Fuck Your God

But it IS their right in America

2010-09-09T05:58:00.002-05:00

Let's all have a bible-burning day. Maybe a Sunday morning in front of churches across the country. On the sidewalk, of course; we wouldn't want to be arrested for trespassing.

I mentioned this idea about six years ago to loud gasps of shock. I felt that a book burning is a powerful statement about oppression and censorship that would strike religious-folk most pointedly. And done on their "holy" day of worship would be just...wonderful. Time and again I was told this was a terrible idea. I didn't think so then and don't know. But in light of what that most-un-christ-like man in Florida is doing, I wish I had. It was my idea first DAMNIT! Now I would just look like a copy-cat, and who wants that?

Now, while I don't think this is a good thing for this man to be doing, he does have that right. This is freedom of religion (intolerant as it is toward Islam) and freedom of speech; both of which I argue in favor of here. To condemn his actions out of hand would be disingenuous and hypocritical. The ability to carry out this action is what makes our country so splendid. We are allowed to do this and to have our voices heard. We have this freedom. And there is a price for it.

Those who fought for our independence paid in blood. And maybe he will, too. But he is doing what he thinks is the right thing to do. He's not a smart man, he doesn't see a big picture, he is hateful and arrogant. But is he any different than any other "christian" in this country who protests secularism and aims to force us all into their own religion? Not really. He's just different.

Chuck

Religious Tolerance: Fact or Fiction

2010-08-17T05:37:00.003-05:00

There is no secret to the fact that I loathe organized religion. Whatever the sect, adherents have shown immeasurable hatred and bigotry toward others, whether it's other races or political viewpoints or even other religions. And this hatred of others isn't sect-specific, it courses through the ideologies of most, if not all, of the religions. Growing up baptist I heard first hand their hatred of the Jews (though you will never hear them say this to outsiders lest they feel the wrath of god) and pedophile catholics and gays (as well as anyone who sympathized with them).

Yet, while these god-fearing folks preach their hatred around the globe and marginalize anyone who disagrees, they consistently cry "foul" whenever anyone has the audacity to call them to the carpet. Oh how we pick on those poor unfortunate "saved" souls. We are just abominable toward them. How can anyone dislike a religious person that does so much good in the world? They do all that they do out of love, they say.

Most ironic in all of their rhetoric is their claim of Patriotism and alleged love for out country, Constitution, and our beloved Bill of Rights. Especially the amendment about religious freedom. How dare anyone try to quiet them in this country, this christian country founded on strictly christian principles and established solely on the idea that they, and they only, have the right to worship without restraint. Apparently; "All others be damned" seems to be their cry.

Because no mosque will be built where they don't want one built. Those godless muslims will not have the right to worship freely in this here christian country, no sirree! It is the job of those who are "full of love for their fellow man" to pigeon-hole and oppress the filthy terrorist sympathisers and keep them in their place, which is not in lower Manhattan. These meanies don't have the same religious freedom the perfect christians have. No, we must do all that we can to eliminate them from the face of the earth. Well they may not be THAT extreme, but I'm sure muslim reservations wouldn't be out of the question; it would be easier to keep an eye on them if they were all in one place, I'm sure.

Religious folks are a funny bunch. They don't really believe in logical thought, reason, honesty, truth, love, or even their own bible. Have they read that book yet? Do they get it? Do they have the ability to get the big picture? I don't think so. "Ignorance is Bliss" they say and none are more so than the religious.

They were given plenty of rope in The First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution and we are slowly watching them hang themselves. Good riddance to bad trash.

Chuck

Death to christianity!

2009-11-10T08:41:00.002-06:00

The wicked ones of religion have a saying they like to spout regularly. "Hate the sin, love the sinner." Balderdash. christians don't love the sinner. Well, to put it more accurately, christians don't love non-christians. Especially homosexuals. If these hate-mongers had their way all the fags would be killed.

You see, I was raised conservative baptist. Time and time again I was told that all gay people should be lined up and shot. Or, that they should all be shipped to one island in the middle of the ocean and bombed until they are all dead. Yes. I heard this all the time. Was I alone in this? No, unfortunately not. I still hear similar stories from those who escaped the disgusting grips of religion. Those who cling to the fantasy of their christian tenets are wicked, evil, hateful, and just plain mean. They talk incessantly of a battle between them and the secular world as if those who don't proscribe to their belief system are amassing weapons to destroy them. The world should be so lucky.

And their hatred knows no boundaries. They have been bitching and moaning for months about this new hate crimes bill. Yeah, you know, the one that says you can't physically harm homosexuals and transgendered folks. You can speak badly of them, you can disparage them, you can openly discriminate against them in 31 states, but you can't do to them what these horrific christians have been speaking of for eons. Now it's the law of the land and they are pissed off. They have just been itching to feed the fags to the lions and now they are told "no". Da Horra! But they're not done with their claims of "the world hates us" and everyone is out to get them; No, they are now claiming they have proof. This website tells the whole sordid story. A blogger writes idly and innocently about the build up of angst by the gay community and the church goes wild.

"When people are talking about violence to pro-family proponents, you have to take it seriously," said one in response to the blog.

Of course they take it seriously, they know how serious they are when they speak of killing homos. On a side note, I find it funny that this person considers religion "pro-family". These are the folks that are denying a whole group of people the right to marry and build family. These are the same folks that would rather have innocent children in Arkansas and Florida die in foster care without ever knowing family than allow a gay person adopt and love them. These are the same folks that evict their own underage children by the dozens when they come out as gay. Yes, this is what pro-family does, they hate the sinner AND the sin. That is truly what Jesus would do.

Now, I've read the blog in question and this writer was speaking hypothetically. Just like the christians that want fags lined up and shot. Would christians really kill gays en mass? I'd venture a guess that, no, they wouldn't, as much as it would bring them ultimate joy. He was writing of remote possibility and romantic conjecture. Just like the christians do.

The same "pro-family" hater goes on to say that they are taking this seriously because the events at Fort Hood show us how this idle chatter might mean something. Considering the crime he cites was committed by a religious zealot, maybe we should be more concerned with christians killing homos and less concerned with homos killing christians. It is the christians who are seeing their own numbers dwindle and their way of life in jeopardy, so they have more cause for killing "the enemy" than any queer I've encountered.

More irony in all of this is that religion is an amazingly protected institution in this country. Yet they are also amazingly evil and wicked. Our government gives them so many special rights and protections. What do they do with all of this special treatment? They bully others and work relentlessly to oppress the rest of us. While our soldiers are fighting for democracy and freedom, the christians are fighting for hatred and oppression.

Douche bags.

Chuck

Religious folks aren't very intelligent, are they?

2009-11-01T10:14:00.002-06:00

The religious folks in the United States are all abuzz. Hate crime legislation was passed and signed by Mr. Obama. And the religious nut bags are all crying foul. They think that this new legislation won't allow them their First Amendment right to bigotry. This is only because, I think, they are stupid individuals. Of course this group gives complete credence to fairy tales, so what should we reasonably expect? They staunchly believe that there is this major war against them and so they attack before being attacked. They hate before any hatred heads their way. Preemptive strikes against the heathens.

The goons of religion don't get it. Speech is different from action. You don't like queers? Fine. You want to express your hatred of homosexuality? Great, have at it. You want to kill or maim or attack them? That's a whole different ball of wax. It is my personal conviction that religion should be outlawed from the public discourse and my First Amendment right allows me to express this. It does not, however, allow me to punch religious people in their faces. Sad, but true.

So hate away, religious person. Be free to be bigoted. Just make sure it stays oral. And if you don't, don't be surprised should the gays better the instruction you give and sock it right back at you.

Chuck

Why do THESE FOLKS get special rights???

2009-09-29T05:44:00.002-05:00

Everyone deserves a second chance. If there is some manner of illness, maybe more than two. If it's mental illness, how about some kind of help; therapy can do wonders for folks looking to get their mental illness under control. Personally, I've known way too many people with this type of illness and medications have been quite helpful to them.

Unfortunately we immediately consider sex offenders to be merely violent criminals that deserve to be locked up or banished from society with no further question. I'm not a doctor or law enforcement official, but I wonder how many sex offenders suffer from some type of mental illness, like obsessive/compulsive disorder? Could these people be rehabilitated through therapy and medication? Could they be closely monitored and return from their banishment into a productive life of citizenry? Yes, we all agree that sex offenders have done some pretty horrible acts to innocent people, but is it at all possible that some of these people are acting beyond their own control and would benefit from psychological intervention?

In Georgia, these people are just pariahs. Exiled from any life they may be able to eke out by some of the most strict sex offense laws in the nation. I wouldn't have been struck by this Associated Press story in today's Chicago Sun Times if I hadn't read this particular line: "...Georgia law, which bans the state's 16,000 sex offenders from living, working or loitering within 1,000 feet of schools, churches, parks and other spots where children gather."

Churches? Really? Churches! Yes, religious organizations get special rights and privileges. These folks not only DON'T pay taxes, they get all kinds of special laws protecting them from everything and all kinds of people. Is there some reason that churches need protection from other people? What is so bad about churches and religious folks that they would need such special consideration? And what about the Church of Pedophilia? Do they have to stay away from themselves in Georgia? How can a state legally make such laws respecting all religious institutions in this manner if the First Amendment of The Constitution of the United States forbids any government, local and national, from making any law respecting religion or the free practice and expression of religion?

What I find to be more appalling than all of these special laws protecting religion is that they are not reciprocal. Religion and those who lead these heinous organizations are free to denounce, mock, lambaste, and HATE everyone around them. They engage in political rhetoric and fear mongering, they press for politicians to favor them, and they argue for more and more and more privilege and special laws to keep away the heathen masses who simply wish to worship, or not, in a way that doesn't agree with them. Americans who identify with religion is on the decline. Yet these people still see themselves as special and truly believe that everyone should worship as they do, even if it means via legislation. Yet if someone chooses to hate them back, those people could be breaking the law. If you wish to NOT HIRE a religious person because they belong to such a hateful group, you are breaking the law. If you express disdain toward religious organization in a physical way, you break the law.

While I agree that physical violence against any person or thing is wrong, I find it disturbing that the laws protecting religious property and people from this require stronger penalties against the perpetrator. Why? What is it about churches and religious people that demand such intense punishment? Surely it's not because religious people are so good and wonderful and blameless that acts against them are so much worse? They can't possibly think that they are so undeserving of disgust and hatred that any negative act against them is shocking and unwarranted? But, alas, they really do consider themselves special and deserving of privilege.

I think we should abolish ALL LAWS that protect the religious institutions and their hateful bunch. Let them reap what they have sown on their own. Why should they get special treatment while folks who may be working very hard to atone are thrown out into the muddy cold of exile? How many pedophile catholic priests are in that camp in Georgia? I'd venture to say not many. These people are special, they spread the love of their own warped and weird version of a god. So they are exempt from following the laws of everyone else. I'd say "fuck your god" to those folks, but I'm sure they already have.

Chuck

Constitution openly ignored by Illinois government

2009-09-25T08:09:00.004-05:00

The First Amendment of our U.S. Constitution, as you've read here before, prohibits the government from sponsoring or championing one religion over another or promoting any religion at all. In the state of Illinois it goes much further and prohibits the state from funding religious institutions, in particular it prohibits funds being allocated for religious schools.

Article X, Section 3 of the Illinois State Constitution states:

SECTION 3. PUBLIC FUNDS FOR SECTARIAN PURPOSES FORBIDDEN

Neither the General Assembly nor any county, city, town,township, school district, or other public corporation, shallever make any appropriation or pay from any public fundwhatever, anything in aid of any church or sectarian purpose,or to help support or sustain any school, academy, seminary,college, university, or other literary or scientificinstitution, controlled by any church or sectariandenomination whatever; nor shall any grant or donation ofland, money, or other personal property ever be made by theState, or any such public corporation, to any church, or forany sectarian purpose.

And yet State Representative Maria Berrios, D-39th, feels that the state Constitution does not apply to catholic schools. One can only guess it's because she was raised catholic? One can only guess. This supporter of the Church of Pedophilia* has given tens of thousands of dollars of tax monies to aide in the infrastructure and capitol improvements of these schools. One can also guess that, perhaps, could Ms. Berrios have a problem with adhering to the State Constitution? Isn't she sworn to uphold this all-important document and law of our lands here in Illinois? What could possibly account for this level of disdain? Why does she loathe a state she was elected to represent and a constituency that believes in the Illinois Constitution?

Anti-abortionists will appose public funds for Planned Parenthood and other providers claiming that they are murderers and that it is against their religion. Yet I'm sure they are ok with the public promotion of pedophilia by giving money to the organization that was, and still is, wracked by massive payouts, debt and legal wrangles due to this outrages behavior. A double standard, not uncommon for religious folk.

One can only hope that the ACLU will challenge this. We don't need our state Constitution trampled like this. If you get a chance, phone Maria Berrios or send her an e-mail. Especially if you're not a pedophile or some other religion.

Chuck

(catholic)

Shades of Gray

2009-08-21T07:47:00.002-05:00

Life is not black and white. There are gradations of all colors in all aspects of living. Nuances, some would call them. Nature is full of nuance. Look at rainbows. Inspect a couple of identical twins. Even cloned sheep are not exact when inspected closely. Even, sometimes, gender is not just male and female. This week we've been introduced to Caster Semenya and she has thrown our understanding of gender out of whack. We still don't know for sure that Ms. Semenya is fully female, or even female at all (though, out of respect for this individual we will consider her female). She may well be intersexed like many children born each year are. Your belief in God, or Buddha, or Muhammad, or any number of "higher beings" is irrelevant to this woman's plight. What is, however, is that there is question. There is question because she appears so ambiguous. Her "nuance" is not what one would expect in a black and white world.

In our American society there are those who only subscribe to the black and white. For them there is right and wrong, those who believe in their god and those going to hell. The case of Caster Semenya illuminates the gray in this black and white "reality" to which they adhere so strongly. You see, America is full of nuance. It is full of gray areas and full of "other" religions and non-religions. Because we are home to so many that believe in so much it is important that we extend respect for as many as we can.

In the public sphere this is not always easy. Those who only align with black and white wish to eliminate the gray. They wish to blacken that with which they disagree and whitewash anything with which they agree. Unfortunately this does not sharpen and enhance our world view but, alas, cheapens it and dulls the excitement we get from the experience of life. Those who embrace their own god and condemn those who embrace another short-change their own existence with blinders and rose-colored glasses. What they have chosen to see is not complete. Their experience is lessened. Cheapened.

Nature, however you choose to explain it, created nuance. Who are we to disallow it's existence?

Chuck

No great loss for the freedom of the press

2009-08-18T12:48:00.002-05:00

Ah, the freedom of the press. It's a wonderful and much needed protection specified in our U.S. Constitution's Bill of Rights. But the press treats this with utter disregard and amazing lack of importance and respect. Unless, of course, it suits a particular need. Usually not the need of the press to inform the public about important topics like government corruption or other immoral deeds done by elected officials. Usually it's self protection for their own misdeeds.

One of the most egregious abuses of this freedom was perpetrated by Robert Novack. He reported on Valerie Plame knowing that keeping her identity secret was paramount to her career. He willingly outed her with no thoughts about how this would affect her life. Or even how this would affect the security of our country. Now, he was passed this information by government officials because, I'm very sure, they felt confident he would print it. And print it he did.

Robert Novack is a dick. Or should I say correctly, WAS a dick. Robert Novack is dead at 78. I'm not saddened by this news. Good riddance to bad trash as the saying goes.

We still mourn the loss of Molly Ivens, but not this cocksucker of a reporter Novack.

Chuck

What is your god?

2009-08-03T08:40:00.002-05:00

God isn't just the one of whom christian's speak. A god can be anything, what, or who, ever you hold highest in esteem. Totems and fetishes represent gods believed in by someone whether real or just imagined. Looking around your local area will reveal a great many gods worshipped by the masses. Some are completely enamored with their respective religious gods while a great many more prefer money or fame or prestige. Our politicians of all levels love and worship power, whatever trips the ego into high gear.

But suppose we chose one of these gods at random and demanded that all Americans worship that god as the highest of all deities. There would be all manner of revolt and outspoken opinions about our first amendment right to worship as we see fit. But judeo-christian leaders in our country look to do just that very thing. They pursue this kind of legislation in their efforts to ban abortion or gay marriage or prevent questionable religions from gathering in hotel conference rooms. When they demean others of different, or no, religious affiliations such as muslims or wiccans they are exerting a veiled attempt at religious censorship. When they cry about our country being founded upon christian principles they attempt to censor religious freedom.

The United States is a warm and wonderful melting pot. And in this diversity of culture we must learn to accept those who are different. We should embrace those differences because they prove the worth of all that we have worked to achieve in establishing a free nation with liberties and justice for all. It shows firsthand the importance of loving people.

Regardless of the god you choose as your own.

Chuck

We have freedom of religion here? Not if you're Muslim.

2009-07-20T08:22:00.002-05:00

Oak Lawn, Illinois: A conservative Muslim faction called Hizb ut-Tahrir held a convention this weekend at the Oak Lawn Hilton in this Chicago suburb. Outside was held another convention, a convention of protesters who didn't like this group in their backyard (NIMBY?). Technically this Muslim group is a political party with their own religious agenda. Just like the Republicans want that everyone in the U.S. convert to christianity and become a heterosexual white male this group would like everyone to convert to Islam. Republicans are afraid. So much so these protesters claim Hizb ut-Tahrir should be considered terrorists. I assume because christians aren't terrorists? We all know how those bible-thumpers are full of love and compassion for their fellow man. But I guess it takes a terrorist to know a terrorist. One protester complains, "I want to know why the FBI has a terrorist watch list and why this group is not on that list?" Could it be the FBI knows more about them than this idiot does? Methinks they might.

Ah, to be a white, conservative, NASCAR loving, christian, male in the United States. Everyone else is going to hell. The way it should be. This country is only a melting pot if you become like those who hate, christian.

I'd also like to comment on the two gay guys who were harassed in Salt Lake City by police and Mormon officials for kissing. These two fellas were on private property that had their own decency standards. While these standards might not match those of others around the country they are the standards set for this area of privately held land. There are certain things that don't go on in my house, too, and if you do them I escort you to the door. These men are disrespectful boobs and should have been shoo'd away. Maybe not this harshly but sent away. These Mary's need to get over it.

Chuck

The importance, and sometimes necessity, of anonymity

2009-07-06T12:28:00.002-05:00

Why do we have a Constitutional Amendment protecting the freedom of speech and the freedom of the press? Because prior to these protections the government enjoyed censorship and revisionist media. They didn't like folks to speak ill of them or to inform the electorate of their activity. Those who did received retribution and laws were passed to prevent further negative reporting. And not just in our country but all over the world (at the time). And so we have protections and have enjoyed these freedoms for quite some time. Until fairly recently.

When George W. was disgracing the Oval Office he forbid the press from publishing certain things. Most notably images of dead soldiers returning home from Iraq. These images truly drove home to many the meaning of this war and how very unjust and evil it was. And when your are either wickedly religious or courting this base of voters you can't let them see how awful they really are. Truth to these people is like water to fire; dangerous and deadly.

This Mr. Bush also went to great lengths to "claim" executive privilege so that those who sigh his paycheck could not know what he was up to. He's not alone in this, Mr. Obama is also committing to a tenure of protectionism and secrecy worthy of only those whose wicked deeds should remain hidden lest they be found out. Even here in Chicago our elected officials have worked to quash negative press by keeping secrets. Ask Mr. Daley the important questions and you will surely get no answers.

And so we have now resorted to anonymous blogging in order to get out the truth and get AT the truth to what is happening in our government.

What, you may be asking, brought about this particular column on this particular day? As you all should know by this time Sarah Palin has resigned her post of governor of Alaska without fulfilling her very first commitment to the post. A blogger in Alaska has written about a rumor of investigation against Ms. Palin for corruption. A blogger, I'm sure, very few have ever heard of. Sarah's lawyers have already begun cleanup. They have, pre-emptively I might add, already threatened a lawsuit against CNN, MSNBC, FOX, The New York Times, and The Huffington Post should any of them decide to report on this rumored lawsuit. These lawyers are claiming this reporting is defamation and libel. So much for the First Amendment. So much for the Constitution. We can only hope these large media outlets research and report, against the demands of politicians who wish to operate outside the watchful eyes of those who elect them. It would be a travesty if the rumor were true and we only found out after an important event because news outlets caved to government pressure and abandoned our Constitution.

But they've already begun that process. And that is sad and shameful.

Chuck

Happy Holiday

2009-07-04T10:02:00.002-05:00

Today we revel in our Independence. Today we celebrate freedom. Today we embrace our country.

We have NAMBLA catholics in America. We have christians and jews. We have mormons and jehova's witnessess. We have agnostics and secular humanists. We have muslims and buddhists. We have every religion imaginable. While we may not agree with some or any we still rejoice in their being and the freedom they have to be who they are in our United States.

We, too, have Republicans and Democrats and Independents. We have the Cool Moose Party and the Green Party. We have parties many of us have never heard of with platforms built of outrageous and bigoted planks. And, also, in these we rejoice their being and the freedom they have to be who they are.

And we have blacks and whites. We see Indians and Asians and Canadians and Native Americans. We have communities of Irish and Italians and Russians and Cambodians. Neighborhoods comprised of Latinos/as and Spaniards and French and Ethiopians and South Africans both black and white.

In America are Elks and Kiwanis and Four H and Knights of Columbus and Boy Scouts and Girl Scouts. We have non-profits and for-profits. Big Business and small business. We have cities and countries and rich and poor. In America we have everyone.

