Everything Evolves

During my June vacation in Washington D.C., I had the pleasure of visiting the Smithsonian Natural History Museum. Very cool! Free entry, too!

Rocks about 2.5 billion years old reveal that the Earth's atmosphere hasn't always been supportive of life as we know it today.

Water life adapts to droughts and evolve into land animals.

Ideas also evolve-- slavery was upheld by the United States Constitution at first; later, it was repealed. Women were second class citizens, now they are more and more being treated with proper fairness.

For one while, you couldn't legally buy a strong drink! 

Yikes!

And yup . . . even religions have evolved. Denominations splinter off from each other and become less and less familiar with how their scriptures lay out the tenants of their faith. Doctrines change and people tone down the more radical passages found in their scripture texts. Yes, even faith evolves.

And look at the United States today-- we seem to be at the threshold of allowing homosexuals to live their lives with full freedom as well. This is long over due in my opinion, just as Women's rights and Minority rights were long over due (and perhaps, still not fully realized even now).

Yes-- even the so called "Land of the Free" is still striving and evolving towards a more perfect union.

Evolution is everywhere. We might as well accept it. And we might as well use the engine of evolution to push our nation towards becoming a nation that is truly, fully free.

Get Outta My Pants!

Isn't the notion odd that someone would dare forbid you the use of contraception?

The Catholic Church is claiming that President Obama's health care plan will force them to purchase and provide insurance that will offer medical features (contraception) which are against their faith. In so doing, this violates their rights to practice their faith.

I thought about this a bit. Maybe the Catholics have a good point. If their leaders think contraception is evil, they shouldn't be forced to purchase it or use it at their own free will.

But for all the ideals that their leadership attempts to unjustly impose, I think they cancel out their own point.

I noticed an organization named Amac who supports the Catholic Church's official stand against ObamaCare. They sent out a message to their members encouraging them to purchase arm bands and where them on certain days in order to vocalize their support of the Church. In that message, they quote and emphasize a potion of the First Amendment:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof

They really hone in on "prohibiting the free exercise thereof"-- which is extremely important, I must admit.

But, they seem to overlook the clause that balances out that statement-- which is also extremely important-- "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion".

Nope. No religious faith gets any special favors, attention, or exemptions by Congress when laws are made. The laws made shouldn't care what any establishment of religion thinks about them provided the free exercise of faith remain.

But don't get carried away. If the tenants of your faith include world domination, well . . . I don't think the Bill of Rights will cover that one . . .

That's why faith is a private thing . . . just like the inside of my pants.

No, This is About Power

Ever since Pope Benedict XVI gave his September 2010 speech in Europe, his words about atheism have been on my mind. Particularly these words here:

Even in our own lifetime, we can recall how Britain and her leaders stood against a Nazi tyranny that wished to eradicate God from society and denied our common humanity to many, especially the Jews, who were thought unfit to live. I also recall the regime’s attitude to Christian pastors and religious who spoke the truth in love, opposed the Nazis and paid for that opposition with their lives. As we reflect on the sobering lessons of the atheist extremism of the twentieth century, let us never forget how the exclusion of God, religion and virtue from public life leads ultimately to a truncated vision of man and of society and thus to a “reductive vision of the person and his destiny”

I've seen plenty of arguments for and against this notion. And I've personally been in a few on-line arguments with other people over this issue.

I hope that when I share my opinion here, that I don't come across sounding as though I'm completely "right" and any opposing viewpoint is completely "wrong". Rather, I hope that my opinion can at least be thought provoking or perhaps even stir up a meaningful dialog on the subject matter.

And, my opinion may very well be met with silence. That's OK, too. I feel the need to get this off my chest at the very least. Writing helps me to do that-- even if no one comments or even reads this post.

Let us assume that Hitler was unquestionably an atheist and that the Nazi regime was undeniably--without debate-- the result of an atheistic philosophy and world view though and through.

Even with such an assumption, can we still not think of other large scale crimes against society that were committed in the name of God?

And can we still not see that many people who subscribe to the wold view of atheism can still do good and make great contributions to society?

I have slowly come to the opinion that arguing the level of religiosity found in either Hitler or the Nazi regime alone cannot completely help us learn the dire lessons that we need to grasp from history.

I personally think that it's clear that Nazism was not about atheism-- not when the belt buckles of some soldiers would read: Gott Mit Uns.

Nazism was not about atheism when religious imagery was mix in quite well with the propaganda of the Nazi party.

But, I'll dare say that Nazism was not necessarily about theism, either.

No, in my opinion, this is about power.

