I saw a blog the other day where some bleeding heart neo-con was crying about how she didn't understand how someone could have an abortion when so many families wanted a baby, but couldn't have one of their own. She was under the impression that all these "many families" had all given up taking fertility drugs, had settled on adopting 5-year-old black kids, and were unable to find one that was available.
I went to The Administration for Children and Families website, a division of the US department of Health and Human Services, to find out how many US kids were available to these many families. Feel free to check for yourselves, but here are the approximate numbers on orphans and available children up for adoption:
117,000 kids in the US, at the time of the report (1999), needed homes. 51% of these kids were black, 32% where white, 11% were Hispanic and 6% would qualify as other. 29% of these kids were babies under the age of 1 year old at the time they had been made available for adoption and 42% of them were between the ages of 1 and five. The average amount of time that these children had been waiting for a home was 46 months, almost 4 years. The numbers I am speaking of only include children in the US, so you must also consider the millions of orphans in other countries.
I'm sorry if you had your heart set on a newborn baby with blond hair and blue eyes, but nature already decided you can't have that. This is your next best option. So, until all these kids have homes or the pro-lifers adopt them all themselves, I don't want to hear about how terrible abortion is.
Another thing to consider for poor 16-year-olds who are pregnant is that roughly 17% of all children in the US (13 million) live in poverty. Children born to children are often born into poverty and are more likely to themselves become high school dropouts, teenage mothers and to be poor. So for a 16-year-old, keeping the baby is not a good option and neither is giving it up for adoption as that child will probably never find a home. Come to think of it, none of these options are easy decisions; abortion is not an easy way out as many say it is, and neither is carrying a baby for 9 months and then handing it over to someone else. Both can have serious emotional and /or medical consequences but I say either are better than a 16-year-old trying to raise a kid as a poor, young, uneducated single mother.
One last thing--while all these people are trying to put Jesus in our public schools, they may want to leave a little room for the condoms.
Sources: Deptartment of Health and Human Services, US Census
Tuesday, September 06, 2005
Thursday, September 01, 2005
Fear Mongering, Profit Driven Drug Companies
The above is an ad I saw in Time Magazine by a drug company trying to enforce its communistic grip of the US drug monopoly that these types of companies have enjoyed for so long. They are using this as a scare tactic to convince you that anything made overseas in some "shady" country could not possibly be trusted. If that is the case, then don't ever shop at Wal-Mart, buy another pair of shoes or buy a car from any American car company ever again.
Why is it that we can trust a place like China to make our baby strollers, safety seats, children's toys and every piece of baby clothing but we can't trust them to make a boner pill? Why is it that this is one area where capitalism and free trade is bad? Why are they so afraid of the competition?
Is it because the top 7 pharmaceutical companies earn 20 billion in annual profits, that the top 12 make more profit than all the top 24 automotive related industries, including GM and Ford, combined? Could it be because a company such as Merck made 6 billion dollars in profits in 2004? Could it be because these companies make an 18.5% return of revenues, which is 8 times higher than the average of other industries? Could it be that the pharmaceutical industry wants to remain one of the most profitable industries in the world? Or could it be that we as Americans are just being taken for a ride since we pay around 45% more for drugs here than they do in other western countries, and we account for nearly half of all world wide drug revenues?
In 1990 Americans spent 37 billion dollars on prescription drugs but by 1997 it was almost 79 billion. In 2001 the top 10 US drug companies increased their profits by 33%. Prescription drugs are the fastest growing portion of health care costs as they typically increase 17% per year and will soon overtake physician compensation as the 2nd biggest expense in medical care.
You may say that they need to keep competition out because they are developing cures for cancer and AIDS and need the revenues for research and development, and to make sure their drugs are safe, right? Wrong. Only 1 out of 5 dollars made in the drug industry goes towards research and development; most companies spend twice as much on marketing and advertising. Most drug research comes from small biotech companies who later get their breakthroughs pushed by the major drug companies. The Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) states that over 100,000 people in the US die per year due to side effects from their medication; that's almost three times the amount of deaths from automobile accidents. The FDA claims there may have been as many as 28,000 deaths from the drug Vioxx alone.
Now, to address all the bullshit in the ad; I know the thought of buying medicine from the Neanderthals in third world nations such as New Zealand is terrifying so I have come up with some statistics from the CIA to break down the threat.
Greece, Canada, Israel and New Zealand all have longer life expectancies than the US. If these countries can keep their people alive longer than we can, then I want to take the drugs that they are taking; clearly they are working.
The Czech Republic, Greece and New Zealand all have higher literacy rates than the US. Maybe the reason our drugs kill so many people here is because the pharmacist can't read the labels and end up putting the medicine in the wrong bottles.
Here is another thought; half of the countries listed on their map are now or were at one time nuclear powers. So does this mean we trust them with the power to wipe out humanity but we can't trust them to cure humanities menstrual cramps and swollen prostates?
I would also like to point out that the company who made this ad is a British, not American company. China and India both have a larger GDP than the UK (2nd and 4th) and both have plans of going to the moon within the next few years. Oooh, I'm scared; besides, when was the last time you saw a doctor or a pharmacist who wasn't from one of the countries that were mentioned in the ad?
Monday, August 29, 2005
An Open Letter to the People of Indiana
Although I guess I have known this for years my two recent trips to Indiana have led me to believe that they must have done away with their traffic laws. They still have speed limit signs but apparently highway etiquette is beneath them. So for the last time:
The left lane is a passing lane; if you are not passing someone, drive in the right lane.
The left lane is also known as the fast lane; if you are driving slow, or slower than the guy behind you then you need to move into the slow lane, AKA the right lane.
You don't have to try to fight everyone who honks at you or flashes their brights at you trying to get you to move out of the way; you do not own I-65.
When a bigger faster vehicle comes up behind you at a high rate of speed the laws of physics argues that you should move out of the way, not slam on your breaks.
I know it is hard to see out of your rear view mirror with the gun rack hanging in your back window but try using your side view mirrors from time to time if you haven't already knocked them off during your last DUI.
Yes I know there is a speed limit law but I may choose not to obey it and pay the appropriate fines if I am caught.
Just because you think 75 is "fast enough" doesn't mean that I do. Maybe I think you are stupid enough to run off the road.
Just because you think I am driving dangerously doesn't make it any more so than you being a 95 year old blind lady who can't see over the dashboard.
It is not your job to enforce the speed limit. I don't try to pull you over for driving a car that is not safe for highway travel or for not wearing a shirt in public, or your violation of open container laws now do I?
No, being so obese that you exceed the cars weight limit is not an excuse for driving slow in the fast lane.
Just because you have an old car/truck from the early 80's that is spewing black smoke from the back that would make Spy Hunter jealous, doesn't mean that you are exempt from the law due to having a car that is not capable of traveling at those speeds. My advice would be to get a new car or drive on the back-roads where your home is parked.
Apparently NRA, W, and number 8 stickers slow down your vehicle immensely; do not put one of these stickers on your car. Other observations have led me to believe that mustaches have the same affect on vehicle speed.
It's not a race; when I am forced to pass you in the right lane that doesn't mean I want to race so don't bother speeding up while I am trying to get by.
So pretty please, with a cherry on top; get the fuck out of my way!
The left lane is a passing lane; if you are not passing someone, drive in the right lane.
The left lane is also known as the fast lane; if you are driving slow, or slower than the guy behind you then you need to move into the slow lane, AKA the right lane.
You don't have to try to fight everyone who honks at you or flashes their brights at you trying to get you to move out of the way; you do not own I-65.
When a bigger faster vehicle comes up behind you at a high rate of speed the laws of physics argues that you should move out of the way, not slam on your breaks.
I know it is hard to see out of your rear view mirror with the gun rack hanging in your back window but try using your side view mirrors from time to time if you haven't already knocked them off during your last DUI.
Yes I know there is a speed limit law but I may choose not to obey it and pay the appropriate fines if I am caught.