Today we will celebrate the differences and the diversity of our Country. We will light fireworks representing our deliverance to freedom. Today is our day of Independence, July 4th. And while there may still be some in our land that are not fully free we smile on our moving forth toward correcting injustice and our yearning that all breathe free.

Today we let the bells of freedom ring. Have a happy and safe holiday.

Chuck

This man is an asshat.

2009-06-21T09:34:00.002-05:00

With freedom comes responsibility. And if you can't properly handle that responsibility than you should be slapped. Yes, I know that is advocating violence but some people are just irresponsible assholes that need proper reprimanding. I could say they should not be allowed to write in a public forum or open their mouth if another if human being is within earshot but that would go against all that I hold dear, our First Amendment. I know you are all wondering, "What is he talking about?"

Here it is. You see, Mr. Dahlgren is passing on an e-mail he received and allowing his audience to believe it is truth. Mr. Dahlgren, you do no one, including your audience and your cause, a good service. You are, essentially, treating them with contempt in your assumption that they will believe something simply because you post it on your site. Mr. Dahlgren is a poor poster of "news" and should have given appropriate caveats to this column.

There are some very important fallacies contained in the e-mail he received and he has not only believed them himself but allowed his readers to believe them. The e-mail lists certain paraphilias as sexual orientations. This website goes into great detail as to why these are NOT orientations, and it can be taken as a good source because of the research the writer went through and the appropriate sources she cited for her determination. Mr. Dahlgren should have done even a minuscule amount of research and he would have been able to write a truthful, informative piece. In its stead he chose to purpetuate lies and hatred to further a cause.

It is truly sad when someone puts their own ideal above truth. We should all strive to remain curious for better education about topics we deem important. We should do due diligence before writing or "reporting" on something. I still receive e-mails that Bill Gates will send me money if I forward an e-mail to everyone in my list. Really? Really. And those who send it truly believe it and do no research before sending it along. Have any of these people received their checks? No, yet they continue to send it along EVERY time it pops into their inboxes. The same stupidity can be attributed to Mr. Dahlgren. Why?

Well, this Bill has been floating around for some time. And several of those folks who have written about this whole "pedophile" thing have been proven wrong and hate filled. It stands to reason that someone as "enlightened" as Mr. Dahlgren would have know about those corrections and simply deleted this bogus e-mail. Alas he did what right wing hate filled people do and decided to march on with incorrect rhetoric and spread the hate a little more. As the saying goes, "If you tell a lie enough times it becomes the truth." Way to go, sir. Let me guess, you told your wife and kids you love them, too, didn't you? And I would be willing to wager a buck you swear by your religious affiliation.

Chuck

Anti Semites Unite!

2009-06-12T09:03:00.002-05:00

This has not been a good week for Jews. Is there no end to the persecution?

Earlier this week Barack Obama's former pastor, Jeremiah Wright, expressed disgust over "them Jews" not letting him speak with or see his former parishioner. Now, for those of you who are not familiar with conservative evangelicals, this manner of speech against Jews isn't an anomaly. Growing up conservative baptist I heard this all the time, though it was usually followed up by some sort of praise for the Jews because, after all, they are god's chosen people. And while they may have it all wrong for not believing in Jesus and are most definitely going to hell because of it, god did choose them first so we must not speak ill of them. Well, now Mr. Wright is offering an apology. Nice.

Let us remember another "famous" person extolling Jewish virtue from several years back. Mel Gibson had so many wonderful things to say about these folks that he was forced to issue an apology. Poor guy.

These two guys are very religious. They work very hard to impose their views and moral code on the masses. Both are openly anti-gay. I don't think it would be a stretch to assume they would love more legislation championing their respective religious gods. Yet they spew hatred of others. They say that it is easier to ask for forgiveness than for permission, and perhaps that is true. But what these two religious people should also consider is their own religious text that states, "from the overflow of the heart, the mouth speaks." Matthew 12:34. Spoken by their Jesus.

How good can these people be? I'm guessing not much. By their own sword their hearts are wicked.

And this week the national Holocaust Museum was shot up by another anti Semite. Tragic. Once can only guess how emboldened to action he may have been by other's hate speech and rhetoric.

What one says matters. Pat Robertson and his hate might disagree, Jeremiah Wright might not, either, and Mel, well, what can I say about this strict catholic who's divorcing amid infidelity? With morals like these guys have, who needs religion?

Chuck

My apologies

2009-06-10T07:33:00.002-05:00

In the writing classes I've taken we rely on honest peer review. These are the equivalents of editors in professional publications and are not only helpful but necessary for quality writing. It has come to my attention that I have more peer reviewers of this blog than I thought and I welcome the critique and correction.

My last post was quite the mess of information. First, I was unclear in stating my point. Second, there was a glaring error. Two readers pointed this out in the comment section and my thanks goes out to them. I would like to fix these two points in this post.

I'm going to start with the error. John is correct in his statement that there is no law preventing freedom of speech. The hate crimes legislation simply considers crime based on certain criteria "hate crimes" against protected peoples. The new legislation is meant to clarify this and specify new classes as protected. It is not attempting to limit the freedom of speech or inhibit it as I might have implied in my previous post. This implication may have been explicit or implicit but was not intended. I should have spent more time reviewing my post before posting it and I would have caught this.

The point of my last post was also muddled. When this was first pointed out to me by Uzza I didn't see it and came across rather harshly. With their clarification I began to understand the point of the comment tried to clarify my post. A favorite quote from a friend of mine when we would discuss personal difficulties of mine would be, "Can you please be a bit more vague, I think I'm understanding you too well." Being sarcastic myself, this often prompted me to be far more specific than I was used to being.

My point from last post: I don't believe in government censorship. I do, however, believe in personal censorship and think that individuals should have private filters that work between their brains and their mouths to prevent certain things from being said. The radio hosts linked to in my last post engaged in their right to free speech when they spoke of beating innocent children simply because they didn't like them. Aside from being mean spirited this kind of talk could, quite possibly, embolden someone to act accordingly. It was this type of talk that "allowed" a school student to kill another student simply because the other student was different. One student was raised hearing homophobic hate speech and, when the other expressed his attraction to this student of the same sex, shot him. The rhetoric he heard regularly "allowed" this action. When anti-choice people consistently label abortion doctors and women using these services "murderers" they diminish their human-ness and reduce them to evil "others" deserving of death. This speech "allows" folks like Mr. Roerden, the gentleman who recently shot an abortion provider in a church, to feel justified in ridding the world of such beasts. When Greenpeace labels lumberjacks "rapists of the earth" they justify the spiking of trees and the injury or death of those "rapists".

It's unfortunate that these are repercussions of our First Amendment. It would be fantastic of people understood and considered the consequences of their actions before committing to them audibly or in written form but, alas, we aren't all the concerned with consequences these days.

I hope this post is clearer than the last and I apologize for that miscommunication. Thank you for your honest peer review and thank you so much for reading.

Chuck

"Yes, we can!"

2009-06-07T07:34:00.004-05:00

But that doesn't mean that we should. With freedoms come responsibilities. When we are children we are taught respect for others and acceptance of different cultures and peoples, with their religions and cultures and ways of live. We are America and consist of myriad ways to enjoy our being. Part of that enjoyment is being able to express ourselves freely however we choose. Some of us write, some of us draw or paint. Some utilize other media such as photography or acting. However it is you choose to express your opinions and thoughts and ideas is protected with our First Amendment.

Well, in the over two hundred years since this was firmly established within our Constitution and practiced by the many in our country, there are those who feel there are no responsibilities attached to these freedoms; that their freedom to speak and to be heard should allow them to run unencumbered by any responsibility for their speech whatsoever. And, as they say, one bad apple...

Many of those folks are religious and feel that speaking hatred about the "other" with whom they don't agree is not only their right but their "god"-given duty. Take Pat Robertson, a very outspoken televangelist I have mentioned here before. He is, once again, speaking out about the danger of homosexuality and it's impending slippery slope of aberration. Yes, the godless fags will soon be having sex with all manner of animals; and he specifically mentions ducks. And, of course, at the same time mentions pedophilia because, as statistics show, gays must molest children in order to recruit. They can't just breed the little fuckers to increase the gay population, after all. You would think he would reserve that for the NAMBLA catholics but, alas, that may be just too close to home.

Others who like to spread the hate are radio talk show hosts. Theirs is a little more dangerous because they like to incite violence against "others" they don't like. Pat Robertson may want to listen to this little diatribe against children. These radio hosts honestly believe that beating innocent children is a worthwhile endeavor if it achieves the desired results. They learn well from the "ways justify the means" crowd and all the ethics and morals that go with it.

And then you have the anti-whatever groups. Like right-wing right to lifers. A doctor was killed IN CHURCH last week. He performed late-term abortions and religious nuts didn't like him. He had a history of violence and hate speech perpetrated against him so often that he had body guards. Last week they got him; because killing a live person who's business you know very little about is better than aborting a fetus that won't live outside the womb. Greenpeace is like this, too. For them it's better to beat a harp seal hunter to death with a club than it is for a hunter to beat a harp seal; humanity is worth far less than harp seals. They also peg trees with large metal spikes, trees that are marked for clear cutting on private property by privately owned companies. Again, Greenpeace thinks it's better to violently harm humanity than it is for people to chop down a renewable resource.

Many of these groups are now on the defensive because of the doctor who was killed IN CHURCH last week. They are defending their freedom of speech by claiming that they never called for violence against anyone. But when you define someone as a "murderer of children" or a "baby killer" or another hateful moniker you are encouraging violence. Freedom of Speech is not a no-strings-attached freedom. We are all held accountable for what comes out of our mouths in one way or another.

This image could, very well, be adjusted to any number of hateful organizations in the world today. It would fit Pat Robertson to a "T", as it would fit those disgusting radio hosts or pro-lifers or Greenpeace or Focus on the Family or Westboro Baptist Church and Fred Phelps.

So, while we are able to say whatever we like we should also remember that there are affects. Someone will feel it. Hate speech legislation is important for this reason, to keep people accountable for what they say. And it protects those who are against this legislation, too; religious folks. And while I'm no fan of censorship I am a fan of personal responsibility. Something some folks who talk know nothing about.

Chuck

Are Republicans relatable any longer?

2009-05-27T09:23:00.004-05:00

There's a lot of talk about the sinking ship that is the Republican Party. They're losing the voting base and, because of dwindling support, are grasping at straws to be something meaningful. The religious part of their support has turned into a pariah for most people. Is it the GW debacle that has turned people off to religion and the GOP? They shifted too far to the right and narrowed their views too much for main stream voters.

So they chose an African-American as their chairman. A desperate attempt to draw in more minorities without alienating the male-centric ego and giving the white affluent male a warm fuzzy feeling. Too bad this guy is just a dancing monkey. His performance so far has been less than stellar and borderline embarrassing. But check out his latest effort to demonize the homosexual community and rally the money-men; he says that if you allow same-sex marriages than companies that once didn't recognize them or allow same-sex benefits would now be forced to. This would increase expenditures and reduce the bottom line.

I find this fitting for the party of religious kooks to reduce marriage to a monetary drain on society and eliminate any love and commitment in the institution. Marriage is one gigantic financial burden on companies now. So that's what is so sacrosanct, that is what is so important to married couples. While we all knew this to be the reason for matrimony it's nice to see the GOP finally saying it aloud. It's not the religious ceremony that makes marriage sacred but, in stead, the bottom line.

Way to go!

Freedoms are only for Christians

2009-05-25T09:56:00.002-05:00

It's funny how people only believe in our Constitution and it's Bill of Rights when it helps their own cause. It doesn't apply to anyone else. You see, we have a First Amendment that states:

"Amendment I
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."

You, my fellow American, are free to worship whomever, however, whenever, wherever, whatever you wish in this country that is The United States of America. The government is not allowed to infringe upon this right, according to the above First Amendment to our Constitution.

Unless you choose no religion. Or you are gay. You see, if you are no religion or you are LGBT you have no place in our country. You have no place on this planet and you have no place in humanity. Please understand that this is not hate for you and your lifestyle choices, this is hatred for your actions; hatred for your sin, if you will. Our Constitution is only for those who practice real religions; religions like NAMBLA, aka: Catholicism, Protestants, Jews, Mormons, and Jehovah's Witnesses. All others, such as Atheists, Gnostics, Secular Humanists, Muslims, Scientologists and Wiccans practice heathen lifestyles and, because of this, aren't covered by the First Amendment. And Jehovah's Witnesses are only covered by a very thin thread.

Who decides these things? Self-Proclaimed Constitutionalists such as Devvy Kidd. This "christian" woman claims to be a woman who does not hate but, instead, is a woman who loves amazingly. Evidence to this claim is in her most recent article espousing such bullshit. In all of her christ-like wisdom she knows more than science and far more than any LGBT person on the planet. How did she come upon all of this knowledge and wisdom? By reading what many who are NOT CHRISTIAN would consider fiction; the bible. When you peruse her website you will, no doubt, become just as convinced that the only way to be a true American is to denounce and reject anything that is not christian. A true Constitutionalist such as herself knows that to be a real American and to stand for true First Amendment principles is to outlaw any lifestyle that is not the one proscribed by this woman.

I find it fascinating that anyone would read the First Amendment in this way and still consider themselves fair-minded and loving. Currently this way of thinking is on the fringe of American society. But there are still a great many people who think the way this woman thinks. We can only hope it remains on the fringe. Satan is subtle. And pretty. Maybe even a redhead.

Chuck

Not all christians are un-christ-like jackasses.

2009-05-15T07:01:00.002-05:00

While it would be quite true to say that many of the religious horde are wicked and contradictory to the holy books they espouse, some of them are actually civilized. I know it's shocking but every now and then I come across one that might actually be like-able. And it's refreshing.

The other day I took part in an on-line dialogue with just such a person. A man that engaged in conversation with several non-christian folks and showed amazing respect for the other side of the story. Happily, I can report that those with whom he disagreed also showed respect for this man's opinions. It was an amazing back-and-forth and one that I thoroughly enjoyed.

It's good when people of differing opinions and set of religious beliefs can come together and not get all hot-headed but, instead, work toward mutual understanding while still remaining true to our beliefs and opinions. David C. is to be commended for his respect of others. He is one of the all-too-few that give religion a good name. Maybe one of the folks Lot saw that were worthy of saving from the fire and brimstone?

If you're not already reading Fannie's Room each weekday you really should start. And continue religiously.

Chuck

A change of topic, sort of.

2009-05-12T11:22:00.002-05:00

Freedom of the press; an important part of our Bill of Rights. Our forefathers understood the value in allowing the press to run free and print good, solid news without repercussion from government retaliation. They saw this as a check by the electorate to keep the government in line. And for quite a great many years the media has done a fairly nice job in their reporting.

With the onset of web-based content print journalism is on the decline and many newspapers are falling into bankruptcy. This fact alone is scary and a travesty. There are still many people without the means to access on-line news and will become less informed and unable to make sound decisions or to fully participate in government. This, in turn, will allow our elected officials to run roughshod over the minority of society, those who are poorer and with limited means. And government does not have a good track record for equality and fair treatment of these people as it is.

But I'm finding it hard to feel any pity or sorrow for the print media itself. More and more often we are seeing journalists resort to opinion based solely on emotion with no factual evidence to support those opinions. Ironically, any facts on the subjects about which they write are usually opposite those opinions. Or any facts they do choose are one sided without well constructed arguments. What is left available to those seeking out print media is poor journalistic endeavor at best. News has become sensationalist, emotionally based fluff. And less and less of us are interested. It's a sad testimony to the industry when BOTH leading newspapers in the third largest metropolis in the United States are in bankruptcy.

What will happen with this important check on government gone? Like a room full of kindergartners with no supervision. Chaos.

Chuck

Our Constitution is in good hands.

2009-05-03T08:17:00.002-05:00

The GOP is smarting. They are continually being trounced in elections and the country is telling them they are out of touch. And most of what we hear from the right is just that. The issues that matter to the American people right now are not the issues Republicans are talking about. In stead of relevancy they are engaging in hissy fits and acting like sore losers. And these tactics are losing them face, respect, and will lose them more elections. The people want solutions and bipartisanship. They want a government that works together to get things done for the people. But the Republicans feel that it's their way or the highway and they will simply pack up their toys and go home. For shame.

With Justice Souter retiring in June, the Democrats are able to appoint someone to the Supreme Court this year. I can't think of a more appropriate person to have this honor than our current president. Barack Obama was a Professor of Constitutional Law at the University of Chicago. He is not an "it's who I know" Ivy League MBA grad. Our President actually understands law and the high law of our land. He has studied it and practiced it and taught it to others. Who better to appoint an interpreter of that law?

Whether you like Obama or not, whether you voted for him or any other Democrat or opted for a Republican, there can be no arguing that he is perfect for this opportunity. What we must hope, though, is that the Republicans will not make this into yet another "Circus of Irrelevancy" that they have developed such a knack for. Of all the things they are getting wrong we wish for them to get this right. No current politician is better suited for this than the one set to engage in it.

I collective sigh of relief. Maybe we should ask him to nominate Fannie? She seems relatively even-keeled and with common sense. And she has a great sense of humor. We could use a good woman up on that hill. And how progressive would it be to not only have a woman, but a lesbian vegetarian? We'll just have to wait and see.

Chuck

I could if I wanted to.

2009-04-30T08:49:00.002-05:00

If I wanted to use the word "kike" I could. Or "nigger" or "zipper head" of "dago" or any number of derogatory terms referring to a contingent of humanity. Our first amendment allows me this "right" to voice my opinion however I choose. But simply exercising my "right" to hate speech doesn't make it "right." Using these terms to describe people is wrong. The other day I called a man a girl and a cunt. One was a term he used to describe someone and the other was my own dig at his orientation. I was wrong to use those terms regardless of our liberties. This does not, however, change my opinion of this man. He's still despicable.

Miss California is free to believe

2009-04-24T07:12:00.002-05:00

Sometimes people mistake their own individual beliefs for the morals of everyone. Perez Hilton is one of these people. OK, we get it, you're gay. And someone has maligned your petty beliefs by stating, in a public national forum, that they don't think like you. This woman, in fact, doesn't think like many of us. But we are a free country where she can think any way she likes. She is quite able to believe in marriage and religion any way she chooses. Mr. (Ms.?) Hilton asked this woman a deeply personal question with strong religious conviction and got an answer he (she?) didn't care for. It wasn't an answer he agrees with. Perez, you need to get your nose out of that shallow, celebrity-obsessed, uber-liberal hole in the ground and embrace the first amendment for all of it's parts. It is a part of our Constitution and Bill of Rights that has allowed you to spill your useless trash and become a financial well-off celebrity yourself. You see, Perez, it is YOU who are the cunt for disparaging this girl her first amendment rights while bathing in them for your own personal gain. Miss California is NOT an elected official using public office to legislate her own religious conviction onto the masses. She is a private citizen. She is a beauty pageant contestant. We all know these kinds of people shouldn't talk because their outsides are far more beautiful and smart than their insides, but who really watches these things for their cerebral challenges? If it is Perez Hilton, dare I say his outside is prettier than his inside. And that is frightening.

Chuck

Filing for Divorce, is that allowed???

2009-04-13T13:01:00.002-05:00

So Mel Gibson and his wife are divorcing. This is quite shocking coming from this particular camp. I'm not one for celebrity gossip but this juicy tidbit had me piqued. Why this one?

Mr. Gibson is a very strict catholic. He's been married for almost thirty years and has seven children, because that's what sex is for. And divorce for those as strict and pushy in his religion is frowned upon. Let's face it, he's against gay marriage and has been quite outspoken with his religious beliefs to the point of producing and paying for his own movie about Jesus. He's talked about the sanctity of marriage and the importance of christ in his life.

Now, he's also had trouble with alcohol abuse, bigotry, and now divorce. I'd venture to say "Yeah, his religion and the relationship he has with his god is pretty high on his list of priorities. and boy howdy does it show."

Another stellar example of religion done right. Could it be Ellen's marriage to Portia caused this?

Chuck

Happy Easter?!

2009-04-12T09:39:00.001-05:00

To all the godless christians who are so passionate about the pagan rituals surrounding this holiday, all the best this Easter Sunday.

Snake bite kits work.

2009-04-10T07:46:00.002-05:00

They really do. Let's stick with the analogy and not discuss the other uses for these things, shall we? Snake bite kits contain little suction cups that are placed over the area of insertion and suck the venom out of the infected culprit. And it seems our judicial system is working in a similar fashion.

There was an article in Newsweek recently that shows a marked decline in the number of folks claiming religious affiliation. Today on MSNBC there is a story about religious groups losing lawsuits for discriminating against folks they simply don't like. The article quotes a religious leader claiming this as a lessening of religious freedom. Because nothing says religious freedom like the trampling of others and treating the "other" in society with less dignity than you would treat a house plant. That is exactly what Jesus would do, I suspect, treat people as though they were sewer sludge.

I read another article this week I found to be interesting also, though I don't have the link and I apologize. A Mexican family RE-converted to Judaism after centuries of familial catholocism. It seems the wonderfully loving and ever christ-like catholics of the Inquisition forced this family to convert to catholocism to save their immortal souls. How sweet is that? I can only imagine what Jesus-onian persuasion they used for this joyous occasion. I'm sure it was something soothing and with all the love they could muster. No pressure, really! And for this re-conversion the family had to jump through many, many, many hoops proving the past family's true religious affiliation and present commitment to the jewish faith. Another heart-warming story showing the true love religion offers the darkened hearts of the world.

