Universal Abortion Background Check

On February 1st the president's executive orders go into effect, assuring all citizens are safe from the dangers of unregulated abortions.

All women who desire an abortion will be entered into a national registry. The government has decided that women will only be allowed to have one abortion per year, and no more than seven in a lifetime. “Women have a right to choose in the constitution...er...somewhere, but we do need to make sure they know that their government is best at distributing those rights.”

All women who wish to have an abortion must produce references from a close friend or relative who will certify their need for abortion is absolutely necessary. “We support a woman’s right to choose” said Christian Coalition President Roberta Combs, “but think these regulations are necessary to protect the public from the violence associated with unrestricted access to abortions.”

Those seeking abortion must now undergo a background check, where financial records will be obtained to determine whether she can truly support a child. Those found able to do so will not be allowed to terminate the life of another human being. (Tip from Planned Parenthood: Leave the iPhone at home when pleading economic hardship!)

Further, if the background check reveals mental illness or demonstrates reasonable doubt as to the carefulness with which the woman is exercising her reproductive rights, the decision to abort will be placed in the hands of an arbitrator.  “While due regard must be maintained for a woman's privacy, stemming human-on-human violence for the public good outweighs the risks,” said legislators.

There will be mandatory counseling from an authorized counselor, psychiatrist, or clergyperson coupled with a three day “cooling off” waiting period.

Small rural clinics will be replaced with satellite abortion operating rooms attached to major hospitals in large cities where federally licensed and properly supervised abortion providers will ensure documentary compliance.

In attempt to close the “private practice loophole” only federally licensed abortion providers will be able to prescribe Mifepristone (RU-486, aka “the morning after pill”).

No one under the age of eighteen will be allowed to have an abortion without the supervision of their parents.

Finally, all non-medically necessary abortions must take place within the first trimester. “No one really needs more than three months to decide on something like taking a human life. High Capacity Waiting Periods - those consisting of more than three months for choosing termination - are really only needed by medical professionals and law enforcement agencies...and eugenicists,” quipped someone in a rather dashing vest.

Abortion Extremist™ Terry O'Neil, President of The National Organization For Women (NOW) disagrees. “These regulations are nothing more than a draconian curtailment of the God given freedoms that established this country and made it the beacon of hope it has become for people around the world. We will fight this by any means necessary.”

Further legislation will seek to reinstate and strengthen the late-term abortion ban; give law enforcement additional tools to prevent and prosecute unlawful abortions; and end the media silence on abortion violence research.

Homeschooling WINSday

Okay...I know this is supposed to be "Worship Wednesday"...but I've sorta got that covered at the parish blog.

Today I just want to briefly highlight a that a German couple has been granted political asylum in the US because...get this...they wanted to home educate their children. Homeschooling is illegal in Germany. After having their children forcibly removed and taken to school, they contacted the HSDLA who filed on their behalf.

I was glad to hear that they'll be settling in what used to be my back yard, Morristown, TN.

Public Option for kids

This is a youtube video - you'll have to come to the blog or go to the host.
Because some people still don't understand basic economics.

If your healthcare reform doesn't deal with the rising cost of healthcare by opening the path to private competition, then you're just shuffling money around.

I Hate to Say I Told You So

But I told you so. Now the AU (arrogant Unitarians?) has its collective panties in a wad over the signing of the Manhattan Declaration.

At a press conference today, Religious Right leaders and Roman Catholic bishops unveiled a joint statement criticizing laws that allow reproductive choice and same-sex marriage.

Hmm...Roman Catholics acting catholic? That is news! I really wish AU could get their story straight.

Said the Rev. Barry W. Lynn, Americans United executive director, “This declaration is certain to be deeply divisive. These religious leaders want to see their doctrines imposed by force of law, and that goes against everything America stands for.

“I am optimistic that the people in the pews will not heed their leaders’ misguided call to action,” Lynn said. “Polls show that most church-goers do not want to see their faith politicized. But I am also well aware that religious leaders have vast lobbying power that cannot be ignored.”

