Featured Verse

"All Scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness; that the man of God may be adequate, equipped for every good work." (II Tim 3:16) "The sum of Your word is truth" (Psalm 119:160)

Sunday, September 28, 2008

Rebuking the Toad

I received a comment to a recent post which demands a reply. The following is the comment just as it appeared;

Toad734 said...

That's funny because it always seems it's the conservatives who are trying to implement a state religion which everyone one else has to adhere to, always trying to stifle free speech or even in McCain and Palin's case, freedom of the press. The Right are the ones who want to attack the constitution with a new marriage amendment, it's the Right who is always trying to take away our civil liberties for "our safety", its the right who is always trying to get music, lyrics, videos, tv, movies, radio, art, etc. censored. It's conservatives who fought against ideas such as the 15th amendment.And by activist judges would you be referring to ones who sneak in to the court house grounds in the middle of the night to install a big statue of the 10 commandments? That's what I call an activist judge. Just because some judges are non partisan and smart and can actually acknowledge the intentions of the founding fathers doesn't make them activists just because you, uneducated in the law, disagree.

Toad makes several charges in his comments that are so outlandish that I have to wonder how he could have established their credibility in his own mind.
1). That conservatives want to stifle freedom of speech, freedom of the press, and censor the media.

Since Ronald Reagan abolished the 'fairness doctrine' we finally have a situation in this country in which freedom of speech is flourishing. I realize that the Left is unhappy with this situation and many want it reinstated. This charge may seem a little like the 'pot calling the kettle black', but in the mind of the Leftist the fact that there are so many voices now actively opposing their views it must be an effort to silence them. The Left does it's fair share of criticism of the Right as well. But the right to criticize the speech of another falls under the category of free speech. What the Left calls an effort to stifle free speech is really nothing more that healthy political debate. Conservatives have as much right to be engaged in the political debate as does the Left. However, if the Left finds that they no longer have the stomach for it, we would be agreeable to accepting the Left's capitulation.

2). That Conservatives fought hard against ideas like the 15th Amendment.

This charge betrays a great deal of ignorance. On Feb. 26 1869, the 15th Amendment passed the Senate with not a single Republican voting against it, and not a single Democrat voting in favor of it. The next day the House vote was 144 to 44 in favor of passage. All 144 in favor were Republicans and all 44 against it were Democrats. It was the Democrats who opposed the 15th Amendment to the Constitution, as well as much of the civil rights legislation which was passed during the civil rights movement of the 1960. For Toad's edification, may I recommend Emancipating Slaves, Enslaving Free Men by Jeffrey Rogers Hummel. It is an excellent book on the history of the civil war and offers a perspective thereof which is not often heard.

3). That Conservatives are trying to establish a 'state religion' and that an activist judge is one which violates the religion clause of the First Amendment.

The First Amendment clearly states that, "Congress shall make no law respecting the establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof." No Conservative has proposed such a law, nor has any Conservative stated that he would be in favor of such a law. However, Conservatives do insist that efforts to respect the first portion of the religion clause not lead to gross violations of the second. There in lies the problem. The Left has interpreted the first portion of the religion clause in such a way that in naturally leads to violations of the second.

This 'uneducated' blogger has read no less than two books on the subject of the original intent of the framers of the Constitution, as well as the essays of the Federalists and the Anti-federalists. The original intent of religion clause of the First Amendment was to prevent the federal government from interfering with state laws regarding religion and their establishments. The concern of the framers was not that the states would use public authority and money to favor one religion over another, many did exactly that and it was an acceptable practice. The worry of the framers who insisted upon this provision was that the federal government would establish a national church interfering with churches favored in the various states.

The concept of a constitutional 'separation of church and state', established solely by activist judges, has done much to greatly curtail religious freedom in America. Communities are being restricted from using their local tax dollars to erect any type of religious monument or even a Nativity display at Christmas time. Teachers and students alike are forbidden from expressing their faith on public school property. Families or church groups visiting public monuments at our Nation's Capital are fined for engaging in prayer. Just this week, in my own state of Virgina, five state troopers have resigned following a directive that banned them from using the words Jesus or Christ in public prayers. In recent years there have even been those (mostly on the Left) who argue that the religion clause of the First Amendment makes it unconstitutional for members of a religious institution to engage in political activism.