Anyone that wants to control how you think, how you live, who you consider your enemies, who you worship, and who you may not worship is only seeking power. A person seeking absolute power can come heralding the name of Christ or come denying the existence of God. And followers of either ideology can find themselves mindlessly supporting such a wantonness drive for human control.

I admire the Founding Fathers of the United States of America. They tried to fashion a government that allowed belief in God without imposing religion upon anyone. After fleeing from a monarchy, they understood well that mindlessly following any ideology is the truest danger of society. We need to be free to argue, disagree, live our own lives, and state opinions that are unpopular. We need to learn to do this and still respect each other's humanity and refrain from resorting to violence to resolve ideological disputes.

When force is used to impose an ideology on others, then the moral tenants of the ideology in question are probably only an afterthought.

Because in the end, it's all really about power.

How All Business Phones Should be Answered?!

I ran across this e-mail recently. I'll post it first, then at the end make my comments about it:

How ALL business phones SHOULD be answered!

'GOOD MORNING, WELCOME TO THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA'

'Press '1' for English ....

....Press '2' to disconnect until you learn to speak English .'

And remember only two defining forces have ever offered to die for you ...

Jesus Christ

... And the American Soldier.

One died for your soul,

The other for your freedom.

If you agree......

Keep it going

Now, to force me to answer my phone with the greeting above is quite unfair. You don't think so? What if someone told the supporters of the above e-mail to answer the phone with, "Allah Akbar". I bet their faces and necks would turn red hot!

This is not a Christian nation. Congress Shall Make NO Law respecting the establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.

If this were a Christian nation, why do we have a President rather than a Pastor. Why do we have a Congress rather than a Congregation? Why a Constitution rather than just using the King James Bible?

That's what a real Christian nation would do. And a real Christian nation would do away with our freedoms in the process, too.

Forcing everyone to learn English is a convenience. But the world is getting smaller and the United States is a melting pot. Trace your heritage back. White people have black uncles. Black people can trace back to Ireland, West Africa and Choctaw. People of Asian decent call themselves Americans first when you might be tempted to call them Chinese-- yet they are of Japanese decent!

I bet those who want everyone to speak English or get out of the country couldn't find a bathroom if they were dropped in Germany, France, Sweden, or Mexico even!

Learn a little bit of a foreign language. You and you're children will need it 20 years from now.

Lastly, soldiers have indeed died for our freedom. So, you sure as hell have no right to impose your religious views upon me. And don't suggest I don't care about our soldiers. I don't have to voice adoration for Jesus to love this country and honor our military.

Period.

The Good Neighbor

Ever hear the saying? Good fences make good neighbors.

I personally find truth in that comment.

Before I moved into my current dwelling, we took on a mortgage for a home that had been vacant for a while. The neighbor was used to the house being empty and took the liberty to pull through our soon-to-be driveway, across part of our soon-to-be yard, and then on to his own property.

He had a perfectly good driveway of his own. But he used it only as his exit.

We had hoped our neighbor would stop using our driveway. Maybe he'd catch the hint that cars other than his own now occupy the space.

Nope. He would just squeeze through.

That is . . . until my wife hired a landscaper to plant shrubs along the property line.

The look on our neighbor's face was priceless.

He wanted to protest, but what could he say?

I like a neighbor that knows when it's time to go back home to his own property.

Don't get me wrong; doing favors for your neighbor is good. Helping each other out is commendable. Greeting the new person with brownies and cookies is a warm gesture. Those are good things that nobody can honestly berate.

Checking on each other after a nasty storm (Jesusland can have some really inclement weather at times). Loaning out some tools. Giving away some firewood. That's being a good neighbor.

But there comes a point when I want my neighbor to stay next door and stay the hell out of my damn business. So long as I'm not making too much noise, I'm keeping my property neat, and I'm minding my own damn business, I really want to be left alone.

Fundamentalist Christians are like neighbors who don't know where the property line is. They feel like their relationship with God gives them license to ignore the property line and absorb whatever space they feel they can claim for the "Kingdom of God".

A fence creates a healthy and necessary boundary between Fundamentalists and the rest of us. That fence is built by our United States Constitution and is named The First Amendment.

Find a land surveyor and discover where the property line really is.

The Sovereign Lord over America

I ran across another one of those crazy e-mail messages that I sometimes get.

Here are some quotes from it:

Since assuming office, President Obama has consistently misrepresented this country's religious heritage and our commitment to Christianity.

On his first trip abroad, Barack Hussein Obama told the Turkish Parliament: "Although we have a large Christian population, we do not consider ourselves a Christian nation, or a Muslim nation. We consider ourselves a nation of citizens who are bound by ideals and a set of values."

Who is the "we," the president refers to? According to a 2009 survey, 62% of his fellow citizens believe America is a Christian nation.