Aww...I preferred it when they were saying that the Roman Catholics only wanted to stop helping people at all!

Lynn noted the House version of health-care reform was revised at the behest of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops to curtail women’s access to abortion.

So which is it, AU? Should they have stayed out of politics altogether (when they energized their base to lobby for universal health-care)? Or is it only when they bring to their political activism who they are as people of faith?

Obama's Hypocrisy on Censorship

President Obama began his visit to China with an exhortation to free up censorship and allow the citizenry to question and criticize their government without fear of reprisal.

President Barack Obama pointedly nudged China on Monday to stop censoring Internet access, offering an animated defense of the tool that helped him win the White House and suggesting Beijing need not fear a little criticism.

Yeah. Ask Fox News how well Obama takes a little criticism. Anita Dunn, the White House communications director, was interviewed last month and said: “We’re going to treat them the way we would treat an opponent. As they are undertaking a war against Barack Obama and the White House, we don’t need to pretend that this is the way that legitimate news organizations behave.” (Source: NYT)

It was a delicately balanced message and Obama couched his admonitions with words calling for cooperation, heavy with praise and American humility.

Our country needs to apologize to China? When did that happen? We've stood up for their freedom for 70 years! And our economies energize each other, raising the standard of living for both countries.

"I think that the more freely information flows, the stronger the society becomes, because then citizens of countries around the world can hold their own governments accountable," Obama told students during his first-ever trip to China. "They can begin to think for themselves."

I'm in a conundrum. I have no idea which government snitch line I should report this to. - should I report this quote to fishy@whitehouse.gov or flag@whitehouse.gov? I just can't decide which one best holds the populace accountable to the government. OOOPS! I meant that the government is accountable to the people.

Jail Time If You Don't Buy Health Insurance

Wow. There is now proof that the 1098 page bill (which none of these starry-eyed legislators have actually read) contains a provision to SEND YOU TO JAIL IF YOU DON'T BUY HEALTH INSURANCE.

Sen. John Ensign (R-Nev.) received a handwritten note Thursday from Joint Committee on Taxation Chief of Staff Tom Barthold confirming the penalty for failing to pay the up to $1,900 fee for not buying health insurance.

Violators could be charged with a misdemeanor and could face up to a year in jail or a $25,000 penalty, Barthold wrote on JCT letterhead. He signed it "Sincerely, Thomas A. Barthold."

What is this? Does anybody remember the STAMP ACT??? Let's not lose sight of the fact that Congress has no constitutional authority to make us buy their program. Government intervention is one of the biggest aggravating factors in this crisis, and more government intervention is not going to help.

The current health care disaster in America is not simply a problem of people refusing to buy health insurance; it's an issue of people not being able to afford to buy health insurance. When the annual insurance premium for a family of four is something above $13,000, that's a terrible financial burden that many Americans simply can't afford to pay -- especially when so many people have lost their jobs due to the faltering economy. Worse, the government says that health insurance companies can't compete across state lines for your business (and we all know that the best way to reign in costs while maintaining quality, is through market competition).

The brutal facts of the matter are inescapable: The American people are too broke to buy their own health insurance, and the American government is too broke to buy it for them. The whole nation is going bankrupt over runaway health care COSTS. Any measure claiming to be healthcare reform that does nothing to address the COSTS is completely bogus.

Jedi Tesco Fiasco

Reported in the Guardian:

Tesco has been accused of religious discrimination after the company ordered the founder of a Jedi religion to remove his hood or leave a branch of the supermarket in north Wales.

Daniel Jones, founder of the religion inspired by the Star Wars films, says he was humiliated and victimised for his beliefs following the incident at a Tesco store in Bangor.

Yeah...I'll bet this aint the first time he's ever been humiliated and victimized over his hoky religion.

The 23-year-old, who founded the International Church of Jediism, which has 500,000 followers worldwide, was told the hood flouted store rules.

