Church & state
Apparently after nearly two centuries of prayer in school, the Supremes suddenly realized the dangers “moral indoctrination” which we had somehow managed to avoid over all those years. So the Ten Commandments were taken down off the walls and shortly thereafter the metal detectors went up at the doors.
The Congress manages to honor the separation of Church and State while holding fast to the connection between God and State. The public schools will be improved when they are allowed to do the same.
This letter has not been edited.
Why can't kids pray at home before going to school? Shouldn't the parents be praying with their kids anyway?
Posted by just sayin' on July 3, 2007 02:34 PMBring back teacher led prayer in the schools. The kids will make such a shambles of this, with the joking, wisecracking and kidding around, that the teachers will end the practice in self defense.
Also, put the commandments, in their entirety, on the walls. Use the original version where death was the punishment for breaking any commandment,
Hey kids, dishonor your parents and they can kill you. Maybe in the public square, with a crowd and rocks. Cool Huh?
Let these whimpy Christian kids see the Bible as it was written.
Maybe the teacher can find a prayer that includes something about smiting (killing) the enemies of Jehovah.
Or better yet, the psalm where the speaker remarks how good it feels to bash the enemies babies heads on rocks to kill them.
`Bout time these modern day kids see the horror of the Judaeo-Christian religion that we older folks lived with.
Posted by Sharon B. on July 3, 2007 02:57 PMObviously, there's the constitutional aspect. It's hypocrisy for Congress to continue this in a supposedly secular (no religious test is required to hold office) country. A fundamental difference though is that members of Congress won't get pressured into doing so (as opposed to kids). How many kids, even if they don't believe in Jesus, would have the courage to not pray. There's quite a bit of peer pressure.
Christians should stop playing the victim. The Founding Fathers may have been Christian but they recognized the dangers of have religion intermingle with the state.
Posted by Rin3 on July 3, 2007 02:58 PMif you want your child to be led in prayer by a teacher at a school, send them to a private school, where other children won't be subjected...
Posted by Roy on July 3, 2007 03:24 PMOr keep them at home, and home school them.
I can not believe that the James Jones I know and love wrote this letter.
Connecting the ten silly commandments and metal detectors. All those commandments about loving, worshiping , making a special day for God. What was she thinking? Must have been a bad day for her.
Posted by Sharon B. on July 3, 2007 03:31 PMok now all of you get on the band wagon as states are putting in foot baths at airports for all the muslim cab drivers and its paid for with tax money.
oh wait they are not Christian so we have to let them have their foot baths and prayer mat space in government buildings where no one else can do that.
If Christian kids re instituted the foot washing ritual, I`m sure the gov would build them baths.
Were talking kids in school here, not adults working on a job.
Way to mix in your agenda though. Good show.
Posted by Sharon B. on July 3, 2007 04:41 PMJones: "Apparently after nearly two centuries of prayer in school, the Supremes suddenly realized the dangers “moral indoctrination” which we had somehow managed to avoid over all those years."
It took that long for the Supreme Court to realize that making black kids sit at the back of buses,etc. was wrong. Not because of the bible, but because of common sense and compassion. Churches somehow managed to avoid the racial problem all those years. Prayer in school is usually simply a meaningless ritual. For example, I doubt if school prayer ever paid any attention to the black people who got lynched or to the fact that the black kids were praying in broken down schools. It is interesting that we started realizing the evil of Jim Crow about the same time as school prayer was rejected.
To be meaningful for children, it is essential that prayer be accompanied with explanation and with a tie-in to every day life. Many who want school prayer do not want the teacher to get into those matters. They prefer to keep school prayer as a rote and mechanical exercise which is quickly forgotten if ever remembered.
Posted by Truth on July 3, 2007 05:08 PMTruth,
"It took that long for the Supreme Court to realize that making black kids sit at the back of buses,etc. was wrong."
Actually it wasn't the Supreme Court on that one. We fought a civil war to establish that African-Americans are in fact persons entitled to the full civil rights.
That's the same argument we're having today over the staus of the fetus.
