for marriage, to regulate marriage for the mentally ill, and to put age limits on marriage. State may also regulate the right to marriage between blood relatives. The States do not have all the power to regulate marriage though. In 1878 the Supreme Court ruled that polygamous marriages are illegal. In Reynolds V. United States, the court concluded that a State may outlaw Polygamy for everyone, regardless of whether it is a religious duty. The requirement that marriage is between a man and a woman was held to be essential.
From this we learn that state can regulate who marries. If they are allowed to regulate so much with marriage, why is it not okay that they regulate gender? Also note that marriage is not a FREEDOM. It is a right. We are not taking anything away from the gays because we are not allowing them to married. They do not have the right yet and since its not a freedom we are not taken a freedom away from them. I think because it seems to easy to get married we take for granted this right. We assume we have the right and freedom to marry how what and where we want. But we don't. The right has to be given to us.
In 1993, the decision of the Hawaii Supreme Court in Baehr V. Lewin revived the possibility of homosexual marriage. The court held that the state restricting legal marriage to parties of the opposite sex establishes a sex based classification, which is subject to constitutional scrutiny when challenged on equal protection grounds. Though they were not recognizing a constitutional right they did indicate that the states would have a hard time providing that gay and lesbian couples were not being denied equal protection under the laws. The Circuit Court than found that the state had not met its burden and it enjoined the state from denying marriage applications based on the sex of the applicants. The decision was stayed pending an appeal. Because of this a number of states prepared legislation to ban same sex marriage and to prohibit recognition of such marriages performed in other states. However, this decision was stayed pending another appeal to the Hawaii Supreme Court. In 1996, Congress enacted the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) which defines marriage as a legal union between one man and one woman and permits states to refuse to recognize same-sex marriages performed in other states. This act also prohibited the federal government from treating the same sex relationships as marriage even if it was recognized by the states (interesting side note liberals: it was signed into law by President Clinton).
In 2008, Proposition 8 in California continually made headline news. For any who happened to have their head in a hole or were to busy fighting a socialist from taking over the country, Prop 8 was a statewide ballot concerning the issue of same sex marriage. Proposition 8 added a new amendment to the CA Constitution which says, "only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California." Before this time, the Supreme Court has affirmed that same sex marriage was a constitutionally protected right. While that phrase is not official a part of the Constitution, 3 lawsuits have been filed and are being heard which have the potential to change this. I can not remember any issue in recent elections that has caused such a fuss nationwide. Millions from both sides were poured into this issue. In the end 52.5 % of those that voted, voted Yes to Prop 8.
What made this issue hit so close to home was 2 things. First my gay friend decided I could not be his friend because I supported Prop 8. Apparently its a-okay to be gay but not a-okay to believe that marriage is between a man and a woman. Secondly, my church, The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints came out in support of the proposition. This was significant to me because it does not often voice its support for or against an issue. Also, the backlash against my church was not pretty, in fact in some ways I found it horrific. Especially because it was not our church's support that got the amendment passed. It may have helped but it was not what did it. One of the key events in the passage of Prop 8 was the increased turnout of black voters. Voters who came out to vote for their beloved President Obama. 70% of them voted in support of Prop 8. Woops President Obama! Asians and Latinos also voted yes for Prop 8 at a higher percentage than whites, but no percentage was as high as the black vote. Because of the strong Christian background in many black families, they voted heavily in support of Prop 8.
As of now, 4 states have or are on their way to allowing gay marriages, many have passed amendments blocking gay marriage, and some allow civil unions. Civil unions is a legal union similar to marriage. While it is not recognized as a marriage per say it allows the couple to receive all the benefits, rights, and responsibilities of a married couple. Civil unions are not recognized by the federal government, thus other states are not forced to recognize them either. Prop 8 would not have outlawed civil unions, or as they are known in CA, Domestic Partnerships.
Would it not seem ideal if religion had all the say in marriage if marriage suppose to be sanctified of God? Why has it become political issue?
For some the issue of same sex marriage is as simple as their religious beliefs. They do not believe in it, and feel that it could be destructive to society, so they will not support it. It is always important to stand up for ones beliefs so I strongly support this. I would not expect someone to vote in support of legalizing drugs if they felt that drugs were bad for individuals and for society. I support this reason for not voting for Prop 8 and it played a large role in why I supported Prop 8. The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints explained their position regarding this very well and I see no need to explain it further as I fully support all that is said in this document.