Another quote:

Look at the currency in your wallet, Mr. President. Do the bills say "In God We Trust," or "In Allah We Trust," or "In the Ideals and Values That Bind Us As a Nation We Trust"?

Listen to our national Anthem, which contains the stirring words, "Then conquer we must when our cause it is just. And this be our motto, In God Is Our Trust." (Even the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals, the most liberal in the land, just ruled "In God We Trust" is constitutional.)

President Obama can hardly leave the White House without tripping over monuments to our Judeo-Christian heritage.

And the quote that really caught my eye:

For the first time in our history, atheists recently met with White House officials. No one knows if the president popped in to greet the God denying atheists. It was just one more in a series of moves that are apparently designed to de-Christianize America. Frightening when you consider the list of blessings and cursing associated with whether or not our country honors God listed in Deuteronomy 28!

And the goal of the e-mail:

Please consider signing our online petition reminding our President that this IS a Christian nation and urging him to once again acknowledge that the God of the Bible is the Sovereign Lord over America.

The problems with this whole thing?

• Fundamentalist Christians don't realize the danger in making our country a theocracy. Should it become fully Christian, what sort of "Christian" will it be? Will being the wrong kind of Christian become a crime? Will non-Fundamentalist Christians lose rights because they don't deserve basic freedoms? Are non-Fundamentalists lower than other human life? But what happens when the government stops liking your kind of Christian? What happens when the face of Fundamentalism changes and leaves you behind?

• Fundamentalist Christians don't realize that this nation is not (and was not) meant to be a theocracy. Read a little bit of your Constitution sometime. Oh . . . I'm sorry . . . so you haven't read any of that document either, huh? (OK, OK, that's not fair-- but it's so fun to say . . .)

• Fundamentalist Christians don't realize that "In God We Trust" and "One Nation Under God" were *not* always on our money or in our pledge. Congress didn't add these mottoes until the mid 1950s. Why didn't the Founding Fathers establish this precedent if they were so pious and religious while supposedly meaning for this to be a Christian nation?

• Fundamentalist Christians don't realize that atheists can run for office, too. Though some states may still outlaw atheists from running for public office on paper, this can be corrected with a quick visit to an appeals court. This freedom for an American citizen to run for office holds true for Muslims, Jews, Mormons, as well as all other religious groups and ethnic races who are American Citizens*. And it's not necessary to swear on the Bible to take office, either. That's just a tradition.

Say it with me: ˈsi-tə-zən

• Fundamentalist don't realize that the curses in Deuteronomy 28 do not apply to us. If you're Christian, they don't apply because that was to the people of Israel back in the bronze age or something like that. The United States is not Israel. And if you're non-Christian, then Deuteronomy 28 never mattered to anyone.

This mindless drive to Christianize our nation bothers me deeply. The drive to make everyone adhere to "Christian" values . . . to force everyone to be as religious as you are by force of law . . . such a drive is reminiscent of despotism and hate.

This kind of Fundamentalism is hate hiding under a Christian blanket.

* As for "citizens" who commit acts of terrorism against the nation in which they live-- such people don't deserve the rights of citizenship in my opinion. I feel that statement should go without saying . . . but someone might think I support the citizenship of anyone who commits a terrorist act or is involved in some plot against the United States. Well, nope, I don't. Absolutely not.

The only thing that person deserves is jail.

An Anonymous Atheist in Jesusland

Atheists can catch a hard time in Jesusland. As a result, many of us who live there keep quiet. I know atheists in my area who fear losing their jobs if they are open about their non-belief. Some atheists in Jesusland don't worry about losing their jobs. But when the "cat's out of the bag", they find that their co-workers often distance themselves even though no one threatens to fire them.

I'm tired of staying in the closet.

A few atheists that I've met have made promises to become open activists for atheism when they retire.

When they retire.

Hell, my spouse could lose her job if her employer knew I was an atheist!

I'll have to avoid becoming an active, open atheist until she and I both retire!

But what exactly does activism for atheism mean? Atheist activism simply means that we help the citizens of Jesusland realize that atheists are among them-- and no, we don't have horns on our heads and long tails coming out of our butts. We don't carry pitch forks and we don't worship satan. We won't eat their babies and we deserve to be treated like citizens just like any other citizen of Jesusland.

No. The citizens of Jesusland do not have a right to make us assimilate.

Why? Because, it's not supposed to be Jesusland in the first place. Last time I looked at a map, I lived in the United States of America.

The good citizens of Jesusland wouldn't want to be pressured into Islam, Judaism, or even an opposing denomination within their own Christian faith. So, why should we atheists feel pressured to believe in god?