Just because you think 75 is "fast enough" doesn't mean that I do. Maybe I think you are stupid enough to run off the road.
Just because you think I am driving dangerously doesn't make it any more so than you being a 95 year old blind lady who can't see over the dashboard.
It is not your job to enforce the speed limit. I don't try to pull you over for driving a car that is not safe for highway travel or for not wearing a shirt in public, or your violation of open container laws now do I?
No, being so obese that you exceed the cars weight limit is not an excuse for driving slow in the fast lane.
Just because you have an old car/truck from the early 80's that is spewing black smoke from the back that would make Spy Hunter jealous, doesn't mean that you are exempt from the law due to having a car that is not capable of traveling at those speeds. My advice would be to get a new car or drive on the back-roads where your home is parked.
Apparently NRA, W, and number 8 stickers slow down your vehicle immensely; do not put one of these stickers on your car. Other observations have led me to believe that mustaches have the same affect on vehicle speed.
It's not a race; when I am forced to pass you in the right lane that doesn't mean I want to race so don't bother speeding up while I am trying to get by.
So pretty please, with a cherry on top; get the fuck out of my way!
Saturday, August 20, 2005
While I am Away; Some Pictures I like
I will be away for a week or so but I wanted to leave you with some of my favorite Photobucket collections.
Same arguments for intelligent design apply:
How to support our troops Republican style:
Example of the tolerant right wing / loving Christians:
Doesn't anyone see the similarities between the last Star Wars and the our current situation?
Do we have a religious maniac in office?
WWI poster with the American Pitbull Terrier:
What is in Bush's office?
How Neocon Christian Republicans see the world:
The Dawgs:
The aristocratic dawg:
Same arguments for intelligent design apply:
How to support our troops Republican style:
Example of the tolerant right wing / loving Christians:
Doesn't anyone see the similarities between the last Star Wars and the our current situation?
Do we have a religious maniac in office?
WWI poster with the American Pitbull Terrier:
What is in Bush's office?
How Neocon Christian Republicans see the world:
The Dawgs:
The aristocratic dawg:
Wednesday, August 17, 2005
Jesus Speaks Out Against Public Prayer
Jesus solves the issue of public prayer:
Matthew 6:5-8:
5: And when thou prayest, thou shalt not be as the hypocrites are: for they love to pray standing in the synagogues and in the corners of the streets, that they may be seen by men. Verily I say unto you, They have their reward.
6: But thou, when thou prayest, enter into thy closet, and when thou hast shut thy door, pray to thy Father which is in secret; and thy Father which seeth in secret shall reward thee openly.
7: But when ye pray, use not vain repetitions, as the heathen do: for they think that they shall be heard for their much speaking.
8: Be not ye therefore like unto them: for your Father knoweth what things ye have need of, before ye ask him.
Ok, this issue is settled! This is a quote straight from JC's mouth. If you try to pray at a football game, or in school, or shove it down peoples throats anywhere else, not only is it rude, not only do you look ridiculous, not only may you be breaking the law if you're doing it in a public place funded by my tax money, but you will also burn in Hell.
After all, the premise of Christianity is to obey what Jesus says, otherwise...
Matthew 6:5-8:
5: And when thou prayest, thou shalt not be as the hypocrites are: for they love to pray standing in the synagogues and in the corners of the streets, that they may be seen by men. Verily I say unto you, They have their reward.
6: But thou, when thou prayest, enter into thy closet, and when thou hast shut thy door, pray to thy Father which is in secret; and thy Father which seeth in secret shall reward thee openly.
7: But when ye pray, use not vain repetitions, as the heathen do: for they think that they shall be heard for their much speaking.
8: Be not ye therefore like unto them: for your Father knoweth what things ye have need of, before ye ask him.
Ok, this issue is settled! This is a quote straight from JC's mouth. If you try to pray at a football game, or in school, or shove it down peoples throats anywhere else, not only is it rude, not only do you look ridiculous, not only may you be breaking the law if you're doing it in a public place funded by my tax money, but you will also burn in Hell.
After all, the premise of Christianity is to obey what Jesus says, otherwise...
Wednesday, August 10, 2005
Stem Cells Continued
Ok, I have a confession to make. In my last post I showed a picture of a blastocyst which is the early stage of an embryo from which stem cells are derived, and asked people to tell me why they thought this mass of about 100 cells is a human being. Most people agreed that indeed this is just group of cells with no brain, no heart or heartbeat and no nervous system. But then there were several anonymous posters who said that this blastocyst was human because it will one day become human and that it has a soul. No, it doesn't have soul, like James Brown has soul, but it has A soul, that I suppose God implanted into it sometime between ejaculation and fertilization.
Well I have to admit that all of our anonymous posters were wrong, not because of my agnostic religious beliefs say there is no such thing as a soul, but because the picture I displayed was A COW EMBRYO! So no, it doesn't have a soul, it would have never turned into a human and there is really no difference between a bunch of cells in a cow embryo and a bunch of cells at this stage of a human embryo because they look like and essentially are the same thing. It is pretty easy for me to differentiate between a grown cow and a grown person, but not so easy for me to tell when they are only one week into their development. Sure the DNA is different but there really isn't much that sets a human blastocyst apart from that of a cow's. Cow embryos have even been fertilized by human sperm though they have yet to get past the single cell stage. So my point is that these people don't know the difference, they can't see the difference, and they cannot say for sure what these cells will turn into, if they turn into anything at all. Ever hear of a miscarriage?
I guess souls are like invisible ghosts that are stored in a soul closet up in heaven until someone gets it on and it is therefore taken out of heaven, put into an embryo by God (who is watching you have sex so he can insert the soul at exactly the right time) so it can later grow up to follow God, so it can get back to heaven. I say why not just skip the middle man and let the soul stay in heaven. Why take the chance right? If you were chilling in paradise and someone said, "hey do you want to go hang out in Somalia and starve for 45-50 years, or be born to a poor single crack mom who will hate you thus taking a chance of you becoming "evil" and therefore not being allowed to go back to Heaven and instead, burning in Hell for eternity; which would you rather do? I would rather not take the chance and just stay in Heaven, wouldn't you?
It's ironic that the very people who claim that life couldn't have evolved from a single or multi-celled organism are the exact same people who call a clump of cells, such as a blastocyst, human life. Which is it, can a clump of cells evolve into a human or not?
Here's what a guy like me sees:
Here is what the neocons see:
Well I have to admit that all of our anonymous posters were wrong, not because of my agnostic religious beliefs say there is no such thing as a soul, but because the picture I displayed was A COW EMBRYO! So no, it doesn't have a soul, it would have never turned into a human and there is really no difference between a bunch of cells in a cow embryo and a bunch of cells at this stage of a human embryo because they look like and essentially are the same thing. It is pretty easy for me to differentiate between a grown cow and a grown person, but not so easy for me to tell when they are only one week into their development. Sure the DNA is different but there really isn't much that sets a human blastocyst apart from that of a cow's. Cow embryos have even been fertilized by human sperm though they have yet to get past the single cell stage. So my point is that these people don't know the difference, they can't see the difference, and they cannot say for sure what these cells will turn into, if they turn into anything at all. Ever hear of a miscarriage?
I guess souls are like invisible ghosts that are stored in a soul closet up in heaven until someone gets it on and it is therefore taken out of heaven, put into an embryo by God (who is watching you have sex so he can insert the soul at exactly the right time) so it can later grow up to follow God, so it can get back to heaven. I say why not just skip the middle man and let the soul stay in heaven. Why take the chance right? If you were chilling in paradise and someone said, "hey do you want to go hang out in Somalia and starve for 45-50 years, or be born to a poor single crack mom who will hate you thus taking a chance of you becoming "evil" and therefore not being allowed to go back to Heaven and instead, burning in Hell for eternity; which would you rather do? I would rather not take the chance and just stay in Heaven, wouldn't you?