But because of my belief in freedom, individual choice (within certain bounds and as long as there are no harmful effects to anyone else due to your actions), and small government, there is more to the issue than simply that I do not believe in same sex marriage.
First, it could, and already has taken away the right for adoption agencies to not place children in homes run by a gay couple. Some adoption agencies, especially those run by religious organizations feel that it is in the kids best interest to have a mother and a father. If gay marriage became legal adoption agencies could be forced to place children with same-sex couples or shut down completely. This has already happened in Massachusetts and California. In 2004 same-sex couples were given the right to marry. In 2006 Catholic Charities of Boston was forced to abandon its adoption work because of religious objections to the new stat law requiring that same-sex couples be allowed to adopt. In 2004, after being sued by a California couple, an Arizona Internet based adoption agency had to stop posting profiles of Californians because they would not adopt to same sex couples in California.
The next issue if the tax exemption status of Churches. Would they be able to keep that status if they publicly oppose same-sex marriages or refuse to allow same-sex marriage ceremonies in their religious buildings? In 2007, a church refused to allow a same-sex civil union ceremony in its facility. The New Jersey Division on Civil Rights revoked the church's property tax exemption although New Jersey Law exempts from property tax all buildings used in the work of associations organized expressly for religious purposes. In 1999, a San Fransisco Supervisor sought to initiate legal action to revoke the Mormon Church's tax exempt status because the church had encouraged its members to support a 2000 initiative that defined marriage as between a man and a woman.
In California 98% of California school districts provide comprehensive sexual health education. The school districts must teach respect for marriage and committed relationships and that the instruction should be appropriate for pupils of all sexual orientations and no bias can be showed towards or against any person based on specific categories. Also, if Prop 8 had or still does fail, parents would not have the right to excuse their children from instruction. Massachusetts parents recently sued because their young children were going to be taught about same-sex marriage and they were not only not going to be notified but they were not going to be given the opportunity to excuse their children despite the statue given them that right. Some of the biggest sponsors for No on Prop 8 had filed briefs urging the court to reject the parents claims and to deny their rights. The parents lost and the same organizations moved onto CA telling parents their children will not be taught about same sex marriage in schools. If Prop 8 is said to be unconstitutional, California schools would be required to teach same-sex marriage on the same footing as traditional marriage would effectively take even more rights away from the parents, than the government has already taken away.
Now let me state that some say that these potential effects will not occur. Some pro gay marriage organizations state that forcing agencies to adopt to same-sex couples will not be the outcome. They say that what happened in Massachusetts was because of anti discriminatory laws and that The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints would not be effected due to their private status. Some claim that the tax exemption status would not be changed. And they have promised parents that their kids would not be forced to be taught about same-sex marriage in school. But are they saying that because they want votes or because its true? Because based on history, I for one to not believe them. Legal scholars can't even agree whether tax exemption policies would be effected. If they can't decide, should the churches just forget about that issue? Legalizing gay marriage could not only effectively open up the way for the moral decapitation of society but would churches even continue to have rights? Those for same-sex marriage say that they just want the right to marry. That's it. But no one is every satisfied once they get what they have been wanting. They always want something else. They always feel that they deserve more; that their rights are still being infringed. Is it okay to give people more rights by taking the rights of others away?
There are so many issues that can be discussed. So many potential consequences and outcomes but I have written enough for now. My head is spinning already. Let me just state a few more opinions though before I close. I love all my gay friends(even if they hate me) and relatives and I want the best for them. But I do not see how being able to get the legal title of being Married is going to do that for them and thus I do not feel that I am harming them in any way. I also do not feel that we need to change the structure of society to fit into every persons choice and lifestyle. If you feel like the title of Marriage will complete you then something else in your life is probably lacking.
What I do know is that society is getting destroyed. That we need to stop focusing so much on who has the right to get married and start focusing more on how to fix this Institution in America. How to get America to not forsake marriage and how to keep families together. Why should we be allowing others to take part in an Institution and a right that we can not even completely handle?
Also I hate comparing the gay-rights movement to the civil rights movement. They are not nor will they ever be the same thing. But perhaps the gays should take note of how peaceful protests and peaceful actions work better than violence and loud disruptive protesting. And perhaps they should stop calling us hate mongers until they stop hating those who do not believe the way they do.