I didn't think discrimination was Christlike.

You Can't Have Your Cake and Eat It, Too

Obama gave an address to school children on September 8th. I didn't watch it. I didn't really need to watch it. But, I might catch it later on-line or something. We'll see.

However, I did watch parents on local area news stations say that schools should not show Obama's speech because they do not want their children politically indoctrinated by that liberal, closet Muslim snake our President.

And schools in my community (from what I hear) refused to show his address.

I admit to making an assumption here. I assume that most people who did not support Obama, do not want his address to be shown in public schools. Yet, many of these same people would still argue that prayer and religious indoctrination should remain in schools.

Ah! But now, they finally get it!!

No more excuses. In order to protest against Obama's address, one has to also grasp the reasons why the courts keep religious indoctrination out of public schools.

Well at least, such people should finally understand.

Because-- when they concluded that they didn't want Obama to brainwash address their children, they inadvertently and inescapably admitted that any sort of indoctrination of our children by the State is problematic. The State should not even have leverage to indoctrinate our children with "wholesome" activities such as cooperate prayer during school hours or Intelligent Design (so that our kids won't grow up thinking they're monkeys).

And to be honest-- was Obama really trying to indoctrinate our children with anything more than the "stay in school" mantra we constantly hear as children?

I'm not sayin' . . . but, I'm just sayin' . . .

Sorry, Obama-speech haters-- you can't have your cake and eat it, too.

Religiously Bad

Gregory S. Paul has recently published a study that strongly suggest that a society's belief in God correlates with social ills found within that society.

And not in a good way.

We've heard this kind of thing before concerning the territories within the United States. The "religious states" tend to fair worse in all things good. And I should know, I live in one of them.

OK, maybe that last statement wasn't fair. But it was fun to say!

Well, this study shows a little more ambition and takes a cold, hard look at several other rich, Westernized democracies across the globe.

The findings suggest that religious societies exhibit higher pathological and dysfunctional markers. Examples of these markers include a higher incidence of rape, murder, STDs, teen pregnancies and abortions. All of these activities raise significantly higher-- not only within the United States, but also in other religious societies where belief in God is more prevalent.

If this is true, then why does religion make people become bad?

I can only speculate-- but perhaps religion causes people to practice their pathologies in their closets. The pressure from within a religious society may cause people to pretend to be pious. But around the bend and behind the barn, they're being religiously bad.

That possibility may account for the flurry of Republican congressmen who have gotten tied up into sexual scandals in recent months. To date, polls indicate that the best predictor of religious affiliation is political affiliation. So, I'm not simply picking on the Republican party.

And as a side note, I'm not saying Democrats do not get into sexual scandal (er, Bill Clinton, Jessie Jackson, John Edwards all come to mind). But somehow it doesn't seem so bad when Democrats do it. Oh, it is just as bad and damaging to the loved ones involved. But typically (not always I suppose), Democrats haven't prefaced their scandal with hypocritical religious piety. So, this tendency makes it easier for them to recover after getting caught up in a few social "nasties".

Now strictly speaking, perhaps belief in God isn't so much the problem. Perhaps religion in and of itself isn't really what's wrong.

Perhaps the real issue is fear to fully express oneself because of religious rules. Perhaps such fear prevents people from coming out and being open about who they are and what they truly love. What happens when you become too afraid to explore life and truly find yourself? Something pathological seems to breed when people are afraid to participate in harmless social taboos. Such suppression seems to push people across the line that lies between social taboos and maladaptive behaviors.

And most interestingly, the United States rates the worst in negative social markers when compared to other democracies. And the United States has the strongest overall religious overtones of all the other democracies according to Gregory Paul's publication.

Oh great. I live in the worst state within the worst democracy.

Well . . . when I compare my situation to something like living in a tiny village where people still perform witch hunts . . . I'm happy with living right here in the good ol' U.S. of A!

The United States is a wonderful place to live, in spite of these findings. But, our nation could be better. We could really grow into the nation that our Constitution originally tried to form. Perhaps we can forge an even better nation than what was ever intended by the Founding Fathers. We should never think that we have completely formed that more perfect union.

And from the appearance of things, we probably don't need God to accomplish that either.


My thanks to the Universal Heretic for inspiring this post. I was struggling to find something to write about. Not any more! Thanks!

Liberty Enlightening the World

I am apt to believe that it will be celebrated by succeeding generations as the great anniversary festival. It ought to be commemorated as the day of deliverance, by solemn acts of devotion to God Almighty. It ought to be solemnized with pomp and parade, with shows, games, sports, guns, bells, bonfires, and illuminations, from one end of this continent to the other, from this time forward for evermore.

