HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » hootinholler » Journal
Page: 1 2 3 4 Next »

hootinholler

Profile Information

Gender: Male
Hometown: Pa/Md
Home country: USA
Current location: Some have said not earth :shrug:
Member since: Sat Nov 20, 2004, 03:27 PM
Number of posts: 24,368

Journal Archives

TESTIFY!

Edit: Seriously, it's worth watching.



Whitewashed.

I guess it's time to drag this out again (re: Talibornagin christian nation)

Some research I did a while ago during some other outrage the talibornagin was suffering...

We can expect a rasher of the talibornagain gnashing of teeth and wailing over their perceived persecution. Bring on the Lions!

In light of that, I thought it appropriate to provide a review of Church-State history in the U.S. As it happens, I have a file full of snippets of events that seem sorta relevant.

This is stuff I've gathered from all over.

The continental dollar of the Revolutionary War, was designed by Benjamin Franklin in 1776:The mottos on this coin are "Mind Your Business" and "We Are One."

The Tripoli Treaty of 1797 - States unequivocally the US is not a
Christian Nation:
ARTICLE 11.

As the government of the United States of America is not in any sense
founded on the Christian Religion,-as it has in itself no character of
enmity against the laws, religion or tranquility of Musselmen,-and as
the said States never have entered into any war or act of hostility
against any Mehomitan nation, it is declared by the parties that no
pretext arising from religious opinions shall ever produce an
interruption of the harmony existing between the two countries.
---
This document was endorsed by Secretary of State Timothy Pickering and
President John Adams. It was then sent to the Senate for ratification;
the vote was unanimous. It is worth pointing out that although this
was the 339th time a recorded vote had been required by the Senate, it
was only the third unanimous vote in the Senate's history. There is no
record of debate or dissent. The text of the treaty was printed in
full in the Philadelphia Gazette and in two New York papers, but there
were no screams of outrage, as one might expect today."

THE WHOLE ARTICLE: http://www.thenation.com/doc/20050221/allen

This is confirmed by at least 2 of the Founders. Now remember this one later:

Is the appointment of Chaplains to the two Houses of Congress
consistent with the Constitution, and with the pure principle of
religious freedom? In strictness the answer on both points must be in
the negative. The Constitution of the U. S. forbids everything like an
establishment of a national religion. The law appointing Chaplains
establishes a religious worship for the national representatives, to
be performed by Ministers of religion, elected by a majority of them,
and these are to be paid out of the national taxes. Does this not
involve the principle of a national establishment, applicable to a
provision for a religious worship for the Constituent as well as of
the representative Body, approved by the majority, and conducted by
Ministers of religion paid by the entire nation? -- Madison In "Essay on Monopolies,"

Moving right along now... to Jefferson:

Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely between man & his god, that he owes account to none other for his faith or his worship, that the legitimate powers of government reach actions only, and not opinions, I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof, thus building a wall of separation between church and state. Adhering to this expression of the supreme will of the nation in behalf of the rights of conscience, I shall see with sincere satisfaction the progress of those sentiments which tend to restore to man all his natural rights, convinced he has no natural right in opposition to his social duties. - Thomas Jefferson 1/1/1802

In 1837 Congress passed an Act that specified which mottos and phrases
were allowed to be printed on currency; this included the national
motto, "E Pluribus Unum" (From Many One). The motto was not
required however.

And then the shit storm starts chucking turds:

* In 1860, during the Civil War, Protestant denominations organize the 'National Reform Association', which aimed to amend the Constitution to "declare the nation's allegiance to Jesus Christ."

* In 1861, Rev. M. R. Watkinson writes Salmon P. Chase, the Secretary of the Treasury, a letter suggesting "the recognition of the Almighty God in some form on our coins". He suggests "God, Liberty, Law" as a motto on a "beautiful coin, to which no possible citizen could object".

* In 1864, Congress approves "In God We Trust" for use on one-cent and two-cent coins.

* In 1865, Congress acts to place the motto on all coins.

In 1865, with the conclusion of the Civil War, a new Act was passed by Congress to allow the addition of the phrase "In God We Trust" to currency. "In God We Trust" was still not the national motto at this point and was not used on all money. It was simply allowed to be used on coins, and was used mostly on small denomination coins along with the national motto, "E Pluribus Unum."

Round one: Talibornagain.

The Pledge of Allegiance was written in 1892 it read:

I pledge allegiance to my Flag and the Republic for which it stands, one nation, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.