It's ironic that the very people who claim that life couldn't have evolved from a single or multi-celled organism are the exact same people who call a clump of cells, such as a blastocyst, human life. Which is it, can a clump of cells evolve into a human or not?
Here's what a guy like me sees:
Here is what the neocons see:
Wednesday, August 03, 2005
Is This Human? / Stem Cell Research
The above photo is of a Blastocyst, which is basically a fertilized egg a few days later with about 100 or so extra cells and a little fluid. At this stage of development, it has yet to even enter the uterus. It is from the inner mass cells of a human Blastocyst where stem cells are obtained.
I know this Blastocyst consists of living cells, as does my sperm and every pathogen that has entered my body. Why is one worth saving and the others are not? Could the people against embryonic stem cell research explain to me what, if anything, makes this human? And what information do you have that would back your claim? How do you know that this embryo will ever indeed be carried to term and result in a person?
With no nervous system, no heart beat, with no brain or anything else one would associate with a fully developed mammal, let alone a human being, how does one try to proclaim that this is indeed a human? Could someone please point out the human characteristics that are represented in this photo? Is this a human being?
Monday, August 01, 2005
ALTV?
Story: Al Gore TV, CNN
Back from his last identity crisis of being a bearded woodsman, Al Gore, along with a group of investors, debuted a new television network Monday called Current TV, and it promises to be as exciting as Al Gore himself. This network will feature short segments called "pods", and each pod will only be around 7 minutes long, as to not loose the attention of the ADD caffeine generation. CNN describes the preview as a "hipper, more irreverent version of traditional TV news magazines", in other words they are ripping off MTV News and the Daily Show all at once. However, they also explained that programming would be covering topics such as jobs, technology and spirituality. I don't know about you but when I think of "hip", jobs and spirituality are the first things that come to mind.
And excuse me for not wanting to watch a network owned by the guy whose wife was the head of the PMRC, the anti free speech organization responsible for warning labels on mainly hip-hop and metal CD's, regardless of their actual content. In other words, this was another organization trying to step in and take the place of parenting. At first glance, I would think that The 700 Club would be more exciting than this gimmick network.
Back from his last identity crisis of being a bearded woodsman, Al Gore, along with a group of investors, debuted a new television network Monday called Current TV, and it promises to be as exciting as Al Gore himself. This network will feature short segments called "pods", and each pod will only be around 7 minutes long, as to not loose the attention of the ADD caffeine generation. CNN describes the preview as a "hipper, more irreverent version of traditional TV news magazines", in other words they are ripping off MTV News and the Daily Show all at once. However, they also explained that programming would be covering topics such as jobs, technology and spirituality. I don't know about you but when I think of "hip", jobs and spirituality are the first things that come to mind.
And excuse me for not wanting to watch a network owned by the guy whose wife was the head of the PMRC, the anti free speech organization responsible for warning labels on mainly hip-hop and metal CD's, regardless of their actual content. In other words, this was another organization trying to step in and take the place of parenting. At first glance, I would think that The 700 Club would be more exciting than this gimmick network.
Thursday, July 28, 2005
Sellouts! CAFTA Blows!
We expect this from big business Republicans (and Bill Clinton) but here are the names of the Democrats who support the loss of US jobs, factories with no environmental regulations and slave labor with no rights. Yes, McDonalds and Kentucky Fried Chicken will be able to open restaurants in Central America putting out of business small family owned restaurants but I don't see how that benefits me. The only good that comes from CAFTA is that Fortune 500 companies stock prices have an oppurtunity to edge up a quarter point. It solves no problems in Central America, it only creates more.
Thanks guys! Now the rest of the country can look like Detroit.
The following Democrats are responsible for the loss of your job:
Melissa Bean, Illinois (8th District): 202-225-3711
Jim Cooper, Tennessee (5th District): 202-225-4311
Norm Dicks, Washington (6th District): 202-225-5916
Henry Cuellar, Texas (28th District): 202-225-1640
Ruben Hinojosa, Texas (15th District): (202) 225-2531
William Jefferson, Louisiana (2nd District): (202) 225-6636
Jim Matheson, Utah (2nd District): (202) 225-3011
Gregory Meeks, New York (6th District): (202) 225-3011
Dennis Moore, Kansas (3rd District): (202) 225-2865
Jim Moran, Virginia (8th District): (202) 225-4376
Solomon Ortiz, Texas (27th District): 202-225-7742
Ike Skelton, Missouri (4th District): 202-225-2876
Vic Snyder, Arkansas (2nd District): 202-225-2506
John Tanner, Tennessee (8th District): (202) 225-4714
Edolphus Towns, New York (10th District: (202) 225-5936
Thanks guys! Now the rest of the country can look like Detroit.
The following Democrats are responsible for the loss of your job:
Melissa Bean, Illinois (8th District): 202-225-3711
Jim Cooper, Tennessee (5th District): 202-225-4311
Norm Dicks, Washington (6th District): 202-225-5916
Henry Cuellar, Texas (28th District): 202-225-1640
Ruben Hinojosa, Texas (15th District): (202) 225-2531
William Jefferson, Louisiana (2nd District): (202) 225-6636
Jim Matheson, Utah (2nd District): (202) 225-3011
Gregory Meeks, New York (6th District): (202) 225-3011
Dennis Moore, Kansas (3rd District): (202) 225-2865
Jim Moran, Virginia (8th District): (202) 225-4376
Solomon Ortiz, Texas (27th District): 202-225-7742
Ike Skelton, Missouri (4th District): 202-225-2876
Vic Snyder, Arkansas (2nd District): 202-225-2506
John Tanner, Tennessee (8th District): (202) 225-4714
Edolphus Towns, New York (10th District: (202) 225-5936
Wednesday, July 27, 2005
Tell Your Senators to Keep the Estate Tax!
Do you think the US doesn't need 30 billion dollars in tax revenue per year?
Do you think Paris Hilton deserves to be rich more than someone who works 50 hours per week, just because of her last name?
Did you know that the Estate Tax (AKA Death Tax to Republicans) only affects estates worth over 1.5 million dollars?
Did you know that the Estate Tax never exceeds 50% no matter how rich someone is?
Did you know that the Estate Tax only affects approximately 2% percent of the entire population, but this small percentage accounts for over 45% of the wealth in this country?
Did you know that 8 of the 15 richest people in this country inherited all of their wealth, and never worked a day in their life for it?
Did you know that in 1982 the wealthiest 400 individuals in the "Forbes 400" owned $92 billion? By 2000 their wealth increased to over $1.2 trillion.
Did you know that Bill Gates alone has as much wealth as the bottom 40% of all U.S. households? (He is one of the few who actually worked for it)
Did you know that you will never be this rich and that you personally will never have to pay an Estate Tax?
Would you whine and complain if someone handed you a free check worth over $750,000?
Did you know that because of this country's lax trade policies, its defeat of European Communism, its lenient tax laws, and its welfare system which protects rich people from hordes of poor people roaming the streets looking for their next victim, that rich people in this country get richer every year, and are only allowed to do so because they live in this country to begin with?
Don't you think it's about time they show a little gratitude and realize they owe their success to the United States of America and the American workers?
If so, click this link below and tell your Senators to keep the Estate Tax in place!
http://www.usalone.com/estatetax.htm
The repeal has already passed in the House of Representatives!
Do you think Paris Hilton deserves to be rich more than someone who works 50 hours per week, just because of her last name?
Did you know that the Estate Tax (AKA Death Tax to Republicans) only affects estates worth over 1.5 million dollars?
Did you know that the Estate Tax never exceeds 50% no matter how rich someone is?
Did you know that the Estate Tax only affects approximately 2% percent of the entire population, but this small percentage accounts for over 45% of the wealth in this country?
Did you know that 8 of the 15 richest people in this country inherited all of their wealth, and never worked a day in their life for it?
Did you know that in 1982 the wealthiest 400 individuals in the "Forbes 400" owned $92 billion? By 2000 their wealth increased to over $1.2 trillion.
