The ACLU has asked a federal judge to punish school officials for allowing a pre-game prayer at a high school baseball game. Louisianas ACLU director called the brief prayer for player safety “un-American and immoral” and says that school board members should be fined or jailed for failing to stop it. Last month a Louisiana judge ruled against the same school board for letting an elementary school student recite the Lord’s Prayer before a meeting. That ruling has been denounced by Louisiana’s Democratic Governor, Kathleen Blanco, and is being appealed. –Brit Hume, with Michael Levine contributor, from the Fox News Network Special Report, 04.07.05
Knowledge and wisdom
“Knowledge is proud that he has learned so much; Wisdom is humble that he knows no more.” –William Cowper
Income Equality Advocates Press Wealthy to Redirect Their Tax Breaks
They’re rich, they’re outraged, and they’re not going to take it anymore — their tax refund, that is. A Boston-based group that wants to close the nations “wealth gap” announced on Wednesday that its members have agreed to turn down their share of “tax cuts for the wealthy” by signing a “Responsible Tax Pledge.” Individuals who have taken the pledge this year are due an average estimated 2004 tax break of $20,000, the group Responsible Wealth said.
Responsible Wealth (a project of United for a Fair Economy) is calling on rich Americans to “redirect their federal tax breaks — by giving their “unwanted and unneeded windfall” to grassroots organizations that are working for “fairer” taxes. Those groups include Responsible Wealth; and the Fund for Tax Fairness at the Tides Foundation – the foundation frequently mentioned during the 2004 presidential campaign because it is supported by charitable donations from Teresa Heinz Kerry. The “Responsible Tax Pledge” offered by Responsible Wealth states that big tax breaks are bad for America . “Its irresponsible to put America deeper into debt to give tax cuts to millionaires,” the pledge says. “Its wrong to choose tax cuts for millionaires over health care for people who cant make ends meet. Its wrong to give tax cuts to the wealthy instead of investing in education, research, job training, affordable housing, a healthy environment, vaccines and emergency services.” –Susan Jones, The Morning Editor, from www.cnsnews.com, 04.07.05.
Kansans vote to protect marriage
In an election that typically sees a low voter turnout of around 10-15 percent, Kansans turned out in force Tuesday to vote for a marriage-protection amendment. Not only was turnout high, but of the 105 counties in Kansas, 104 voted to protect marriage as the union of a man and a woman. The final statewide vote which saw 69 percent favor the amendment makes Kansas the 18th state to adopt a marriage-protection amendment. –from Focus on the Family.
“The future is something which everyone reaches at the rate of sixty minutes an hour, whatever he does, whoever he is.” –C.S. Lewis.
“Godly men” denying God and truth
“That was not my implication (that Jesus was homosexual), and certainly not anything I ever said. …My office is being flooded with angry messages from around the country, and from around the world, about something I never said. …We have absolutely no indication of Jesus sexual orientation. Absolutely none. Therefore, it would be totally inappropriate for me to speculate about it.” –Episcopal Bishop Vicky Gene Robinson on remarks he made in February seeming to imply that Jesus was homosexual.
**God calls homosexuality a sin. Jesus is Gods sinless Son; therefore, thats a pretty good indication of his “sexual orientation.” –from the Federalist Patriot at www.federalist.com – Chronicle 05.14, 04.06.05.
An environmentally unconcerned Orca?
The average cost of rehabilitating a seal after the Exxon Valdez Oil spill in Alaska was $80,000.00. At a special ceremony, two of the most expensively saved animals were being released back into the wild amid cheers and applause from onlookers. A minute later, in full view, a killer whale ate them both. –from an unidentified news service item listed in an e-mail from our friend Muriel McConnon.
Jesus – on marriage and divorce (see if you can find where he prohibits marriage for other than a man and a woman)
The Pharisees also came to Him, testing Him, and saying to Him, “Is it lawful for a man to divorce his wife for just any reason?” And He answered and said to them, “Have you not read that He who made them at the beginning “made them male and female, and said, “For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh? “So then, they are no longer two but one flesh. Therefore what God has joined together, let not man separate.”
They said to Him, “Why then did Moses command to give a certificate of divorce, and to put her away?” He said to them, “Moses, because of the hardness of your hearts, permitted you to divorce your wives, but from the beginning it was not so. And I say to you, whoever divorces his wife, except for sexual immorality, and marries another, commits adultery; and whoever marries her who is divorced commits adultery.”
His disciples said to Him, “If such is the case of the man with his wife, it is better not to marry.” But He said to them, “All cannot accept this saying, but only those to whom it has been given: For there are eunuchs who were born thus from their mothers womb, and there are eunuchs who were made eunuchs by men, and there are eunuchs who have made themselves eunuchs for the kingdom of heavens sake. He who is able to accept it, let him accept it.” (Matthew 19:3 – 12)
The ‘Divorce Threatens Marriage’ Lie
“Divorce itself no more undermines the institution of marriage than car crashes undermine the institution of driving. In fact, the vast majority of people who do divorce deeply wish to marry again; painful divorce has not undermined marriage even among those who have divorced.” –Dennis Prager 04.12.05
Same-Sex Marriage and the Deliberate Sense
Soon after last falls election, a number of commentators began to point out the curious fact that, contrary to conventional wisdom, gay marriage may not have helped President Bush win reelection at all. The conventional wisdom had been (from the Right) that moral issues carried the day, with opposition to gay marriage leading the charge; and (from the Left) that bigotry and intolerance carried the day, with “homophobia” leading the charge. There may be something to this conventional wisdom, however one likes to formulate it. It is possible that gay marriage did get Bush re-elected, mostly because the issue was on the ballot in Ohio , the state that swung the election to Bush. The statisticians will have to sort that treacherous question out, if indeed a final sorting-out is possible. But what needs no sorting out, because it is plain as day, is the fact that a very large number of people who voted for Senator John Kerry at the top of the ticket and, we might reasonably infer, voted for Democrats all the way down the ticket, went on to cast their vote against gay marriage. Consider: Bush lost Oregon with 48% of the vote, but a prohibition on gay marriage passed with 57% of the vote. Another blue state, Michigan , resulted in very similar numbers. In decisive Ohio , Bush won with just over half the vote, and a prohibition on gay marriage won 62%. Similarly, in very red Mississippi and Georgia , Bush won with 60% and 58% of the vote respectively, while gay marriage went down resoundingly (86% and 76%). And in this context let us not forget that other blue states, including California , have already passed prohibitions on gay marriage.
In short, the most striking fact about the decisive answer the American people gave to the question of gay marriage, is that it was emphatically the answer of the American people , not some faction or narrow majority of it. The most striking fact about gay marriage is not “division” or disagreement, but precisely agreement.
Now the place to begin any serious political inquiry is not, as we might be inclined, in the minds of intellectuals, but down in the trenches, so to speak, where men are slugging it out over what they regard as the critical questions about who we are as a people and the future character of our nation. It will do us little good to draw our conclusions from the cosmopolitan opinions of urban America, either of the Left or of the Right; for the cosmopolitans are manifestly at odds on this issue (as they are on a number of other central issues) with the rest of their fellow citizens. –excerpted from an article by Paul J. Cella III, at www.claremont.org 04.08.05
Article contributed by Richard Vandagriff and Mark Zaveson