I like that, simple and to the point.

When the Federal Reserve was created in 1913 "In God We Trust" remained absent from paper currency.

In the 1950s Congress changed the national motto from "E Pluribus
Unum" to "In God We Trust" (which is how “In God We Trust”
became required to be printed of federal money), "So help me God" was
added to federal oaths (despite the fact that the Christian Bible
clearly states not to swear by God or any other person, place, or
thing when taking an oath. Matthew 5:33-37, James 5:12), and "under
God" was added to the Pledge of Allegiance.

This was also about the time the Presidential Prayer Breakfast started.

* In 1957, the motto is first used on paper money.

* On July 30, 1956, a bill is passed by congress and signed by the president declaring "In God We Trust" the national motto of the United States.

Round two: Talibornagain.

John F. Kennedy September 12, 1960, address to the Greater Houston Ministerial Association:

I believe in an America where the separation of church and state is absolute--where no Catholic prelate would tell the President (should he be Catholic) how to act, and no Protestant minister would tell his parishioners for whom to vote--where no church or church school is granted any public funds or political preference--and where no man is denied public office merely because his religion differs from the President who might appoint him or the people who might elect him.

Clearly, some people still 'get it.'

* In 1970, The constitutionality of the motto is challenged (Aronow v. United States). The Circuit court determined it "has nothing whatsoever to do with the establishment of religion".

* In 1979, Madalyn Murray O'Hair of American Atheists challenges the motto (O'Hair v. Blumenthal). The circuit court ruled "the slogan was secular".

* In 1994, The Freedom From Religion Foundation challenged the motto citing it's survey that showed a majority of Americans consider the motto religious. lawsuit was dismissed by the district Court without trial

On September 4, 2002 Michael Newdow was a guest on the popular FOX program Hannity & Colmes. On this program Mr. Newdow stated that he felt that Congressional Chaplains violated the Separation of Church and State. Sean Hannity responded by saying:

"Who hired the first chaplain for congress? ...James Madison in 1789. Did you know that?"

You want to refer to some liberal activist judge..., that's fine, but I'm going to go directly to the source. The author of the Bill of Rights hired the first chaplain in 1789, and I gotta' tell ya' somethin', I think the author of the Bill of Rights knows more about the original intent--no offense to you and your liberal atheist activism--knows more about it than you do."

Which would bring us back to the second paragraph, where Madison
Himself admits the Chaplin is a violation of Church-State separation. BWAAHAAAHAHAAAA Go bark at the moon you friggin Codger!

But, sadly it's come to this:

The Constitution Restoration Act of 2004, introduced into both houses
of Congress on February 11, 2004, "includes the acknowledgment of God
as the sovereign source of law by an official in his capacity of
executing his office."

Update: It gets re-introduced pretty much every session.

And with this quote from CNN on March 24, 2004:

Justice Sandra Day O'Connor said there "are so many references to God" in public affairs, noting "In God We Trust" was on U-S currency and coins. She added the Supreme Court opens all its public sessions with the words, "God save the United States and this honorable Court.”

We can expect no help from the Courts with a problem so clearly subversive of the Constitution.

Kinda sad, isn't it?
Posted by hootinholler | Thu Apr 2, 2015, 09:24 PM (3 replies)

So I've taken to wearing kilts on Fridays

It's been generally well received and it's kinda fun on the Metro.

Given the poll list, vote for the temperature below which I should not wear it for fear of damaging, shall we say, the dangly bits. I've worn one at 45F and it was a tad brisk.

Feel free to supply a name for your choice.

The third way have already decided whom we are purging

You might wonder who. You might call for a list, which can't be provided. Mainly because it's not politicians we are purging.

Who then? The young voter and the poor.

I can hear the cries of bullshit, now, but if you really stop and think for a moment, that is who isn't coming to us.

As long as our politicians allow banksters to go unpunished.

As long as we don't fight to fix a rigged system that keeps the poor in poverty.

As long as we don't fight for making it easier to vote.

As long as we allow insurance companies to rape us financially to pay for a part of required health care.

As long as we allow the government to continue to profit off of student loans.

As long as our tax code is structured to funnel the money to the top.

As long as we continue to militarize the police.

As long as prisons are profit centers for private concerns.

As long as we continue to spy on our population wholesale.

As long as we keep accepting a slice of bread instead of half of a loaf (forget the whole loaf).