Did you know that Bill Gates alone has as much wealth as the bottom 40% of all U.S. households? (He is one of the few who actually worked for it)
Did you know that you will never be this rich and that you personally will never have to pay an Estate Tax?
Would you whine and complain if someone handed you a free check worth over $750,000?
Did you know that because of this country's lax trade policies, its defeat of European Communism, its lenient tax laws, and its welfare system which protects rich people from hordes of poor people roaming the streets looking for their next victim, that rich people in this country get richer every year, and are only allowed to do so because they live in this country to begin with?
Don't you think it's about time they show a little gratitude and realize they owe their success to the United States of America and the American workers?
If so, click this link below and tell your Senators to keep the Estate Tax in place!
http://www.usalone.com/estatetax.htm
The repeal has already passed in the House of Representatives!
Monday, July 25, 2005
Guns and Alcohol Should be Tax Exempt too!
According to the Tax Guide for Churches and Religious Organizations, on the IRS' website:
"Congress has enacted special tax laws applicable to churches, religious organizations and ministers in recognition of their unique status in American society and of their rights guaranteed by the First Amendment of the Constitution of the United States."
If religious organizations get tax exempt status based on their protection under the Constitution then guns and alcohol should be Tax Exempt too. What better way to celebrate our freedoms than getting drunk and shooting each other and then going to church the next day to repent.
Although my father was an IRS agent for over 25 years, Sec. 501c of the IRS tax code was not his specialty and he has no good answer as to why churches don't pay taxes and is as just as baffled as I am. So if anyone can help shed some light on this subject I would like to hear your educated view on the actual laws governing tax exempt organizations under the US tax code.
I always thought churches were tax exempt because most of them were "charitable organizations", or at least claimed to be. However, what I gather from the above statement is that because freedom of religion is protected under the constitution, the government doesn't have the right to interfere with its practice and finances. But, if Alcohol is protected under the 21st amendment, doesn't it stand to reason that it would be unconstitutional to tax alcohol, or guns for that matter since they are both protected under amendments in the Constitution? And while we are at it, Time, Newsweek and other forms media should not be taxed since they are also protected under the same amendment as religion. Unless of course a member of the press refuses to give up their source, then that is clearly not protected (<---sarcasm).
Why does one get special exemptions and the others don't? Are they saying that one amendment is more important than any other amendments? If so, who decided this? If not, why the special treatment for religious organizations and charities but not for other thing protected under the Constitution?
And as most people know, tax exempt religious or charitable organizations cannot condemn or support a candidate for political office. I guess that means Pat Robertson, Jerry Falwell, The NAACP, Westboro Baptist Church (Rev. Phelps), Ronnie Floyd and all the Southern Baptists and Focus on the Family should all start paying taxes.
"Congress has enacted special tax laws applicable to churches, religious organizations and ministers in recognition of their unique status in American society and of their rights guaranteed by the First Amendment of the Constitution of the United States."
If religious organizations get tax exempt status based on their protection under the Constitution then guns and alcohol should be Tax Exempt too. What better way to celebrate our freedoms than getting drunk and shooting each other and then going to church the next day to repent.
Although my father was an IRS agent for over 25 years, Sec. 501c of the IRS tax code was not his specialty and he has no good answer as to why churches don't pay taxes and is as just as baffled as I am. So if anyone can help shed some light on this subject I would like to hear your educated view on the actual laws governing tax exempt organizations under the US tax code.
I always thought churches were tax exempt because most of them were "charitable organizations", or at least claimed to be. However, what I gather from the above statement is that because freedom of religion is protected under the constitution, the government doesn't have the right to interfere with its practice and finances. But, if Alcohol is protected under the 21st amendment, doesn't it stand to reason that it would be unconstitutional to tax alcohol, or guns for that matter since they are both protected under amendments in the Constitution? And while we are at it, Time, Newsweek and other forms media should not be taxed since they are also protected under the same amendment as religion. Unless of course a member of the press refuses to give up their source, then that is clearly not protected (<---sarcasm).
Why does one get special exemptions and the others don't? Are they saying that one amendment is more important than any other amendments? If so, who decided this? If not, why the special treatment for religious organizations and charities but not for other thing protected under the Constitution?
And as most people know, tax exempt religious or charitable organizations cannot condemn or support a candidate for political office. I guess that means Pat Robertson, Jerry Falwell, The NAACP, Westboro Baptist Church (Rev. Phelps), Ronnie Floyd and all the Southern Baptists and Focus on the Family should all start paying taxes.
Thursday, July 21, 2005
Tax Exempt Theme Park?? Florida Still Sucks!
Washington Times article
There is a Biblical theme park in Orlando, FL that recently won a court decision exempting it from paying taxes. The activist Circuit Judge Cynthia MacKinnon decided that "Holy Land Experience" should be tax exempt due to its religious nature.
The thought of religious organizations not paying taxes is disturbing and the thought of a religious theme park in general is even more so. But now, a theme park based on a religious theme somehow gets to avoid the $786,343 property tax bill and all future tax bills, which would be over $1 million per year. Even if the parent company is involved in religious publishing and missionary work how can a theme park sitting on a 12 million dollar piece of property, that charges $29 for admission, be considered a religious entity?
This precedent has given me a few ideas:
1. I am now going to start a religion called Toadism; Toadism is actually a non-denominational, all-inclusive religion which will encourage religious belief in general, not just one specific denomination. I will start a non-profit religious organization based on Toadism which promotes religion through missionary work and religious literature. I will then spin off the following subsidiaries to further all religious education and make them all tax exempt whilst paying myself a 3 million dollar per year salary. Since the parent company should be bringing in 3.1 million dollars per year in revenues I will spend the .1 million left over after my salary on all the religious literature I publish and use the rest to support my religious missionary, me.
2. I will also open a theme park but instead of Christianity, mine will be based on Islamic extremism. This theme park will be called Jihad Island and will include rides which mimics riding in a public bus in Jerusalem as it gets blown up by a suicide bomber, and one where you are a US marine riding around Baghdad in an unarmored Hummer dodging RPG's, small arms fire and IEDs. Since the theme park is religious in nature, I will not have to pay any federal taxes from it's revenues and have enough left over to give myself a nice little raise.
3. The next subsidiary will be a religious-themed condom manufacturer with a picture of Lot on the front talking about how he wished he had condoms back when he had sex with his two daughters. I could also put Biblical scripture on the back from the book of Samuel which explains the homosexual affair between Jonathan and David. Since the proceeds will be used to further the cause of my religion, this should qualify as a not-for-profit, tax exempt organization.
4. I will also start a nail manufacturing company that sells oversized nails for the "big jobs". What better spokesperson than Jesus himself. After all, he knows all about quality nails. The slogan would quote Jesus saying "If they were strong enough for me, they're strong enough for you." Since there is a depiction of a religious figure on my product, that should be enough to keep this one tax exempt as well.
5. Next I would like to make a boxed wine company which would put out products similar to He-Brew which will have a picture of Jesus at a party turning water into wine and Noah getting blasted after the flood waters receded. Of course all profits (after my 3 million dollar salary) will go to support my missionary work and my missionary, which just happens to be me.
Now doesn't a religious based theme park filing for tax exempt status seem just as ridiculous?
IRS explanation of "church"
There is a Biblical theme park in Orlando, FL that recently won a court decision exempting it from paying taxes. The activist Circuit Judge Cynthia MacKinnon decided that "Holy Land Experience" should be tax exempt due to its religious nature.
The thought of religious organizations not paying taxes is disturbing and the thought of a religious theme park in general is even more so. But now, a theme park based on a religious theme somehow gets to avoid the $786,343 property tax bill and all future tax bills, which would be over $1 million per year. Even if the parent company is involved in religious publishing and missionary work how can a theme park sitting on a 12 million dollar piece of property, that charges $29 for admission, be considered a religious entity?