Z said...

GOOD FOR YOU! If more Conservatives started actually addressing these things, one by one, the Left would have to stop throwing the lies ...the trouble is, our media's closing their eyes to the truth. THAT is scary!

Toad734 said...

I didn't say anything about the fairness doctrine nor do I care about it. What I was talking about was the Press not having access to Palin. Rush Limbaugh can try to link Obama to Bin Laden all day long if he want only mouth breathing knuckle draggers are going to believe him and they are going to vote for what ever swill the Republican Party puts in front of them anyway. Those morons do more harm for your side than good and it is why the country is now turning on you. The days of the neocons, Intelligent Design, Trickle Down Economics, Shoot first talk later, free market, deregulation, is over and you have no one but yourselves to thank for that. Look at the polls, that's all you need to see.

2. I should have said Conservatives, not Republicans. Yes, I get it, Lincoln freed the slaves and he was a Republican. A lot has changed since then; the Democrats at the time were the conservatives. But it was the Republicans in Ohio in 2004 that tried to keep blacks from voting and it was the Republicans in Florida in 2000 who threw out votes from black areas.

3. How is putting Christian symbols such as the 10 Commandments on government grounds, when no other code of laws such as hammurabis code of laws or the laws of Confucius or Mohammed, not condoning one religion over another? How is advocating teaching Genesis in the classroom not only the government advocating religion but the government endorsing Christianity?

What you don't get is that your freedoms stop when they start interfering with mine. That's what you people never realize. If you want your kids to pray then let them pray at the place which was built for prayer, a church, not a school. If you do want them to be able to pray in school then you are free to send them to any madrassa of your choosing. Buy when the entire school has to stop to let the Christians have their prayer, that infringes on atheists, agnostics, Muslims or anyone who doesn't need to pray to Jesus every 5 minutes. And when you have a 10 commandment statue on the lawn of a courthouse, a Muslim shouldn’t have to feel like he is going through the inquisition or being judged by Christian laws to fight a speeding ticket. Again, your right to religion ceases when you start to suppress others, judging them on Christian principles at a state level, is not securing their freedom of religion or freedom from religion. Using my atheist money to put up Christian displays on property that is paid for with my tax dollars does the same thing. You are free to put all the baby Jesus' you want on your front lawn, you are even free do decorate the Pagan Christmas tree and put lights on the public courthouse but keep the dead guy on the stick out of it. Anyone who thinks a manger scene on public property is ok should also be willing to allow statues of Buddha, Vishnu, Krishna and Minora's on the same lawn. If you don't feel that is ok, then it isn't ok to but baby Jesus on my property with my money.

I highly doubt any normal person who prayed at the Vietnam memorial would get fined. I am sure there that this is either another conservative lie or you aren't telling even half of the story. It was probably a bunch of loonies who wanted to block anyone else from using or viewing the property in order to pray for all the dead babies or whatever and wouldn't leave. Nice try.

As far as the troopers are concerned, they are free to pray all they want at home or at the places which were built for prayer, the Church. If you are a cop, you are being paid to pay attention and be a cop, not to close your eyes and pray while some old lady gets her purse stolen.

Did they stop allowing people to pray in churches or something?

When you allow me to teach evolution in your church, I will allow you to pray at my school.

And when you make laws like not letting a state sell alcohol on Sunday that is a religious infringement and endorsement of protestant Christianity. When you teach the bible in public schools, that is the state also endorsing religion, when you force employers to let their employees/students pray how ever many times they want, that is not only ridiculous but also implies a state religion. You know where they get away with that? Saudi Arabia. I think your views with religion fit more with a place like Saudi Arabia and Iran; perhaps you should think of moving there as you clearly have never read anything the founding fathers wrote concerning religion.

Glad I could be of assistance to your lack of understanding.