-- John Adams

Our nation absolved allegiance from the British Crown in order to rule itself on July 4th, 1776 by issuing the Declaration of Independence.

This event makes every Fourth of July special. Each Fourth of July marks one more year that this nation has remained free. And today, we've reached 233 years now.

Let us all contemplate how wonderful liberty is. Let us all appreciate our freedom by learning about where it came from in the first place.

Let us be grateful for all servicemen and servicewomen who sacrifice and join our all-volunteer military so that our freedom is protected.

Be grateful for the democratic process and our elected officials who participate in this great political experiment. And be grateful for our justice system. Even with the flaws and frustrations of our legal system, we could be worse off.

And be grateful that we can complain to our elected officials and even poke fun at them when it suits us, because we have freedom of speech and expression.

And, thank your God, should you believe in him (or her) -- exercise your freedom of religious expression.

And if you are a non-believer, breath in the fresh air of freedom because you may exercise your freedom of personal expression and freedom of any sort of religious oppression.

Think of how ancient Greece and Rome once stood as beacons of light to the rest of civilization. Then consider how these empires fell and plunged the world into the Dark Ages. Consider the events which characterized the Dark Ages, then think on the Age of Enlightenment and how it emerged from that period of darkness. Consider how great minds, great discoveries, and great words of expression re-kindled the flame that illuminated the dark world once again.

Know that liberty is the cornerstone of enlightenment; Liberty enlightens the world.

Think on the original name of our great Statue of Liberty. Consider how it was a gift from the French who helped us during our Revolution. Then take time to contemplate the French's role in the Enlightenment era. And take time to think about how a French sculptor took symbols from the best of world civilization and embodied them in our greatest monument of freedom -- a token given to our country to celebrate it's centennial birthday.

Celebrate this day. Eat some potato salad and barbecue. And if your vegan, eat some barbecue tofu in honor of this day.

If you had to work today, I hope you can still take time to celebrate. Sit back, relax, and enjoy your freedom -- even if you have to take a rain check and celebrate tomorrow.

Church Tradition

And he said unto them, Full well ye reject the commandment of God, that ye may keep your own tradition . . . Making the word of God of none effect through your tradition, which ye have delivered: and many such like things do ye.

Mark 7:9 and 7:13

I've realized over these past few years that a disconnect exists between religious beliefs and actual written scripture. I've come to realize that churches simply pass down their religious doctrine to the next generation and mainly study from the passages that reinforce their traditions.

Ironic that Jesus himself makes this same complaint against Jewish leaders within the New Testament text. Yet, generally, Christians do not heed this warning.

If they did, they'd be in for a treat . . . or a shock.

Here are some common misconceptions that I grew up with due to Church tradition, but are not compatible with scripture:

Sunday is the Sabbath day for Christians

Tithing is required from the Church (Keeping parts of the Law)

Marriage to a new spouse is acceptable among Christians after divorcing the original Christan spouse

Nothing is wrong with Christians taking other Christians to court to settle a legal dispute

Woman are equal to Men in Church (Most don't want to own up to this sexism. But if you take many passages that speak of women being subject to men literally, can you really make an exception?)

The Lord's Supper consisted of crackers and grape juice

The Bible was a complete unit during the early Christians lives (I never would have admitted this verbally, but time had to go by before I could grasp the fact that scripture went through a canonization process where both Jewish and Christian leaders argued over which books would be included. This process happened for Judaism around 3 or 4 B.C. by many sources. For Christians, this happened around the 2nd century or so. That's 200 years after Jesus was crucified!)

The United States is a Christian Nation (First, the Bible doesn't even mention the United States! Next, the Constitution Separates Church and State. Before you disagree with me, read the First Amendment and Article Six of the Constitution. Many Christians want the United States to be a Christian nation because Israel is known as a Jewish nation and God did such a good job of protecting them because of it -- Israel being conquered by the Babylonians, the Romans, the Jews suffering during the Holocaust and the present day military conflicts make great examples of God's wonderful protection! The United States needs God's protection, too! So lets be a Christian nation just like Israel is a Jewish nation! Please!)

I could think of other examples, but I'll stop here. These traditions contradict scripture, but Christians do not want to surrender these ideas for various reasons.

Well, I only have one computer but my immediate family and extended family is waiting in line to use the PC.

I need my own laptop!!

The Oath of Office

Keith Ellison is the first Muslim ever elected to the United States Congress. Ellison swore in with the 110th United States Congress using a copy of the Koran which once belonged to Thomas Jefferson. This decision drew a lot of criticism. One of the most notable critics of Ellison's swearing in ceremony is Dennis Prager. In November of 2006, Prager's criticism raised a controversial question:

Why doesn't US law only allow the Bible to be used during oath of office ceremonies?