This precedent has given me a few ideas:
1. I am now going to start a religion called Toadism; Toadism is actually a non-denominational, all-inclusive religion which will encourage religious belief in general, not just one specific denomination. I will start a non-profit religious organization based on Toadism which promotes religion through missionary work and religious literature. I will then spin off the following subsidiaries to further all religious education and make them all tax exempt whilst paying myself a 3 million dollar per year salary. Since the parent company should be bringing in 3.1 million dollars per year in revenues I will spend the .1 million left over after my salary on all the religious literature I publish and use the rest to support my religious missionary, me.
2. I will also open a theme park but instead of Christianity, mine will be based on Islamic extremism. This theme park will be called Jihad Island and will include rides which mimics riding in a public bus in Jerusalem as it gets blown up by a suicide bomber, and one where you are a US marine riding around Baghdad in an unarmored Hummer dodging RPG's, small arms fire and IEDs. Since the theme park is religious in nature, I will not have to pay any federal taxes from it's revenues and have enough left over to give myself a nice little raise.
3. The next subsidiary will be a religious-themed condom manufacturer with a picture of Lot on the front talking about how he wished he had condoms back when he had sex with his two daughters. I could also put Biblical scripture on the back from the book of Samuel which explains the homosexual affair between Jonathan and David. Since the proceeds will be used to further the cause of my religion, this should qualify as a not-for-profit, tax exempt organization.
4. I will also start a nail manufacturing company that sells oversized nails for the "big jobs". What better spokesperson than Jesus himself. After all, he knows all about quality nails. The slogan would quote Jesus saying "If they were strong enough for me, they're strong enough for you." Since there is a depiction of a religious figure on my product, that should be enough to keep this one tax exempt as well.
5. Next I would like to make a boxed wine company which would put out products similar to He-Brew which will have a picture of Jesus at a party turning water into wine and Noah getting blasted after the flood waters receded. Of course all profits (after my 3 million dollar salary) will go to support my missionary work and my missionary, which just happens to be me.
Now doesn't a religious based theme park filing for tax exempt status seem just as ridiculous?
IRS explanation of "church"
Friday, July 15, 2005
Time to end Socialism in the United States!
Handouts for the lazy, the criminals, and the backwards must come to an end before we end up with a hammer and sickle on our flag.
So how do we do it, how can we help fight socialism in the US? How do we keep people from getting free handouts for doing nothing and not working? How do we force people to start carrying their own weight? How can we eliminate our budget deficit and eliminate waste in our federal government that rewards and breeds laziness?
We stop giving them free money and make them pay their fair share of taxes!
So where do we start, how do we identify these leaches? The first place I would look would be Washington DC; DC is full of welfare recipients, but what can you expect from a city whose Mayor smoked crack? It’s easy to find these people.They are all over the place in DC. All you have to do is go to any street corner and find a guy wearing a suit and tie who either lobbies for an industry or works for a Fortune 500 corporation; he is the one stealing the bread off of your table and keeping your taxes high. What, you thought I was talking about some fat black lady with 3 kids, didn't you?
Welfare:
That's right, if the US eliminated corporate welfare the government would be able to provide annual tax cuts twice the size as the ones handed out in 2001. In 2002, the US spent 93 Billion dollars to subsidize US business and industry. In the 1940's, corporations paid 33% of all federal taxes, yet by the 1990's they were only paying 15% of all federal taxes meanwhile individuals saw a 60% increase in their tax burden. In other words, not only are they having us make up for the corporate tax decreases, but they are actually handing our cash to the wealthiest people in America. This is the exact definition of income redistribution.
The "Big 3" auto makers received 333 million dollars of our tax money while posting profits of over 13 billion dollars in 1995. You may say that is needed in order to keep people working or to develop new technologies like hybrid vehicles, right? Wrong- since 1979 the "Big 3” have laid off over 350,000 US workers and only put out one Hybrid vehicle between the 3 of them while both Honda and Toyota have opened several US plants, and each put out more than one Hybrid vehicle without the help of the federal government. In approximately the same time period, average CEO pay for Fortune 500 companies has gone from 40 times the amount of the average worker to 411 times the amount of the average worker. In Japan the ratio is more like 20 times that of an average worker. Another big welfare recipient is GE; their CEO earns over 8.5 million dollars per year. Do you really think he would quit if they only paid him 1 million per year and diverted that money towards R&D? Remember Jeff Skilling of Enron, the corrupt subsidized energy company, he earned 84 million dollars in 2000 before committing one of the biggest acts of corporate fraud in history. These companies clearly do not need these welfare checks to survive, they just need to trim the fat and produce a product that works- one that people want.
Farm Subsidies:
The fattest recipient of federal welfare is agriculture. The US budget for the department of agriculture is over 35 billion, 2.5 billion of that is in the form of crop insurance so farmers/farming conglomerates don't have to take any risks in their business and get compensated for any failed crops. Does this mean that the government should start subsidizing bartenders when they have a bad tip night due to a blizzard? Over 20 billion dollars of this budget gets paid out as farming subsidies which mostly go to big corporate, profitable farms, including tobacco growers. Mostly, these are companies such as ADM who grow corn (an unprofitable subsidized crop) which is converted into corn syrup which is one of the main culprits of putting fat on the asses of Americans, contributing to our nations healthcare crisis. In other words, Hoosier Ma and Hoosier Pa who own their own small family farm have no lobbyist to petition on their behalf for these handouts; that’s what Farm Aid was all about. So if you are a small family farmer and are wondering how to survive, grow corn, call Mellencamp, get your own lobbyist.
Logging Subsidies:
And for all the people out there who are being plagued by the mounting surplus of trees in this country, you will be happy to know that logging and timber companies receive over 50 million dollars per year in order to pave our nation's forests. You can't really expect them to provide their own infrastructure when depleting all of our forests can you? This is America. We are Capitalists! The government should not interfere with commerce and business, unless it's giving them money in order for them to cut their costs and make more money. Anything else is socialism! This, by the way, is a drop in the bucket compared to what the mining companies get.
Free cash handouts for people who don't work:
8 out of the 15 richest people in this country had their money handed to them and did not work a day in their life to earn it. So, why is it ok for the Walton family or Paris Hilton to do nothing and get free money handed to them but it's not ok for a shoeless single mom in Tennessee to get money which she didn't work for? Why do poor and middle class Republicans fight for these people? Do you really think Paris Hilton cares about how much tax you pay to the federal government? Do you really think she would fight and lobby for you to keep more of your money? Then why are you so adamant about fighting for her, do you really think she deserves it more than a guy who works 50 hours per week and still can't afford to pay the bills? The Estate Tax (AKA the Death Tax to spinster Republicans) only affects 1.5-2% of the population, so who cares if someone has to pay more than 50% of their 19 billion in taxes to the federal government? The Estate Tax only applies to Estates worth over 1.5 million dollars; I hardly think that anyone will go hungry if they only inherit half of that. Hand me a free check for over $500,000 and see if I bitch about it. If we can't tax dead rich people, who can we tax, the poor living people?
Wealth Redistribution:
Most of the states in the union are on welfare. Chances are, if you are guy in a "red state" who bitches about socialism and crack moms in New York bringing down America, you are a benefactor of this welfare and wealth redistribution from progressive, liberal states who actually make money and can support themselves.
California annually pays out over 25 billion dollars more in taxes than it receives in federal subsidies. My state of Illinois also pays out almost 25 billion dollars more of its tax revenue than it receives in federal subsidies. In contrast, Alabama receives 10 Billion dollars more per year than it pays out in taxes because it is unable to sustain itself with its current tax rates and tax base. Indiana and South Carolina received 4 billion and 5 billion more than they pay out respectively. California's GDP is the same as all former Confederate states combined. So why is it, with all this money, do you hear about California having to live through blackouts and water shortages every year, yet you never hear of these shortages in Mississippi, a state that constantly loses money?