But, thankfully, the practice of organized religion is waning. The vipers' poison is losing it's potency. We are on our way to true freedom and liberty. And eradicating this terrible, awful, no good scourge on society.

Have a fantastic easter weekend!
Chuck

Our local NAMBLA guy chimes in

2009-04-03T12:28:00.002-05:00

So the local High Holy leader of NAMBLA here in Chicago, Francis George, has chimed in on President Obama's impending visit to Notre Dame. This catholic university has invited our pro-choice president to deliver the commencement address to this year's graduates and some are none too happy. The biggest joke comes from Chicago's own pedophile connoisseur who is calling this invitation "an embarrassment" for the catholic church. Oh? Really? Because, after all, having a boy fucker in your own home isn't an embarrassment Mr. Cardinal? You, sir, invited a man who is known to have molested innocent young boys who put all their faith and trust into him. This reprobate abused this faith and trust and had secret sex with these underage youths. Knowing that this man has a "thing" for boy pussy you decided to let him live with you in your mansion in Chicago's Gold Coast neighborhood directly across the street from a park and a block from the beach. But this doesn't embarrass you? Methinks it should. That and your claim to be holy should both embarrass you.

Chuck

Attack of the 50' christian

2009-04-03T11:58:00.002-05:00

christians are all about the attack. Here in the United States of America they are granted special privileges with an Amendment specifically protecting them and the decision they make to be christians. Our founding fathers determined that they should be a protected class unto themselves and that no entity in this country should treat them negatively. Yet this protection and privilege is not enough for this group of bigots so they spend time attacking anyone who dares to disagree with their brand of "truth". christians will demand that politicians adhere to their mindless religious teachings and insist on having laws passed to deem unbelievers unlawful and dirty. They insist that the world would not be so screwed up if it would only follow its bigoted doctrine.

This week a woman at work kindly informed me that the reason for my homosexuality is because society says I must be this way. "If society weren't so screwed up you would be normal." She told me that if I were to have grown up in her country and town I would have a girlfriend or wife now. Society has made me this way. She has also taken to bringing me literature "showing the miracles of Christ" in order to give me hope for change.

What causes these people to think this way? They truly believe that I am broken in some way. And because of my brokenness it's OK to pass legislation banning my person. These types of attacks happen every day against the homosexual community in the name of religion. They have become commonplace. Yet bring these to the attention of society and You are the bad person attacking christianity. Demand respect as a fellow human being and equality in the United States and you are an enemy of all that is good. Demand to be treated as you would treat "any other person on the street" and you are satan's handyman.

Well, don't look to me for respect if you are of a religious "ilk" and don't demand respect for a lifestyle you have chosen. The government can instruct that I respect you in my professional life and not treat you like the jackass that you are, but you won't receive the same in my personal life. You keep your religious heehaw to your self and I will try not to spit on you. Fuck your god, I say, Fuck your god.

Much Love,
Chuck

Hey Pope, shut the fuck up!

2009-03-27T09:12:00.002-05:00

I wrote the other day about the pope's visit to Africa and the comments spewed forth by The Most Holy of Pedophiles. There seems to be this strange fear by most of the world to tell the pope he needs to shut the fuck up and stick to his own kind, that being the procreation of all things child-abusive. That is what he and his NAMBLA buddies are best at getting done so they should just leave the rest of the world alone. This includes science and scientific study. For centuries the catholic church as shown itself to be in strong opposition to anything truthful and scientific. "What? The earth round? Shush up." "Oh, you say the earth revolves around the sun? Nonsense." "Galileo, get out of the church, you heretic." "You say the Holocaust never happened? Welcome to our fun little group. Grab an innocent and trusting altar boy and hop on!"

But I still found it a little surprising that it took almost a week for a reputable scientific organization to chastise this booby of a leader. The Lancet, in this editorial, has finally decided to tell "His boi-hole-iness" to pipe down and get his facts straight before opening that crevasse he calls a mouth. Kudos to the scientists in England for standing up for the truth and not kow-towing to stupidity just because he wears a dress.

I do wish, however, that more in the scientific community would have spoken up. Where was the World Health Organization? Where is ACT-UP when you need them? Where is the American Medical Association? These are people with the facts and the folks in the trenches working hard to solve this global crisis that has hit Africa especially hard. Where is Bono? I thought this was his pet cause? There is this fear of the catholic church that just confounds me. It's about time we all just realized that this emperor has no clothes on and forget about him.

Chuck

Ethics? In Government? Can't be...

2009-03-25T06:24:00.002-05:00

To say that the men who drafted our U.S. Constitution were religious would be an understatement. They didn't just believe in a strict moral code but they also lived that code. There was no room for "me" in government. They believed in inclusiveness and fairness, they believed in championing the little guy, the man without a voice. Ever wonder why we have two legislative houses and why one has two representatives from every state regardless of population? It's so the most populous state can't trample the equality of the least populous state. A great idea. Why is there a Bill of Rights that so staunchly protects the citizenry? So the government can't trample "the people" all willy nilly. These founding fathers crafted a country very carefully to ensure fairness and freedom for as many as possible. And they didn't think of their own purse contents when they did this, but, in fact, risked it all when they drafted the Declaration of Independence. They were thoughtful, considerate, and "us" thinking men.

Today's governing body is not like this at all. While I believe and defend the separation of church and state I believe we have forsaken morality for and good ethical standing for a "me" mentality. Our elected officials pursue that "I" in team so fervently and vigorously it's no wonder they are so tired. Most of these people are rich when they run for office and richer when they leave. It matters not if these folks are Republicans or Democrats, they chase fame and fortune like salmon swimming to spawn. They need morals. They need ethics. Not just ethics reform because, really, you can't reform something you don't have. And sad to say, they need a little religion. Honest faith. And fear for their souls. If they had them.

Chuck

Ignorance is bliss, but please keep it to yourself.

2009-03-23T07:35:00.003-05:00

There are countless folk who revel in their stupidity and fantasy. They cling to falsehoods like Titanic passengers to life rafts. The pope and his catholic minions are just one such example, but an oh-so-fabulous one they are. I would usually forgo writing about this perverted leader of NAMBLA* when he is speaking to a foreign country but this latest visit of his requires comment.

I'm sure you've heard that he has been on a visit to Africa, probably because it has a NAMBLA population second only to Rome? This is a continent working desperately to solve, or greatly reduce, it's AIDS problem. This portion of the planet is aswim in violence against every one by every one; tyrannical leaders are killing citizens, tribes of natives are killing tribes of natives, men are brutally raping women, and on and on it goes. So this Leader of all Pedophiles is telling the Africans not to use condoms and not to have sex. Because this is what will solve all of Africa's ills.

I'm sure he thinks that all those studies that show reductions in HIV infections when condoms are used and safer sex practices are instituted are nothing short of balderdash. I'm mean, look how well abstinence has worked for his band of happy, sexless men. Not a sign of sexual digression to be seen for miles and miles. His NAMBLA-ites are a bastion of sinlessness and purity.

Fantasy can be fun and nice, even for adults. But it's not a lifestyle you engage in perpetually. Most mature human beings will tell you that while ignorance can be bliss, education is more so. Sometimes is best to grow up and face reality. It's about time the pope got rid of his party dress and party hat and chose more grown-up clothes. And embraced truth.

Chuck

You think your kids are safer with catholics???

2009-03-13T14:11:00.003-05:00

I mean, really, what sane parent would leave their child alone with a catholic? And I don't even presume to care if that catholic is a layperson or clergy, although clergy does seem far worse of the two choices. The Associated Press reports today that the catholic church has paid more than $2.6 billion dollars since 1950 for child molestation. The fact that this amounts to almost $55 million dollars every year is less striking than the fact that they have been paying out since 1950. The catholic church has been paying victims of child abuse for almost 50 years. 50 YEARS!!! Yet the pope will scold U.S. politicians that think abortion should be available to women who need it. This is a medical decision that should be between a woman and her doctor, not between a politician and the pope. This pope leads an organization that has been paying for sex for fifty years. And this sex is with children. Personally I think we should look elsewhere for our moral guidance. You would think the catholic church was the umbrella organization for NAMBLA. Yet NAMBLA has a worse reputation.

According to this Associated Press article there have been nearly 803 cases of molestation this year. This same organization also has the chutzpah to say that sex between ADULTS of the same sex is immoral. Really? But sex with innocent helpless children is OK? Coercing an underage child, who has put all of his faith and trust in and adult to keep him safe, into having sex is acceptable to the catholic church (or NAMBLA? for the sake of this blog. I mean, what really is the difference between the two?)? If the public school system in this country was paying $55 million each year because of child sexual abuse there would be a tearing down of school buildings. Yet the catholic church is considered holy, apostolic, and reverent. I think Jesus said "Let the little children come unto me" and not "Let the little children cum onto me." But I've forgotten a lot of the Bible I once new so I could be mistaken here.

Chuck

The First Amendment Right to Free Speech: Revoked

2009-03-12T11:19:00.002-05:00

The inevitable has happened. If you are a citizen of Chicago Illinois your U.S. Constitutionally protected right to freedom of speech has been officially revoked. You are no longer allowed to criticize the government in thought, spoken word, or written media of any type whether physical or virtual.

As I've mentioned before the right to speak critically of the government in our fair city is under attack. It seems as if those looking to suppress the voting citizens of Chicago have been successful. FixWilsonYard.org is a group of over two thousand tax paying citizens in the Uptown neighborhood on the north side of Chicago that is currently battling city hall with a lawsuit to halt the Wilson Yard redevelopment from happening. This is a development of slums that the neighbors don't want here. Our Alderman and our Mayor do. Apparently they feel all the poor people on the public dole should be housed in half-million dollar condos for free an all in one neighborhood. The developer issued a subpoena for information about two websites that have written about this slum, www.buenaparkneighbors.com and www.uptownupdate.com. Both websites have commentary by the tax payers in the area about their disapproval of this slum, Uptown Update is run by an anonymous blogger. The city wanted the names and personal information of anyone who posted on these websites. The date for compliance of the subpoena has passed. When you read the latest post on Uptown Update about the construction and then read the comments tax payers have posted you notice that no information about construction permit violations is forthcoming by FixWilsonYard.org or the city. It has always been typical of FWY to chime in with correct information at times when confusion was rampant. Not now. It causes one to wonder if FWY lawyers have suggested a moment of silence from FWY. A cause for alarm, really, because this means the city has successfully quieted the electorate opposition. Through our court system.

These websites and the comments left on them are Uptown voters' redress of grievances with which we petition our government. This is their option for alerting the government to their dissatisfaction with what is happening in their neighborhood and with their tax money. The government has chosen to silence them. To spit on their First Amendment rights.

Ghandi said "An injustice anywhere is an injustice everywhere." This is injustice perpetrated against the citizens of this country regardless of your home town and a gross injustice perpetrated against our Constitution and our Bill of Rights. You should be outraged. And you should be just a little bit frightened.

Chuck

Religion and the electorate

2009-03-05T06:07:00.002-06:00

Look at most major elections and you see a trend toward religion. Everyone wants to be religious and emit a strong sense of god goodness. And despite any political record they may have this becomes a major reason for voting. There was a lot of talk about Obama's religion during our presidential election with so many afraid he might be a closet Muslim. As if that would even matter. He cleaved to his christianity like a drowning man holds the life ring, people all around him defending his religion. He's not alone. Past presidents have all made very public their church attendence before and while in office. But what good is all this talk about religion and goodness and god? One need only look at Bill Clinton and his adultry and Roland Burris and his lies and G.W. Bush and his senseless murder of gi's and his abundance of stupidity and lies. Religion does nothing. Yet we will continue to elect them for this qualification.

Will we ever see the forest for the trees? None too soon, unfortunately.

Chuck

Religious leaders in Chicago start race war!

2009-03-02T06:23:00.002-06:00

Roland Burris is bad for the people of Illinois. He has omitted important facts from his initial testimony before the Illinois House and the impeachment committee. He has changed his story twice beyond his initial testimony. He admitted to attempting to raise money for an embattled governor while discussing his acceptance of the seat he now holds yet neglected to inform the committee about this. In other, not so beat-around-the-bush words, Roland Burris lied and finagled and, most importantly to me, attempted to purchase his senate seat by soliciting donations to Rod Blagojovich's campaign. Yes, I'm accusing him of these wrong doings because that is how I interpret the events as they unfolded.

Now for the kicker. Mr. Burris is being backed by black aldermen in Chicago. He is also being backed by black clergy from predominantly black churches from the south side of Chicago. The alderman have essentially threatened the political stature of elected white officials with the black vote. The clergy have praised Burris for all of his good work in government. Both groups are chastising the media for reporting the recent fiasco and the large call from white elected officials for Burris' resignation. They say that this lying and corrupt man should be allowed to hold his seat for only one reason:

HE'S BLACK. The black community wants his in office for only this reason. Despite all the wrong doings this man has committed against government and justice and the hard work that scores of people have done over mountains of time these groups want Roland Burris in office. It begs the question: Is the black community willing to compromise justice and good government and honesty and integrity and good will simply so they can have an African American in this seat? Roland Burris is a man who was not electable through proper means and is only able to have this seat through appointment. The electorate found him unacceptable many times and will find him unacceptable should he decide to run in 2010. Yet the black community demands he remain in power and is working through coercion. Because this man is black. The only positive thing about this man as surely his deeds are not.

This community is willing to overlook all of this and ONLY concentrate on his skin, the very thing they rail about in others. Should those of us who are white vote for a candidate simply because they are white? Had that been the case we would have a white president who would be doing a poor job and tossing us into oblivion. We elected a black president, NOT BECAUSE HE IS BLACK, but because the country felt he had the best qualifications. The black community says "Qualifications be damned, just give us black!"

And religious leaders in Chicago are condonning injustice and sin and only seeing skin color. This to their shame. They engage in racism. They perpetuate racism. They promote racism. They praise racism.

Chuck

Racism is NOT dead.

2009-02-20T10:29:00.002-06:00

Nor will it be anytime soon. Racism is also not a condition resting solely on the shoulders of the black contingency.

I'm white. No secret there. And some would counter that, because of this fact, I don't know about racism, its effects, or even encounter this malady. This is a falsehood. I know my fair share.

Racism is a two way street. It must be fought by everyone, black and white alike. But it's not always dealt with in this way. Racism is usually thrown at "the white demon" like a hateful epithet and then left to fester. It has become a tool of victimization.

Where am I going with this? Roland Burris is the Jr. Senator from Illinois appointed by beleaguered ex-governor Rod Blagojovich. When the state was seeking a replacement for President Obama's vacated seat the black community raged on that it must be a black man. News outlets debated. Black religious leaders in Chicago all but demanded. Capitulation. Burris chosen. For many reasons an obvious mistake and now we are paying the price.

I'm not blaming, in any manner, this fiasco on black America because they are black. That would be silly and ignorant. I do, however, put much blame on their backing him because HE'S black. There was ample evidence that Obama was supported by more blacks than ever before. Was it his Senatorial record. He didn't really have one. Was it his platform on specific policy? Ask someone and they will tell you he is black and he is about change. They will know very little specifics. Ask those who called for a black replacement why they should be black and that will be the only reason. Not because blacks have better or worse records in things governmental.

Roland Burris was never able to get elected to high political office because no one of the electorate wanted him. He was supported this time because he was black. That is racist. That is discrimination. That is wrong. And look now where we are.

If we want racism to go away we should support people based on their qualifications. Not on their skin color. When we support someone because of bogus red herrings we lose. We lose good people, we lose integrity, we lose respect.

Chuck

Are Bloggers' First Amendment Rights in Jeopardy?

2009-02-08T07:13:00.010-06:00

This space is typically reserved for matters pertaining to organized religion and it's involvement in government; usually an attempt to protect the peoples government from the perversion of religion. Today, however, it is in defence of the people against government.

Let's start with the important fact: Digital media in the form of blogging on BLOGGER.COM, and other blogging sites, is under attack by the city of Chicago and private enterprise being employed by the city of Chicago and it's taxpayers. Your First Amendment rights are being threatened with oppression and censorship by intimidation and strong-arm techniques. The city of Chicago is seeking to stop the electronic media from expressing opinions, viewpoints, and factual information about the abuses of government upon it's electorate.

Your right to free speech is specified by The Declaration of Independence:

Amendment I
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

Now for the background for this.

Helen Shiller is the alderman for the 46th ward of Chicago and has been for about 20 years. She originally ran on the platform of helping the poor and disenfranchised of the Uptown neighborhood on Chicago's north side. But after 20 years in position this area of the city is still overburdened with homelessness, the mentally ill, and poverty. Some of these being superlatives for the entire country. With minimal improvement in the standard of living for these folks in Uptown taxpaying citizens have been making attempts to remove her from office through legal election cycles to no avail.

Around the year 2000 she helped create a TIF district in the neighborhood. This stands for Tax Increment Financing and means that tax dollars will be siphoned off in this district for the improvement of the community. Noble? Should be. Ms. Shiller hooked up with a developer named Peter Holsten and worked up plans for a development on approximately six acres of land that had been owned by the Chicago Transit Authority. This development is called "Wilson Yard" after the CTA named space.

(this picture taken from http://www.aldermanshiller.com/. To the best of my knowledge this image is public domain.)

This image shows the finished development which is to be completed in 2010. The portion to the left of the Target store is housing. The community was told this would be mixed income property and elderly housing. We are now informed that it will be low income, very low income, and NO INCOME housing. None of this was agreed upon by the tax paying residents of Uptown nor were our views and opinions used in the development of this taxpayer financed housing project. The taxpayers in the neighborhood objected vehemently to this historically proven failure of a housing model, warehousing of poor people in tall and congested spaces similar to Cabrini Green in Chicago; Cabrini Green being the "ghetto" of JJ and his family as portrayed in "Good Times" from television.

When the neighborhood's redress of grievances went unheeded and our concerns were ignored by the alderman and the developer legal action was taken by the taxpayers in the form of a grassroots organization and a lawsuit against the city of Chicago and the developer. You can read all about the specifics of the lawsuit at Fix Wilson Yard.

A blogger also started posting information about this TIF problem and the tax abuse involved. This blog, Uptown Update, became a neighborhood sensation with many taxpaying citizens getting involved and expressing their opinions. They also added a button on the blog where you can donate to Fix Wilson Yard to raise money for the legal expense of the lawsuit.

These two entities have become quite the thorn in the sides of both Peter Holsten and Helen Shiller. As this lawsuit is against the city of Chicago it is their lawyers that are defending it, Peter, and Helen. Those lawyers are now attempting to violate the first amendment rights of free speech by issuing subpoenas against Uptown Update and other bloggers in what seems to be an intimidation tactic to stop this blogger from updating the electorate on these shenanigans. They have also subpoenaed other bloggers from reporting the news about this violation of the public trust.

Why is this important to you? Because if local government is able to lessen or censor your freedom of speech with this critique of government it will set a precedent for larger state government and up the ladder to federal government. Imagine what we would have if George W. Bush had this precedent in his arsenal. I'm sure you remember the uproar that occurred when he disallowed the images of dead soldiers from the Iraq war from being published. These things start small and seemingly inconsequential. Until it happens to you directly.

Now is your chance to prevent this from happening to you and support those to whom it IS happening. Visit Uptown Update daily, donate as much as you can and as often as you can to Fix Wilson Yard. These people are working very hard to protect your tax money and your first amendment rights. This is a landmark time in Chicago. With the United States in financial crisis and a downturn in revenue please don't let them spend what little we have on a lawsuit to diminish your rights. You have a right to be heard. You have a right to speak. You have a First Amendment Right!

Chuck

Guilty, or just by association?

2008-12-21T09:15:00.003-06:00

Main Entry:
big·ot
Pronunciation:
\ˈbi-gət\
Function:
noun
Etymology:
French, hypocrite, bigot
Date:
1660
: a person obstinately or intolerantly devoted to his or her own opinions and prejudices ; especially : one who regards or treats the members of a group (as a racial or ethnic group) with hatred and intolerance
— big·ot·ed \-gə-təd\ adjective
— big·ot·ed·ly adverb

Barack Obama chose Rick Warren to perform the invocation at his inauguration in January. A very conservative right wing religious leader. He says he would like to present all opinions in his white house. Perhaps he would also like David Duke to be there. He could place his hand on the Q'aran while Mr. Duke swore him into office. Is that, too, an opinion in these United States? Why, yes, it is. Albeit not one we wish to give voice to. Why is it then alright to give voice to homosexual bigotry? Mr. Warren professes to know many gay people and to have eaten in gay homes. That's all well and good, Mr. Warren, for slave masters kept niggers in the main house to serve them at all hours of the day. This did not make either the ownership of slaves or mistreatment of them acceptable. Knowing fags and dining with them, even if that fag is Melissa Etheridge, does not excuse your designation of them as less than other members of our citizenry.

While I would like to say that this misstep is entirely on the shoulders of our President-elect that would be untrue. The gay community must accept a bit of blame for this one. They know his opinion about gay marriage and have chosen to ignore it. They have not called the man to the carpet and held him to an acceptable standard. While many refuse to believe Mr. Obama was explicit in his stand on gay marriage it makes it no less true. This current happenstance should be of no surprise. He has made it clear that he will tolerate homosexuals and do nothing to win them equality. He is, after all, a christian and will legislate those christian beliefs onto the masses. Whether you are christian or not. And the gay community has said, loudly and clearly, that this is alright with them.

Chuck

Christians Love? What?