But the grocery empire struck back, claiming that the three best known Jedi Knights in the Star Wars movies – Yoda, Obi-Wan Kenobi and Luke Skywalker – all appeared in public without their hoods. Jones, from Holyhead, who is known by the Jedi name Morda Hehol, said his religion dictated that he should wear the hood in public places and is considering legal action against the chain.
"It states in our Jedi doctrination that I can wear headwear. It just covers the back of my head," he said. "You have a choice of wearing headwear in your home or at work but you have to wear a cover for your head when you are in public."

Tesco said: "He hasn't been banned. Jedis are very welcome to shop in our stores although we would ask them to remove their hoods.

"Obi-Wan Kenobi, Yoda and Luke Skywalker all appeared hoodless without ever going over to the Dark Side and we are only aware of the Emperor as one who never removed his hood.

"If Jedi walk around our stores with their hoods on, they'll miss lots of special offers."

Word has it that President Obama stands ready to extend American freedom of religion to the UK - and you can see whose side he's on!


Hmm...the Force is strong with That One.

In all seriousness, I think Tesco was brilliant in their response.

Now...I wonder if NHS will cover the expense of having a clinical psychologist have a look under Mr. Jones' hood.

In Defense of Liberty

"Statesmen, my dear Sir, may plan and speculate for liberty, but it is Religion and Morality alone, which can establish the Principles upon which Freedom can securely stand. The only foundation of a free constitution is pure virtue."

— John Adams

"It is in the manners and spirit of a people which preserve a republic in vigour. . . . degeneracy in these is a canker which soon eats into the heart of its laws and constitution."

— Thomas Jefferson

"[In a republic, according to Montesquieu in Spirit of the Laws, IV,ch.5,] 'virtue may be defined as the love of the laws and of our country. As such love requires a constant preference of public to private interest, it is the source of all private virtue; for they are nothing more than this very preference itself... Now a government is like everything else: to preserve it we must love it . . . Everything, therefore, depends on establishing this love in a republic; and to inspire it ought to be the principal business of education; but the surest way of instilling it into children is for parents to set them an example.'"

— Thomas Jefferson copied into his Commonplace Book.

"If the public safety be provided, liberty and propriety secured, justice administered, virtue encouraged, vice suppressed, and the true interest of the nation advanced, the ends of government are accomplished . . ."

— Algernon Sidney

ANYTHING IN THERE ABOUT NATIONALIZED HEALTHCARE?

Finally, something old and something new.

"Today it would be progress if everyone would stop talking about values. Instead, let us talk, as the Founders did, about virtues."
— George Will

"Righteousness exalteth a nation."
— Proverbs 14:34

The Next Red Scare

You might have seen the political hit piece that is passing as the DHS's report on "Right Wing Extremism." If not, Michelle Malkin is commenting on it with great acumen. All I have to say is this:

McCarthyism is McCarthyism - no matter which side is doing it.


Just be ready for the new Red State Scare.

Speak your mind or mind your speech?

From the Church Times:

The liberties we enjoy in a demo­cracy are inseparable from freedom of expression. The exercise of that freedom makes demands on us all. Nowhere are those demands more highly charged than where religious groupings believe their faith has been insulted.

Those sections of society that are unable to tease out the relationship between freedom of expression and self-restraint, or to understand that, when offence is given, challenge — rather than violence or prohibition — should be the response, pose a threat to the fabric of a democratic state.

FREEDOM of expression is a dearly bought and cherished attribute of democracy. Respect and consideration for the sensi­bilities of others should be equally valued. The freedom to hold an opinion does not confer the right to express it regardless of context. Neither does personal or collective offence necessarily license pro­hibi­tion of offending material.

There is no right to be protected from offence, but there is a right — even a duty — to engage in debate, and thus to challenge the giver of offence. It is through debate that we learn what may be tolerated and what must be proscribed. Violence of speech or action short-circuits this civilised usage, and gives rise to oppression, fear, and resentment.