For all of you Libertarian "flat taxers" out there, does this mean that we can make someone in Rural Alabama pay the same sales, fuel and alcohol tax that I pay in Chicago? Apparently I pay 8.75% in sales tax so Mississippi can keep their tax rate at 4%. On top of all this, Mississippi residents get a $12,000 tax exemption for married people when New Jersey residents only get a $2000 dollar exemption. If Mississippi kept $10,000 of that exemption, would they still need New Jersey's money? For every dollar Mississippi pays out in federal taxes it gets $1.84 in return, New Jersey only gets $.57 back for every dollar it sends to Washington, we here in Illinois get $.77 back in subsidies for every dollar we pay in taxes. Welcome to the motherland of the Union of American Socialist Republics, or U.A.S.R.
Final Thoughts:
I understand the concept of helping someone when they are down; I had no problem with the US bailing Chrysler out of their slump in the 80s as they quickly paid back all their loans. But when companies like GM, Ford, etc., do develop hybrid or hydrogen vehicles, and start to make a profit on them, are they going to give these subsidies back? When the price of corn peaks, does ADM plan on giving their subsidy money back, or are we just creating a culture of welfare where these companies can cook their books, find tax loopholes, pay for their CEO's weddings and we, the middle class, flip the bill allowing the rich to get richer, and diverting this money away from people who actually need it?
Sources: CATO Institute, Office for Social Justice, Forbes, Christian Science Monitor, US Census Bureau, Levy Economics Institute, Sierra Club, Retrovsmetro.org, Federation of Tax Administrators
So how do we do it, how can we help fight socialism in the US? How do we keep people from getting free handouts for doing nothing and not working? How do we force people to start carrying their own weight? How can we eliminate our budget deficit and eliminate waste in our federal government that rewards and breeds laziness?
We stop giving them free money and make them pay their fair share of taxes!
So where do we start, how do we identify these leaches? The first place I would look would be Washington DC; DC is full of welfare recipients, but what can you expect from a city whose Mayor smoked crack? It’s easy to find these people.They are all over the place in DC. All you have to do is go to any street corner and find a guy wearing a suit and tie who either lobbies for an industry or works for a Fortune 500 corporation; he is the one stealing the bread off of your table and keeping your taxes high. What, you thought I was talking about some fat black lady with 3 kids, didn't you?
Welfare:
That's right, if the US eliminated corporate welfare the government would be able to provide annual tax cuts twice the size as the ones handed out in 2001. In 2002, the US spent 93 Billion dollars to subsidize US business and industry. In the 1940's, corporations paid 33% of all federal taxes, yet by the 1990's they were only paying 15% of all federal taxes meanwhile individuals saw a 60% increase in their tax burden. In other words, not only are they having us make up for the corporate tax decreases, but they are actually handing our cash to the wealthiest people in America. This is the exact definition of income redistribution.
The "Big 3" auto makers received 333 million dollars of our tax money while posting profits of over 13 billion dollars in 1995. You may say that is needed in order to keep people working or to develop new technologies like hybrid vehicles, right? Wrong- since 1979 the "Big 3” have laid off over 350,000 US workers and only put out one Hybrid vehicle between the 3 of them while both Honda and Toyota have opened several US plants, and each put out more than one Hybrid vehicle without the help of the federal government. In approximately the same time period, average CEO pay for Fortune 500 companies has gone from 40 times the amount of the average worker to 411 times the amount of the average worker. In Japan the ratio is more like 20 times that of an average worker. Another big welfare recipient is GE; their CEO earns over 8.5 million dollars per year. Do you really think he would quit if they only paid him 1 million per year and diverted that money towards R&D? Remember Jeff Skilling of Enron, the corrupt subsidized energy company, he earned 84 million dollars in 2000 before committing one of the biggest acts of corporate fraud in history. These companies clearly do not need these welfare checks to survive, they just need to trim the fat and produce a product that works- one that people want.
Farm Subsidies:
The fattest recipient of federal welfare is agriculture. The US budget for the department of agriculture is over 35 billion, 2.5 billion of that is in the form of crop insurance so farmers/farming conglomerates don't have to take any risks in their business and get compensated for any failed crops. Does this mean that the government should start subsidizing bartenders when they have a bad tip night due to a blizzard? Over 20 billion dollars of this budget gets paid out as farming subsidies which mostly go to big corporate, profitable farms, including tobacco growers. Mostly, these are companies such as ADM who grow corn (an unprofitable subsidized crop) which is converted into corn syrup which is one of the main culprits of putting fat on the asses of Americans, contributing to our nations healthcare crisis. In other words, Hoosier Ma and Hoosier Pa who own their own small family farm have no lobbyist to petition on their behalf for these handouts; that’s what Farm Aid was all about. So if you are a small family farmer and are wondering how to survive, grow corn, call Mellencamp, get your own lobbyist.
Logging Subsidies:
And for all the people out there who are being plagued by the mounting surplus of trees in this country, you will be happy to know that logging and timber companies receive over 50 million dollars per year in order to pave our nation's forests. You can't really expect them to provide their own infrastructure when depleting all of our forests can you? This is America. We are Capitalists! The government should not interfere with commerce and business, unless it's giving them money in order for them to cut their costs and make more money. Anything else is socialism! This, by the way, is a drop in the bucket compared to what the mining companies get.
Free cash handouts for people who don't work:
8 out of the 15 richest people in this country had their money handed to them and did not work a day in their life to earn it. So, why is it ok for the Walton family or Paris Hilton to do nothing and get free money handed to them but it's not ok for a shoeless single mom in Tennessee to get money which she didn't work for? Why do poor and middle class Republicans fight for these people? Do you really think Paris Hilton cares about how much tax you pay to the federal government? Do you really think she would fight and lobby for you to keep more of your money? Then why are you so adamant about fighting for her, do you really think she deserves it more than a guy who works 50 hours per week and still can't afford to pay the bills? The Estate Tax (AKA the Death Tax to spinster Republicans) only affects 1.5-2% of the population, so who cares if someone has to pay more than 50% of their 19 billion in taxes to the federal government? The Estate Tax only applies to Estates worth over 1.5 million dollars; I hardly think that anyone will go hungry if they only inherit half of that. Hand me a free check for over $500,000 and see if I bitch about it. If we can't tax dead rich people, who can we tax, the poor living people?
Wealth Redistribution:
Most of the states in the union are on welfare. Chances are, if you are guy in a "red state" who bitches about socialism and crack moms in New York bringing down America, you are a benefactor of this welfare and wealth redistribution from progressive, liberal states who actually make money and can support themselves.
California annually pays out over 25 billion dollars more in taxes than it receives in federal subsidies. My state of Illinois also pays out almost 25 billion dollars more of its tax revenue than it receives in federal subsidies. In contrast, Alabama receives 10 Billion dollars more per year than it pays out in taxes because it is unable to sustain itself with its current tax rates and tax base. Indiana and South Carolina received 4 billion and 5 billion more than they pay out respectively. California's GDP is the same as all former Confederate states combined. So why is it, with all this money, do you hear about California having to live through blackouts and water shortages every year, yet you never hear of these shortages in Mississippi, a state that constantly loses money?
For all of you Libertarian "flat taxers" out there, does this mean that we can make someone in Rural Alabama pay the same sales, fuel and alcohol tax that I pay in Chicago? Apparently I pay 8.75% in sales tax so Mississippi can keep their tax rate at 4%. On top of all this, Mississippi residents get a $12,000 tax exemption for married people when New Jersey residents only get a $2000 dollar exemption. If Mississippi kept $10,000 of that exemption, would they still need New Jersey's money? For every dollar Mississippi pays out in federal taxes it gets $1.84 in return, New Jersey only gets $.57 back for every dollar it sends to Washington, we here in Illinois get $.77 back in subsidies for every dollar we pay in taxes. Welcome to the motherland of the Union of American Socialist Republics, or U.A.S.R.