2008-12-17T08:40:00.003-06:00

That just can't be correct. Christians don't love. Well, maybe they say they do, but look at their actions. These surely tell a very different story.

This weekend I was listening to NPR and they had a story about a town in Ohio that is fighting the war on Christmas head on. The town is encouraging it's residents and businesses to wish one another a "Merry Christmas" in defiance of the "Happy Holidays" trend. This begs the question "What about those other religious holidays that fall in the month of December?" Christians don't seem to care about those. After all, Christianity is really the only religion that matters, everyone else is going to Hell, anyway.

But this isn't the only issue on which they refuse any compromise or concession. What about abortion? Whether you agree with it or not, there are times when it may be necessary. Christians like Ms. Palin don't really care about that. And isn't this issue really something for medical professionals to work out? Yeah, yeah, I know, it's all about giving a voice to those without one, but these religious zealots have a strong tendency to miss the forest for the trees and seldom look beyond the procedure to the person beyond who is already outside the womb.

And then we have gay marriage. They say the Bible is against this and yet they totally overlook several other things the Bible is against but they have no problem pursuing; like clothing made of mixed fibers such as cotton/polyester blends. A big no no. And, shock, the Bible even talks of the evils of heterosexual marriage saying only to engage in this if you are too horny to remain outside the boundaries of matrimony. But marry they do. All the time. Many of them even more than once. Shock. And, wait, what does the almighty book say about divorce and remarriage? Against it! Except if your spouse cheats on you, that is. But how many marriages end in divorce for this reason? I'd suspect very few. But divorce rates hover around 50% these days.

It's amazing how much hate is in the hearts of Christians these days. And yet they talk and talk and talk. So when will society learn and relegate them to pariah like they should? I fear it's no time soon.

Chuck

Six Degrees of Separation

2008-12-09T10:59:00.002-06:00

The governor of Illinois was arrested today by federal authorities in what is being said as an investigation into his attempt to "sell" president-elect Obama's senate seat. It is coming as quite a shock to many of us in this state known for extreme corruption through all branches of government. We already have a governor in prison. We have federal probes investigating Chicago city government, as well. It seems to go on and on and on. It's amazing how deep it runs and how common an occurance it is in this state. I've not heard any specifics about our soon-to-be but it is only a matter of time. You don't grow up in Illinois politics and come out uncorrupt. And I don't care how much Obama will deny it in the next four years, I won't believe him. Not only is he from Illinois he is from Chicago. It rubs off. Let's see what eventually comes out in the wash. My mom had a proverb for us when we were growing up; Be sure your sins will always find you out. In time.

Rev. Wright and Politics. He likes to mix..

2008-12-08T06:00:00.003-06:00

So, this man who caused such controversy around the presidential election was back on the pulpit this last Sunday working very hard to lose the tax exempt status of Trinity United Church of Christ in Chicago. Jeremiah Wright is quoted in the Chicago Tribune this morning that folks "suffer a delusion that politics don't belong in the pulpit." I'm sure our founding fathers would be glad to hear that news. They are, after all, the ones who came up with that bullshit. Mr. Wright, how would you like to have that congregation of yours pay taxes on it's property, income, investments, blah, blah, blah? Cry foul? I'm sure you all would but what's good for you is good for me. Maybe we should also regulate what goes on in your congregation. Maybe we should have strict government oversight. I know, lets pass stringent laws telling you what you can and can't talk about. Like hate speach toward the white monster and gay people. Maybe even force you to follow the same equality laws as the rest of us. What a great day it would be if the federal government told you, under no uncertain terms, that you HAD TO perform gay weddings. WHITE GAY WEDDINGS. Justice. It's a beautiful thing. Try destroying our Constitution and see what happens next. Those of us who are truly American and love the country like the Constitution and appreciate the separation of church and state. It's the unAmerican amoung us who don't like these things. You give the impression of being unAmerican, Mr. Wright. Am I wrong in this?

Do we really separate church and state?

2008-11-30T08:59:00.003-06:00

Our government is promoting religion. And while it may not be just promoting a single religion, it has opened the door to persecution of those who do not practice any religion. I say this based on rulings in courts around this country concerning anti-gay legislation that has been passed, upheld, and challenged. Whether it is any of the anti-gay marriage amendments in the 30 states now listed or any of the four anti-gay adoption laws in this country that only harm the thousands of children waiting for loving families. Our government allows them to remain in spite of the fact they are in effect because of religious bigotry and hatred. Of those who voted in favor of Prop 8 in California did so because of their religious beliefs. If athiests were the majority in this country and voted to ban ALL marriage, what would the religious do? Why, cry discrimination and bigotry, of course. And they would be correct. What someone will do for you, they will do to you. Religious folks would be wise to heed that sentiment. And another they may wish to consider is that as expressed by Shylock in "The Merchant of Venice" by Shakespeare. For gays just may, one day, "better the instruction." As much as the vile religiosity may deserve that betterment of instruction it would still make for a very sad time.

Chuck

Who's enslaving whom now?

2008-11-09T07:27:00.003-06:00

Religion has done some horrible things in the history of our world. And when we were forming our new republic, our new nation, we attempted to prevent that. We didn't do a perfect job with this task, but there is hope that we can work to make it better. That didn't happen on Tuesday, November 4, 2008.

The ballot initiative Proposition 8 in California has shown us that we are all too eager to bully those weaker than ourselves. We achieve greatness only to beat down the "other" amoung us. It's truly sad to see. This law banning gay marriage in the most populous state in our country was approved by more than 70% of the same black voters who voted for Barack Obama. They reached out for equality for blacks and slapped back equality for gays. Exit polls indicate they did this because their RELIGION doesn't agree with homosexuality. Mr. Obama said the very same thing about gay marriage when he was campaigning. You might remember that NY Times article I mentioned a while back, and if you don't please do take a look in the archives. I'll go through and post the link here when I find it. He said he doesn't agree with politicians legislating their own religion into law but he would do just that because he's a christian. Seems his followers think that is ok, too. Of course it wasn't ok post 1963 when it applied to them, but it does now when it applies to those "others" they don't like. Nice.

Protecting marriage in the minority communities means telling 18,000 couples that they are no longer married under civil law because you don't like their spouse. Protecting marriage in 2008 is voiding the love of not only those 18,000 married couples but those countless numbers who are building a relationship of love and commitment with one another. Protecting marriage today in America, a nation of "equality" for all, means telling people they are not entitled to the full benefits and protection of our U.S. Constitution, that they are only partial citizens of this nation.

I suppose our next move is decide just how much of one person each "gay" is in this country. You know, for census sake, and collection of taxes, and determining the value of property. Oh, I have a splendid idea. How about 2/3? Yeah, that sounds just about right.

Chuck

At Last, At Last...

2008-08-05T14:55:00.002-05:00

I know what you are all thinking. Yes, it has been over a year since my last post. And with all manner of chutzpah going on with those religious nutbags.

But, really, this is all about the impending end to the reign of terror that was our president. I still find it rather unsettling that it is the religious right that put this man in office. A group of "conservative christians" that felt GW was the best man for the job. And look how it ended up. He lied. Over and over and over. He bullied. Over and over and over. He took all that was good and moral and lovely and ruined it. It says a whole lot about the idiocy of this group of people. And what is scary is that Barack Obama is trying to woo them. No need to rehash that NY Times interview, but you should at least remember it. These people are looking to continue running roughshod over the country with all of their stupidity. Let's hope this time they stay home. Let the intelligent amoung us vote.

Chuck

Independance Day Irony

2007-07-05T20:50:00.000-05:00

So, American Flag sales are down this year. In the midst of a war. Supporting your troops doesn't mean you blindly agree with the president, who is a real turd in my book. It means supporting the flag. It means believing your country can be good and right again and doing what it takes to get it that way. Thankfully we are on that track with the Republicans doing so poorly. But lest we forget, the Dems aren't all that much better so keep a close eye on them.

How was your Fourth? The view of all the fireworks from our living room was spectacular. It was like watching bubbles in a pot of boiling water, they were everywhere all over the landscape. It was like a freedom war zone without the death. Explosions of color for miles upon miles. And I thought of the irony of that.

I wished several folks at work a happy holiday. They looked at me as though I were crazy. "It's just another day", they say. No different than any other. Really? Are we not, supposedly, fighting a war for democracy and freedom? Well, that is what the government tells us even if we all do know better. But you would think that, somewhere amidst all this fighting, we would really contemplate what got us to this point in our history; The Revolution and the Declaration of Independance and the Constitution of the United States. "All men are created equal" and all that jazz. Nope, just a look of insanity. It's no wonder we are so hell bent on controlling the immigrant population (every one who looked at me funny also came from a different country and had an accent of their homeland) these days. They look at our day of Democracy with apathy. Is that what we really want for our country; apathy? Don't we already have enough of that from folks that were born here?

I hope you had a great holiday.

Chuck

"The Witch is Dead, The Witch is Dead, The Wicked Witch is Dead

2007-05-16T09:17:00.000-05:00

And so Falwell is gone. Thank God for this. Spend five minutes in prayer or silence and thank whichever God you call as your own. This evil man is finally gone. They say he prepared for the continuation of his work by his sons, but we all know how these things work out, poorly. They say he had heart trouble, an understatement if I ever heard one. And an irony. I say "What heart?" That man had no heart for anything but wickedness. He preached not the Bible but only what would bring glory to himself. He didn't preach about a loving and caring God but about a hateful and bigoted religious group of Americans. Well sit back and watch as his ugly little feet shrivel up because the wicked witch is dead. And so it goes...

Chuck

VA Tech and the Chicago Sun Times

2007-04-18T08:32:00.000-05:00

The headline of the Chicago Sun Times yesterday cried out "Where were the warning signs?"

They were all over the place. And they have been for quite some time. Years, in fact. Many, many years.

We all hate disappointment and difficulty. No one likes to feel like they just aren't good enough. We've all heard the stories, or have been there, of the person who no one wants on their team. So society has watered it down. It is now not PC to let anyone be second. No one can be disappointed in an outcome. Everyone is good and best and straight A. One of the signs that I see pointing to this tragedy is the double wide stroller. Parents don't want one child feeling second best so they buy these side-by-each monstrosities that take up an entire city sidewalk width and don't allow anyone else to get by. All so that a newborn doesn't have to ride in the back.

Another sign: California legislators actually had to consider a bill to outlaw spanking your children. Some lawmaker actually wanted to BAN THIS. This woman can't be serious? How does she expect you to teach you child right from wrong? Or does she think there is no wrong? Well, thirty college students dead from a disappointed kid with a gun is wrong.

Schools grading students on what each one actually knows and not on a standardized putz test is a sign. We just don't do things that way anymore. There have even been instances when students don't consider cheating wrong.

We have a current president that says it is ok to kill thousands of it's own soldiers and countless thousands of innocent civilians for groundless cause, after all, the Iraq war has been found to be without cause. Well, except that Sadam Hussein "tried to kill my daddy."

We have a current president that thinks it's ok to torture folks it says are enemies and doesn't even charge them as such. He holds them prisoner against our own due process and against the Geneva Conventions. What message does that send to our children?

These are all signs of a civilization in moral chaos. For those of you who get "Fuck Your God," kudos, for those who are still offended by it, go back to school. Learn something. Then, maybe you'll see those signs, too.

Chuck

Speaking of Barack

2007-03-23T16:27:00.000-05:00

What a mess that man is in. First he has this "two degrees of separation" thing with the Hillary video, now he can't, or just won't, admit an affiliation with "The Gays" who are supporting him. Yep. He's the savior incarnate. Way to go Mr. Obama.

C

Religious Hypocrites

2007-03-15T08:38:00.000-05:00

Religious people, christians in particular, are funny when it comes to their religion. When other religions are militant about their beliefs it's such a horrible thing. When I kiss my boyfriend on a street corner in Chicago, I'm jamming my lifestyle down their throats. Yet, when a christian sends this to me:

"HE is the only one that can save this country from the people that want him removed from the government. Our great nation will not stand if we delete HIM from all aspects of our government as the atheists want.Jesus Test This is an easy test, you score 100 or zero. It's your choice. If you aren't ashamed to do this, please follow the directions. Jesus said, "if you are ashamed of me, I will be ashamed of you before my Father." Not ashamed Pass this on .. Only if you mean it. Yes, I do Love God. He is my source of existence and Savior. He keeps me functioning each and everyday. Without Him, I will be nothing. Without Him, I am nothing but with Him I can do all things through Christ that strengthens me. Phil 4:13 This is the simplest test .. If you Love God, and are not ashamed of all the marvelous things he has done for you.
Send this to ten people and the person who sent it to you! "

it is ok. Is this NOT militant? Well, to this person, I sent this response:

"We should ALSO add Buddha and Mohammed and Thor and Athena and Zues and every other deity known to man. Our country was not founded on Christian religion only but on the FREEDOM TO WORSHIP AS ONE SEES FIT FOR HIMSELF. If you disagree with this, you should reread your history books. You should also research the founding fathers, many of whom were NOT monotheistic. To think otherwise is ignorant of the facts. If you wish to eliminate ALL OTHER religions and only allow Christianity you are bigotted and shortsighted. You have chosen to dismiss the free will your god gave his creations (according to your bible). And remember, what someone will do FOR you, they will also do TO you. If our government will oppress and try to eliminate other religions for you, they will also do it TO you.

If you truly love the god of your religion, you will NOT inflict an injustice such as this on others. In stead, you will foster love and acceptance of others, others that your god also created. Your bible states quite clearly that you should not consider yourself more highly than you ought. Look it up before you go pissing your "Holier than Thou" on someone else's Holy. That is exactly what is causing all the trouble in Isreal, Ireland, and the Middle East. It is the lack of "Live and Let Live". And if you are so "without sin", than continue casting your stones, but I doubt you are. You just like to think so.

C

www.fuckyourgod.blogspot.com"

This was sent to everyone in the CC line of the e-mail that was sent to me. One of those, zmendo@comcast.net, had this to say:

"Chuck,

Please delete me from any emails that you send. I am not interested in anything that you have to say!!"

I find this rather funny. Apparently they don't appreciate our government. They are unAmerican and disagree with our Constitution. I bet they would say they love this country. If they TRULY loved this country, they would accept the freedom of religion that is guaranteed by our Constitution. Instead they choose to turn a blind eye to every American and the rights they are also given to enjoy unless that American is Christian. In zmendo's opinion, I'm guessing by this response, only Christians should be free to worship as they see fit. After all, the rest of us can simply go to hell. Isn't that just like a christian to think these days? With hatred and bigotry? Seems like it to me.

Have a great day. Even you zmendo@comcast.net, whoever you are.

Chuck

More Ann Coulter

2007-03-12T01:15:00.000-05:00

Well, by this time we've all heard about Ann Coulter. For those of you who check in for my opinion, here goes.

This diatribe toward Mr. Edwards was given during a Republican Political event. She was applauded for her remarks. And what hateful remarks they were. These rantings of hers not only insulted Mr. Edwards AND gays, they also insulted any sane, thinking American. Why? Well, we really all want some of the same things, regardless of our political affiliation; fairness, equality, peace, prosperity. These are things that any party should fight for. The fact that Ms. Coulter would choose to use such charged epithets at a political function shows how truly despicable SHE is. The fact that she was cheered and applauded speaks volumns about the true spirit of the Republican Party. I don't see them rebuking her very loudly or vehemently. No, they cheered and applauded.

For a party that claimed the moral high road in the last two elections, for a party that openly courts the religious base in this country, this shows their true god. I don't see the God of the Bible here, do you? No, instead we see the god of power and hatred.

One more thing to contemplate. Falwell is still courting the Republican party, calling on Newt Gingrich, a self-professed womanizer. A womanizer in a political party that cheers on hatred and bigotry. And their god is who? I think I'll look elsewhere if I want good morals. The Republicans seem to have lost all of theirs.

And just as a side note for those wondering, I DON'T endorse Barack Obama. He has bigot issues all his own.

Chuck

So, Politics doesn't effect you?

2007-02-04T18:28:00.000-06:00

We've all heard it said by those who are too busy with life to pay attention to politics that, "Well, it really doesn't effect me anyway." I still hear this from people and it amazes me.

We have currently lost over 2,000 soldiers in Iraq. Countless others are pulling double and triple duty. Others who had enlisted as National Guardsmen/women are being called up for duty. Inactive duty soldiers are suddenly active. How many thousands has this happened to and how many more before these people are affected by Politics? In all reality, they're just blind and not paying attention. Politics effect you.

In California, politicians would like to outlaw incandescent light bulbs. This won't effect you, you say. They would also like to outlaw spanking children under the age of two. This won't effect you, either. There are myriad laws out there. Not one of these effects you, I suppose. You live in a politics-free environment. Bulley for you. But when that rug is pulled, you will be clueless as to how to stop it. And I can hear you asking now, "How could this happen? Why did no one stop this from happening?" Well, it's because you were too self absorbed.

Remember that when your son or daughter is called up, or killed, or effected by legislation and politics. I guess all I'm asking is that you wake the hell up.

Chuck

Good Bye, Molly

2007-02-02T12:10:00.000-06:00

Before we move on to politics and it's effects on your life, let's take today to honor and wish farewell to the wonderful Molly Ivins. She was sharp and quick witted. She loved our country. And she made a difference. We will miss her columns. We will miss her critique and her insight. Sleep well.

Chuck

Is EVERYONE running for President?!

2007-01-27T12:29:00.000-06:00

It seems that everyone who was recently elected to the House and Senate is now deciding to run for President in 2008. That being the case, who's watching the Capitol? That means, who's looking out for those of us who elected them? Shouldn't they be doing their jobs? It seems to me that if they can't do this one they have NOW, they shouldn't get the one that comes NEXT. Are they worth a promotion of this sort? How can they take on the world when they couldn't even take on G.W.? These folks really need to prove themselves. Actions speak louder than words.

And this goes for both Democrats and Republicans. To them all, I say "Shut up, sit down, and do the work in front of you." When 2008 gets here, we will all take a look at what you've accomplished and go from there. And we all don't care how many millions were donated to you from the business sector, you are there to work for us. You are there to do what is RIGHT, not what is profitable for YOU. You are a public servant, so serve.

The popular thing after the last presidential election was all the talk of abolishing the Electoral College. But, honestly, most of the population isn't smart enough to handle true democracy and do what's best for the COUNTRY and only know how to be self serving. We should just trust the founding fathers with this just as we do with the Constitution and Bill of Rights. If you really knew how it worked and how it has worked through time, you wouldn't be bitchin'. To those, I also say shut up. Pay attention to the elected, write to them regularly (they all have e-mail now, you know), and vote accordingly.

Maybe tomorrow we'll discuss this statement: "Oh, I don't vote. Politics doesn't really affect me, anyway." In the mean time, discuss.

Chuck

Miscellaneous goings on..

2006-11-17T13:12:00.000-06:00

You all did well with your voting. You threw the bums out. Now if the Dems would only get their shit together and form a coherent whole. Granted, they have quite an umbrella to stand beneath, but they really need to focus. So far they are a mess. They didn't win on their own merits, they won because the Republicans were asses. Now they need to prove they can handle it. If not, they're out next time. Like they say, "Sometimes the devil you know is better then the devil you don't."

The conservative parts of the country are being hit rather hard by their god these days. N. Carolina had a bit of a catastrophe with tornadoes and Utah had a minor temblor. Oh, and now there is a legal investigation into the Foley mess. Will it ever stop with those right wingers? It seems like, between all the hurricanes in Florida and the rest of the south coast, tornadoes in the midwest, sex scandals with the "morally" superior, and the smack-down of Republicans, the right wing god is trying to tell these turds something. Maybe the left ain't so bad after all.

The holidays are upon us now. Enjoy them. And for however many of you actuall read this, thank you.

Chuck

Today, We Vote

2006-11-07T11:28:00.000-06:00

Remember, today is NOT about political affiliation or parties. You vote for a candidate who will represent this country the best. No one party will do that for you and they need to know that you know that. We already know that no party will do the right thing, so that leaves that chore up to you. Voting along party lines is for the unimaginative and ignorant.

Our founding fathers risked everything they had for the start of this country, and that was quite a bit. Most of these guys had lots of money and land and prestige. They sacrificed this for us. Today's politicians have greed and ego. Neither of which they are willing to sacrifice. They don't really care about you, the citizen, they care about being a politician and all that entails. Just look at the indictments and you will see that that is power, prestige, and other ill-gotten gains. They are nothing like the founding fathers, no matter how much they try to persuade you otherwise.

Remember, if they lie to get into office, they will lie once in. If they exagerate about their opponents work to get your vote, they will do the same about their own record. It's up to YOU to pay attention.

Now get out and vote.

Chuck

Get Your FUCKING GOD out of MY Politics!!!

2006-09-30T13:54:00.000-05:00

Damn those religious freaks. They really won't be happy until they are running your entire life alongside those power hungry Republicans (soon-to-be Democrats). They are now working to outlaw contraception. These are the same folks who talk of the slippery slope of homosexuality and it's degeneration into all manner of unthinkable perversion. (Although it's rather funny that these religious folks are the ONLY ones who think this way. What would Freud have to say about this line of thought?) They just seem to want to get more and more and more and more involved in my, and your, sex live. Maybe because they don't have one of their own? Repression does strange things to a person.

Speaking of repression, have you heard of the Congress man from Florida who recently resigned? His crowning acheivement while in office was strong legislation toward curbing sexual predators and tracking them more closely. It has recently been brought to light that he is one of them. And a Republican. Instant messages and e-mails have been discovered that he wrote to high school boys that were sexually charged and inappropriate. A Republican in Florida. Isn't that nice?

