Dawnsinger

Wanted: A few good Pilgrims

Who: Christian Exodus

Where: South Carolina

What: Drumming up mass migration of conservative Christians to a single state with the aim of using a concentrated political force to return the state to government based on Biblical principles, with hopes of influencing national politics.   Secession a possibility.

When:  Taking applications now.

Note to self:  On the face, this sounds kooky.  But reserve judgement.  Migrating in search of self-determination and freedom of religion is a bedrock of American history.   

Read today's story | Visit Christian Exodus

Ten Commandments redux . . .

It occurred to me over the past week - based on conversations with friends and coworkers and a flood of spam from one political committee or the other - that there is a severe disconnect between what people think the Ten Commandments say, and what they actually are.

In fact, despite the fact that they can work themselves into a foaming rage on either side of the issue, many have no clue at all about the Tem Commandments.    I would challenge Christians to educate themselves on this subject, before rolling out into a political battle.  The quick answer of many is that the reason we should display the Ten Commandments in public places, such as courthouses, is that the commandments are the basis of our legal system.  Who, after all, can argue against something like "Thou shalt not kill"? (or "murder," which is a more accurate sense) .

I'm not sure if this is ignorance or obfuscation.   

The fact is that little of the Ten Commandments is part of our law . . . or ever has been.  And if your defense of public displays is based on the notion that the Commandments are somehow secular in nature, you'd better check your ammo.  They are inherently religious.  A quick primer:

Some trust in chariots . . .

So the fury continues over the Supreme Court - which for many in America has replaced the President and Congress as both the legislative and executive branches of government.  Sandra Day O'Connor,  today's poster child for swing votes, is leaving the bench.  And the ailing Chief Justice Rehnquist, presumed to be near leaving - either due to retirement or due to meeting his Maker.  This giving President Bush a potential triple-play of Supreme Court nominations  . . .  two vacancies and a promotion to chief justice.

O'Connor herself is playing coy with the idea of reneging on her resignation if offered the chief justice's slot.  According to Sen. Arlen Specter,  when approached with the idea by several senators, she replied that she was "flattered" at the though, but did not dismiss it.   (Read this near the bottom of this story)

So Moveon.org and Focus on the Family and all points in between are girding for the latest round of  America's millennial Civil War, based on the premise that the selection of Supreme Court justices is more important than the election of presidents and congresscreatures.  And they may be right.

High Court muddle

The Supreme Court muddled things today, with a pair of late-session rulings on the display of the Ten Commandments that left even Justice Scalia scratching his head.  In a case from Kentucky, a 5-4 court ruled that displaying the Ten Commandments inside a courthouse is an unconstitutional establishment of religion.  Unless it isn't.  In this case, it was unconstitutionial, but every instance is going to have to be judged on a case-by-case basis.   The copy of the Ten Commandments posted inside the Supreme Court, for example, passes constitutional muster.  I'm a member of Mensa, and I don't quite get the distinction. 

Evidently neither did Scalia, who complained bitterly about a lack of guiding principle in today's decisions.  He noted that the absence of a clear principle was a sign of tyrrany.

What set him off was the second decision, on a case in Texas, in which the justices ruled 5-4 that a display of the Ten Commandments outside the building, on the courthouse lawn, is OK.   The logic - or principle - applied vaguely in the first decision seems to contradict the second decision.

I'm having trouble at the moment finding any pundits who have reconciled these two decisions.

What to do about the "attack" on Christmas?

I've been viewing with some bemusement the uproar this season about religion & Christmas.  The blizzard of lawsuits over public displays of nativity scenes (pro and con), the move toward "Happy Holidays" as opposed to "Merry Christmas."  And so on. 

There is some validity to concerns about unequal treatment public displays - in cases where a Hannukah display is allowed, but a Nativity scene is not.   Not an open-and-shut case of discrimination, as some argue that Hannukah is not a religious holiday.  That's semantic games to me.   

But in fact, Christians involved in this debate are generally attempting to stem erosion of historic Christian privilege and prominence in this country.    This - like the lingering argument over prayer in schools - assumes a privileged place for Christianity in the United States.   Whatever history our country has in this area  (and those who claim this country was not founded on Christian principles are fools), that time is gone . . . and the sooner Christians understand and accept the world they live in, the better.    That there is an assault on Christianity by a dedicated faction is without question.   It's hard to imagine Christians in the United States  ever facing the relentless persecution that our brothers face in other countries.  But we are only fooling ourselves if we do not understand that we are going to lose all privilege, and even, to some extent, be driven underground.   And at the very least, we can count on the fact that the future of the United States is a fierce  secularism that will not tolerate public Christianity.   Or even private Christianity that is too devout, too apparent.   

To those concerned about this changing world, I'd say this:  Be sure of what your faith is . . . and be prepared to pay the price for it.   Whatever our Founding Fathers believed about a Promised Land where we would be free to worship freely . . .  they also set up a mechanism by which those freedoms could be curtailed, and even quashed.    At the very least, you should not rely on the City Council to help prop up your faith by erecting a Nativity scene on the courthouse lawn.   Your response should not be to the court.  Your response should be to erect the Nativity scene on every lawn of every Christian family.  You should not be concerned about whether Wal-Mart employees say "Happy Holidays" instead of "Merry Christmas."   Be concerned instead that there are people in prison and being executed this very day because they dared own a Bible or share the gospel. 