And for Goodness Sakes America get off this girls back. She only spoke up for what she believes is right. Are we now forcing everyone to support the gay lifestyle or is it that we want everyone to lie so that gays think we are all in support of them? If anything she should have won the crown because it showed her integrity and honesty.
Thursday, April 16, 2009
Success
I am so happy for those who put so much time and effort into the Tea Parties as I hear they were a great success. I wish I had gone and declare now that I will try my best to go to any future protests. How great is it that thousands of people put aside whatever they needed to do and joined together to show their support for America and Freedom and their disgusts at the wasteful spending that has been going on for years and is only getting worse. How great is it that we have the freedom to do this in America. I pray that we will continue to be able to have that freedom and that our children will not be in debt for the rest of their lives because of this wasteful spending. And boo high taxes.
Now I want to talk about another important thing: Glen Beck's We Surround Them. His website has more information on it. The basis of this project that he recently unveiled is that He and others are getting concerned with the direction Both Parties and America are going in. The point is to show us that we are not alone, in our concerns and in our love for America. It is to ask what has happened to the country that stands up for the little man? The Forgotten Man? People are finally waking up wondering what has happened to us and are saying that its time to enforce the law.
He states that we have 3 choices. We can become the Americans of September 10th with our heads in the sand, the Americans of September 11th, unprepared and in despair, or we can choose to renew our promises of September 12. Remember September 12, when America came together and promised ourselves that we would never forget. We promised that we could focus on the things that are important like our family and our friends. It is up to us to find a solutions. Do not leave it up to the politicians because though they may say they are part of the solution, they are actually the problem. We need to start giving our support to politicians when they practice the values and principles that we believe in. There are 12 values and 9 principles.
The 12 values are:
- honest
- reverence
- hope
- thrift
- humility
- charity
- sincerity
- moderation
- hard work
- courage
- personal responsibility
- gratitude
The 9 principles are :
- America is good.
- I believe in God and He is the Center of My life
- I must always try to be a more honest person than I was yesterday.
- The family is sacred. My Spouse and I are the ultimate authority, not the government.
- If you break the law you pay the penalty. Justice is blind and no one is above it.
- I have the right to life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness, but there is no guarantee of equal results.
- I work hard for what I have and I will share it with who I want to. Government cannot force me to be charitable.
- It is not un-American for me to disagree with authority or to share my personal opinion.
- The government works for me. I do not answer to them, they answer to me.
We can stay tuned to Glen Beck for more unveiling of what he is working on within the 9/12 project and for more discussion on these principles and values.
How great are these principles and values that we can live by. Why are Liberals already fighting this? Can we not agree that we all love freedom, want the best for our families and want to run our families as we feel is right? I believe in honesty, hard work, life, liberty, and I know that America is good. I know that America is destined to be a great Nation. The God chose it to be a great nation and its time we stand up and allow it to be. So what can we do? Glen Beck says talk to your neighbors, get together with your friends, read books that talk about these principles and values (for a list of books to read you can check our his website). I say to continue to protest, continue to be loud and express yourself. Join local political groups and seek change. Talk and talk and talk. Never stop. Stand up for what you feel is right and continue to work for that, even in the face of adversity. And most importantly and oft forgotten, serve your country. We believe that we need to take care of ourselves and each other and not leave it up to the government, so live your life like that. Serve your fellow man. Give of your time, your talents, and your funds. Looks for ways you can make a difference in the lives of our servicemen, a young kid, a mother, an elder. Anyone and Everyone. Love like there is no tomorrow. Never take for granted what you have, especially when it comes to freedom. We are a lucky people, we live in a great nation. Don't forget it.
Now I want to talk about another important thing: Glen Beck's We Surround Them. His website has more information on it. The basis of this project that he recently unveiled is that He and others are getting concerned with the direction Both Parties and America are going in. The point is to show us that we are not alone, in our concerns and in our love for America. It is to ask what has happened to the country that stands up for the little man? The Forgotten Man? People are finally waking up wondering what has happened to us and are saying that its time to enforce the law.
