Sunday, August 8, 2010
Friday, August 6, 2010
Faith Healers "At It Again"
One of my hot button issues is in the news again as christian idiots - this time from Oregon - relied on faith healing and refused to seek medical help for their child.
In late July 2010, two members of the Followers of Christ church were charged with first-degree criminal mistreatment for failing to provide medical care for their infant daughter. The couple,
Timothy and Rebecca Wyland pleaded not guilty during a brief appearance before Clackamas County Circuit Judge Robert D. Herndon and were released without bail.
The area above their child's left eye started swelling shortly after birth. She developed a hemangioma -- a fast-growing mass of blood vessels -- that bulged out and pushed the eyeball down and outward. Oregon Health & Science University doctors who examined the girl said that without treatment, she could lose sight.
This shit has got to stop. This is a pattern with this particular church (and, let's face it, there are others). Two other couples from this church failed to provide medical care to their children: a15-month-old and a 16 year old, and both died as a result.
These folks should lose custody of their children. There are many responsible folks out there who would be willing to raise them and give them the proper care they need.
In late July 2010, two members of the Followers of Christ church were charged with first-degree criminal mistreatment for failing to provide medical care for their infant daughter. The couple,
Timothy and Rebecca Wyland pleaded not guilty during a brief appearance before Clackamas County Circuit Judge Robert D. Herndon and were released without bail.
The area above their child's left eye started swelling shortly after birth. She developed a hemangioma -- a fast-growing mass of blood vessels -- that bulged out and pushed the eyeball down and outward. Oregon Health & Science University doctors who examined the girl said that without treatment, she could lose sight.
This shit has got to stop. This is a pattern with this particular church (and, let's face it, there are others). Two other couples from this church failed to provide medical care to their children: a15-month-old and a 16 year old, and both died as a result.
These folks should lose custody of their children. There are many responsible folks out there who would be willing to raise them and give them the proper care they need.
Wednesday, August 4, 2010
A Victory Over Bigotry and Intolerance in California Today
A federal judge overturned California's same-sex marriage ban Wednesday in a landmark case that could eventually land before the U.S. Supreme Court to decide if gays have a constitutional right to marry in America.
Chief U.S. District Judge Vaughn Walker made his ruling in a lawsuit filed by two gay couples who claimed the voter-approved ban violated their civil rights.
Gay couples waving rainbow and American flags outside the courthouse cheered, hugged and kissed as word of the ruling spread.
No one has yet been able to explain to me why they care who other choose to marry.
Of course, the battle is not over yet... not even in California where the bigoted proponents of Prop 8 plan to appeal the judge's decision.
Let's hope they fail miserably.
Chief U.S. District Judge Vaughn Walker made his ruling in a lawsuit filed by two gay couples who claimed the voter-approved ban violated their civil rights.
Gay couples waving rainbow and American flags outside the courthouse cheered, hugged and kissed as word of the ruling spread.
No one has yet been able to explain to me why they care who other choose to marry.
Of course, the battle is not over yet... not even in California where the bigoted proponents of Prop 8 plan to appeal the judge's decision.
Let's hope they fail miserably.
Thursday, July 29, 2010
Unconstitutional State Constitutions
Texas' Bill of Rights Section 4:
" RELIGIOUS TESTS: No religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office, or public trust, in this State; nor shall any one be excluded from holding office on account of his religious sentiments, provided he acknowledge the existence of a Supreme Being."
Tennessee's Bill of Rights: Article 9:
Section 2. " No person who denies the being of God, or a future state of rewards and punishments, shall hold any office in the civil department of this state."
South Carolina's Constitution, Article 4 Section 2:
"Person denying existence of Supreme Being not to hold office. No person who denies the existence of the Supreme Being shall hold any office under this Constitution."
North Carolina's Constitution, Article 6 Sec. 8:
" Disqualifications of office. The following persons shall be disqualified for office: First, any person who shall deny the being of Almighty God...."
Maryland's Bill of Rights: Article 36:
" That as it is the duty of every man to worship God in such manner as he thinks most acceptable to Him, all persons are equally entitled to protection in their religious liberty; wherefore, no person ought by any law to be molested in his person or estate, on account of his religious persuasion, or profession, or for his religious practice, unless, under the color of religion, he shall disturb the good order, peace or safety of the State, or shall infringe the laws of morality, or injure others in their natural, civil or religious rights; nor ought any person to be compelled to frequent, or maintain, or contribute, unless on contract, to maintain, any place of worship, or any ministry; nor shall any person, otherwise competent, be deemed incompetent as a witness, or juror, on account of his religious belief; provided, he believes in the existence of God, and that under His dispensation such person will be held morally accountable for his acts, and be rewarded or punished therefore either in this world or in the world to come."
Why these are all unconstitutional:
Article VI, section 3 of the United States Constitution
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.
" RELIGIOUS TESTS: No religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office, or public trust, in this State; nor shall any one be excluded from holding office on account of his religious sentiments, provided he acknowledge the existence of a Supreme Being."
Tennessee's Bill of Rights: Article 9:
Section 2. " No person who denies the being of God, or a future state of rewards and punishments, shall hold any office in the civil department of this state."
South Carolina's Constitution, Article 4 Section 2:
"Person denying existence of Supreme Being not to hold office. No person who denies the existence of the Supreme Being shall hold any office under this Constitution."
North Carolina's Constitution, Article 6 Sec. 8:
" Disqualifications of office. The following persons shall be disqualified for office: First, any person who shall deny the being of Almighty God...."