The Supreme Court validated both the institution of slavery and the Jim Crow laws. Today they have denied personhood to the fetus and children the right to public prayer in public schools.
The Jim Crow laws were partly undone by Brown but more thouroughly by federal legislation passed durning the 1960's and 1970's (Civil Rights Act, 1964)
The Jim Crow laws were not undone by forbidding prayer in the public schools. That's just a secular humanist superstition.
Posted by James Jones on July 3, 2007 05:56 PMHi JJ, old dear, old pal.
Your last line isn`t what he said. He just mentioned timing.
That isn`t even a secular humanist superstition, it is an idea that just popped into your head.
Now don`t let it rattle around alone.
But you are right that children have been denied the right to public prayer. But you forgot the caveat: if a school official leads them.
The little dears can pray by themselves or in groups or take up chanting in the halls, that might sound pretty, but no coerced prayer.
In the future you wouldn`t want your children praying to Allah /God/Universal Mind, now would you?
Posted by Sharon B. on July 3, 2007 07:03 PMYou're right Jones, it's time to fire the chaplain!
Posted by Charles B on July 3, 2007 08:00 PMWhy CAN'T the kids pray at home before going to school?
Posted by Agree on July 3, 2007 08:41 PMWhy CAN'T the kids pray at home before going to school?
Posted by Agree on July 3, 2007 08:41 PMLike I said, Jones, "It took that long for the Supreme Court to realize that making black kids sit at the back of buses,etc. was wrong."
How can you sit there and say: "Actually it wasn't the Supreme Court on that one. We fought a civil war to establish that African-Americans are in fact persons entitled to the full civil rights."
For God's sake, Jim Crow was alive and well long after the Civil War. I'm not talking about theory, I'm talking about reality.
The Supreme Court was clearly not the force behind the civil rights movement. The force behind that movement was compassionate and caring people, both religious and non-religious. But they had to bring the Supreme Court into line in order to change the law.
And they also had to bring the churches into line. The history of the way the churches, particularly those in the south, dealt with discrimination of blacks over the yeas is disgraceful. I presume that there was a lot of praying and bible reading going on in those churches as they ignored the evil elephant in their midst. Oftentimes, bible study and discussion can be a good way to ignore the reality of the world. People can spend a great deal of time discussing, and mainly cussing, homosexuality while poor people starve. Sometimes churches are just a fool's paradise in which they think they are doing good because they are criticizing people who believe differently from them. What goes on in the churches is not the important thing; it's what goes on in the streets that is important. And oftentimes when church is over on Sunday morning, so is religion. Too many people think that they are good because they pray rather than because of what they do when they are not praying.
Posted by Truth on July 3, 2007 08:47 PMJones has given us a good example of how much good comes from public prayer: Congress.
Posted by Truth on July 3, 2007 08:51 PMTruth:
heh heh.
Posted by Charles B on July 3, 2007 09:03 PMThe believe in the goodness of God is inversely proportional to the evidence.
Posted by B. Snyder on July 4, 2007 04:22 AMAgree,
They can and do. That point is irrelevant.
Once they get to school there are only two choices:
Either they a) pray or b) don't pray.
The choice we select teaches a lesson. The question is what lesson are you going to teach?
Posted by James Jones on July 4, 2007 06:00 AMTruth,
I'm talking about theory, or more accurately values, and reality.
You can't take an honest look at the history of this country and ignore the fact that it was Christian churches that organized and lead the abolitionist movement.
You are transfixed by the notion that religious people behave badly but ignore the reality that people without religion behave much worse.
If you take the acknowledgement of God out of the schools, and you have, then you have to think seriously about what happens when you replace that acknowldgement with atheism.
Then after a half-century you ought to take an honest look at what atheism has delivered.
We had prayer in schools for a couple of centuries and we did not breed religious intolerance or establish a theocratic government.
We remained over all those years one of the most tolerant nations on earth with Church and State separated.
It's all well and good to dismiss the Congress with contempt as you have. OK -then what better way do you suggest we should be governed?