He states that we have 3 choices. We can become the Americans of September 10th with our heads in the sand, the Americans of September 11th, unprepared and in despair, or we can choose to renew our promises of September 12. Remember September 12, when America came together and promised ourselves that we would never forget. We promised that we could focus on the things that are important like our family and our friends. It is up to us to find a solutions. Do not leave it up to the politicians because though they may say they are part of the solution, they are actually the problem. We need to start giving our support to politicians when they practice the values and principles that we believe in. There are 12 values and 9 principles.
The 12 values are:
- honest
- reverence
- hope
- thrift
- humility
- charity
- sincerity
- moderation
- hard work
- courage
- personal responsibility
- gratitude
The 9 principles are :
- America is good.
- I believe in God and He is the Center of My life
- I must always try to be a more honest person than I was yesterday.
- The family is sacred. My Spouse and I are the ultimate authority, not the government.
- If you break the law you pay the penalty. Justice is blind and no one is above it.
- I have the right to life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness, but there is no guarantee of equal results.
- I work hard for what I have and I will share it with who I want to. Government cannot force me to be charitable.
- It is not un-American for me to disagree with authority or to share my personal opinion.
- The government works for me. I do not answer to them, they answer to me.
We can stay tuned to Glen Beck for more unveiling of what he is working on within the 9/12 project and for more discussion on these principles and values.
How great are these principles and values that we can live by. Why are Liberals already fighting this? Can we not agree that we all love freedom, want the best for our families and want to run our families as we feel is right? I believe in honesty, hard work, life, liberty, and I know that America is good. I know that America is destined to be a great Nation. The God chose it to be a great nation and its time we stand up and allow it to be. So what can we do? Glen Beck says talk to your neighbors, get together with your friends, read books that talk about these principles and values (for a list of books to read you can check our his website). I say to continue to protest, continue to be loud and express yourself. Join local political groups and seek change. Talk and talk and talk. Never stop. Stand up for what you feel is right and continue to work for that, even in the face of adversity. And most importantly and oft forgotten, serve your country. We believe that we need to take care of ourselves and each other and not leave it up to the government, so live your life like that. Serve your fellow man. Give of your time, your talents, and your funds. Looks for ways you can make a difference in the lives of our servicemen, a young kid, a mother, an elder. Anyone and Everyone. Love like there is no tomorrow. Never take for granted what you have, especially when it comes to freedom. We are a lucky people, we live in a great nation. Don't forget it.
Wednesday, April 15, 2009
Just Because You Can't Laugh Too Much At the Clintons
Making Fun Of the Media, Another Good Past Time....
Those Evil Right Wingers
The fact that this story made it into the news today is very ironic...a bit too ironic. Today is tax day and it is protest time for thousands who are tired of unlimited government spending, increased taxes, and outrages overstepping by the government. But apparently what matters more is that this country is aware of all those evil right wingers out there. Now don't get me wrong, there are people that go too far on both sides and we do have home grown terrorists, but please do not tell me it was an accident that the report was released in time for tax day. And why is an article like this one more available on CNN than an article about the protesting? In fact, why are there no articles about the protesting on CNN? Its not like it is a common to have thousands of people protesting taxes.
This was soo simple yet still fun. Maybe because I am just so bored.
This was soo simple yet still fun. Maybe because I am just so bored.
Thursday, April 9, 2009
A Melting Pot of Stuff
Look at this cool yet kind of creepy picture. Its almost as fun looking at as when you stare at the sky and find shapes in the clouds.
This article might explain why Obama was elected. I do agree with the part that America may not rely on free market economy as much anymore but its interesting how more people don't support capitalism. Maybe I should right a post about this later. For now enjoy.
After watching NCIS for hrs on straight I am not convinced she jumped. Why would you jump when you are with two teenagers? Poor teen boy though. Nobody expects for a woman to fall out of the sky on top of them.
If pictures are worth a thousand words, what are videos worth??
Apparently not much because the Obama Camp is denying the bow.
This video is from my youtube archives but it kind of reminds me of all those Obama supports who can't get their facts straight.
Stay tuned for a posting about some of the Conservative Events and Movements that are being worked on as we speak.
This article might explain why Obama was elected. I do agree with the part that America may not rely on free market economy as much anymore but its interesting how more people don't support capitalism. Maybe I should right a post about this later. For now enjoy.
After watching NCIS for hrs on straight I am not convinced she jumped. Why would you jump when you are with two teenagers? Poor teen boy though. Nobody expects for a woman to fall out of the sky on top of them.