Christmas itself is a bad battleground.   It wasn't that long ago that the celebration was banned in parts of the United States as an "un-Christian" Catholic celebration (apologies to my Catholic friends).    The religious significance we attach to Christmas barely rises through the din of  cheesy reindeer songs and uncontrolled commercialism that begins weeks before Halloween and runs through the post-Christmas sales.  Much of what Christmas is today was forged in Victorian times and refurbished by modern post-industrial capitalism.   The religious aspect of Christmas isn't dead, of course, but more and more it's confined to candlelight services thoughtfully scheduled around the family gift-giving orgy.   I wonder what would happen if Christians decided to drop out of  commercial Christmas . . . made a conscious decision to make it truly a religious holiday.   No tree.  No gifts.   No Santa. No reindeer. Just a family feast honoring the gift of the Christ Child.

I would challenge Christians to quit looking for a comfortable faith.  We've been pampered and blessed, and now things are not going our way.  It may well be that someday we will be forced to find out how much of our faith is real . . . and how much has been "easy grace."   I've talked to friends in countries where Christians are persecuted . . . they pity American Christians, because they believe, and probably correctly, that we can never be sure how real our faith is.

   

Declaration of Independence banned

Add Thomas Jefferson to the list of Founding Fathers who don't understand that the Constitution calls for the ethnic cleansing of Christians and God from the face of the earth.  And merry well met . . . just another reason Louisiana shall not languish at the bottom of the educational totem pole for long:

Read about Principal Patricia Vidmar's campaign to abolish the Declaration . . .

As for Thomas Jefferson, I think I'll steal that quote that Barbra Streisand has been flinging about (although she doesn't have a clue what it means):

"A little patience, and we shall see the reign of witches pass over, their spells dissolve, and the people, recovering their true sight, restore their government to its true principles."

Further deponent sayeth not . . .

George Washington: Ignorant, bigoted Red-State Bible-thumper

And now a few words from the Father of our Country, who like most of his contemporary Founding Fathers,  was ignorant about the Constitution's currently-understood demands that all mention of divinity be purged from public life in general and government in particular:

Thanksgiving Day Proclamation, 1789

"Whereas it is the duty of all nations to acknowledge the providence of Almighty God, to obey His will, to be grateful for His benefits, and humbly to implore His protection and favor; and Whereas both Houses of Congress have, by their joint committee, requested me "to recommend to the people of the United States a day of public thanksgiving and prayer, to be observed by acknowledging with grateful hearts the many and signal favors of Almighty God, especially by affording them an opportunity peaceably to establish a form of government for their safety and happiness:"

Now, therefore, I do recommend and assign Thursday, the 26th day of November next, to be devoted by the people of these States to the service of that great and glorious Being who is the beneficent author of all the good that was, that is, or that will be; that we may then all unite in rendering unto Him our sincere and humble thanks for His kind care and protection of the people of this country previous to their becoming a nation; for the signal and manifold mercies and the favorable interpositions of His providence in the course and conclusion of the late war; for the great degree of tranquility, union, and plenty which we have since enjoyed; for the peaceable and rational manner in which we have been enable to establish constitutions of government for our safety and happiness, and particularly the national one now lately instituted' for the civil and religious liberty with which we are blessed, and the means we have of acquiring and diffusing useful knowledge; and, in general, for all the great and various favors which He has been pleased to confer upon us.

And also that we may then unite in most humbly offering our prayers and supplications to the great Lord and Ruler of Nations and beseech Him to pardon our national and other transgressions; to enable us all, whether in public or private stations, to perform our several and relative duties properly and punctually; to render our National Government a blessing to all the people by constantly being a Government of wise, just, and constitutional laws, discreetly and faithfully executed and obeyed; to protect and guide all sovereigns and nations (especially such as have show kindness to us), and to bless them with good governments, peace, and concord; to promote the knowledge and practice of true religion and virtue, and the increase of science among them and us; and, generally to grant unto all mankind such a degree of temporal prosperity as He alone knows to be best.

Given under my hand, at the city of New York, the 3d dy of October, A.D. 1789.

(signed) G. Washington

Thanksgiving for Dummies

Johnny can't read.  Johnny doesn't know history.  Johnny can't do math.  Johnny doesn't know geography.  Ditto for his teachers.

Today's lunacy from Maryland, where public schools forbid any discussion of the fact that Thanksgiving was created, part and parcel, as a religious holiday . . .  read the story

More cultural "cleansing," to ensure that American kids continue their plummet to the bottom of  educational achievement.  Assisted by "educators" who believe in indoctrination, rather than education.

The good news is that sooner or later,  Louisiana won't be alone on the bottom of the educational totem pole.

More notable election commentary

A few more columns worth reading, regarding the election:

Kerry didn't lose the values battle - James Q. Wilson, Wall Street Journal

We weren't dumb enough to vote for Kerry - Mark Steyn, Opinion Telegraph

Election 2004 epiphanies - George Will, Town Hall

Why Democrats are tagged as the party without values -  Dennis Prager, Creators Syndicate

Sunrise in the West - William J. Stuntz, TCS

'Thou shalt not kill' offends Dutch Big Brother

Dutch authorities have destroyed a painting created to protest the slaying of filmmaker Theo Van Gogh, who was killed by a Muslim extremist last week, because the painting contained the admonition "Thou shalt not kill."  That phrase might offend someone, Dutch officials said.

Local news crews were threatened by police and forced to hand over taped coverage of the destruction.

Somebody needs to pull their finger out of the dike.