Posted by James Jones on July 4, 2007 06:19 AMAnother good belly-laugh to wake up to in the morning. Jimmy Jones on school prayer. - or is that prayer in Congress? Or . . . ? Well, anyway, Jimmy Jones.
Jonesy, where do you find "Truth" - or anybody else for that matter - "dismissing Congress with contempt"? Oh well. You won't admit you said it. Or, if you admit you said it, you will insist that you meant something else to begin with; but of course you didn't say it in the first place; so it isn't what you said. And so on, round and round, and round and round, and . . . ad infinitum, ad nauseam.
We did, indeed fight a Civil War. Also, as has been pointed out, repression of the colored people continued long after this event. And, ultimately, it was the Supreme Court that brought matters to a head, if not to an end; since it was the Supreme Court that finally said, Jim Crow laws will no longer be enforced, or considered in the Courts.
Your monumental, and abysmal, ignorance of Law - not to mention your inventive and fantastic interpretation of the Constitution - coupled with your total absense of basic knowledge of history, does, of course, make you a wonderful apologist for the Right-Wingnut theories, and views, of government.
If it be a case of, "Never mind the facts, reality, or truth; just fly off into the atmosphere with piosity, religiosity, and flowery rhetoric", we can always count on you, Jonsey, to be at the forefront of the presentations. Whether or not it actually be your background, you are a wonderful example of the "education" one gets in a parochial school.
But, please do keep on keeping on. You provide, far and away, the best opportunity for others to present reality, truth, and factual information in rebuttal to superstition, fantasy, and imagination that we have on the website.
Posted by Old Grouch on July 4, 2007 07:38 AMIt's a common mistake you fundamentalists make, Jones.
You say: "If you take the acknowledgement of God out of the schools, and you have, then you have to think seriously about what happens when you replace that acknowldgement with atheism."
As St. Francis once said: "preach the gospel at all times, use words only when necessary". The best prayers are not those uttered with the lips, but rather those acted with the body. The idea that prayer is the only way of honoring God is a major fault of people like you. I'd much rather the kids be encouraged to do good deeds than to recite the Our Father. I think God would too.
What, you think Congress is perfect and that it is the result of prayer? I believe that Congress clearly can stand a lot of improvement.
The following comment of yours is blasphemous:
"We remained over all those years one of the most tolerant nations on earth with Church and State separated."
You're not familiar with slavery? No one in their right mind should make a statement like that. And our intolerance was not limited to blacks. It extended to the Irish, the Jews, the Poles, the Catholics, the Mexicans and the many other immigrants who came here. It's not a matter of how tolerant we were compared to some other nation, it is a matter of how tolerant we were.
Your apparent thinking that a person is either a fundamentalist or an atheist is highly flawed and the product of a sick egocentrism.
You say:
"You are transfixed by the notion that religious people behave badly but ignore the reality that people without religion behave much worse."
Again, your sick egocentrism compels you to think that a only the fundamentalists such as yourself are religious. You are unable to digest the clear fact that there are many different ways of being religious. For example, getting up on Sunday and going to help the poor rather than going to the church and praying. There is a saying that you have to leave the church building to find God; that saying has merit.
You are quite right that there were Christian churches that supported abolition and subjected themselves to the dangers of doing so, just as there are many churches today that do great work, as evidenced by their presence at Katrina. But churches are not monolithic, just as people are not monolithic. Some are good and some are bad. I count among the bad ones the ones that say "my way or the highway". And the fact that a person does good work does not mean that all he does is good. There are people who do indeed do good works while they go around condemning to hell those that believe differently than they. For example, there are people who do good works who condemn others who do good works but choose works rather than words as their form of prayer.
For example, there are people who do good works who condemn others who do good works but choose works rather than words as their form of prayer.
?????????????????????????
There are the two guys who volunteer in the soup kitchen. One of them goes to church every Sunday and prays orally. The other goes to the soup kitchen and prays manually. The first one thinks the second one is going to hell for not going to church on Sunday and praying orally.
