Americans United for the Separation of Church is sounding the alarm on the Republican "faith based" initiatives. This initiative completely violates the Constitution, particularly since to date ONLY Christian organizations have been given money.
There is no ambiguity in the line our Founding Fathers drew separating Church and State. Our Founding Fathers were very outspoken in their ideas. For example, Ben Franklin very specifically gave his opinion of government funding of religious institutions:
"When a religion is good, I conceive it will support itself; and when it does not support itself, and God does not take care to support it so that its professors are obliged to call for help of the civil power, 'tis a sign, I apprehend, of its being a bad one."
— -- Benjamin Franklin, letter to Richard Price, October 9, 1780, quoted from Adrienne Koch, ed., The American Enlightenment: The Shaping of the American Experiment and a Free Society, New York: George Braziller, 1965, p. 93.
So what would Ben Franklin say to our tax money going to Congressional earmarks for: (info from an Americans United letter) more this way»
Awhile back I wrote about an anti-Semtitic incident in Indiana where a Republican politician told a group of Jews that they didn't count because they only made up 2% of the Indiana population. I called this the Republican "2% solution." This is how the incident appeared to the Jewish group:
[In Feb. 2006], the Indianapolis JCRC’s Jewish Lobby Day was held. Around 40 Jews from around the State of Indiana came to Indianapolis to lobby our state senators and representatives on a number of issues.
The day ended with a private meeting with Speaker of the House Bosma meeting our group in the beautiful House chambers. We asked questions about full day kindergarten, about the clinics, and a young member of the delegation asked about providing sexuality education in public schools that is more than abstinence based. He responded to everything we asked. Sometimes we liked what he said and sometimes we didn’t. Speaker Bosma wondered why we hadn’t discussed the controversy surrounding the issue of prayer in House chambers. He told us his version of what happened and what he believes, and a passionate exchange took place. The end of this exchange left us, the Jewish delegation, in shock. Speaker Bosma, defending the prayer issue, asked, “How many Jews are there in Indiana? About 2%? There are at least 80% Christians in Indiana." more this way»
Submitted by mole333 on 27 November 2007 - 2:13pm.
To WILLIAM H. HERNDON, Esq. February 15, 1848.— LETTER TO WILLIAM H. HERNDON. WASHINGTON, February 15, 1848.
Dear William :
Your letter of the 29th January was received last night. Being exclusively a constitutional argument, I wish to submit some reflections upon it in the same spirit of kindness that I know actuates you. Let me first state what I understand to be your position. It is that if it shall become necessary to repel invasion, the President may, without violation of the Constitution, cross the line and invade the territory of another country and that whether such necessity exists in any given case the President is the sole judge.
Before going further consider well whether this is or is not your position. If it is, it is a position that neither the President himself, nor any friend of his, so far as I know, has ever taken. Their only positions are— first, that the soil was ours when the hostilities commenced ; and second, that whether it was rightfully ours or not, Congress had annexed it, and the President for that reason was bound to defend it; both of which are as clearly proved to be false in fact as you can prove that your house is mine. The soil was not ours, and Congress did not annex or attempt to annex it. But to return to your position. Allow the President to invade a neighboring nation whenever he shall deem it necessary to repel an invasion, and you allow him to do so whenever he may choose to say he deems it necessary for such purpose, and you allow him to make war at pleasure. Study to see if you can fix any limit to his power in this respect, after having given him so much as you propose. If to-day he should choose to say he thinks it necessary to invade Canada to prevent the British from invading us, how could you stop him Î You may say to him, " I see no probability of the British invading us "; but he will say to you, " Be silent: I see it, if you don't."
A political comedy show featuring Katie Halper, Negin Farsad and Lee Camp with a special appearance by your favorite church-state separation advocates, First Freedom First.
Submitted by Khalper on 19 September 2007 - 2:59am.
Many people have been discussing the recent FISA fiasco which has taken America one further step away from democracy and torn yet another hole in the doncument that DEFINES America, our Constitution. I can practically hear Patrick Henry's rage and George Washington's sad disapproval.
Let's keep one fact firmly in mind before we discuss the Democrats: the erosion of American civil liberties, the destruction of our defining document, the Constitution, and the betrayal of our founding fathers' dream for America, has been led by Bush, the bulk of the Republican Party, and that Benidict Arnold, Joe Lieberman. Most of the blame for this crap is squarely on the Republicans.
Most...
But not all.
And therein is a massive problem for those of us who want to fight against the destruction of American democracy. We don't have too many choices in how to fight. As I recently outlined, the Republicans are actively attacking America's very foundations: the Constitution, our economy, our national security. Being an independent or Green or whatever other nobody flash in the pan is tantamount to having no role in how our nation is run whatsoever. Political insignificance, the path of the independent, the Libertarian, the Green, the apathetic...that is doing nothing but abandoning American democracy to destruction at the hands of the Republicans. Like it or not, that is what it is. more this way»
Despite having withdrawn his nomination just weeks ago to avoid political embarrassment in the Senate, the White House has just recess-appointed SBVT funder and major RNC meal ticket Sam Fox to his previously-rejected post as Ambassador to Belgium.
This is so totally wrong, in so many different ways.
Senate Foreign Relations Committee Democrats will be assessing every option -- both legal and within the SFRC itself -- for taking on this recess appointment.
Never before has a withdrawn nominee been recess appointed in this fashion. The White House withdrew Fox's nomination on March 27th, less than an hour before the hearing was to start, admitting later that he did not have the votes to survive.
It’s sad (but not surprising) that this White House would abuse the power of the presidency to send a big-money Rethug Party donor to a post in Belgium over the objections of the Senate.
When it comes to getting body armor for our soldiers or relief for New Orleans, they’re AWOL, but they'll move heaven and earth to reward a smear.
This administration has governed on fear and smear for far too long. Today's move shows it is so wedded to the politics of personal character assassination that they are willing to take unprecedented steps to reward Sam Fox with an ambassadorship that he clearly does not deserve. more this way»
Got any dirt, tips, leads or money for us? Then drop us a line or two at editors [at] culturekitchen [dot] com or use our general contact form to reach everybody in the editorial team ASAP.
Nibble daily on our brainy goodness with our daily syndication digest. You'll receive an email with a list and links to the previous day's posts.
"Look, Queen Elizabeth has more diamonds than me. Why don't people attack her for it? .While they were telling NBA players to take off their medallions for game days, why don't they tell the Pope not to wear his medallion to work?"