If pictures are worth a thousand words, what are videos worth??
Apparently not much because the Obama Camp is denying the bow.
This video is from my youtube archives but it kind of reminds me of all those Obama supports who can't get their facts straight.
Stay tuned for a posting about some of the Conservative Events and Movements that are being worked on as we speak.
Tuesday, April 7, 2009
Freedom of Speech
The Washington Post had an article that caught my attention last week. I wish I could find the exact article I read but this one deals with the same subject. It is an interesting topic? State funding versus freedom of speech versus legality of showing pornography.
First let me give you some information on pornography. Porn can never satisfy a person. It leaves the viewer craving for more and more in order to achieve the sexual high they are trying to get. It enslaves them and leads to not only self abuse but violence, hatred, lying, anger, and selfishness towards others. It is an addition that is hard to break on ones own. It warps and perverts their view of sex and can lead to unhealthy expectations. It leads to not only debt, but has the potential to lead to crimes such as rape and sadism, not to mention child porn. It destroys relationships and marriages and sex no longer becomes something sacred between a man and a women. $3,075.64 is being spent on pornography every second
and 28,258 Internet users are viewing pornography every second. This problem, which destroys lives and relationships is not going away and seems to become more popular as time goes on.
Now freedom of speech. Is is the freedom to speak freely without censorship or limitation? The actual wording of the first amendment is "Congress shall make no law . . . abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances." This amendment is often applied to the freedom to seek, receive, and impart information or ideas regardless of the medium used. This freedom is not absolute as there are often restrictions places based on the competing values.For example, this does not include Hate Speech. Also, a law limited speech can be deemed constitutional if it is the least drastic means available for accomplishing its stated objects. The court has also allowed speech to be restricted in certain places. While public forums are offered almost blanket protection, public libraries, public schools, and jails are not. The Court has ruled that in the interest of order and decorum, speech may be reasonably limited in these places. One must also remember that this freedom is only to restrict the government from restricting your rights, these laws to not apply the same way to the private sector. The 1980 U.S. Supreme Court case Pruneyard Shopping Center v. Robins said the U.S. Constitution does not give individuals an absolute right to enter and remain on private property to exercise their right to free expression. The state were given the power to adopt reasonable restrictions on private property, including granting greater freedom to individuals to use such property but most states that have encountered this issue have followed the Court's view. Thus your freedom of speech is not always protect.
Does porn fall under freedom of speech? The Courts are constantly debating whether restrictions on Pornography are restriction freedom of speech. How do you regulate child porn without restricting this right that adults have? Where is the fine line between illegal behavior and someones freedoms. Legislation that would ban certain types of pornography are getting more often than not ruled unconstitutional by the Supreme Court. In 2004 the Supreme Court ruled that a law mean to punish pornographers who peddles porn to web-surfing kids is unconstitutional. Apparently it had too many restrictions, that though it was mean to do some good, would harm peoples freedom of speech. This is just one example of the many times the Supreme Court has ruled legislation restricting pornography unconstitutional, with the support of the ACLU. So based on the Supreme Court, the viewing of pornography is a freedom and any such restriction of it would be in violation of freedom of speech. This is not to say that the Supreme Court has always declared legislation unconstitutional. In 2008, the 2003 Protect Act was declared constitutional, overturning the ruling of a lower court. This act was to prevent child abuse.
So is the porn movie, which was not child porn, protected because of freedom of speech and because it was shown at a public university? Unfortunately the answer is yes. The Government technically has no right to restrict the showing of the porn movie at the school as it breaks no laws and because the school is government owned and is a public arena. The senators act to keep funding from the school is probably technically unconstitutional. Until the courts allow more restrictions on porn the state university can not necessarily restrict it.
But now for my personal opinion:
The fact that the school is allowed to show porn is a good example of why our society is going down the gutters. To want to show such degrading material to the students, pretending that its to educate them in safe sex is disturbing. Like the students are going to care or remember what they were just taught if they are waiting for this form of sexual stimulation. I am glad the senator is trying to restrict their funding, not because I think it will work, but because at least some one is standing up to what is going on on our college campuses. Maybe one day this country will realize what pornography is doing to our country and will work to find a solution to this problem. But for now, this is just another example of why we need to have the total separation between government and education as we try to have with government and religion. Everyday I hope my future children will be able to go to private universities so that they can get a good education and not be given an invite to a public showing of a porn movie.