Posted by Truth on July 4, 2007 09:25 AMJJ, why can`t the kids pray inside their heads like I did before every chemistry test?
I thought outward public prayer was a no no to Jesus.
Could you be confusing inside and outside prayer? Weren`t you supposed to go in a closet to pray.
Schools could build a little prayer spot for kids, but no teachers, coaches etc there. Would that make you happy?
B. Snyder, I break out in goose bumps when anyone uses math in these posts.
What a great quote that would make. I may use it? Please
Posted by Sharon B. on July 4, 2007 10:08 AMOld Grouch,
You will not be disciplined by me as long as you stay away from material issues and indulge yourself with ad hominem attacks which appear to be your raison d'etre.
You did however post one coment that interests me:
"We did, indeed fight a Civil War. Also, as has been pointed out, repression of the colored people continued long after this event. And, ultimately, it was the Supreme Court that brought matters to a head, if not to an end; since it was the Supreme Court that finally said, Jim Crow laws will no longer be enforced, or considered in the Courts."
Now, of course Brown did not do that at all but your misundersatnding there is not interesting.
I would like to know if you use the "colored people" phrase exclusively for African Americans. By that I mean, would you also describe Mexicans, or Koreans
or Native Americans as "colored"?
Truth,
You seem to have a curious intellect but the problem is that you're only one question deep.
Then you go hysterical and that makes it difficult to discuss the issues.
Posted by James Jones on July 4, 2007 10:21 AMJone, there you go again, as my friend Ronald Reagan famously said, attacking the messenger because you have no intelligent rebuttal for the message. Of course, what really makes it difficult for you to discuss the issues is the speciousness of your positions. I suggest you pray about that.
Posted by Truth on July 4, 2007 11:46 AM
Jonesy,
If you read the quotation itself, you will find I never mentioned a specific case. There are several Supreme Court decisions that put a halt to Jim Crow being enforcable in the Courts. Cumlatively, these decisions affected both the Constitutions and the Statutes of those States having such laws; as well as States whose laws paralleled them outside the immediate area of the former slave States.
If you would prefer the word, "Negro", please feel free to use it yourself. The usage back when I was growing up was "Colored". Asians were usually referred to as coming from their country of origin, and Mexicans were so mentioned as well. Native Americans were usually called, "Indians". As with most others, I tend to write with customary usage, clarifying if necessary, since intelligent people do recognize that current "politically correct" words sometimes are necessary.
It really would be wonderful if you were able to deal with "material issues". But, so far anyway, you haven't shown much ability along those lines, as several examples might show, perhaps particularly your one about humans, chipmunks, and the Moonlight Sonata, in defense of the idea that blastocysts are persons.
But do feel free to repeat your thoughts there, and elsewhere as well. They are really hilarious most of the time.
Posted by Old Grouch on July 4, 2007 12:03 PMOld Grouch, I bought a stuffed chipmunk at a yard sale. I put little glasses on his face and glued a tiny pencil and notebook to his hands.
On the notebook, in chipmunk size letters, I wrote "Moonlight Sonata".
I will gaze at him as I wait for JJ to answer my last post.
gazing..........eyes grow heavy......nodding off....
Posted by Sharon B. on July 4, 2007 12:17 PMSharon, that is priceless!
I really wonder what he would do if someone were to suggest he get a dictionary, and look up the meaning of "atheist", a word he throws around as if it were some kind of real bludgeon to use against those who don't happen to swallow his own particular mixed bag of superstitions. Then again, I guess we all know the way that would go, since getting him to even try to actually learn something is a hopeless task; much like trying to pick up a pool of mercury with one's fingers. Worst of all, he seems to actually believe he's presenting a "material issue" when he gets started. And I won't even begin on the one about the room full of chimpanzies, typewriters, and Shakespeare's Collected Works.
But, it's fun, anyway.
You have a nice holiday, Sharon. Pat the chipmunk on the head for me - sort of like rubbing the belly of the Luck God, maybe?