Now, keep in mind that I'm not saying that Democrats will be any better, it's just that right now there are fewer of them and they have less power. Their time is coming with the new elections in November. Let's just hope they show more restraint than those across the aisle.

Chuck

You Go, Hugo!!!!

2006-09-25T17:15:00.000-05:00

Bravo to Mr. Chavez. There is nothing better to hear than the rhetoric slapping G.W. in the face. And some of it just what Bush uses as his own rhetoric.

As we have all heard by now, Hugo Chavez called our president "The Devil" at the United Nations. I tend to agree with him. George has been the most evil man on the planet for the last several years. It is of my opinion that all those soldiers of ours and those soldiers AND civilians of Iraq who have been killed during this war is the fault of George. He deceived to get us there and hasn't stopped. He has condoned the lies, perpetrated the lies and condoned torture. He even went so far as to fight to continue to torture.

I still find it amazing that the religious right loves him. Jerry Falwell just recently praised the Republican regime and said he hopes they continue ruling the roost after G.W. leaves. Another evil bastard, that one is. "You will know they are Christians by the way they love one another" says their book. I'm hardpressed to find God-like love in either of these two.

Now this here is hear-say and I can't tell you where I heard this and if it is even true. But apparently a reporter told Chavez that you can't say things like that about the president of the U.S. or you could get killed. His response: "I have God on my side. I'm not afraid of him." I could only HOPE this were true. What a great line.

Chuck

You call yourself an American?!

2006-08-27T22:18:00.000-05:00

Today I was returning home from work. I had my headphones on so I was rather oblivious to the man talking to me from behind. I feel a tap on my shoulder and this man asks me about my pin. (you all know the one, it's pink and says "Fuck Your God") It's the only pin on my backpack so it's not hard to know what he's talking about. I tell him it's a political pin defending the separation of church and state. Unlike other people who think it's just a bit harsh and say so, this man tells me I need to keep my political opinions to myself. I found this reaction to be quite ironic. I always thought it was good to have good political opinions and to discuss them intelligently. I bet this man even thinks I'm the unAmerican one.

Oh, did I mention he was quite obviously drunk?

Have a great day.
Chuck

Bill of Non-Rights

2006-08-08T08:43:00.000-05:00

Thought you all might enjoy this. Found it on the net. There is ONE part I don't agree with, and you will all know that part. For most of it, though, it's rather common-sense-ical. I have left it unedited from the original found and received permission from the author to reprint. His name is Tim. Thanks Tim for the Bill.

New Preamble to the Constitution:

"We, the sensible people of the United States, in an attempt to help everyone get along, restore some semblance of justice, avoid more riots, keep our nation safe, promote positive behavior, and secure the blessings of debt-free liberty to ourselves and our great-great-great-grandchildren, hereby try one more time to ordain and establish some common sense guidelines for the terminally whiny, guilt ridden, delusional, and other liberal bed-wetters. We hold these truths to be self evident: that a whole lot of people are confused by the Bill of Rights and are so dim they require a Bill of NON-Rights."

ARTICLE I: You do not have the right to a new car, big screen TV, or any other form of wealth. More power to you if you can legally acquire them, but no one is guaranteeing anything.

ARTICLE II: You do not have the right to never be offended. This country is based on freedom, and that means freedom for everyone -- not just you! You may leave the room, turn the channel, express a different opinion, etc.; but the world is full of idiots, and probably always will be.

ARTICLE III: You do not have the right to be free from harm. If you stick a screwdriver in your eye, learn to be more careful, do not expect the tool manufacturer to make you and all your relatives independently wealthy.

ARTICLE IV: You do not have the right to free food and housing. Americans are the most charitable people to be found, and will gladly help anyone in need, but we are quickly growing weary of subsidizing generation after generation of professional couch potatoes who achieve nothing more than the creation of another generation of professional couch potatoes. (This one is my pet peeve...get an education and go to work....don't expect everyone else to take care of you!)

ARTICLE V: You do not have the right to free health care. That would be nice, but from the looks of public housing, we're just not interested in public health care.

ARTICLE VI: You do not have the right to physically harm other people. If you kidnap, rape, intentionally maim, or kill someone, don't be surprised if the rest of us want to see you fry in the electric chair.

ARTICLE VII: You do not have the right to the possessions of others. If you rob, cheat, or coerce away the goods or services of other citizens, don't be surprised if the rest of us get together and lock you away in a place where you still won't have the right to a big screen color TV or a life of leisure.

ARTICLE VIII: You do not have the right to a job. All of us sure want you to have a job, and will gladly help you along in hard times, but we expect you to take advantage of the opportunities of education and vocational training laid before you to make yourself useful.

ARTICLE IX: You do not have the right to happiness. Being an American means that you have the right to PURSUE happiness, which by the way, is a lot easier if you are unencumbered by an over abundance of idiotic laws created by those of you who were confused by the Bill of Rights.

ARTICLE X: This is an English speaking country. We don't care where you are from, English is our language. Learn it or go back to wherever you came from!

(lastly....)

ARTICLE XI: You do not have the right to change our country's history or heritage. This country was founded on the belief in God. And yet, you are given the freedom to believe in any religion, any faith, or no faith at all; with no fear of persecution. The phrase IN GOD WE TRUST is part of our heritage and history, and if you are uncomfortable with it, TOUGH!!!!

-Enjoy your Tuesday,
Chuck

Our Golden Calf

2006-08-01T12:04:00.000-05:00

I keep pointing out the connection to the Republicans that the religious amoung us have. Yet it still keeps amazing me. The religious continue to worship their golden calf that is money and power and the bottom line that is the Republican party. At the same time they disparage the left that is working so very hard to help those who are poor and hungry and diseased and crippled with pain. Listen to the squeals of anguish from the religious about how awful strong monogomous family life is (aka: gay marriage and adoption) and yet have nothing to say about the troubles STILL afflicting those in New Orleans. People who still have yet to be able to return to their homes and bring family back together. They would rather build huge churches in which to worship Republicans than help out. They help perpetuate the lies of the party and still claim moral superiority. They espouse hatred toward others. Looking at all that they are doing, I can't help but think, "What WOULD Jesus Do?" I can't imagine he would be very happy.

November is coming quickly. What are you going to do about all of this?

Chuck

With principles like these.....

2006-06-26T12:21:00.000-05:00

Last week during a news conference, the president said that he was protecting the country and using sound moral principles. HA! It is now known that Karl Rove is the one who leaked Valerie Plame's name to the newspapers with the president's blessing. Dick Cheney knew all about it, too. The president said last year he didn't know who did it. He lied to the American people. The president has spent his tenure lowering taxes for only the rich and cutting programs for the poor. He has pushed through policies without the opportunity to pay for them. He said, very ademantly that there were weapons of mass destruction in Iraq when he, and his cronies, knew this to be false. This lie was used to send thousands of YOUR NEIGHBORS to die in a wrongly justified war. Again, he lied to the American people. This one resulted in, so far, 2500 deaths for us and countless for this poor country. Our president has tried, unsuccessfully, to continue using torture. Against the Geneva Convention. He terrorizes his own people with threats of harm by others and propogates fear. And now, he is chastising newspapers for reporting news. A fellow republican wants to take legal action against the newspaper for reporting news.

Well, I don't know about you, but this all reaks of fascism and wickedness. Surely not upstanding moral values. Funny that religious folks still like him. Doesn't say much for them.

Keep protecting your Constitution folks. G.W. is working on it's dismantling. One right at a time.

Chuck

Strange Bedfellows

2006-06-15T12:32:00.000-05:00

Republicans and the Religious Right.

Funny.

How did these two become so entrenced with one another? It seems so odd. They really are at opposite sides of the spectrum. The Republicans have always been notorious for greed and money. They love money. And what does the Bible, upon which so many of the religious base their hateful morality, say about money? "For the love of money is the root of all kinds of evil" 1 Timothy 6:10 NIV. The Republicans, who are in control of so much of our government right now, were in cahoots with the energy folks and, voila, your energy costs have soared. And this is kept in the dark, away from you, who are paying these soaring energy costs. Rebublicans are in close relations with big businesses rebuilding things in Iraq. The Republicans are cutting taxes for the most wealthy amoung us and YOU, the middle class, are stuck with the bills. All of this and claiming a superior morality.

Let's see:

"For this you can be sure: no immoral, impure, or greedy person-such a man is an idolator-has any inheritance in the kindom of Christ and of God. Let no man deceive you with empty words, for because of such things God's wrath comes on those who are disobedient. Therefore do not be partners with them" Ephesians 4:9. If you read the entire passage here, you will see it is speaking of living a good, pure life. But this bit really seems important when looking at the Republican party of late, and it's relationship with the Religious. According to it, the religious shouldn't even associate with them. But, alas, they are.

Now the religious are pissed. What did they expect from such a corrupt group? Now I'm not saying the Democrats are any less corrupt. Give them time and opportunity. But I guess this is what happens when religion and politics are so deeply intertwined. Religion has become just as immoral. They resort to underhandedness, deceit, and a complete disregard for love and compassion. And without love, they are nothing but a clanging gong.

Chuck

Religion's Wickedness

2006-06-02T15:00:00.001-05:00

The American Inquisition bagan a short time ago. It is now fervently marching onward. One result it hopes to acheive is SLAVERY.

In the next week our government will debate an Amendment to our National Constitution, a document drawn by our founders for the purpose of protecting and defending our personal freedoms and liberties. This most important historical document was written, thought out, and planned to ensure that each one of us be able to persue life, Liberty, and happiness without discrimination. It was meant because "All Men Are Created Equal."

Those amoung us who claim religion and profess to "Love God" now seek to enslave. It is by their own judgement that they are attempting to cause others to become lesser beings. Beings unworthy of the equality bestowed upon them by their creator and guaranteed them by our National Constitution. The president of These United (sic) States, who swore an oath to his God and to his Country to protect our National Constitution, is now seeking to destroy the fundamental qualities of our National Constitution. He has agreed to, and is actively persuing, adding hatred, bigotry, inequality, and SLAVERY into our National Constitution. He is of the opinion that there are those amoung us that are not "Created Equal" and are less worthy of "Live, Liberty, and the Persuit of Happiness." He is also of the opinion that there ate those amoung us that are less worthy of the equality guaranteed us by our National Constitution.

The ones who profess to "Love God" and claim religion have judged others to be worthy only of enslavement. And to be sure, when you strip a free peoples of Life, Liberty, and that persuit of Happiness, when you place a value on them that is less than you aught, you reduce them to SLAVES. They wish to ENSLAVE by chaining people to a religious morality that is not held by the oppressed but only the oppressor. This To-Be-Debated Amendment will effectively work not only to oppress and ENSLAVE but to also restrict the rights and freedoms of ALL religions that are currently enjoyed.

As has been quoted here before:

"What one will do FOR you, they will also do TO you."

In who's God do you trust? Your own, or the that of the religious Al Queda attacking YOUR NATIONAL CONSTITUTION?

Chuck

Ironies from Illegals

2006-05-13T16:22:00.000-05:00

So, most of the illegal immigrants in this country are from Mexico. Mexicans seem to be strongly Catholic. No surprise they see nothing wrong with breaking the law.

Coming into a country illegally is breaking the law. Coming in legally and then staying illegally is breaking the law. To hold up a sign that says they are not criminal is wrong. They are criminals. If they are religious people who believe in the Bible, shouldn't they do what it says? I would think so. Well, it says to obey the laws of the land. They need to be held accountable.

Immigration is a good thing. Many of us come from families where, long ago, there was immigration. It was done the right way. If that right way was different at that time is irrelevent. We have a system of laws that must be adhered to. If this very important set of laws is deemed by our lawmakers to be not worthy of adherance, how can they expect ANY to be worthy? How can they expect respect for the law from citizens if they have none? I don't think they can.

I think this issue is that simple. Illegal immigration is illegal. Illegal immigrants are criminals. We have laws to deal with criminals. Let's get with it.

Chuck

During this holiday, how important IS the First Amendment to YOU?

2006-04-14T13:02:00.000-05:00

We've all heard about the First Amendment, and at this point have undoubtedly heard how more folks know the Simpson's names' than our Bill of Rights. This would lead one to believe that the First Amendment isn't all that important to us. Maybe that is because WE haven't had to fight for it recently. But that doesn't mean we should be any less prudent about protecting it.

Our First Amendment states:

Amendment I

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

I would urge ALL of you to read this, to memorize this, to hold this dear to you. I know that many of our leaders claim to hold dear strong religious conviction, but "actions speak louder than words", don't they. The current Republican administration is certainly showing its true colors of corruption, ineptitude, and disregard for ANY moral conviction. They are ALSO showing strong ANTI-AMERICAN traits. Our country is morally weaker, financially weaker, militarily weaker, and ethically weaker. And those in office that are Democrats aren't off the hook. They have continually FAILED to fight strongly on YOUR behalf. They have allowed our country to descend into its weakened state, all for personal gain of money and power.

At the same time, these officials DECEIVE you by passing laws with strong religious undertones. Simply so you will continue to give them power. Well, remember this:

"What some one will do FOR you, they will also do TO you"

These laws may currently agree WITH your religious convictions, but do they correlate with ALL of our convictions? Our country is made up of Christians, Jews, Muslims, Buddhists, Islamists, Atheists, and a host of others. Isn't it printed on our money "E Pluribus Unim"? Out of many, one? We pride ourselves on our diversity, religious and otherwise.

It is up to you, the people, to ensure that this remains a country "of the people, by the people, and for the people." It is up to you to vigilantly protect our Bill of Rights.

Enjoy your holiday, whichever it is. And enjoy the religious freedom you have to celebrate that holiday.

Chuck

Organized Religion vs. God? Yes, VS!

2006-04-13T16:52:00.000-05:00

Fascinating concept. With potential to be terrifically controversial. And I got it from a Republican. Whodda Thunk?

The Bible teaches heaven and hell, god and satan, good and bad. It also teaches to beware of satan as he is a master of deception. So people create organized religion to band together against satan. And yet time and again it has ended up doing his bidding. How? Distraction. Jesus taught against the pharisees and being "clean" on the outside while remaining "unclean" on the inside, where it matters. We had the inquisition, which turned out to be a terrible blot on religion. The pope, it is STRONGLY speculated, supported Hitler. And most currently, we have a plethora of religious leaders steeped in scandal, whether it be Jim Baker, Pat Robertson, Jimmy Swaggart, and much of the Catholic church and it's fostering of pedophiles. And let's not forget our current president and his band of merry religious men. One of which is now under investigation for child sexual impropriety. Others are in trouble for ethical improprieties involving government monies and corruption. Think simply Tom DeLay, Bill Frist, Scooter Libby, and on and on and on.

All these people have "strong religious conviction" in common. Yep, organized religion. Could it be that organized religion is really the work of the very satan against whom they are working? Could he (?) be using their own tools against them? Sorta looks that way. And that's frightening. These organizations pervert the Bible, ethics, and even government, and the masses still consider them morally upstanding and follow them wholeheartedly. These organizations are not interested in actually BEING morally sound, just looking. They are too distracted with power, money, and prestige. No longer are they concerned with "Seeking and Saving the lost".

God, why have they forsaken you?

You mull it over. Let me know what you think.

Chuck

Voting Season

2006-03-17T06:34:00.000-06:00

Well, voting starts on Tuesday, March 21, 2006 and goes right through to November. I hope you know who you're voting for. AND WHY. And, I hope the reason is not because they are either a Republican or a Democrat. Voting strictly along party lines is disgusting. It's uninformed, irresponsible, and wrong. WRONG I SAY! You should vote for the candidate that is best of the worst. I mean really, do we have a good candidate for ANYTHING? Nope. And remember something I write in here regularly: What they will do FOR you, they'll do TO you. We need candidates that vote for the good of the country and the people, notcandidates who vote along party lines or in line with their own religion. That candidate's religion may not be yours, and for a good portion of the country, they are not. For a candidate to vote in line with the catholic church because he is catholic, or a protestant church because he is protestant is wrong. They do NOT represent their house of worship only. They represent the People of The United States of America. ALL OF THEM.

Please don't misunderstand me, voting with morals, values, compassion, love, understanding and good strong ethics is good. It's desirable, even. But when politicians vote based on their religious teaching, they cross the line of Separation of Church and State. This whole Roe V. Wade thing would be DONE if we could only put it in it's place, the doctors' offices where it belongs. If religious folk are anti abortion, don't have one. They should teach their children proper sex education, whatever they feel is right. They should bring up their children with the morals and values in which they believe. Their religion belongs in their own home and in their own church.

And you, the voter, if you are so short sighted and self centered to only consider what is good for you personally, and not what is good for this country, I would call you Un-American and Un-Patriotic. Just remember, if a politician will do it FOR you, they'll do it TO you. And you just might deserve it. So vote what's best for the country, best for ALL of society. Vote for what is upstanding, and right, and moral, and good. You could very well save someone else's civil rights along with your own.

Happy voting!

Chuck

Fuck the Pope

2006-03-01T16:11:00.000-06:00

Today is Ash Wednesday. A day all the good little catholics go to church and get ashes on their heads. They start the lenten season by giving up something. Anything. And the most popular things seem to be those that really don't matter or take the least effort. Ah, the sacrifice of Christ. What heart these people have.

Well, I say they should give up politics. For good. They keep putting their hands in it trying to legislate those of us who really have no use for them and they can't even properly legislate their own. They've gone so far as to tell politicians that they can't take the communion if they don't vote per catholic standards. They should first forbid it to ANY PRIEST OR OTHER CLERGY that is involved in either being the PEDOPHILE or the one who protects them. Like cardinal george here in Chicago. First of all, if the rumor mill is right and he's gay, out he goes. Secondly, he's admitted to shuffling the perverts around the church or doing less than nothing to protect kids. How can he be holier than thou if he allows known pedophiles near children, essentially bringing the sheep to slaughter. And all the good little catholics are supporting him. Nice. So the catholics and their "holy, apostolic church" is a den and producer of child molesters. And, again, they want to legislate the non catholics. Just what we need, legalized child molestation. Are they secretly in cahoots with NAMBLA?

Well I'll say it again. Fuck the pope.

Chuck

YOUR Bill of Rights, continued

2006-02-07T14:13:00.000-06:00

Amendment V

No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.

Amendment VI

In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence.

Amendment VII

In Suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved, and no fact tried by a jury, shall be otherwise re-examined in any Court of the United States, than according to the rules of the common law.

Amendment VIII

Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.

Amendment IX

The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.

Amendment X

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

-- So, there you go. Read them all. Study them well. These are here to keep you safe. Our founding fathers, with good reason, didn't trust government and neither should you. Take it with a grain of salt. And respect it for what it is. And like anything else, proceed with caution and use sparingly. As I have been saying for a long time now, "Nothing natural, in moderation, is bad for you."

Chuck

Bill of Rights I through IV

2006-01-23T10:36:00.000-06:00

The following is our Bill of Rights, in part. Please read them carefully. They are yours. They outline some very important things in your life as a citizen of the United States and to not understand them and read them is to your, and our, detriment. Especially in the face of our current leadership.

The Preamble to The Bill of Rights:

Congress of the United States begun and held at the City of New-York, onWednesday the fourth of March, one thousand seven hundred and eighty nine.
THE Conventions of a number of the States, having at the time of their adopting the Constitution, expressed a desire, in order to prevent misconstruction or abuse of its powers, that further declaratory and restrictive clauses should be added: And as extending the ground of public confidence in the Government, will best ensure the beneficent ends of its institution.
RESOLVED by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America, in Congress assembled, two thirds of both Houses concurring, that the following Articles be proposed to the Legislatures of the several States, as amendments to the Constitution of the United States, all, or any of which Articles, when ratified by three fourths of the said Legislatures, to be valid to all intents and purposes, as part of the said Constitution; viz.
ARTICLES in addition to, and Amendment of the Constitution of the United States of America, proposed by Congress, and ratified by the Legislatures of the several States, pursuant to the fifth Article of the original Constitution.

The Bill of Rights: A Transcription
Note: The following text is a transcription of the first ten amendments to the Constitution in their original form. These amendments were ratified December 15, 1791, and form what is known as the "Bill of Rights."

Amendment I
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

Amendment II
A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

Amdment III
No Soldier shall, in time of peace be quartered in any house, without the consent of the Owner, nor in time of war, but in a manner to be prescribed by law.

Amendment IV
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

There is more to come so stay tuned.

Chuck

Bill of Rights are coming! Bill of Rights are coming!

2006-01-17T14:07:00.000-06:00

But not today. Today we discuss responsibility. Specifically, responsibility of self. Who really is responsible for ME? Well, I don't think it is me, anymore. Or you, or my family. It seems that that responsibility is slowly becoming the responsibility of the government.

Think "smoking bans in public places", or anti-abortionists, or gay marriage opponents (or even gay rights opponents, for that matter), or Neo-Cons, or religion in the public sector such as schools, Intelligent Design, etc., etc., etc. The government seems to want responsibility over what I think, learn, feel, do (in my home or out), and act. All this legislation is starting to outlaw my own freedoms and liberty. This whole smoking thing is getting so out of control. Who are these schmuks telling me where I can smoke? I can't smoke in a privately owned bar? Oh, by the way, I'm not a smoker, just concerned for personal civil liberties and freedoms in a country supposedly "The land of the Free". What, I can't pray privately in school? What is that? Am I shoving my religion down someone's throat here? You don't like it, fine. Pray to your god silently and leave me alone. I can't criticize the president? Right. If he's acting like a retard, I'm going to say something, Republican or Democrat.