Prohibition has reinforced the idea that violent protest is the only response to false­hood....defamation must be met with dialogue. Neither tolerance nor self-restraint is learned under the rule of the censor.

Prohibition of free speech isn't as far as you think. In seminary, a friend was called into the dean's office for using biblical language about God - because some people found it offensive. You can't imagine the opprobrium - the violent political moves and abuses of professorial power - that is heaped on anyone who would limit feminine universals in language...but masculinity is ruled right out. It's tragic because in losing God's masculinity we lose God's transcendence...and we are placed on the road to paganism and panentheism.

That's no moon

It's a moonbat!

h/t Tim from GairneyBridge

Rendering to Caesar

Archbishop of the Roman Catholic Archdiocese of Denver, the Most Rev'd Charles J. Chaput, had some strong words for how to navigate the current political situation. In an age when the powers of the state - especially the federal government - are expanding and encroaching on various parts of our social and economic lives, he offers a sane critique that is distinctly Christian, catholic, and American. That it comes from the lips of the second Native American to be granted episcopal rank should lend credit to his words. In dealing with Caesar, this man carries the historical memory of his office through the gift of apostolic succession and the DNA-bound memory of a people who were robbed of their land by promises of phony goods and assurances of protected status.

The speech is in promotion of his new book, Render Unto Caesar. This isn't the first time the man has spoken with clarity and conviction on the issues of how Christian citizens are to behave in a republic. He's provided consistent leadership in the election, and I pray the whole house of Roman Catholic bishops in the US - as well as bishops in other judicatories - listen to this man who is made a chief shepherd in the flock of God. Below are some snippets:

We need to remember that tolerance is not a Christian virtue. Charity, justice, mercy, prudence, honesty – these are Christian virtues. And obviously, in a diverse community, tolerance is an important working principle. But it’s never an end itself. In fact, tolerating grave evil within a society is itself a form of serious evil. Likewise, democratic pluralism does not mean that Catholics should be quiet in public about serious moral issues because of some misguided sense of good manners. A healthy democracy requires vigorous moral debate to survive. Real pluralism demands that people of strong beliefs will advance their convictions in the public square – peacefully, legally and respectfully, but energetically and without embarrassment. Anything less is bad citizenship and a form of theft from the public conversation.

Caesar does have rights. We owe civil authority our respect and appropriate obedience. But that obedience is limited by what belongs to God. Caesar is not God. Only God is God, and the state is subordinate and accountable to God for its treatment of human persons, all of whom were created by God. Our job as believers is to figure out what things belong to Caesar, and what things belong to God -- and then put those things in right order in our own lives, and in our relations with others.

[As Christians] we have a duty to be politically engaged. Why? Because politics is the exercise of power, and the use of power always has moral content and human consequences.

The “separation of Church and state” does not mean – and it can never mean – separating our Catholic faith from our public witness, our political choices and our political actions. That kind of separation would require Christians to deny who we are; to repudiate Jesus when he commands us to be “leaven in the world” and to “make disciples of all nations.” That kind of radical separation steals the moral content of a society. It’s the equivalent of telling a married man that he can’t act married in public. Of course, he can certainly do that, but he won’t stay married for long.

“To suggest -- as some Catholics do -- that Senator Obama is this year’s ‘real’ prolife candidate requires a peculiar kind of self-hypnosis, or moral confusion, or worse. To portray the 2008 Democratic Party presidential ticket as the preferred ‘prolife’ option is to subvert what the word ‘prolife’ means.”

I like clarity, and there’s a reason why. I think modern life, including life in the Church, suffers from a phony unwillingness to offend that poses as prudence and good manners, but too often turns out to be cowardice. Human beings owe each other respect and appropriate courtesy. But we also owe each other the truth -- which means candor.

President Obama is a man of intelligence and some remarkable gifts. He has a great ability to inspire, as we saw from his very popular visit to Canada just this past week. But whatever his strengths, there’s no way to reinvent his record on abortion and related issues with rosy marketing about unity, hope and change.