Final Thoughts:
I understand the concept of helping someone when they are down; I had no problem with the US bailing Chrysler out of their slump in the 80s as they quickly paid back all their loans. But when companies like GM, Ford, etc., do develop hybrid or hydrogen vehicles, and start to make a profit on them, are they going to give these subsidies back? When the price of corn peaks, does ADM plan on giving their subsidy money back, or are we just creating a culture of welfare where these companies can cook their books, find tax loopholes, pay for their CEO's weddings and we, the middle class, flip the bill allowing the rich to get richer, and diverting this money away from people who actually need it?
Sources: CATO Institute, Office for Social Justice, Forbes, Christian Science Monitor, US Census Bureau, Levy Economics Institute, Sierra Club, Retrovsmetro.org, Federation of Tax Administrators
Tuesday, July 12, 2005
CIA Leak and Karl Rove
"I didn't know her name and didn't leak her name"- Karl Rove
"If Matt Cooper is going to jail to protect a source, it's not Karl he's protecting." -Robert D. Luskin, Karl Roves Attorney
"He was not involved" -Scott McClellan about Rove and the CIA leak
"The President knows that Karl Rove wasn't involved," "It was a ridiculous suggestion," and, "It's not true." - Scott McClellan
"If someone in this administration leaked classified information, they will no longer be a part of this administration, because that's not the way this White House operates, that's not the way this President expects people in his administration to conduct their business." -Scott McClellan, White House Press Secretary
So we know this administration lied about WMD, and now we know they have essentially committed treason and lied about this as well; I wonder what else they aren't telling us?
Intelligence Identities Protection Act:
SUBCHAPTER IV--PROTECTION OF CERTAIN NATIONAL SECURITY INFORMATION
Sec. 421. Protection of identities of certain United States
undercover intelligence officers, agents, informants, and
sources
(a) Disclosure of information by persons having or having had access to classified information that identifies covert agent
Whoever, having or having had authorized access to classified
information that identifies a covert agent, intentionally discloses any
information identifying such covert agent to any individual not
authorized to receive classified information, knowing that the
information disclosed so identifies such covert agent and that the
United States is taking affirmative measures to conceal such covert
agent's intelligence relationship to the United States, shall be fined
not more than $50,000 or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both
I like the idea of prison more than the 50,000; he puts more than that in the collection plate at church every Sunday!
"If Matt Cooper is going to jail to protect a source, it's not Karl he's protecting." -Robert D. Luskin, Karl Roves Attorney
"He was not involved" -Scott McClellan about Rove and the CIA leak
"The President knows that Karl Rove wasn't involved," "It was a ridiculous suggestion," and, "It's not true." - Scott McClellan
"If someone in this administration leaked classified information, they will no longer be a part of this administration, because that's not the way this White House operates, that's not the way this President expects people in his administration to conduct their business." -Scott McClellan, White House Press Secretary
So we know this administration lied about WMD, and now we know they have essentially committed treason and lied about this as well; I wonder what else they aren't telling us?
Intelligence Identities Protection Act:
SUBCHAPTER IV--PROTECTION OF CERTAIN NATIONAL SECURITY INFORMATION
Sec. 421. Protection of identities of certain United States
undercover intelligence officers, agents, informants, and
sources
(a) Disclosure of information by persons having or having had access to classified information that identifies covert agent
Whoever, having or having had authorized access to classified
information that identifies a covert agent, intentionally discloses any
information identifying such covert agent to any individual not
authorized to receive classified information, knowing that the
information disclosed so identifies such covert agent and that the
United States is taking affirmative measures to conceal such covert
agent's intelligence relationship to the United States, shall be fined
not more than $50,000 or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both
I like the idea of prison more than the 50,000; he puts more than that in the collection plate at church every Sunday!
Wednesday, June 29, 2005
Why the 10 Commandments are an Obsolete Document which Had Nothing to do with the Founding of the US
The Supreme Court recently ruled that displaying the 10 Commandments inside a Kentucky courthouse was unconstitutional. They also ruled that if they are a part of a display, showing other documents of law and government, and that it wasn't religious in nature, that it is ok to display them as a historical example of early law.
I would have to say I agree with their decision for the most part but since when are courthouses museums? Of course it's ridiculous to think that any God Bob could try to force his religion down someone else's throat by displaying his religious dogma in a place that was paid for by my tax dollars. No Christian would let the 5 pillars of Islam to be displayed in their courthouse would they? No, and for good reason, because in doing so it endorses a religion and could alienate the Christian population (wouldn't that be just terrible) and violate the 1st Amendment to our Constitution.
Even though only 3 of the 10 Commandments are referenced in our law books today, people still claim that this document is the basis of our government and that is why they should be displayed in all these public places that I pay for. We can all agree that it is not against the law to disobey your father and mother or covet thy neighbor's wife, or work on the Sabbath. So why is it this document that they deem so important to the development of the United States? Well some say that we were founded as a Christian nation but if you have read my other blogs you would know that is not that case. They also say that since we were founded as a Christian nation that makes the 10 Commandments all that more important and that it pioneered some great moral laws that we still abide by today. Some even say that perjury, thou shall not kill, and don't steal are Christian principles; wrong again. Hammurabis Code of Laws (origin of the 10 Commandments and Hebrew law) which criminalized murder (harm to others), perjury and theft, among many others, predated the 10 Commandments by approximately 300 years; the Babylonians were not Christians. Maybe that's why we invaded Iraq; we just wanted to return to our legal roots.
Solon of ancient Greece is also a noted law giver and his face does appear on the Supreme Court's building along with Moses and Confucius, therefore, not a religious display. So why don't these people in Kentucky and Alabama secretly rush in, in the middle of the night to install images of Solon, Confucius and Hammurabi in their courtrooms? Why don't they go to the Supreme Court fighting to allow images of The Roman Emperor Justinian, Solon and Hammurabi to be displayed in public schools if they are so concerned about the history of law givers and the impact they had on the development of the United States? Is it that they are just stupid and uneducated and don't know who these people are? Is it like when Bush was asked to name his favorite philosopher and he said Jesus because he didn't know any others? Or is it that their displays really are religious in nature and the reason they concentrate on Moses and the 10 Commandments and not Hammurabi's Code of Law or Justinian Law is because they are trying to convert the world over to Christianity?
If you are one of the people who don't agree with the constitution and Supreme Court, exactly which 10 Commandments do you want to put up? Would it be the 1st set of commandments which Moses destroyed, the 2nd set, the ones that were written on Mt. Sinai (Exodus 34) or the ones written on Mt. Horeb(Deuteronomy 5)?Although most people do agree that Mt.Horeb and Mt.Sinai were the same place, most Christians believe that Mt. Sinai was in the Sinai Peninsula of Egypt where St. Catherine's Monastery sits but the "land of Midian" where Moses lived (Exodus 3) which includes Mt. Horeb is across the Gulf of Aqaba in Saudi Arabia. Yes that is correct, the "all perfect word of God" isn't at all perfect and contradicts itself all over the place, Hammurabi's laws did no such thing. Other contradictions include what the Sabbath was observing; was it the day God rested after making the Earth (Exodus 20:11) or was it to commemorate the deliverance of the Jews out of Egypt (Deuteronomy 5:15)? With all these contradictions regarding the origin of the 10 commandments, wouldn't you rather promote other, more concrete examples of law which actually inspired the American Constitution?
The following are examples of why other documents are so much more appropriate to attribute to our laws and government than is the Bible:
Excerpts from Hammurabi's Code of Laws 1750 BC:
"If any one bring an accusation of any crime before the elders, and does not prove what he has charged, he shall, if it be a capital offense charged, be put to death." Does this remind anyone of our US crime of perjury? This is where Moses got the whole false witness against thy neighbor commandment.
"If any one steals the property of a temple or of the court, he shall be put to death, and also the one who receives the stolen thing from him shall be put to death." Written apprx. 300 years before "thou shalt not steal".