Prager basically argues that American government's core values are based upon the Bible; therefore, using the Koran in it's place is un-American and unconstitutional.

Prager apparently has never read the First Amendment.

Also, Prager probably has never heard of the Treaty of Tripoli.

I've said this in a recent post . . . I don't mind our currency and our Pledge having "God" included. I don't even mind swearing on a Bible -- although the Bible has a few scripture passages which expressly forbid swearing or taking oaths. Check out Steve Wells' blog entry about swearing oaths at Dwindling Unbelief. He does a good job of making the same point I'd like to make about using the Bible in oath ceremonies.

But in the end, none of this should matter. Ellison should get to use his Koran. And let Prager use his Bible. Should more atheists become a part of Congress, let them use thin air (as many Congressmen already do --regardless of faith). Or maybe atheists can use Steve Wells' The Skeptic's Anontated Bible.

Now that would be a great leap forward in the freedom of religious expression!


With President-elect Obama's inauguration drawing near, I wonder what text will he use. People have accused Obama of being a Muslim all this time; people fear a Muslin taking high office and derailing America through abusing the executive powers of the office of President.

I wonder how many people would explode if Obama were to swear on a Koran.

I hope Obama would choose to use nothing at all. But even that action may incriminate him in the eyes of his critics.

So to be safe, Obama will probably follow suite with the other Presidents before him and take his Oath of Office on a Bible.



Hell . . . in the end, that's fine with me.

Hate -- the "Nondiscriminate" Killer

An unfortunate and sad event has been reported in the news recently. I alluded to this problem slightly in an earlier blog post when I said:

If my freedoms are taken away because some group doesn't like me, your freedom can just as easily be taken away, too, regardless of your skin color. Don't believe me? Learn the truth about why this country was born in the first place.

A woman contacted a Ku Klux Klan group in Louisianan and expressed interest in recruitment. Though she began initiation, she developed a change of heart for whatever reason and desired to return home.

Upon her request to leave, she was shot dead.

This was a white woman -- by the way.

Her color did not matter. They murdered her anyhow.

As I said earlier . . . the hate found by people like Klan members is generated by a desire to control and remove the rights of others. Their issue with skin color only justifies their illogical way of thinking.

Hate like that doesn't take much to generalize when it is superficial in cause.

Those Klan members killed her because they wanted to control her. At that point, she was no different from any other minority.

I bet they thought God wanted them to murder her, too.

Congress shall make NO law . . .

Crushing all deceivers, mashing non-believers
Never-ending potency
Hungry violence-seeker feeding off the weaker
Breeding on insanity

Smashing through the boundaries, lunacy has found me
Cannot stop the battery.

-- Metallica

Believe it or not . . . separation of Church and State is a good idea. This idea IS WRITTEN into the US Constitution as part of the FIRST Amendment. This idea GRANTS freedom of religion -- along with freedom of speech and freedom of the press.

The above mentioned freedoms are among the most important in American society. Suppress those rights and you can kiss the "land of the free" goodbye.

Why?

Because . . . people cannot have true freedom if they cannot express themselves according to their own will or desires.

See . . . the religious environment of our founding fathers etched the importance of this concept into their minds. Back in England, you had better align your religious beliefs with the ruler of the day or -- off with your head! Rulers did what they wanted and ruled because they said that God put them on the throne. Got something negative to say about your king? Well, you've just said it about God's sense of judgment, too! Then the king and clergy introduced you to your divine punishment -- a guillotine, flaming steak, or boiling oil, to name only a few. And those tortures were their way of giving you a "going away" party while on your way to enjoy your eternal punishment in hell.

Ouch!

Our founding fathers clearly recognized this problem and didn't want to recreate the same environment after framing our new government.

After all, why do you think they left England in the first place?

Even the pilgrims left because they wanted freedom of worship . . . not because England didn't have ANY Christians there. They weren't leaving to evangelize a new world. They were leaving to be left alone.

The founding fathers understood that variance in belief had to be tolerated in order for everyone to have freedom. The Catholic needs to tolerate the Protestant. The Protestant needs to tolerate the Quaker. The Deist has to tolerate the Theist. And yes, the Atheist deserve tolerance, too. Each gets to practice his or her faith (or non-faith) . . . but none can force this on the other. This must exist not only among citizens, but with the governmental administration as well.