I think Catholics – and I mean here mainly American Catholics – need to remember four simple things in the months ahead.

First, all political leaders draw their authority from God. We owe no leader any submission or cooperation in the pursuit of grave evil. In fact, we have the duty to change bad laws and resist grave evil in our public life, both by our words and our non-violent actions. The truest respect we can show to civil authority is the witness of our Catholic faith and our moral convictions, without excuses or apologies.

Second, in democracies, we elect public servants, not messiahs. It’s worth recalling that despite two ugly wars, an unpopular Republican president, a fractured Republican party, the support of most of the American news media and massively out-spending his opponent, our new president actually trailed in the election polls the week before the economic meltdown. This subtracts nothing from the legitimacy of his office. It also takes nothing away from our obligation to respect the president’s leadership.

But it does place some of today’s talk about a “new American mandate” in perspective. Americans, including many Catholics, elected a gifted man to fix an economic crisis. That’s the mandate. They gave nobody a mandate to retool American culture on the issues of marriage and the family, sexuality, bioethics, religion in public life and abortion. That retooling could easily happen, and it clearly will happen -- but only if Catholics and other religious believers allow it. It’s instructive to note that the one lesson many activists on the American cultural left learned from their loss in the 2004 election -- and then applied in 2008 -- was how to use a religious vocabulary while ignoring some of the key beliefs and values that religious people actually hold dear.

Every new election cycle I hear from unhappy, self-described Catholics who complain that abortion is too much of a litmus test. But isn’t that exactly what it should be? One of the defining things that set early Christians apart from the pagan culture around them was their respect for human life; and specifically their rejection of abortion and infanticide. We can’t be Catholic and be evasive or indulgent about the killing of unborn life. We can’t claim to be “Catholic” and “pro-choice” at the same time without owning the responsibility for where the choice leads – to a dead unborn child. We can’t talk piously about programs to reduce the abortion body count without also working vigorously to change the laws that make the killing possible. If we’re Catholic, then we believe in the sanctity of developing human life. And if we don’t really believe in the humanity of the unborn child from the moment life begins, then we should stop lying to ourselves and others, and even to God, by claiming we’re something we’re not.

Catholic social teaching goes well beyond abortion. In America we have many urgent issues that beg for our attention, from immigration reform to health care to poverty to homelessness. The Church in Denver and throughout the United States is committed to all these issues. We need to do a much better job of helping women who face problem pregnancies, and American bishops have been pressing our public leaders for that for more than 30 years. But we don’t “help” anyone by allowing or funding an intimate, lethal act of violence. We can’t build a just society with the blood of unborn children. The right to life is the foundation of every other human right -- and if we ignore it, sooner or later every other right becomes politically contingent.

...for Christians, hope is a virtue, not an emotional crutch or a political slogan. Virtus, the Latin root of virtue, means strength or courage. Real hope is unsentimental. It has nothing to do with the cheesy optimism of election campaigns. Hope assumes and demands a spine in believers. And that’s why – at least for a Christian -- hope sustains us when the real answer to the problems or hard choices in life is “no, we can’t,” instead of “yes, we can.”

The word “hope” on a campaign poster may give us a little thrill of righteousness, but the world will still be a wreck when the drug wears off. We can only attain hope through truth. And what that means is this: From the moment Jesus said, “I am the way, the truth and the life,” the most important political statement anyone can make is “Jesus Christ is Lord.”

Read the rest here.

John Adams on the present crisis

“All the perplexities, confusion and distress in America arise, not from defects in their Constitution or Confederation, not from want of honor or virtue, so much as from the downright ignorance of the nature of coin, credit and circulation.” - John Adams

Do you understand how this works, Mr. Obama, when you write a sub-prime mortgage with China on our children's future? We no longer owe our debt just to ourselves, we also owe it to the whole world—much of it (approx. 8%) to China.