I turned 18 roughly 16 years ago. I'm a grown man. My folks brought me up in the best way they knew how. I don't live with them any longer. That said, if I want to smoke, I will. If I want to marry someone of the same gender, that's my business and don't need the "blessing" of the religious right, if I knock-up a girl and she wants an abortion, that is her decision and mine. These are all things I will have to deal with in my head. They are all my responsibility. They DON'T need legislating by activist anyone.

Next time, The Bill of Rights. In small increments as I know you like to read snippets. Ahhh, the OCD world we live in.

Chuck

WE the people...

2006-01-11T13:55:00.000-06:00

For your convenience, and because I don't think many people have actually read it in its entirety, I'm posting our Constitution of the United States. I think you should all read it. Completely. Even any parts you find to be boring or redundant. Soon to follow will be the Bill of Rights and then the rest of the amendments. Our society is failing. You need to do something. Here is a start. Happy New Year.

The Constitution of the United States: A Transcription
Note: The following text is a transcription of the Constitution in its original form. Items that are hyperlinked have since been amended or superseded.

We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.
Article. I.
Section. 1.
All legislative Powers herein granted shall be vested in a Congress of the United States, which shall consist of a Senate and House of Representatives.
Section. 2.
The House of Representatives shall be composed of Members chosen every second Year by the People of the several States, and the Electors in each State shall have the Qualifications requisite for Electors of the most numerous Branch of the State Legislature.
No Person shall be a Representative who shall not have attained to the Age of twenty five Years, and been seven Years a Citizen of the United States, and who shall not, when elected, be an Inhabitant of that State in which he shall be chosen.
Representatives and direct Taxes shall be apportioned among the several States which may be included within this Union, according to their respective Numbers, which shall be determined by adding to the whole Number of free Persons, including those bound to Service for a Term of Years, and excluding Indians not taxed, three fifths of all other Persons. The actual Enumeration shall be made within three Years after the first Meeting of the Congress of the United States, and within every subsequent Term of ten Years, in such Manner as they shall by Law direct. The Number of Representatives shall not exceed one for every thirty Thousand, but each State shall have at Least one Representative; and until such enumeration shall be made, the State of New Hampshire shall be entitled to chuse three, Massachusetts eight, Rhode-Island and Providence Plantations one, Connecticut five, New-York six, New Jersey four, Pennsylvania eight, Delaware one, Maryland six, Virginia ten, North Carolina five, South Carolina five, and Georgia three.
When vacancies happen in the Representation from any State, the Executive Authority thereof shall issue Writs of Election to fill such Vacancies.
The House of Representatives shall chuse their Speaker and other Officers; and shall have the sole Power of Impeachment.
Section. 3.
The Senate of the United States shall be composed of two Senators from each State, chosen by the Legislature thereof for six Years; and each Senator shall have one Vote.
Immediately after they shall be assembled in Consequence of the first Election, they shall be divided as equally as may be into three Classes. The Seats of the Senators of the first Class shall be vacated at the Expiration of the second Year, of the second Class at the Expiration of the fourth Year, and of the third Class at the Expiration of the sixth Year, so that one third may be chosen every second Year; and if Vacancies happen by Resignation, or otherwise, during the Recess of the Legislature of any State, the Executive thereof may make temporary Appointments until the next Meeting of the Legislature, which shall then fill such Vacancies.
No Person shall be a Senator who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty Years, and been nine Years a Citizen of the United States, and who shall not, when elected, be an Inhabitant of that State for which he shall be chosen.
The Vice President of the United States shall be President of the Senate, but shall have no Vote, unless they be equally divided.
The Senate shall chuse their other Officers, and also a President pro tempore, in the Absence of the Vice President, or when he shall exercise the Office of President of the United States.
The Senate shall have the sole Power to try all Impeachments. When sitting for that Purpose, they shall be on Oath or Affirmation. When the President of the United States is tried, the Chief Justice shall preside: And no Person shall be convicted without the Concurrence of two thirds of the Members present.
Judgment in Cases of Impeachment shall not extend further than to removal from Office, and disqualification to hold and enjoy any Office of honor, Trust or Profit under the United States: but the Party convicted shall nevertheless be liable and subject to Indictment, Trial, Judgment and Punishment, according to Law.
Section. 4.
The Times, Places and Manner of holding Elections for Senators and Representatives, shall be prescribed in each State by the Legislature thereof; but the Congress may at any time by Law make or alter such Regulations, except as to the Places of chusing Senators.
The Congress shall assemble at least once in every Year, and such Meeting shall be on the first Monday in December, unless they shall by Law appoint a different Day.
Section. 5.
Each House shall be the Judge of the Elections, Returns and Qualifications of its own Members, and a Majority of each shall constitute a Quorum to do Business; but a smaller Number may adjourn from day to day, and may be authorized to compel the Attendance of absent Members, in such Manner, and under such Penalties as each House may provide.
Each House may determine the Rules of its Proceedings, punish its Members for disorderly Behaviour, and, with the Concurrence of two thirds, expel a Member.
Each House shall keep a Journal of its Proceedings, and from time to time publish the same, excepting such Parts as may in their Judgment require Secrecy; and the Yeas and Nays of the Members of either House on any question shall, at the Desire of one fifth of those Present, be entered on the Journal.
Neither House, during the Session of Congress, shall, without the Consent of the other, adjourn for more than three days, nor to any other Place than that in which the two Houses shall be sitting.
Section. 6.
The Senators and Representatives shall receive a Compensation for their Services, to be ascertained by Law, and paid out of the Treasury of the United States. They shall in all Cases, except Treason, Felony and Breach of the Peace, be privileged from Arrest during their Attendance at the Session of their respective Houses, and in going to and returning from the same; and for any Speech or Debate in either House, they shall not be questioned in any other Place.
No Senator or Representative shall, during the Time for which he was elected, be appointed to any civil Office under the Authority of the United States, which shall have been created, or the Emoluments whereof shall have been encreased during such time; and no Person holding any Office under the United States, shall be a Member of either House during his Continuance in Office.
Section. 7.
All Bills for raising Revenue shall originate in the House of Representatives; but the Senate may propose or concur with Amendments as on other Bills.
Every Bill which shall have passed the House of Representatives and the Senate, shall, before it become a Law, be presented to the President of the United States: If he approve he shall sign it, but if not he shall return it, with his Objections to that House in which it shall have originated, who shall enter the Objections at large on their Journal, and proceed to reconsider it. If after such Reconsideration two thirds of that House shall agree to pass the Bill, it shall be sent, together with the Objections, to the other House, by which it shall likewise be reconsidered, and if approved by two thirds of that House, it shall become a Law. But in all such Cases the Votes of both Houses shall be determined by yeas and Nays, and the Names of the Persons voting for and against the Bill shall be entered on the Journal of each House respectively. If any Bill shall not be returned by the President within ten Days (Sundays excepted) after it shall have been presented to him, the Same shall be a Law, in like Manner as if he had signed it, unless the Congress by their Adjournment prevent its Return, in which Case it shall not be a Law.
Every Order, Resolution, or Vote to which the Concurrence of the Senate and House of Representatives may be necessary (except on a question of Adjournment) shall be presented to the President of the United States; and before the Same shall take Effect, shall be approved by him, or being disapproved by him, shall be repassed by two thirds of the Senate and House of Representatives, according to the Rules and Limitations prescribed in the Case of a Bill.
Section. 8.
The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;
To borrow Money on the credit of the United States;
To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes;
To establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization, and uniform Laws on the subject of Bankruptcies throughout the United States;
To coin Money, regulate the Value thereof, and of foreign Coin, and fix the Standard of Weights and Measures;
To provide for the Punishment of counterfeiting the Securities and current Coin of the United States;
To establish Post Offices and post Roads;
To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries;
To constitute Tribunals inferior to the supreme Court;
To define and punish Piracies and Felonies committed on the high Seas, and Offences against the Law of Nations;
To declare War, grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal, and make Rules concerning Captures on Land and Water;
To raise and support Armies, but no Appropriation of Money to that Use shall be for a longer Term than two Years;
To provide and maintain a Navy;
To make Rules for the Government and Regulation of the land and naval Forces;
To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions;
To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the Militia, and for governing such Part of them as may be employed in the Service of the United States, reserving to the States respectively, the Appointment of the Officers, and the Authority of training the Militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress;
To exercise exclusive Legislation in all Cases whatsoever, over such District (not exceeding ten Miles square) as may, by Cession of particular States, and the Acceptance of Congress, become the Seat of the Government of the United States, and to exercise like Authority over all Places purchased by the Consent of the Legislature of the State in which the Same shall be, for the Erection of Forts, Magazines, Arsenals, dock-Yards, and other needful Buildings;--And
To make all Laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into Execution the foregoing Powers, and all other Powers vested by this Constitution in the Government of the United States, or in any Department or Officer thereof.
Section. 9.
The Migration or Importation of such Persons as any of the States now existing shall think proper to admit, shall not be prohibited by the Congress prior to the Year one thousand eight hundred and eight, but a Tax or duty may be imposed on such Importation, not exceeding ten dollars for each Person.
The Privilege of the Writ of Habeas Corpus shall not be suspended, unless when in Cases of Rebellion or Invasion the public Safety may require it.
No Bill of Attainder or ex post facto Law shall be passed.
No Capitation, or other direct, Tax shall be laid, unless in Proportion to the Census or enumeration herein before directed to be taken.
No Tax or Duty shall be laid on Articles exported from any State.
No Preference shall be given by any Regulation of Commerce or Revenue to the Ports of one State over those of another; nor shall Vessels bound to, or from, one State, be obliged to enter, clear, or pay Duties in another.
No Money shall be drawn from the Treasury, but in Consequence of Appropriations made by Law; and a regular Statement and Account of the Receipts and Expenditures of all public Money shall be published from time to time.
No Title of Nobility shall be granted by the United States: And no Person holding any Office of Profit or Trust under them, shall, without the Consent of the Congress, accept of any present, Emolument, Office, or Title, of any kind whatever, from any King, Prince, or foreign State.
Section. 10.
No State shall enter into any Treaty, Alliance, or Confederation; grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal; coin Money; emit Bills of Credit; make any Thing but gold and silver Coin a Tender in Payment of Debts; pass any Bill of Attainder, ex post facto Law, or Law impairing the Obligation of Contracts, or grant any Title of Nobility.
No State shall, without the Consent of the Congress, lay any Imposts or Duties on Imports or Exports, except what may be absolutely necessary for executing it's inspection Laws: and the net Produce of all Duties and Imposts, laid by any State on Imports or Exports, shall be for the Use of the Treasury of the United States; and all such Laws shall be subject to the Revision and Controul of the Congress.
No State shall, without the Consent of Congress, lay any Duty of Tonnage, keep Troops, or Ships of War in time of Peace, enter into any Agreement or Compact with another State, or with a foreign Power, or engage in War, unless actually invaded, or in such imminent Danger as will not admit of delay.
Article. II.
Section. 1.
The executive Power shall be vested in a President of the United States of America. He shall hold his Office during the Term of four Years, and, together with the Vice President, chosen for the same Term, be elected, as follows:
Each State shall appoint, in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct, a Number of Electors, equal to the whole Number of Senators and Representatives to which the State may be entitled in the Congress: but no Senator or Representative, or Person holding an Office of Trust or Profit under the United States, shall be appointed an Elector.
The Electors shall meet in their respective States, and vote by Ballot for two Persons, of whom one at least shall not be an Inhabitant of the same State with themselves. And they shall make a List of all the Persons voted for, and of the Number of Votes for each; which List they shall sign and certify, and transmit sealed to the Seat of the Government of the United States, directed to the President of the Senate. The President of the Senate shall, in the Presence of the Senate and House of Representatives, open all the Certificates, and the Votes shall then be counted. The Person having the greatest Number of Votes shall be the President, if such Number be a Majority of the whole Number of Electors appointed; and if there be more than one who have such Majority, and have an equal Number of Votes, then the House of Representatives shall immediately chuse by Ballot one of them for President; and if no Person have a Majority, then from the five highest on the List the said House shall in like Manner chuse the President. But in chusing the President, the Votes shall be taken by States, the Representation from each State having one Vote; A quorum for this purpose shall consist of a Member or Members from two thirds of the States, and a Majority of all the States shall be necessary to a Choice. In every Case, after the Choice of the President, the Person having the greatest Number of Votes of the Electors shall be the Vice President. But if there should remain two or more who have equal Votes, the Senate shall chuse from them by Ballot the Vice President.
The Congress may determine the Time of chusing the Electors, and the Day on which they shall give their Votes; which Day shall be the same throughout the United States.
No Person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President; neither shall any Person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty five Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States.
In Case of the Removal of the President from Office, or of his Death, Resignation, or Inability to discharge the Powers and Duties of the said Office, the Same shall devolve on the Vice President, and the Congress may by Law provide for the Case of Removal, Death, Resignation or Inability, both of the President and Vice President, declaring what Officer shall then act as President, and such Officer shall act accordingly, until the Disability be removed, or a President shall be elected.
The President shall, at stated Times, receive for his Services, a Compensation, which shall neither be increased nor diminished during the Period for which he shall have been elected, and he shall not receive within that Period any other Emolument from the United States, or any of them.
Before he enter on the Execution of his Office, he shall take the following Oath or Affirmation:--"I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my Ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States."
Section. 2.
The President shall be Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, and of the Militia of the several States, when called into the actual Service of the United States; he may require the Opinion, in writing, of the principal Officer in each of the executive Departments, upon any Subject relating to the Duties of their respective Offices, and he shall have Power to grant Reprieves and Pardons for Offences against the United States, except in Cases of Impeachment.
He shall have Power, by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, to make Treaties, provided two thirds of the Senators present concur; and he shall nominate, and by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, shall appoint Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, Judges of the supreme Court, and all other Officers of the United States, whose Appointments are not herein otherwise provided for, and which shall be established by Law: but the Congress may by Law vest the Appointment of such inferior Officers, as they think proper, in the President alone, in the Courts of Law, or in the Heads of Departments.
The President shall have Power to fill up all Vacancies that may happen during the Recess of the Senate, by granting Commissions which shall expire at the End of their next Session.
Section. 3.
He shall from time to time give to the Congress Information of the State of the Union, and recommend to their Consideration such Measures as he shall judge necessary and expedient; he may, on extraordinary Occasions, convene both Houses, or either of them, and in Case of Disagreement between them, with Respect to the Time of Adjournment, he may adjourn them to such Time as he shall think proper; he shall receive Ambassadors and other public Ministers; he shall take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed, and shall Commission all the Officers of the United States.
Section. 4.
The President, Vice President and all civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors.
Article III.
Section. 1.
The judicial Power of the United States shall be vested in one supreme Court, and in such inferior Courts as the Congress may from time to time ordain and establish. The Judges, both of the supreme and inferior Courts, shall hold their Offices during good Behaviour, and shall, at stated Times, receive for their Services a Compensation, which shall not be diminished during their Continuance in Office.
Section. 2.
The judicial Power shall extend to all Cases, in Law and Equity, arising under this Constitution, the Laws of the United States, and Treaties made, or which shall be made, under their Authority;--to all Cases affecting Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls;--to all Cases of admiralty and maritime Jurisdiction;--to Controversies to which the United States shall be a Party;--to Controversies between two or more States;-- between a State and Citizens of another State;--between Citizens of different States;--between Citizens of the same State claiming Lands under Grants of different States, and between a State, or the Citizens thereof, and foreign States, Citizens or Subjects.
In all Cases affecting Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, and those in which a State shall be Party, the supreme Court shall have original Jurisdiction. In all the other Cases before mentioned, the supreme Court shall have appellate Jurisdiction, both as to Law and Fact, with such Exceptions, and under such Regulations as the Congress shall make.
The Trial of all Crimes, except in Cases of Impeachment, shall be by Jury; and such Trial shall be held in the State where the said Crimes shall have been committed; but when not committed within any State, the Trial shall be at such Place or Places as the Congress may by Law have directed.
Section. 3.
Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the Testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court.
The Congress shall have Power to declare the Punishment of Treason, but no Attainder of Treason shall work Corruption of Blood, or Forfeiture except during the Life of the Person attainted.
Article. IV.
Section. 1.
Full Faith and Credit shall be given in each State to the public Acts, Records, and judicial Proceedings of every other State. And the Congress may by general Laws prescribe the Manner in which such Acts, Records and Proceedings shall be proved, and the Effect thereof.
Section. 2.
The Citizens of each State shall be entitled to all Privileges and Immunities of Citizens in the several States.
A Person charged in any State with Treason, Felony, or other Crime, who shall flee from Justice, and be found in another State, shall on Demand of the executive Authority of the State from which he fled, be delivered up, to be removed to the State having Jurisdiction of the Crime.
No Person held to Service or Labour in one State, under the Laws thereof, escaping into another, shall, in Consequence of any Law or Regulation therein, be discharged from such Service or Labour, but shall be delivered up on Claim of the Party to whom such Service or Labour may be due.
Section. 3.
New States may be admitted by the Congress into this Union; but no new State shall be formed or erected within the Jurisdiction of any other State; nor any State be formed by the Junction of two or more States, or Parts of States, without the Consent of the Legislatures of the States concerned as well as of the Congress.
The Congress shall have Power to dispose of and make all needful Rules and Regulations respecting the Territory or other Property belonging to the United States; and nothing in this Constitution shall be so construed as to Prejudice any Claims of the United States, or of any particular State.
Section. 4.
The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government, and shall protect each of them against Invasion; and on Application of the Legislature, or of the Executive (when the Legislature cannot be convened), against domestic Violence.
Article. V.
The Congress, whenever two thirds of both Houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose Amendments to this Constitution, or, on the Application of the Legislatures of two thirds of the several States, shall call a Convention for proposing Amendments, which, in either Case, shall be valid to all Intents and Purposes, as Part of this Constitution, when ratified by the Legislatures of three fourths of the several States, or by Conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other Mode of Ratification may be proposed by the Congress; Provided that no Amendment which may be made prior to the Year One thousand eight hundred and eight shall in any Manner affect the first and fourth Clauses in the Ninth Section of the first Article; and that no State, without its Consent, shall be deprived of its equal Suffrage in the Senate.
Article. VI.
All Debts contracted and Engagements entered into, before the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be as valid against the United States under this Constitution, as under the Confederation.
This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding.
The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the Members of the several State Legislatures, and all executive and judicial Officers, both of the United States and of the several States, shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution; but no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States.
Article. VII.
The Ratification of the Conventions of nine States, shall be sufficient for the Establishment of this Constitution between the States so ratifying the Same.
The Word, "the," being interlined between the seventh and eighth Lines of the first Page, the Word "Thirty" being partly written on an Erazure in the fifteenth Line of the first Page, The Words "is tried" being interlined between the thirty second and thirty third Lines of the first Page and the Word "the" being interlined between the forty third and forty fourth Lines of the second Page.
Attest William Jackson Secretary
Done in Convention by the Unanimous Consent of the States present the Seventeenth Day of September in the Year of our Lord one thousand seven hundred and Eighty seven and of the Independence of the United States of America the Twelfth In witness whereof We have hereunto subscribed our Names,
G°. WashingtonPresidt and deputy from Virginia
Delaware Geo: Read Gunning Bedford jun John Dickinson Richard Bassett Jaco: Broom
Maryland James McHenry Dan of St Thos. Jenifer Danl. Carroll
Virginia John Blair James Madison Jr.
North Carolina Wm. Blount Richd. Dobbs Spaight Hu Williamson
South Carolina J. Rutledge Charles Cotesworth Pinckney Charles Pinckney Pierce Butler
Georgia William Few Abr Baldwin
New Hampshire John Langdon Nicholas Gilman
Massachusetts Nathaniel Gorham Rufus King
Connecticut Wm. Saml. Johnson Roger Sherman
New York Alexander Hamilton
New Jersey Wil: Livingston David Brearley Wm. Paterson Jona: Dayton
Pennsylvania B Franklin Thomas Mifflin Robt. Morris Geo. Clymer Thos. FitzSimons Jared Ingersoll James Wilson Gouv Morris

I am God

2006-01-04T11:34:00.000-06:00

Enron, MCI, Jack Abramoff, Tom DeLay, G.W., business owners. I think this is the motto for the first decade of the 21st century. "I am God". Look at how they are treating the little guy. You know, most of us. Stealing from people, lying to people, and all around acting as though they had all the power of god. Manipulating all sorts of things to their benefit and not caring the detriment of the little guy.

Well, little guy, welcome to 2006. Is being pro-active on your list of resolutions for 2006? Read. Ponder. Act. It's your world, too.

Chuck

P.S. Don't forget the ID freaks in Kansas. Pushing an anti-Bill of Rights agenda. As we sit idly by.

And So It Goes...

2005-12-28T08:09:00.000-06:00

"People will occasionally stumble over the truth, but most of the time they will pick themselves up and continue on." -- Winston Churchill

We are on the verge of a new year. 2006 is just around the corner, about three days away. It's time we started our list of resolutions, you know, the promises we make to ourselves and break a week later. I think I'm going to make one this year and try like the dickens to hold to it. I'm going to grasp on to hope. It is a concept that eluded a lot of people this year. Those in the path of Katrina and Rita, so many in Africa, in Iraq. And how many others spread around the world. A friend of mine told me once that, it's not that so many are poor or ill or under nourished that causes them such grief. It's not their lack of education. It is, instead, that lack of hope. For without hope they have no purpose. They have no reason. We see this so evidently in our own cities and towns. Impoverished youth with no hope to achieve any thing more than what they have and so turn to lives of crime. What have they to lose? People in third world countries dying of AIDS with no hope of medication and so sit and wait to die. How many young people take their lives every year because they have no hope? Far too many. This coming year, I will hold on to Hope.