After all, what is the true purpose of our government? I propose that Government's purpose is first and foremost to facilitate the power of rule that belongs to the citizens. Yes -- the citizen's power. Government doesn't rule us, exactly. We elect representatives that are supposed to make our voice valid. If they do a poor job, we fire them by voting for someone else! Government also enforces the laws made and protect the citizens from outside and inside forces that threaten our private property and our personal rights. But, government cannot make any such law that overturns our power as people who govern ourselves. Government is not permitted to strip away our "inalienable" rights. In exchange for this, we support the government with taxes and obey the laws that are enforce by the government -- as long as they are reasonable and truly protect the people at large. Many citizens volunteer for the army that the Government funds through our tax dollars. We give, the Government gives. We support each other, but the people rule themselves through the Government by electing leaders. Keep in mind, any government can go astray. The founding fathers understood this too, and wrote into the Constitution the right to protest and assembly that we might bring grievances to our leaders. After all, government facilitate our power to rule ourselves -- they don't rule us as their people.

Government, however, is not about the business of regulating the morality of the culture. The government is then encroaching on the privacy of the citizens and has overstepped it's bounds. Our founding fathers confirm this ideal by making our government secular and non-Christian. Doesn't matter what the religious orientation was for any of the founding members of our government. They ultimately agreed to make our government secular when they added this statement to our Constitution:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or 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.

First Amendment, US Constitution (you know, the Law of our land -- if you're a US Citizen)

Congress is the only branch of government that can make laws. (Though, recently, it seems, some Presidential administrations want to push this envelope. This is very dangerous. Never mind your party affiliation). The First Amendment bans Congress from allowing any faith based organization to have laws made in it's favor -- nor can laws be made to suppress the exercise of any religion. These ideas can clash at times and the lines can get blurry. But, a good way to draw the line is to understand that religion is private. Church is private. Government can't stick it's nose in a religious organization's business (unless they are harming citizens against their will. Then, such a religious group has violated the rights of others and should be stopped). But, Church has no business trying to use Government to create a culture that reflects their beliefs.

Not fair. That violates the free will of everyone else. Change the culture through evangelism!

By the way . . . didn't Jesus say that his kingdom was not of this world?

Look at it this way . . . is our nation a theocracy?

Theocracy -- A government ruled by or subject to religious authority.

In other word's -- God's rule (or his 'clergy').

That won't do. Too many people disagree on who God is (or if he is). Christians can't agree among themselves if God is a trinity or only one person. How can they agree with any particular flavor of religion taking over our government and imposing rule? Instead of having two political parties, we'd have a party for every denomination of religious faith.

Just having two political parties makes my head hurt!

But, never fear. Our government is NOT a theocracy.

Old Testament Israel -- that was a theocracy.

Modern day Arab states ruled by radical Muslims -- those are examples of a theocracy.

But the United States of America . . . now that's a Republic.

A Republic is:

• A political order whose head of state is not a monarch and in modern times is usually a president.

• A nation that has such a political order.

• A political order in which the supreme power lies in a body of citizens who are entitled to vote for officers and representatives responsible to them.

• A nation that has such a political order.

• An autonomous or partially autonomous political and territorial unit belonging to a sovereign federation.

• A group of people working as equals in the same sphere or field

The supreme power lies in the citizens who are entitled to vote for officers. Not God. Not clergy. Not any religion. The citizens -- they are the ones who are sovereign.

Religion has a tendency to breed intolerance. We've seen it in history time and time again. And Again . . . that's why people came to the 'New World' in the first place. Religion breeds intolerance because faith is subjective, yet the rules of religion are often absolute. So without question, someone will not believe in your faith. Never mind if they don't believe in God. If they don't believe in your faith -- what's the difference if they are atheist or Hindu? They don't believe in your God the way you do. Even some people who call themselves Christian are not considered saved by other Christian groups. So, who gets to impose their faith on the world?

This absolutism also tends to cause religious organizations to have deep influence on their follower's lives. Intolerance and absolutism that aims to dictate how you should live so that you can make God happy (or is it all for the clergy? Hmmmm). Regardless, involving your life in a religious faith is a personal decision. Government should NOT pressure any of the citizens to do this. And the interesting part is . . . the Bill of Rights cannot be repealed. So, no act of Congress or vote of the people can erase this ideal.

Government simply does not need the power to rule people's lives in such a manner.

The USA is a Republic -- remember?

I fear, however that our Republic is slowly eroding away. People can become quite corrupt and the citizenry of any country can be lulled to sleep.

I fear that a religion of sorts is grasping the citizens at large and is causing them to forfeit the power of rule into the hands of corrupted entities who influence our government officials.

And believe it or not . . . I'm not referring to the so called 'conservative Christian Right'.

I'm referring to extreme, unquestioning, patriotism.

The religious kind.