As long as our message is we are slightly less evil than those other guys.

We will continue to languish.

One of two things will happen in the next ten years. Either the party will go back to its FDR inspired roots and start fighting to make an actual difference in the lives of the poor which will shore up the middle class, or a new party will come along and capture the demographic.

So why isn't more stuff named for FDR?

I can't think of much of anything named for the President who brought us so much.

In this age of Raygun this and Raygun that.

For that matter not much is named for Johnson either.

After the mid-terms it makes me wonder about the real values at play here in this nation.



-=-=-=-=-=-
P.S. this might seem like a drive by, but I'll be back eventually.

If money is the root of all evil

Why can't we make it the root of all good?

Lately, I have the notion that we have been going about things all wrong for a very long time. Yeah, I know, go figure. Bear with me for a minute, I'm going to attempt to think big and communicate at the same time, so it may take a bit to get to the point.

Seems to me that the major problem isn't wealth per se`it's more that the currency the wealth expresses is based on exploitation. The old Nationalize risk and privatize profit sort of applies here. It's even in the language of the Industrial Era that resources were exploited. The exploitation of humans has long been the staple of the rich getting richer, I suspect probably since the dawn of the human race.

What if we could create a different currency? One where units of exchange are created by helping humanity survive? If BitCoin can be created why can't we create such a thing?

One where corporations can make money by waging peace, or cleaning up superfund sites rather than by building drones, or coatings tat scrub chemicals from the atmosphere.

If we could turn greed loose on a currency that reflects a contribution to humanity, which includes maintenance of the biosphere, humanity might just survive in the long term.

I would love to hear your thoughts.

A question: When Pot is legal nationwide...

Will we as a nation mellow out a little? Start helping people before corporations?

Will it raise our consciousness as a Nation?

Could it enable us to fulfill the promise of a government "Of the people and for the people?"


Holy Fuck Me Harder!

No, this isn't about GD turning into Gender Dysfunction, or is it?

I just waded through the Cannonfire blog's take on Greenwald's latest reveal from the Snowden papers.

It's worse, way worse than I had even imagined when in my paranoid fantasy land. Yes I know there is another thread, but it doesn't link the Cannonfire presentation and is fine for general discussion of this stuff.

The point I'm trying to focus on here, isn't about anonymous or even about internet persona management, but the spooks are choosing winners and losers in the market:



Let that one soak a few minutes, stop deals / ruin business relationships. It would seem that we have found one connection to counter-intuitive results in the marketplace when the invisible hand moves.

Holy shit. Talk about something that should be illegal. This is illegal, right? Choosing business winners and losers? Choosing political winners and losers?

Well I guess it's no worse than the CIA selling crack.

Oh, and feel free to apologize for the shit stirring surrounding Snowden.

The new talking point about the NSA and Snowden made its appearance today on Press the Meat

It's gonna cost us billions for fix what Snowden did. Heard that from more than one guest. That one is new and it was mixed in with the more familiar claims like it's just phone numbers, etc.

Do they not realize it wasn't Snowden who's actions need fixing? The NSA's actions need fixing, that is not Snowden's fault. I think that if they didn't need fixing we wouldn't even know Snowden's name.

Now that we know you're for real, Happy New Year Agent Mike!

Back in the day, I'm a graybeard developer who can turn the knob on the WABAC quite a ways, there was always the notion of Agent Mike monitoring open communications. This usage of Agent Mike in my memory goes back to the UUCP usenet days, in the dark times of bang path addressing before IP and DNS. That's not the point, but if you want to reminisce, feel free.

Anyway, this year, we got total confirmation that not only is there an Agent Mike, but damn, some of the recent shit that's out, hat's off! The Dude has mad skills. It's kind of funny if you google "agent mike" you get all kinds of real FBI and assorted other agents who happen to be named Mike. But not much on the notion of Teh intertubes own Agent Mike.

So Happy new year Agent Mike. I'll be doing my best to ensure that you don't have the ability to run amuck over the 4th this time next year. I'm thinking there are a few others who would like to see that also. Enjoy it whist ya got it.

You know while you're reading this Mike, I can call you Mike, right? Anyway Mike if you would actually like to do something that ensures the Constitution is all Protected and Defended, feel free there are a lot of us out here who would have your back.

So Happy New Year Agent Mike, and Happy New Year DU.
Go to Page: 1 2 3 4 Next »