Beijing could easily trigger a dollar crash of massive proportions. China is estimated to hold over $700 billion in U.S. Federal dollar assets (not to mention what they hold from private debts). In comparison, the total number of dollars in circulation (as measured by M1) is $1.3 trillion. If China were to start dumping its dollars, U.S. interest rates would spike, inflation would soar, the housing market would get pummeled, and the economy would likely plunge into a serious recession.

Why continue the previous administration's disastrous policy?

America’s situation could have easily been avoided by living within its means and following simple, commonsense practices like avoiding debt to foreign powers, which obviously have their own best interests at heart.

God warned the ancient nation of Israel about the folly of foreign debt, and what the eventual outcome would be. Read it for yourself in Deuteronomy 15. God specifically told the people of Israel that if they wanted to prosper, they could lend to other nations but not borrow from them (verse 6).

As wise King Solomon noted, “The rich rule over the poor, but the borrower is slave to the lender” (Proverbs 22:7).

Our first black president is well on his way to reinstituting slavery in this country - though of a sort that is quickly recognized as such.

America being held economically hostage by a country that is still largely Third World shows just how precarious the U.S.’s economic position is...and how tendentious our liberties will be in the coming decades unless we return to principles of true conservatism (not the stuff that Bush II tried to soft-sell).

Bar-room Economics

Suppose that every day, ten men go out for beer and the bill for all ten comes to $100. If they paid their bill the way we pay our taxes, it would go something like this:

The first four men (the poorest) would pay nothing.
The fifth would pay $1.
The sixth would pay $3.
The seventh would pay $7.
The eighth would pay $12.
The ninth would pay $18.
The tenth man (the richest) would pay $59.

So, that's what they decided to do. The ten men drank in the bar every day and seemed quite happy with the arrangement, until one day, the owner threw them a curve.

"Since you are all such good customers", he said, "I'm going to reduce the cost of your daily beer by $20". Drinks for the ten now cost just $80.

The group still wanted to pay their bill the way we pay our taxes so the first four men were unaffected. They would still drink for free. But what about the other six men - the paying customers? How could they divide the $20 windfall so that everyone would get his "fair share?"
They realized that $20 divided by six is $3.33. But if they subtracted that from everybody's share, then the fifth man and the sixth man would each end up being paid to drink his beer. So, the bar owner suggested that it would be fair to reduce each man's bill by roughly the same amount, and he proceeded to work out the amounts each should pay.

And so:

The fifth man, like the first four, now paid nothing (100% savings).
The sixth now paid $2 instead of $3 (33%savings).
The seventh now pay $5 instead of $7 (28%savings).
The eighth now paid $9 instead of $12 (25% savings).
The ninth now paid $14 instead of $18 (22% savings).
The tenth now paid $49 instead of $59 (16% savings).

Each of the six was better off than before. And the first four continued to drink for free. But once outside the restaurant, the men began to compare their savings.

"I only got a dollar out of the $20," declared the sixth man. He pointed to the tenth man, "but he got $10!"

"Yeah, that's right," exclaimed the fifth man. "I only saved a dollar, too. It's unfair that he got ten times more than I!"

"That's true!!" shouted the seventh man. "Why should he get $10 back when I got only two? The wealthy get all the breaks!"

"Wait a minute," yelled the first four men in unison. "We didn't get anything at all. The system exploits the poor!"

The nine men surrounded the tenth and beat him up.

The next night the tenth man didn't show up for drinks, so the nine sat down and had beers without him. But when it came time to pay the bill, they discovered something important. They didn't have enough money between all of them for even half of the bill!

And that, boys and girls, journalists and college professors, is how our tax system works. The people who pay the highest taxes get the most benefit from a tax reduction. Tax them too much, attack them for being wealthy, and they just may not show up anymore. In fact, they might start drinking overseas where the atmosphere is somewhat friendlier.

Zombie-economics

A spectre is rising! The return of economic nationalism!

This is the cover story from the Feb 5 `09 issue of The Economist. I gotta love anything with zombies. That it throws in the problem of anticapitalist fear-mongering protectionism just ices the cake.