Happy New Year, and a Hopeful 2006

Chuck

Fuck your Christmas???

2005-12-20T14:46:00.000-06:00

Well, well, well. It seems the religious right can't stand a day without it's holier-than-thou panties in some sort of a bunch. They are sitting in their Republican supportin' houses of "repute" complaining about a "War on Chirstmas". All the while, they are closing church doors on the high holy holiday because it falls on Sunday. I suppose they would rather hold the service in Target? That's how it sounds to me. Let's close church on Jesus' birthday but piss on Target for including Chanukah and Kwanzaa and New Year in their "Happy Holiday" rhetoric. I think the religious amoung us needs to start getting it's own to obey it's dogma and leave those of us who think they are full of useless bullshit alone. They want to talk about war, ok, fix the one in Iraq that you were so hell bent on. Until you get that right, shut the fuck up. Where are the lions when you need them?

For all of you (all two of you) faithful readers, I'm sorry for the rant. They just really do strike a nerve. I'm all for freedom to worship however and whoever you want, but it really needs to go both ways. We also need the freedom to NOT worship, or even NOT agree with religious dogma. If you don't want me to infringe upon your freedom, don't infringe upon mine. Simple. That means, too, keeping your religion OUT of public school. It's not church. That's what you have church for. Teach your creation and ID there. Also, keep your religion OUT of my government, like the supreme court. If you can't regulate your own little church population, how are you going to regulate a whole country? You know, my mom used to always say, "Be sure your sins will always find you out", and she is right. Look at the catholic church. Look at GW.

You know what I think? I think we need a war on religious zealots. Like Pat Robertson and Jimmy Swaggart. Heck, throw in the pope, too. Why not? They are so power hungry, wanting to tell EVERYBODY how to live. Like that didn't stop with my folks when I turned 18. Again, where are the lions? Boy could we use them again.

Chuck

p.s. Look, Pudge, a new one!!

Is Hope Still Springing Eternal?

2005-11-08T21:32:00.000-06:00

Hope: n. A feeling that what is wanted will happen. To want and expect, longing.

They say that hope springs eternal. Well, for the last several days, Paris has been burning. So have her suburbs. Young people from the ghettos of this beautiful city of lights have lost all hope. Their government has let them down. What have they to lose?

New Orleans drowned in the wake of a monster hurricane. A storm forcast days in advance. Unrelenting winds watched by a nation. Yet the poor remained in her path with no hope for survival. Let down by a government established to protect them. A government Constitutionally obligated to protect them. Their government let them down.

Faith: n. Complete trust and reliance.

Both of these governments had the faith of its' citizens to protect them and stand up for them. These governments let them down.

Love: n. A deep affection or liking for someone or something.

What has stood and is protected by government is personal gain and wealth. Money. While citizens riot and drown, government officials obtain wealth and prestige and power, letting their citizens down.

Where are our priorities? Where do people really fit in this picture? Apparently only to get votes or wealth or for the retention of power. Well, I'm not all that hip on the political meneuverings in France, but I am a little familiar with ours, and it doesn't look good.

Who gives these politicians power? We do. Who votes with very little investigations or attention? We do. And we ought to be ashamed. G.W. Bush claimed moral high ground. Look where his morals have gotten him. Indicted aides, indicted leaders in the house, leaders in the senate stand suspect, a vice president that stands suspect, his own closest aide stands suspect, and he has lost, himself and for our country, immense respect. And the greatest loss for our country is hope. Hope for a better future in our own country and outside of it, as well.

Today is a sad day. This week is a sad week. At least we can have faith that the country we love will get better. Someday. When this boob is gone.

Have a wonderful week.

Chuck

p.s. Shame on you Texas. Will you ever dispose of such bigotry and hatred?

Whatever happened to "Integrity"?

2005-10-26T20:16:00.000-05:00

Webster's defines integrity as honesty, sincerity, etc. There was a day, not too long ago, when a person's integrity meant something. It was important to be honest with other people. Not so much anymore. Much to our shame as human beings. Our government is currently without integrity. Whether Republican or Democrat, they all lack that very important trait. We citizens don't fair much better. We rush down party lines to defend a wrong. Happily. Never once admitting that our "leaders" are letting us down. Where is the honesty in that? Gone.

Do we really care about the condition of our country? Is the ability to say "My party is better than yours" really what our political system is all about? I thought it was about freedom, and truth, and justice. I thought it was about a dream. A dream had by Martin Luther King, Jr. and all the thousands of immigrants crowding Ellis Island before him. I thought it was about protecting the weak and those seeking refuge. A nation "under God", any god, must be a nation of integrity. A nation built on honesty and basic human values. Until our nation is based on a foundation of integrity again, it will be weakened and vulnerable. And those who act without integrity are truly the treasonous. Our president and other government officials included.

Chuck

Today

2005-09-11T09:01:00.000-05:00

Today the country grieves
For lost life
In the name of a god.

Today a country grieves
For lost life
In the name of another god.

Today another country grieves
For lost life
In the name of yet another god.

Today the gods grieve
For lost life

While you observe those lost four years ago today, also remember those who continue to be lost. And all in the name of a different god.

Chuck

While the country shows compassion and love...

2005-09-10T10:20:00.000-05:00

...these guys show who their god is. It is truly a shame that these men wll call themselves men. They have sent away their families to other places for protection from the storm, and in the aftermath do NOTHING to save those suffering around them. They have space, electricity, food, running water, and no compassion. They have no heart for anything but things. Things who's value is only money. People around them continue to suffer and go hungry. They live large on shrimp and champagne. As Andy has a fondness for saying, "It's a grand time to be rich and powerful in America." And for these men, it is doubtless, their god is monetary fortune. Enjoy your weekend.

Chuck

How could this Happen???

2005-09-07T19:52:00.000-05:00

I’ve been holding off writing lately due, mostly, to the hurricane and the tragedy that followed. My blog is about god in our politics. Katrina seemed about politics. Until now.

The media, in all it’s forms, has been as flooded with images of horror as New Orleans has been with water. Those images have been mostly about poor, black folks stranded amongst the mess. The biggest response to this tragedy has been a call of racism. Racism by the government, racism by the rescuers, racism by George W. Bush, himself. Now, I’m not one to defend G.W. on most counts, but this one, I will. I don’t think he is racist. I think he is classist. This tragedy has happened to poor people. Of all ethnicities. It is just that, unfortunately, this region is inundated with poor blacks. These people had no means of leaving New Orleans or any of the regions where they live. They live in poverty. Where would they go? How would they go? What would they do once they got far enough away? Many of these people had only what was there in their homes. And very little of that was hope.

George W. Bush has spent the last five years slashing taxes for the top 1% richest people in this country. At the same time, he is spending enormous amounts of money on a war based on bogus information. Our deficit is reaching record levels. Spending on domestic issues (read “preparing for natural disasters”) is being slashed time and time again. More tax relief for the top 1%. Less money for the country to operate. More money appropriated for a bogus war. And on and on and on.

The number of people living below poverty has increased for the third straight year. Those who are finally finding work (outside of G.W.’s circle of friends) are finding pay reductions. We are making less money. The top 1% are paying less taxes. The south, having such a large portion of poverty already, gets worse.

All of this amounts to a war against the middle and lower class. Lower and middle class southerners who voted for George W. Bush because he is a moral man. Now they see what this man really thinks of them. Not much. They have no money. But they voted for this man because he is a godly man. I ask you who voted for this man….

Where is your god now?

I think your god was displayed quite powerfully in Katrina. And this god is letting you know. G.W. is NOT a very nice man. And if this doesn’t show you this, nothing will.
Chuck

Is THIS what Jesus would REALLY do???

2005-08-24T20:15:00.000-05:00

We’ve all seen the bracelets. “WWJD?” I guess now, those of us NOT in the know, are. Jesus would assassinate a government leader we just disagree with. Well, that sounds like what Pat Robertson thinks. For those of you who don’t know (is there really anyone who doesn’t?), Mr. Robertson is “a man of God”. He runs the 700 Club on television, as well as several other charities. I think it’s important that you read this article first. Here we have this “holy man” calling for an assassination. And his reason? Apparently Mr. Robertson doesn’t like communism. Are we back in the McCarthy era here, folks? Get ready for the Hollywood blackballing. Thank heavens Lucy’s dead. She’s spared a repeat. Now that we know what Pat Robertson thinks Jesus would do, let’s see what the Bible has to say. Keep in mind that Mr. Robertson CLAIMS to follow the Bible.

Romans 13:1-5 (NIV)

Everyone must submit himself to the governing authorities, for there is no authority except that which God has established. The authorities that exist have been established by God. Consequently, he who rebels against the authority is rebelling against what God has instituted, and those who do so will bring judgment on themselves. For rulers hold no terror for those who do right, but for those who do wrong. Do you want to be free from fear of the one in authority? Then do what is right and he will commend you. For he is God’s servant to do you good. But if you do wrong, be afraid, for he does not bear the sword for nothing. He is God’s servant, an agent of wrath to bring punishment on the wrongdoer. Therefore, it is necessary to submit to the authorities, no only because of possible punishment but also because of conscience.”

Seems to me that Mr. Robertson is rebelling. According to Pat’s standard, the Bible, didn’t God put Mr. Chavez in power? I guess this means Pat deserves judgment. Aww. Poor Pat.

So Mr. Robertson offers an apology. Let’s look again at his Bible.

Galatians 5:22

“But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness, and self-control. Against such things there is no law. Those who belong to Christ Jesus have crucified the sinful nature with its passions and desires. Since we live by the Spirit, let us keep in step with the Spirit. Let us not become conceited, provoking and envying each other.”
Mr. Robertson claims frustration. Apparently he was out of control. So I read the first sentence in that paragraph above and wonder, “Love,…peace, patience, kindness, goodness,…gentleness, SELF CONTROL. I see him practicing those.” I guess I would find it ok if it was just one of those. But SOOOO many? You know what is so disgusting? So many people watch his programs. Check out THIS article about this “oh-so-wonderful-holy-man” here. And that’s not even all of it. Although I would hope it would be enough. Probably not. Folks involved in organized religion don’t strike me as all that intelligent.

To Pat Robertson, I leave this quote from his standard:

1 Corinthians 15:1-2

“Now, brothers, I want to remind you of the gospel I preached to you, which you received and on which you have taken your stand. By this gospel you are saved, IF you hold firmly to the word I preached to you. OTHERWISE, you have believed in vain.”

So, read this stuff, draw some conclusions, and we’ll continue on. Maybe next time we’ll take on THIS and figure out what impact this will have on Muslims, Jews, Buddhists, and other religions that, supposedly, are free to be in this great country of ours.

Chuck

Intelligent Design by "Who's God"?

2005-08-11T21:24:00.000-05:00

Your god? Fuck your god.

So Buddhists believe in reincarnation. Christians don't. Atheists believe in no god. Christians don't. Christians believe in Jesus. Jews don't. Buddhists don't. Atheists don't. Christians believe in the Bible. Jews don't. Buddhists don't. Atheists don't. Muslims don't. Agnostics don't. Hindus don't. Yet we are all expected to adhere to christian beliefs because they believe we should. We don't. So much for freedom of religion in the good 'ol US of A.

The pilgrims left England on a tiny little boat so they could worship the way they felt was right. They started the Boston Colony and instituted their laws based on their beliefs. Fine. Roger Williams left to pursue his own set of beliefs and founded Rhode Island. William and Mary founded Maryland. William Penn, Pennsylvania. Mr. Smith, Utah. Some of these people were escaping religious persecution and looking for freedom to worship in their own way. Others for the sole purpose of attaining property and wealth. Think the land rushes of Oklahoma. Property. California was explored by catholics for converts.

With all of this diversity in expanding this country, and the fact that the pilgrims came here to practice religious freedom, how can we reasonably say this country was founded on christian principle? How about human rights? Doesn't that seem more accurate? It does to me.

Now the religious right wants ME and YOU to believe in intelligent design. A theory based completely without intelligence and only on religious belief. Their religious belief. Take a look at this little cartoon and see what you think. Kind of puts this design theory in perspective. Then remember that G.W. wants YOU to worship Jesus. And he seems willing to compromise OUR first amendment for that end. Are you a christian? I'm not. Jews aren't. Buddhists aren't. Atheists aren't. Hindus aren't. Muslims aren't. Why should they worship Jesus? Because the religious right says so? If we aren't careful, it may just come to pass. What are YOU doing to be sure it doesn't?

Chuck

The importance of discussion and education

2005-07-24T22:43:00.000-05:00

This week is going to be VERY hectic for me. I'm moving. But, I would like to give you something to chew on.

G.W. has recently given a nomination for a Supreme Court judge. Somewhat conservative. What are your thoughts? I would like to get into the whole Roe v. Wade thing. Unfortunately, due to the move, it will be later this week or next Monday. More likely than not, Monday.

Have a great week. Thanks for standing by.

Chuck

Morals?? What Morals??

2005-07-18T22:04:00.000-05:00

Please. This is an utter disgrace. George W. Bush is now lowering the moral code. For a man who pledged to bring dignity back to the white house (no capitals on those words currently deserved), he sure is doing a shitty job. Now we are hearing from this turd that no one will be fired unless they have committed a crime. Listen for the next qualification. He'll probably say no one will be fired unless they are CONVICTED of a crime and sentenced. Let's see what G.W.'s standard has to say about his claiming to have morals, but not adhering to them.

Titus 1:15 (NIV)
"To the pure, all things are pure, but to those who are corrupted and do not believe, nothing is pure. In fact, both their minds and consciences are corrupted. They Claim to know God, but by their actions they deny him. They are detestable, disobedient and unfit for doing anything good."

Sounds like both George W. AND Karl Rove, to me. Unfit to do anything good. Karl Rove is a thief. He is a liar. All this has been documented in the papers. He stole from the DNC in Chicago. Theivery. He invited a bunch of homeless people to a fund raiser and promised them food and drink. Deceipt. G.W. has given this man positions of power in YOUR government. And the religious right praises these men. They say these are the men they want leading the country. YOUR country.

Funny. Religious folk so vehemently promoting sin. Well, by their own standard, the Bible, sin. I think the Bible has something to say about those types of evil doers, too. Something about "not inviting them to your table" or "have nothing to do with them". I think I'll take that advice. And I'll tell them so. Fuck your god.

'Til next time...
Chuck

With friends like these...

2005-07-17T22:13:00.000-05:00

By this time we ALL should know what kind of a man Karl Rove is. We have all heard how he has used deciept for his own political gain. We have all heard how he has stolen for his political gain. We have all heard how he has lied, and smeared, and incited. And we have all heard how smart Karl Rove is. Does this man's intelligence dismiss his abominable character? Does bringing up his past actions mean that I am demonizing him and assassinating his character for political reasons? No. It means I am stating facts. Bill Clinton inhaled a joint in college (just like so many of us did) and got a blowjob at work (like so many have actually done or dreamed of). Karl Rove has lied, deceived, smeared, stolen, and ruined lives. George W. Bush is responsible for the deaths of thousands.

Keeping this in mind, I ask you. What do you want for a country? Do you want a country that respects it's citizens? Do you want a country that respects others' citizens? Do you want a country led by people who hold morals, and family values dear to them? Do you want a country of compassion, and responsibility, and integrity? Do you want a country that is a beacon of freedom, and independence, and hope, and trustworthiness? I do. And Karl Rove has worked very hard alongside George W. Bush for many (25?) years to eliminate these characteristics from our country. My country. And YOUR country. He has worked very hard to replace them with his own. With his own characteristics of theivery, lies, immorality, division, and greed.

You decide what characteristics you want for your country. G.W. may talk a good talk, but his walk is still staggered. Just like when he was drunk with alcohol. He's just replaced alcohol with power. And he walks just as crooked. If this is what you want for your country, do nothing. If it's not what you want for your country, do something. Call the White House. Write your representative. Stand up for morality. Stand up for integrity. Stand up for your country. Open your mouth. And do something.

Have a great week,
Chuck

The "Oh, so moral" White House

2005-07-11T22:25:00.000-05:00

Shall we now paint it a nice shade of Crimson? Or just go a sinful grey. In either case, white seems so wrong for what was once a bastion of Liberty. CIA agents are elluded to from "important" White House officials. BUSH White House officials. Tell me once again why Mr. Clinton was impeached and why Mr. Bush was re-elected? Oh, yes, Mr. Clinton received a horrible blow job in the White House. Mr. Bush has only killed thousands and maimed countless others. Oh, wait, he has also RUINED many lives. IN THE WHITEHOUSE. IN THE OVAL OFFICE, EVEN. He is our morally upstanding president. He spews nothing but truth, justice, and the American way. He said way back that whoever was found to have leaked that CIA information was going to get fired. Well, in his same honest way that he has shown in the past, he is balking. In a way, I feel sorry for Scott McLellen. Poor front man for our own Anti Christ. Who is going to want to believe ANYTHING that comes out of his mouth for the rest of his life? If he is willing to sell his soul for GW allegience, ask Karl, is it worth it? Ask Colin, is it worth it? You know the only people who will be paying to listen to speaches by these guys are going to be filthy Republicans. And I can tell you one thing. That's one heap of praise I surely don't want.

Remember folks, these are the guys who claim god is on their side. With all this evil coming from them, I have to say....

FUCK YOUR GOD.

Chuck

GW's Main Man..

2005-07-06T21:11:00.000-05:00

Karl Rove.....how ironic will this be. He could actually be the whistle blower. The powerful man who was so instrumental in getting GW elected. GW, the man who claims this god as his own. This man who claims the moral high ground (although we've already proved that bogus). His main man may have committed a treasonous act. GW, the man who is all over this "Patriotic" thing. If you don't agree with him, he says you're "UnPatriotic". Huh, isn't that funny. It's HIS white house that may be committing treason, and Democrats are UnPatriotic?.

"Who's laughing now, Milkshake?"

What has all this to do with the separation of church and state, you ask? Well, consider that GW wants to blur those lines, as do most religious right republicans, so that they can have the country to themselves. You know, like the very same England we ran away from and declared independance of so long ago. They want me to be a protestant. All other religions be damned. GW has mobilized the religious right to go his way. All the while calling others anti American. He has claimed morality and god as his own. His big boy may have committed treason against the United States. A purely Anti American act. One I would call UnPatriotic. Why would ANYONE in his (or her) right mind want a religion in power that breads such dissension? And treason? Isn't Karl Rove one of GW's men? And isn't GW the "religious one" with god on his side? Is this a god we want in our government? A god who would advocate treason? If GW is willing to allow treason to happen on his watch in this way, what other self motivated ways will he do the same thing?

I have said before in this blog, what someone will do for you, they will do to you. If GW will break the law FOR patriotism (his brand, anyway), I'm sure he will also do it TO patriotism. And his patriotism isn't really what this country means as patriotism. His is all the patriotism of GW. Preserving self at all costs. Even at the expense of YOUR country. This is why the Separation of Church and State is so important.

So, WAKE UP PEOPLE, and smell the coffee. Get off your lazy, apathetic asses and do something. Make a fuss. Write some letters. I wrote to Dick Durbin myself. Do you need e-mail address for your rep? E-mail me. I'll pass it along. I've got the whole list. Do you love your country? Truly love it? Than protect it. From home. What have you got to lose? Just a country and maybe a little time. Be a real Patriot. Maybe even jump on the impeachment bandwagon.

Chuck

Ban Religion??? Sounds good to me.

2005-06-27T21:41:00.000-05:00

I heard a suggestion this weekend that we should ban organized religion. Sounds good to me. Read this if you have a moment. Is this an isolated case? I don't think so. This one may be a bit extreme, but not alone. What about the catholic priest scandal? Those boobies are rampant. Is this what we want for our children? How about the boy scout leader in Arizona that was collecting kiddie porn? Another organization extolling the virtues of religion. How about GW? Killing over 1700 US soldiers in Iraq. I really believe he is the killer here. And now the proof is coming out of the woodwork. Not only the Downing Street memo is pointing out he planned this war (if you can call it planned) even before September 11. He knowingly sent all those folks to Iraq without any appropriate planning and equipment to do the job right. Ignorance must truly be bliss for that man. And he is claiming God as his own. Ban that man's religion. It's murderous. Read this little Bush agenda. What was this man thinking?

On a good note, I think, the Supreme Court is working for our benefit. I agree with this ruling. They had common sense attached.

All this needs some clarity. It is all my opinion and you can choose to disagree if you like. It's a free country, as they say. But I was reading the headlines today and getting pretty angry. And after talking to folks and discussing things going on in our government, I got even more angry. Most of these people aren't even paying attention. They don't even know what is happening. We live in a country of apathy. It's disappointing.

Chuck

P.S. To Mr. Bush. This is for you.
"Therefore each of you must put off falsehood and speak truthfully to his neighbor, for we are all members of one body." Ephesians 4:25 c.

American Standards??

2005-06-24T19:00:00.000-05:00

Today, we are in a climate of meanness. It is the Republicans fighting the Democrats with no holds barred. All bets are off. Unfortunately, it is the American People who are losing. By now, I’m sure, you’ve all heard of the remarks by Karl Rove about the Democrat’s response to September 11th. As much as they are untrue statements, they are, nonetheless, mean spirited and divisive. Meant to further the wedge between the two parties and cause animosity toward the Democrats. I would urge each of you to read the entire article from MSN and decide for yourself. There was then this quote by a Ken Mehlman:

MSN June 24, 2005
“I think what Karl Rove said is accurate and reflects a big difference between the two parties,” added Republican Party Chairman Ken Mehlman.