Don't misunderstand me! Patriotism is good. We need it. Loving one's country is wonderful. We should be involved and we should care. We should come together as one and be proud of our nation. We should feel fortune and gratitude for our realized rights and freedoms. We should have deep respect for those who died for our country and died to protect our freedom.

Patriotism does not require believing our country is completely perfect. The USA has some blemishes in her past. You can still be a patriot while acknowledging these past (and yes, present) faults.

For example:

• In the expansion of the USA, Native Americans were slaughtered. For restitution, the Native Americans were given tiny plots of land so they can be pseudo-sovereign nations. (Gee, thanks.)

• Africans were bought and traded as slaves for many years after the USA was created. It literally took an act of the President and Congress to free the Negro from enslavement. Even after that, the Emancipation Proclamation was not truly enforced until after the Civil Rights movement of the 1960's.

• Navajo Indians were being assimilated into American culture and being forced to forget their language in new public school programs. That is, until the US military realized the Germans never head of the Navajo language. Then, they wanted the Navajo to use their language for encrypted communication in World War II.

• The US build concentration camps to hold Japanese immigrants during World War II.

• US leaders planned a State sponsored terrorism* scheme called Operation Norwoods. The plan was discovered before it was implemented and people were held accountable.

* In other words, US leaders were plotting to stage the hijacking of a US airplane or bomb US buildings. US citizens could very well become casualties so that the people would become upset and rally behind the government in a show of patriotism and readily support war.

• British leaders requested assistance from the US concerning Iran. To help keep Iran suppressed, US leaders supported Saddam Hussein's efforts against Iran. When Hussein's war effort started going poorly, US leaders sent Donald Rumsfeld to meet with Hussein.** Rumsfeld offered military help in the way of intelligence in order to assist Saddam Hussein against Iran (it was in US and British interest at the time). (no joke. You can find pictures of Rumsfeld shaking Hussein's hand).

• When Hussein rebelled against US interests, the Gulf War broke out. (And I thought we were trying to liberate the people of Kuwait). Eight years after that, US leaders end up in Iraq again**. Rumsfeld is in charge of the military strike that ultimately captures Hussein and has him tried for war crimes and executed. (I'm not saying Hussein was a nice guy . . . but, US leaders weren't being too nice, either).

** Ironic that Rumsfeld was sent by Ronald Reagan -- whose Vice-President was George H. Bush. And years later, the Gulf War happened; George H. Bush was President. Eight years later, the Iraqi War happens after 911; George W. Bush (H. Bush's son!!!) was President! And Rumsfield was Secretary of Defense for President George W. Bush at this time.

All coincidence?

• The Iraqi war was launched under false pretenses. Alleged weapons that could endanger the US were said to be horded by Hussein before his capture. Military troops were sent in and toppled the Government. No weapons were found. Then, leaders started to say that we invaded Iraq to free the Iraqi people. Again, patriotism is used to get people's minds off of the scandal. Our love for freedom and our love for our troops gets exploited.

That's enough for now. You get the picture.

But, hey, I still love this country. And I deeply honor our troops. But, I am ashamed of some parts of US history. But, the strength of the US is that we can freely discuss these things and hold our leaders accountable.

Unless, the people become too patriotic to tolerate listening to the truth.

All the things I mentioned above -- all verifiable fact. None of it is left wing, wild-eyed liberal, hogwash. This problem transcends political parties. Both political parties will exploit hyper-patriotism.

Admitting America's imperfections is not unpatriotic. This is important to understand.

Lutherans realize that their name sake, Martin Luther, did evil things against the Jews and spread antisemitism so hard that Hitler was inspired by it. Lutherans acknowledge this and denounce this evil. Does that make them any less Lutheran?

Extreme, unquestioning acceptance to any leadership is like being in a religious cult. This type of patriotism allows corrupted officials to keep the populous in the palm of their hands. This is a type of brainwashing.

I did say that Christian conservatives were not the religion we needed to fear most in attempting to abduct our government. But, I do think that they are influenced the most by this blind, extremist patriotism. And, many religious leaders exploit this notion as do politicians. Mixing extreme patriotism with faith can cause people to follow God and country -- no matter what. Even if both 'God' and country both get caught doing something evil.

People forfeit their power to voice grievance when they refuse to examine the governments actions for the sake of patriotism. Such people will think the country is never wrong and the leadership shouldn't be questioned. They will support every war, fearing they are defaming our precious troops and spiting on our freedom. This is not the case. You can disapprove of a particular war and still honor and support our troops.

Yes, disapproving of a war and still honoring our troops can still be patriotic. Acknowledging the faults of our nation and still being proud of our country can be separate feelings within the same patriotic citizen.

Church and State need to be kept separate like that, too.