Blessed Bumper Stickers

I intended to do a series of these and got sidetracked by leaving my former cult. I'll try to do better.

Authentic Christian Living under Obama

I ran across this excellent post on how to live as a politically conservative Christian under the Obama presidency. It's written by the Rev'd Dcn. Bart Martin, oa chaplain in the REC. Here are the bullet points.

1. Pray like a Saint Augustine
2. Know the times like an Edmund Burke
3. Love the law of God like a King Josiah

For an explication, see the whole blog post.

Congratulations Mr. Obama

Thank you for proving that the Declaration of Independence actually means something.

All people created equal? ...Check!

Endowed with unalienable rights? ....Check!

Liberty and pursuit of happiness? .....Check!

What more could you ask for? Oh wait....

Mr. President, build up a wall of protection around the unborn and make LIFE - essential to equality, liberty, and pursuing happiness - an unalienable right for everybody.

AU's Audacity of Dopes

The atheists [erm...] freedom-preserving faithful at Americans United (against Churches oops, I keep doing that!) have issued a call to SC to ban an "I Believe" license plate.

[A] retired United Methodist minister served as lead plaintiff in Americans United’s lawsuit, Summers v. Adams, which asked the court to halt South Carolina from producing an auto tag favoring one religious group over others.

This plate, unlike those requested by private groups and organizations, originated in the South Carolina legislature and was passed by statute. The plate features a cross, a stained-glass window and the words “I Believe.” No other faith group has been offered a similar plate, let alone those who want a plate stating, “I Do Not Believe.”

Let's take a look at this link to SC DMV plates.

Secular Humanists of the Low Country Plate

Although Secular Humanist of the Low Country is a membership based organization the “In Reason We Trust” plate is available to all SC residents. The fee for the plate is $30.00 every two years in additional to the regular registration fee. As a non-profit organization, the Secular Humanists of the Low Country do not receive any portion of the funds generated from the license plate sales.

Call me crazy, but for the life of me that looks just like an “I Do Not Believe” license plate.

Plates promoting Fishing, Wildlife Conservation, Golf, NASCAR, Education, Home Ownership and even [gasp] the national motto of In God We Trust - all of these are okay. Same with any number of voluntary organizations like colleges, schools, Freemasons, etc. Heck...they even have one for squardancing and the Carolina Shag, the states official dance. Just don't have anything to do with the church.

They're also up in a dander about the Choose Life plate. (Doesn't that go hand in hand with the shag plate anyway?)

If the DMV chooses to appeal the decision, AU will be ready. The state already failed in its appeal defending a law allowing a “Choose Life” plate back in 2006. It’s astonishing, and a waste of taxpayer funds, that state officials would want to continue pushing this when it is clearly a violation of church-state separation, Khan said.

Absolutely right. It's a horrendous waste of taxpayer money to present a plate that raises money from voluntary contributors. (Willikers! Obama is going to make sure you can use that money to fund more abortions...sounds like a win to you dweebs.)

Let's get something straight. THE RIGHT TO LIFE IS A PROTECTION GRANTED BY NATURAL LAW AND GUARANTEED BY THE CONSTITUTION. Civilized countries know this. It's not a church-state issue.

“I wish our legislators would read the Constitution as avidly as they read public opinion polls,” Jones, a Unitarian minister, wrote in a column for The State, South Carolina’s largest newspaper (See “Illicit License.”)

Yeah, me too. Vide supra!

Summers and Knight, both Christian leaders, also saw the legislators’ decision to approve this plate as demeaning to the faith they cherish.

“They are taking a Christian symbol and using it for marketing and advertising purposes,” Summers said. “This is an abuse and misuse of the Christian cross.”

Okay, Summers. What should we do with people that take the Christian ministry and use that for agitating and political purposes?

Give Her Four Stars

This has been in the works since July, but it was made official on Friday.

Congratulations to General Ann E. Dunwoody on becoming the first woman promoted to four star general. Have an excellent 10 years in grade.

And may you never see five stars.