Maryland's Bill of Rights: Article 36:
" That as it is the duty of every man to worship God in such manner as he thinks most acceptable to Him, all persons are equally entitled to protection in their religious liberty; wherefore, no person ought by any law to be molested in his person or estate, on account of his religious persuasion, or profession, or for his religious practice, unless, under the color of religion, he shall disturb the good order, peace or safety of the State, or shall infringe the laws of morality, or injure others in their natural, civil or religious rights; nor ought any person to be compelled to frequent, or maintain, or contribute, unless on contract, to maintain, any place of worship, or any ministry; nor shall any person, otherwise competent, be deemed incompetent as a witness, or juror, on account of his religious belief; provided, he believes in the existence of God, and that under His dispensation such person will be held morally accountable for his acts, and be rewarded or punished therefore either in this world or in the world to come."
Why these are all unconstitutional:
Article VI, section 3 of the United States Constitution
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.
Anyone Think This is Good News?
Even though President Obama promised BP will cover 100% of the cost of repairing and cleaning up the Gulf Oil Disaster, the Wall Street Journal reports that BP will force taxpayers to pick up at least $9.9 billion of the bill.
How will this happen? BP is planning to use tax-code provisions that allow companies to get refunds on losses. Since the disaster will cost BP at least $32 billion, they want almost $10 billion dollars from taxpayers -- effectively cutting BP clean-up costs by a third.
How will this happen? BP is planning to use tax-code provisions that allow companies to get refunds on losses. Since the disaster will cost BP at least $32 billion, they want almost $10 billion dollars from taxpayers -- effectively cutting BP clean-up costs by a third.
Wednesday, July 28, 2010
POTUS and VP Schedule Now Online
Just a quick post to share the online schedule of the president and VP.
It is available at http://www.whitehouse.gov/schedule/complete.
Again... sorry for the lack of posts around here lately. Hopefully I'll crawl out from under the work avalanche and be more active here again soon...
It is available at http://www.whitehouse.gov/schedule/complete.
Again... sorry for the lack of posts around here lately. Hopefully I'll crawl out from under the work avalanche and be more active here again soon...
Thursday, May 27, 2010
Boycott BP!
Although I haven't blogged about the BP oil spill here, most of you probably know my thoughts about it. Of course, nobody is in favor of an oil spill, right? But then there are lunatics like that crazy libertarian Rand Paul, whose position is basically "shit happens, lay off of BP."
So we get eleven oil workers dead. The largest oil spill in U.S. history getting larger every day. The Gulf of Mexico (and even the East Atlantic Coast) will be feeling the ecological effects of this disaster for years to come. And for you Republicans, there is an economic impact, too, as this debacle destroys fisheries and the livelihoods of people who fish and shrimp in the Gulf, or rely on the Gulf for tourism business.
BP CEO Tony Hayward is sanguine about the whole problem. The Financial Times quotes him saying, “I think the environmental impact of this disaster is likely to have been very, very modest.”
The time to boycott BP is now.
Go here: www.beyondbp.org
Tuesday, May 18, 2010
Teddy Roosevelt on Immigration
There is an e-mail spreading around the Internet that most of you have probably seen. It purports to give a quote from Teddy Roosevelt about immigration.
The e-mail gets some of the wording wrong... and the date of the quote wrong... but it gets the essence of Roosevelt's position essentially correct.
Here is the correct quote, from a letter by then former president Roosevelt on January 3, 1919 to the president of the American Defense Society. It was read publicly at a meeting on January 5, 1919. Roosevelt died the next day, on January 6, 1919.
"We should insist that if the immigrant who comes here does in good faith become an American and assimilates himself to us he shall be treated on an exact equality with every one else, for it is an outrage to discriminate against any such man because of creed or birth-place or origin.
But this is predicated upon the man's becoming in very fact an American and nothing but an American. If he tries to keep segregated with men of his own origin and separated from the rest of America, then he isn't doing his part as an American. There can be no divided allegiance here. . . We have room for but one language here, and that is the English language, for we intend to see that the crucible turns our people out as Americans, of American nationality, and not as dwellers in a polyglot boarding-house; and we have room for but one soul loyalty, and that is loyalty to the American people."
This seems like a very sensible position to me. I think there are things in it that both the far left (one language) and the far right (perhaps too open on allowing immigration) may disagree with... but it seems like a good, high-level statement to me.
The e-mail gets some of the wording wrong... and the date of the quote wrong... but it gets the essence of Roosevelt's position essentially correct.
Here is the correct quote, from a letter by then former president Roosevelt on January 3, 1919 to the president of the American Defense Society. It was read publicly at a meeting on January 5, 1919. Roosevelt died the next day, on January 6, 1919.
"We should insist that if the immigrant who comes here does in good faith become an American and assimilates himself to us he shall be treated on an exact equality with every one else, for it is an outrage to discriminate against any such man because of creed or birth-place or origin.
But this is predicated upon the man's becoming in very fact an American and nothing but an American. If he tries to keep segregated with men of his own origin and separated from the rest of America, then he isn't doing his part as an American. There can be no divided allegiance here. . . We have room for but one language here, and that is the English language, for we intend to see that the crucible turns our people out as Americans, of American nationality, and not as dwellers in a polyglot boarding-house; and we have room for but one soul loyalty, and that is loyalty to the American people."
This seems like a very sensible position to me. I think there are things in it that both the far left (one language) and the far right (perhaps too open on allowing immigration) may disagree with... but it seems like a good, high-level statement to me.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