"If a merchant entrust money to an agent (broker) for some investment, and the broker suffer a loss in the place to which he goes, he shall make good the capital to the merchant." Go Hammurabi, banking laws and everything, makes the 10 Commandments look like a square wheel doesn't it.
"If any one be guilty of incest with his mother after his father, both shall be burned." Incest is illegal even in most "red states".
"If a man put out the eye of another man, his eye shall be put out." 300 years before eye for an eye.
Excerpts from the Magna Carta, 1297 AD:
"No freeman shall be taken, imprisoned,...or in any other way destroyed...Excerpt by the lawful judgment of his peers, or by the law of the land. To no one will we sell, to none will we deny or delay, right or justice." Sounds a lot like the 5th amendment doesn't it?
"First, We have granted to God, and by this our present Charter have confirmed, for us and our Heirs for ever, That the Church of England shall be free, and shall have her whole rights and liberties inviolable. We have granted also, and given to all the freemen of our realm, for us and our Heirs for ever, these liberties underwritten, to have and to hold to them and their Heirs, of us and our Heirs for ever." Sounds a lot like the Preamble of the Constitution doesn't it?
"It shall not be lawful from henceforth to any to give his Lands to any Religious House, and to take the same Land again to hold of the same House. Nor shall it be lawful to any House of Religion to take the Lands of any, and to lease the same to him of whom he received it. If any from henceforth give his Lands to any Religious House, and thereupon be convict, the Gift shall be utterly void, and the Land shall accrue to the Lord of the Fee." Sounds a lot like separation of church and state doesn't it?
Face it Moses is a Plagiarist! And the 10 Commandments had absolutely nothing to do with the founding of this nation or its laws. There are plenty of other documents that are closer in relation to the Constitution than the 10 Commandments so can we just drop this issue already?
And by the way, all the smoke, "lightening" and "thunder" reported on top of Mt. Sinai during the writing of the 10 Commandments was due to the fact that Moses, who knew the area well, was sitting on top of an active volcano, not because God was hanging out on top of the mountain.
Sorry for the long boring post.
I would have to say I agree with their decision for the most part but since when are courthouses museums? Of course it's ridiculous to think that any God Bob could try to force his religion down someone else's throat by displaying his religious dogma in a place that was paid for by my tax dollars. No Christian would let the 5 pillars of Islam to be displayed in their courthouse would they? No, and for good reason, because in doing so it endorses a religion and could alienate the Christian population (wouldn't that be just terrible) and violate the 1st Amendment to our Constitution.
Even though only 3 of the 10 Commandments are referenced in our law books today, people still claim that this document is the basis of our government and that is why they should be displayed in all these public places that I pay for. We can all agree that it is not against the law to disobey your father and mother or covet thy neighbor's wife, or work on the Sabbath. So why is it this document that they deem so important to the development of the United States? Well some say that we were founded as a Christian nation but if you have read my other blogs you would know that is not that case. They also say that since we were founded as a Christian nation that makes the 10 Commandments all that more important and that it pioneered some great moral laws that we still abide by today. Some even say that perjury, thou shall not kill, and don't steal are Christian principles; wrong again. Hammurabis Code of Laws (origin of the 10 Commandments and Hebrew law) which criminalized murder (harm to others), perjury and theft, among many others, predated the 10 Commandments by approximately 300 years; the Babylonians were not Christians. Maybe that's why we invaded Iraq; we just wanted to return to our legal roots.
Solon of ancient Greece is also a noted law giver and his face does appear on the Supreme Court's building along with Moses and Confucius, therefore, not a religious display. So why don't these people in Kentucky and Alabama secretly rush in, in the middle of the night to install images of Solon, Confucius and Hammurabi in their courtrooms? Why don't they go to the Supreme Court fighting to allow images of The Roman Emperor Justinian, Solon and Hammurabi to be displayed in public schools if they are so concerned about the history of law givers and the impact they had on the development of the United States? Is it that they are just stupid and uneducated and don't know who these people are? Is it like when Bush was asked to name his favorite philosopher and he said Jesus because he didn't know any others? Or is it that their displays really are religious in nature and the reason they concentrate on Moses and the 10 Commandments and not Hammurabi's Code of Law or Justinian Law is because they are trying to convert the world over to Christianity?
If you are one of the people who don't agree with the constitution and Supreme Court, exactly which 10 Commandments do you want to put up? Would it be the 1st set of commandments which Moses destroyed, the 2nd set, the ones that were written on Mt. Sinai (Exodus 34) or the ones written on Mt. Horeb(Deuteronomy 5)?Although most people do agree that Mt.Horeb and Mt.Sinai were the same place, most Christians believe that Mt. Sinai was in the Sinai Peninsula of Egypt where St. Catherine's Monastery sits but the "land of Midian" where Moses lived (Exodus 3) which includes Mt. Horeb is across the Gulf of Aqaba in Saudi Arabia. Yes that is correct, the "all perfect word of God" isn't at all perfect and contradicts itself all over the place, Hammurabi's laws did no such thing. Other contradictions include what the Sabbath was observing; was it the day God rested after making the Earth (Exodus 20:11) or was it to commemorate the deliverance of the Jews out of Egypt (Deuteronomy 5:15)? With all these contradictions regarding the origin of the 10 commandments, wouldn't you rather promote other, more concrete examples of law which actually inspired the American Constitution?
The following are examples of why other documents are so much more appropriate to attribute to our laws and government than is the Bible:
Excerpts from Hammurabi's Code of Laws 1750 BC:
"If any one bring an accusation of any crime before the elders, and does not prove what he has charged, he shall, if it be a capital offense charged, be put to death." Does this remind anyone of our US crime of perjury? This is where Moses got the whole false witness against thy neighbor commandment.
"If any one steals the property of a temple or of the court, he shall be put to death, and also the one who receives the stolen thing from him shall be put to death." Written apprx. 300 years before "thou shalt not steal".
"If a merchant entrust money to an agent (broker) for some investment, and the broker suffer a loss in the place to which he goes, he shall make good the capital to the merchant." Go Hammurabi, banking laws and everything, makes the 10 Commandments look like a square wheel doesn't it.
"If any one be guilty of incest with his mother after his father, both shall be burned." Incest is illegal even in most "red states".
"If a man put out the eye of another man, his eye shall be put out." 300 years before eye for an eye.
Excerpts from the Magna Carta, 1297 AD:
"No freeman shall be taken, imprisoned,...or in any other way destroyed...Excerpt by the lawful judgment of his peers, or by the law of the land. To no one will we sell, to none will we deny or delay, right or justice." Sounds a lot like the 5th amendment doesn't it?
"First, We have granted to God, and by this our present Charter have confirmed, for us and our Heirs for ever, That the Church of England shall be free, and shall have her whole rights and liberties inviolable. We have granted also, and given to all the freemen of our realm, for us and our Heirs for ever, these liberties underwritten, to have and to hold to them and their Heirs, of us and our Heirs for ever." Sounds a lot like the Preamble of the Constitution doesn't it?
"It shall not be lawful from henceforth to any to give his Lands to any Religious House, and to take the same Land again to hold of the same House. Nor shall it be lawful to any House of Religion to take the Lands of any, and to lease the same to him of whom he received it. If any from henceforth give his Lands to any Religious House, and thereupon be convict, the Gift shall be utterly void, and the Land shall accrue to the Lord of the Fee." Sounds a lot like separation of church and state doesn't it?
Face it Moses is a Plagiarist! And the 10 Commandments had absolutely nothing to do with the founding of this nation or its laws. There are plenty of other documents that are closer in relation to the Constitution than the 10 Commandments so can we just drop this issue already?
And by the way, all the smoke, "lightening" and "thunder" reported on top of Mt. Sinai during the writing of the 10 Commandments was due to the fact that Moses, who knew the area well, was sitting on top of an active volcano, not because God was hanging out on top of the mountain.
Sorry for the long boring post.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)