And as a end note: If you watch Indoctrinate U you will see that while freedom of speech is often curtailed based on political beliefs. I guess its only important when it concerns something you believe in.
First let me give you some information on pornography. Porn can never satisfy a person. It leaves the viewer craving for more and more in order to achieve the sexual high they are trying to get. It enslaves them and leads to not only self abuse but violence, hatred, lying, anger, and selfishness towards others. It is an addition that is hard to break on ones own. It warps and perverts their view of sex and can lead to unhealthy expectations. It leads to not only debt, but has the potential to lead to crimes such as rape and sadism, not to mention child porn. It destroys relationships and marriages and sex no longer becomes something sacred between a man and a women. $3,075.64 is being spent on pornography every second
and 28,258 Internet users are viewing pornography every second. This problem, which destroys lives and relationships is not going away and seems to become more popular as time goes on.
Now freedom of speech. Is is the freedom to speak freely without censorship or limitation? The actual wording of the first amendment is "Congress shall make no law . . . abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances." This amendment is often applied to the freedom to seek, receive, and impart information or ideas regardless of the medium used. This freedom is not absolute as there are often restrictions places based on the competing values.For example, this does not include Hate Speech. Also, a law limited speech can be deemed constitutional if it is the least drastic means available for accomplishing its stated objects. The court has also allowed speech to be restricted in certain places. While public forums are offered almost blanket protection, public libraries, public schools, and jails are not. The Court has ruled that in the interest of order and decorum, speech may be reasonably limited in these places. One must also remember that this freedom is only to restrict the government from restricting your rights, these laws to not apply the same way to the private sector. The 1980 U.S. Supreme Court case Pruneyard Shopping Center v. Robins said the U.S. Constitution does not give individuals an absolute right to enter and remain on private property to exercise their right to free expression. The state were given the power to adopt reasonable restrictions on private property, including granting greater freedom to individuals to use such property but most states that have encountered this issue have followed the Court's view. Thus your freedom of speech is not always protect.
Does porn fall under freedom of speech? The Courts are constantly debating whether restrictions on Pornography are restriction freedom of speech. How do you regulate child porn without restricting this right that adults have? Where is the fine line between illegal behavior and someones freedoms. Legislation that would ban certain types of pornography are getting more often than not ruled unconstitutional by the Supreme Court. In 2004 the Supreme Court ruled that a law mean to punish pornographers who peddles porn to web-surfing kids is unconstitutional. Apparently it had too many restrictions, that though it was mean to do some good, would harm peoples freedom of speech. This is just one example of the many times the Supreme Court has ruled legislation restricting pornography unconstitutional, with the support of the ACLU. So based on the Supreme Court, the viewing of pornography is a freedom and any such restriction of it would be in violation of freedom of speech. This is not to say that the Supreme Court has always declared legislation unconstitutional. In 2008, the 2003 Protect Act was declared constitutional, overturning the ruling of a lower court. This act was to prevent child abuse.
So is the porn movie, which was not child porn, protected because of freedom of speech and because it was shown at a public university? Unfortunately the answer is yes. The Government technically has no right to restrict the showing of the porn movie at the school as it breaks no laws and because the school is government owned and is a public arena. The senators act to keep funding from the school is probably technically unconstitutional. Until the courts allow more restrictions on porn the state university can not necessarily restrict it.
But now for my personal opinion:
The fact that the school is allowed to show porn is a good example of why our society is going down the gutters. To want to show such degrading material to the students, pretending that its to educate them in safe sex is disturbing. Like the students are going to care or remember what they were just taught if they are waiting for this form of sexual stimulation. I am glad the senator is trying to restrict their funding, not because I think it will work, but because at least some one is standing up to what is going on on our college campuses. Maybe one day this country will realize what pornography is doing to our country and will work to find a solution to this problem. But for now, this is just another example of why we need to have the total separation between government and education as we try to have with government and religion. Everyday I hope my future children will be able to go to private universities so that they can get a good education and not be given an invite to a public showing of a porn movie.
And as a end note: If you watch Indoctrinate U you will see that while freedom of speech is often curtailed based on political beliefs. I guess its only important when it concerns something you believe in.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