They all seem to be on the same page of political division. It’s a rather curious thing to see, especially in light of this from Salon dated 1999, before GW was appointed king. This from George:

Salon, May 6, 1999
“Second, I showed the people of Texas that I'm a uniter, not a divider. I refuse to play the politics of putting people into groups and pitting one group against another.” - G. W. Bush

Has our empassioned leader decided to change his tune once getting into office? Let’s, once again turn to the Bible, GW’s self proclaimed standard, and see how he stands up. Read this one about division.

“I appeal to you, brothers, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that all of you agree with one another so that there may be no divisions among you..”
Paul to the Corinthians I Corinthians 01:10

Isn’t this GW’s standard? Is he living up to this by letting Karl Rove and Dick Cheney discredit the Democrats with lies? By grouping people up and lying about them? This causes division among the parties. Specific example is the nomination of Bolton to the UN. GW will not give over records so that there can be harmony in the government, and then says that the Democrats are stonewalling. This is divisive AND untrue.
Looks to me like GW really isn’t holding water with his arguments. Let’s look at this one about lying.

“Therefore each of you must put off falsehood and speak truthfully to his neighbor, for we are all members of one body.”
Ephesians 04:25

What is rather amazing to me is how all those conservatives who voted for him based on his moral standing on policy continue to stand on his side. His hypocrisy is amazing. And the blindness of the American morality is equally so. If this is the result of a church upbringing, why would anyone bring up children in ANY church? What happened to the golden rule of treating others as you would want to be treated? What happened to “loving one another” and harmony? Have these all gone out the window to be replaced with greed and deceipt? It looks as though they have in the Republican controlled environment we are currently experiencing. This is to ALL our shame. We are sitting idly by while treason is being commited against our constitution and citizens. We are accepting an hostile take over of our rights and our government. More importantly, we are permitting that same take over of our morals by a group claiming, in word only, morality. Theirs is a god of greed, power, and corruption. A ruthless atrocity against American values and what our forefathers fought to avoid. Values our Constitution and Bill of Rights were written to protect. Ours is becoming an American Corporation. Strictly for the profit of the white christian right. A white christian right that is dragging the name of religion through the mud and that very same religion is assisting.

So, keep watching for more division from the right and the White House while keeping the Salon article in mind. And if you need more proof that GW is a liar to the American People and trashing YOUR COUNTRY, read this.

Have a great weekend,
Chuck

Catholics and Michael Jackson and that Guy in SJC

2005-06-21T22:24:00.000-05:00

There was a conference of catholic bishops in Chicago last week discussing the issue of child molestation in the church. An article in the Chicago Tribune was giving details about how the church was looking to renew its "zero tolerance" stance on offending priests so as to disallow the same type of scandal it is finishing with from happening again. One bishop was quoted as saying how he wished they didn't need that rule, but it was currently bad timing to abolish it. Funny, isn't it? The catholic church is supposed to be a leader in morality, like the hypocrites of the National Baptist group seem to be. Yet they want to give priests MORE THAN ONE opportunity to molest children. I guess they don't find this offensive and repulsive. Michael Jackson was just aquitted in his case. Will the catholic church now advocate children sleeping in his bed again? If it's ok for a priest to molest over and over, why not Michael Jackson? The catholic church must think that man in San Jose California is pretty close to being a god. Golly, he molested over 3,600 children and kept impeccable records. He even rated them and coded them according to the acts performed. I can almost hear the priests "oooohing" and "aaaaahing" over it already. You just have to love the moral among us. The kind of people we all just want to emulate.

I hope you feel outrage over these occurances. If you really loved children the way they should be loved, you would. Now keep in mind that these catholics want to inject their moral code into our secular government. If Rick Santorum had his way, catholic doctrine would be very much a part of it. Do you want that morality a part of YOUR government? I hope not. I know I don't. If Rick Santorum is such an advocate for catholic morals, and a champion for their cause, what is his relationship like with HIS children. Kind of sends a shiver up your spine just thinking of it. And a little outrage that he's an elected government official. And fear. He's popular, too. Just like the church. We all know how safe our kids are there.

Have a great week.

Chuck

Corporate culture and who's to blame

2005-06-20T22:41:00.000-05:00

Large corporations have CEO's, COO's, Presidents, and Vice Presidents. These people run the company. Part of that running of the company is injecting and managing a corporate culture. This culture is typically used to keep the company focused and on track. If a corporate culture gets too out of whack with, greed, let's say, it eventually comes to the fore and some one pays the piper. Usually some one at the top. One of the four listed above, maybe. They can go to prison like the Enron folks or Tyco folks. Or simply get voted out like the Disney folks. Leading a company wrong will cost you.

Our country is run by GW Bush. Our current corporate culture is one that insists EVERYONE be christian. Of some denomination. It has pervaded our entire infrastructure and given religious perverts the balls to try and force every one to abide by their standards. Look back on a previous post and see where that is getting our president according to his own standards. The rest of the country will blindly follow suit. All the while blaming those who don't adhere. They will destroy the first amendment and eventually others. Or at least they will try very hard.

So why is this country so apathetic? Why are we all standing around with our thumbs up our proverbial butts and not making a fuss? We have a couple of NY Times reporters fighting to protect sources while at the same time the entire media has given away its first amendment rights. Is it investigating what is going on and reporting it? No. GW has forbidden pictures, by our free press, to be taken and printed of dead soldiers arriving home. We are NOT outraged at this?

Current corporate culture won't let us. It's UNPATRIOTIC, they say. I say it's unpatriotic NOT to be outraged. The religious zealots in this country want to do away with the first amendment. They are succeeding enormously with our first round of defense, the press. And our corporate culture says hush, so we hush.

Will GW and the other fundamentalist republicans pay the piper? We can only hope in 2006. Will you still be apathetic then? I hope not. Are you wearing a "Fuck Your God" pin to show your disapproval over their god? You should be. Their god is, after all, the god of greed. For money, for power, and for personal glory. And that is NOT the god I know. Is it the one you know?

Homogenized Politics??

2005-06-15T18:16:00.000-05:00

People say that politics doesn't affect them. Hm. Are they paying attention? It's understandable, if they aren't paying attention, they would feel this way. The affects are rather round about sometimes.

Some say the parties are all the same. What's the point in voting. This, I have a problem with. Look at past performances and we see BIG differences. Republican leadership lies the most profusely and followers believe it most readily. Studies of performances by both parties show that, as the Republicans SAY small government, it always grows when they are in power. BOTH in spending and employment. Those who vote Republican will tell you what the party says, not what it does. Republican leadership says it wants a balanced budget. Studies show that ALL Democratic presidents came closest, with the eight year term of Clinton actually Over performing and producing budget SURPLUS. Try that with a Republican. Look at GW and his budget. He cooks his books with TWO. One for the country using more than he takes in in revenue and one he likes to call an EMERGENCY budget for the war. I think I'll consider my heating budget an EMERGENCY and get MY boss to pay for it. Isn't that what he is doing?

Most of all, Republican leaders vow to uphold the Constitution, yet they look determinedly to add amendments based on religious beliefs in CONTRADICTION to the Constitution. Separation of Church and State. And these religious beliefs are christian beliefs. So much for freedom for all.

I see big differences in these two parties. And they seem pretty important to me. I know the Democratic party lies. But I would rather it be about getting head in the White House than killing 1700 honorable young citizens in a bogus war.

Chuck

What's the Score??

2005-06-10T18:08:00.000-05:00

Our government, as founded and treasured and so gallantly fought for, is dying. It has been selfishly and greedily hijacked by individuals who call themselves “Compassionate Conservatives” and by corporations whose bottom lines will always be money and not people. Abraham Lincoln has been embraced by our two most prominent political parties recently. His legacy has been destroyed by one of them. George W. Bush and his GOP have, once again, spoken and acted in direct contradiction of one another.

“Four score and seven years ago our fathers brought forth, upon this continent, a new nation, conceived in liberty, and dedicated to the proposition that “all men are created equal”.”
Abraham Lincoln, Gettysburgh Address, 1863.

Today, the top 1% of our elite are enjoying tremendous tax breaks while the poorest amoung us suffer social inequity. How is this gross disparity equal?

Today, eleven states have adopted constitutional amendments discriminating against homosexuals because of religious belief. Many more are moving for similar legislation. How is this equal?

Today, mostly white christian groups are working to influence our government to impose christian beliefs into law. How is this equal?

“..that government of the people by the people for the people, shall not perish from the earth.”
Abraham Lincoln, Gettysburgh Address, 1863.

Today, this government is slowly perishing from the earth. At the hands of “compassionate conservatism”.

“So, this is how democracy dies. With thunderous applause.” Star Wars, 2005

Chuck

p.s. To our anonymous commenter: Thank you for your support.

Biblical standards and the Religious Right

2005-06-08T20:02:00.000-05:00

My, how the people who say they adhere to "Biblical Standards" are so ignorant as to what those standards are. Let's look at GW for a moment. He cited weapons of mass destruction as his reason for going to war. Stood by this reason while sending, not his own children, but the nations children, to war. Told the American people this was the reason. Now we have this Downing Street Memo. This says something totally different. George W Bush has "Biblical Standards". And he wants YOU to have them, too. What is a "Biblical Standard"?

And the Bible says......

Colossians 3:09 (NIV) "Do not lie to each other, since you have taken off your old self with its practices.."

Compare GW to this passage from the book to which he claims to adhere. Also, compare other quotes from GW, as well as actions of GW to this:

1 John 2:06 (NIV) "Whoever claims to live in him must walk as Jesus did."

Does Mr. Bush walk as Jesus did? I can't imagine Jesus ever saying "He killed my daddy" and soon after going to war with ANYONE.

Now, I know these are just a couple of examples, and there are many, many more. I think I simply wanted to make a point of how ANTI-Biblical GW really is. And I'm sure, if I had a week to spend, I could compare and contrast GW's actions with Biblical passages directly condemning this man. And there is such a comfort in knowing, according to his own standard, he's going to hell.

Chuck

The awe of children

2005-06-06T22:13:00.000-05:00

I think I'm still a little struck by Saturday's encounter. I then awoke to this article online. It leaves me in awe. Awe struck. Baffled. And it brought me back to my posting from May 31. The day AFTER memorial day. I thought of the Boston Tea Party, again. And some others that I never answered (and no reader tried to answer, either). And, most of all, our Declaration of Independence? We did these for the sake of our entire country. For the future of our United States. For OUR freedom. It's sad to think that, NO, we would not do these things again. Religious zealots and fanatics (yes, one in the same) make those of us Constitutionalists out to be wicked heathens. The fact that some of us might be something other than chrisitian only adds to the flavor and fullness of our Constitution. But this inflames christian zealots. It causes them to fight what they fear is a group of godless heathens. And godless only because the "heathens" might not believe in their GOD.

The woman from Saturday said that she could not respect another's belief because that would mean a disrespect of her beliefs. That doesn't seem right to me. Respect does not mean agreement, per se. More of an acknowledgement that this belief exists. And in this country, it has that right to exist peacefully among other beliefs. How many of these christians feel this way? I'm sure she is not alone. And it is scary to think that our lawmakers are listening to these people. People trying desperately to legislate our religion.

The pilgrims left England in a boat, the Mayflower. Have you ever seen this boat(well, ok, exact replica of)? It was very tiny. People died of illness, were cramped, cold, and hungry. Many died. And not so they could start a christian country. Why did Roger Williams leave Massachusetts and start Rhode Island? Not so he could start a christian country. Why did William Penn leave and start Pennsylvania? Not so he could start a christian country. The Mormons? Ditto. William and Mary? Yep, you guessed it. These people wanted to be able to worship FREELY. And they all did it differently. But they all did it to be FREE. Not christian.

Interesting side note: Florida was explored for the fountain of youth. Can you say "Shallow and selfish"?? Texas was fought over for land, we wanted it from Mexico. Can you say "Greedy"?? Funny these are Bush states. Shallow, Selfish, and Greedy.

Anyway, these are why our country was formed. Not to be christian, but to be FREE. Our Declaration of Independence turns 229 this June 11. We are on the precipice of bleakness for democracy. All the while declaring it from the mountain tops. We have a government working diligently to eliminate the Separation of Church and State, and succeeding in oppressing the press. All of this while going abroad and telling the world how wonderful democracy is. I'm not sure we really know how wonderful it is right now.

I do know, however, that we can do something about it. I also know that I'm trying. What are you doing? Are you aware that by the time they come for you, there may be no one left to defend you. You weren't one of them, so you stayed out of it. And that, dear reader, is apathy. Staying out of it. Another answer to another post.

Chuck

Thanks for your patience

2005-06-05T18:25:00.000-05:00

It's been quite a weekend here in Fuck Your God land. Not terribly busy, but distracting enough to have inadvertently stood someone up. I'm really sorry about that, folks.

I went to the Gospel Music festival in Millennium Park on Saturday. It was mostly uneventful. I will say, it was nothing like past years. It seemed very small and sparsely attended. As beautiful as Millennium Park is (thanks, again, Ms Pritzker), I don't think it's such a great venue. The park is designed superbly using the most of it's relatively small space. It is filled with exciting little spots for small bric-a-brac of activity, but not very good for a cohesive festival such as this one. I will say, the music was wonderful and the youth in one of the tents did a truly magnificent job. Even the white ones. And for those of you wondering, yes, I wore a button. Should I not have? I think it was not inappropriate. Not the best venue, yes, but not inappropriate. People need to be less re-active and more informed and pro-active. It was nothing personal (this time) toward the Bible thumpers. I just injected a little food for thought.

On the bus ride home, we ran into a rather disturbing woman. Delightful, mostly, but rather disturbing. She is a bible believer and church goer. She strongly believes that, as a christian, there should be legislation governing religion in private lives. She voted for Bush precisely because of his beliefs and stand for the bible. She truly believes it is the duty of christians to make other people christian. Funny, even Jesus Christ didn't feel that. He taught it would be nice, and everyone should know, but we all have free will. This woman says, essentially, "Fuck Free Will". Those are my words, but her seeming sentiment. She said that she should not have to respect others' religions. How very frightening. Are christians this militant? I would hope not.

She was also grossly misinformed about our founding fathers. She is under the misguided notion that they were ALL christians and this country was founded on christianity. I seem to have been taught otherwise, and that has been confirmed by many. Most of the founding fathers even denounced christianity. And I thing it was Ben Franklin who said that this country "..was in NO way founded on christianity" but, rather, religious freedom. I fret that there are more women such as this. And more men.

As next week progresses, I hope to write about our passion for our country. Where is yours? What are you doing to protect it? How important is it to you really? And now for the Tony's.

Chuck

Lemmings and us

2005-06-02T22:07:00.000-05:00

Not much of a difference in some behaviors, I'm finding.

I was talking with a co worker today about the sad state of people and society. Discussing how "Civilized" we seem, or don't. I had mentioned my button and the reaction to "Fuck Your God" and how so few people get it right off the bat. There once was a time in this country when people were aware of happenings. They understood tom swiftys or plays on words or whatever you want to call them. They would have understood the chosen wording of the slogan and understood a deeper meaning. But, unfortunately, we've only become very on edge and defensive about everything. We don't think anymore. We just simply follow the status quo. We have this NEED for others to explain everything. It's rather frustrating. And when no explanation comes, we become offended and defensive.

I wish we would think for ourselves a bit more.

The answers to the questions posted the other day are coming. And, no, the Bible quote I was thinking of wasn't the one about worrying about tomorrow. Good try, though.

Chuck

How was your weekend?

2005-05-31T20:16:00.000-05:00

Memorial Day weekend. The unofficial start of summer. I hope you all enjoyed your extra day off (if you got one). Did you stop at 3 pm local time and remember the soldiers dead in battle? Any battle or war, pick one. We’ve had quite a few of them in the current war. Not that we are seeing any draped coffins. GW has quite a grip, doesn’t he? We have soldiers fighting for our freedom. Freedom of the press? Yeah, right. Freedom to practice any religion? Yeah, that, too. These seem rather dicey these days. I know I have said it once before, and my blog is still fairly new, but it bears repeating. “What someone will do for you, they will also do to you.” Remember that. We are going through a whole bunch of crap right now and the government is doing it “to protect the homeland”. Just think, if the government will take away my rights FOR my protection, what will they do TO me for their protection? And then think about what you are doing about it.

This weekend I was thinking about the Boston Tea Party. This was all done out of protest toward a government that was oppressive and didn’t recognize a citizens basic rights as individuals. It was a proverbial straw. Would we do something like that today? It’s hard to imagine in this country of such apathy. “I don’t care what the government does so long as I can drive a Hummer and use all the gas I want.” It is a sad day. Very little griping. Is this our America? Is this the America founded on freedom and hope and strong moral values? Let’s once again bring the Bible into use. What does it say about apathy? Let me look it up and see.

You know what, I’ll let you look, too. Find it and put it in the comments. I’ll post the correct answer on Friday. That should give you some time. Oh, and can you name a rebellion or uproar or something like that that helped us on our road to freedom? Let’s see who really knows their stuff.

Chuck

Whomever your god, you're not garbage

2005-05-27T18:27:00.000-05:00

Today is Friday, May 27, 2005. It's the start of Memorial Day weekend and IML here in Chicago. I wasn't going to really write much, just a little well wishing for the long weekend and a memory of my Mamere, or grandmother, on my mother's side of the family. I miss her. So here's to her.

I was sitting on the bus this evening riding down toward my final destination when a young man asked if he could have a button. Of course, would I turn down that request? Not at all. I handed him one. His buddy wanted one. Great, there you are. Sitting across from me were two others with "Fuck Your God" buttons prominently displayed on our chests. I was in bus heaven. One of them decided to ask the reason, thinking it was an atheist thing.

Open curtain.
Spotlight on.
(music)
Constitution time. We were suddenly engaged in a lively discussion about the frustration with politicians forcing religious dogma down our throats. Dogma many of us don't believe. We discussed the first amendment and freedom of religion. Two others got involved, two incredibly attractive young women. And they were very curious to know more. How wonderful it was to run into young people thoroughly engaged in political conversation. The were interested. They felt affected. They felt part of the process. I hope they read this. And comment. And become part of our currently small family.

One young man gave me cause for concern. He felt helpless to affect change. I have something to say to him.

There was a campaign for something when I was younger. I don't remember what it was for. The slogan was "Never underestimate the power of one". I would urge this young man to grasp this slogan with all his might. Keep in mind that Gandhi was, at first, one man. Jesus was one man. Founders of large religions were one man. Bill Gates was once one man. These people knew they could do something and did. The young man on the bus stated that he had only one vote and that really doesn't matter because of the electoral college. First off, here is someone dragged down by rhetoric in the news spouting what he read or heard and not what he learned on his own. It happens all the time. Anyway, he is right. We have one vote. Limited to only one. But look at the limitless decisions for action we have in front of us. The fate of our country depends on more than one simple vote. It depends on action. This young man is capable of so much. He is worth more than one vote that GW will fix anyway. He is worth action. Start with a button. Get a website. And then make some noise. People will help. They want to. You can effect change. You can do something beyond your vote. Go out and make it happen.

If any of those young folks decide to read, and learn more about our country, if they decide that the separation of church and state is that important, than I say Hooray for our country. Hooray to them. Let's all quit bitching about the state of our union. Let's do something about it.

HAPPY MEMORIAL DAY!!!

Chuck

I was born at an early age...

2005-05-26T07:26:00.000-05:00

To two wonderful parents. I was very lucky with both of them. The gods smiled down upon me, if you will. If you are Rick Santorum, than maybe you would say God, Jesus, and Mary. Maybe some of the saints. Hey Rick, Fuck Your God. Anyway, when I was young, my mom introduced me to me. She would tell me all the time to be who I was. Not to be her son, or someone's brother, but to be ME. My dad reinforced that idea and taught me the lessons of hard work and respect for myself. Work hard, do a good job, and you can sleep at night and feel good about whoever you are.

I am truly glad that both of those people, who had tremendous influence on me, taught me such valuable lessons. I am reasonably well adjusted with a fairly good reputation. Not without my share of enemies, mind you, but a fairly good reputation.

The reason for all of this has to do with religion and god in politics. I realize that separating your spirituality from secular beliefs can be quite hard. Much of who we are depends on how we were raised and what god we believe in. This forms alot of our moral character. That will form much of how we believe society should behave. But there is something we must keep in mind as well. Not everyone believes in the same god as you or me. Not everyone adheres to the same religious dogma. If we are truly to belong to a country that welcomes diverse religious beliefs and allows a freedom to worship as we feel is right and just for ourselves, how can we impose Judeo-Christian beliefs across the board? It seems unfair to those who don't adhere. Much of the spread of the early colonies that became this wonderful country was the secesion of a religious group to other areas so that they could worship freely. Pennsylvania, Maryland, Utah. All to go and worship a god they felt was right. And now we wish to squash that right, that freedom, and that spirituality with laws and rules that would only cater to current Judeo-Christian beliefs.

Are you paying attention to the likes of Rick Santorum, and GW Bush? Have you really looked at Pat Robertson and James Dobson? These are people that want to moralize you according to their belief system. They want you to become Stepford citizens and only think as they do. Well, I find that stifling to my spirituality and moral code. I find that offensive to my person. And I find that in contradiction to both the founding of this country and the Constitution that says I am created equal. By whomever that creator may be.

Chuck