Posted by Old Grouch on July 4, 2007 01:06 PMOld Grouch,
I recommend that if you for some bizzare reason find youself in the company of "colored" people that you refrain from using the term as it is considered bigoted.
Posted by James Jones on July 4, 2007 01:08 PMAnd while were at it we should make the kids memorize the Bible and to spread the word of God through sermon or sword because that is what they do in Muslim countries and look how great and free those places are.
Yes we need more religion and less thinking because thinking is hard and it leads to dancing.
So much focus on the separation of church and state, when the real concern should be on the growing separation of church and God.
(paraphrase of Rabbi A. Heschel, circa 1970)
Posted by [merry man] on July 4, 2007 05:47 PMThe way I would put it that perhaps may mean the same thing: the growing separation between man and his heart. As the fox told the Little Prince, "it is only with the heart that one can see rightly; what is essential is invisible to the eye".
For those interested, here is a longer version:
"Saint Exupery's classic tale can be read on many levels and enjoyed by readers of any age. He tells the story of being stranded in the desert and meeting a tiny blond boy. This Little Prince proceeds to tell of his travels from planet to planet until he arrived on Earth and of what he has learned along the way. The most important thing he reveals is a secret that was taught him by a fox that he tamed:
And he went back to meet the fox.
"Goodbye" he said.
"Goodbye," said the fox.
"And now here is my secret, a very simple secret:
It is only with the heart that one can see rightly;
what is essential is invisible to the eye."
"It is the time you have wasted for your rose
that makes your rose so important.
"Men have forgotten this truth," said the fox.
"But you must not forget it.
You become responsible, forever,
for what you have tamed.
You are responsible for your rose. . ."
"I am responsible for my rose,"
the little prince repeated,
so that he would be sure to remember.
And since I'm in the mood:
People ask why. But like the poet said,"the heart has reasons that reason cannot understand".
Posted by t on July 4, 2007 06:24 PMActually, I think it means that the 'Christianity' practiced by 'conservative' Americans is as profane as any government, so the separation of the two should be less of a concern than how the church (and its members) can reconnect with the sacred.
Sort of like a tree falling in the forest with no one around to hear: if God is no longer present in the church, who/what is really being worshiped? (that's a rhetorical question, btw)
Posted by [merry man] on July 4, 2007 06:33 PMReally, Jonsey? How would you know? By the same sort of flight of fancy that equates failure to follow your silly nonsense superstitions to "atheism"?
Posted by Old Grouch on July 4, 2007 09:12 PMOd Grouch,
Racism is easy to recognize. It''s quite common and quite old.
Posted by James Jones on July 4, 2007 09:48 PMGreat Moral Thinkers
Forbidding the acknowledgement in public schools that we are a part of something greater the ourselves will not bring the young closer to the truth.
Posted by James Jones on July 4, 2007 09:53 PMAcknowledging that we are part of something greater than us, for instance a community of citizens who live work and raise families together, and therefore should work together for the common good might sound a little to socialist for your taste.
Prayer in schools (whose prayers?) tells children thjere is a right way and a wrong way to believe we area part of some bigger.
"Truth." Whose? Yours? Mine? Minister Farrakhan's?
We need to help our children be good, not religious. The terrible myth that people like Jones spreads around is that to be good not only do you have to believe in his God but you have to practice his rituals. It's clearly a case of egocentricity gone wild. For many people, and I expect that I am in that class, God is the conscience. When I have done good things, it has not been because of God but because of man, my conscience telling me that it is important to care about man, not so I'll go to heaven but so I will be more comfortable with myself on earth. Fear of hell is a selfish motivation that will never make the world a better place. There is certainly nothing wrong with loving God, provided it aids the person in loving one's fellow man; but it is not essential to loving one's fellow man, and "love of God" is sometimes used as an excuse for not loving one's fellow man.
Posted by Truth on July 5, 2007 07:27 AM"Once they get to school there are only two choices:
Either they a) pray or b) don't pray."
More than that. They can a) pray silently to whatever deity or deities they please, b) pray aloud without disturbing others to whatever deity or deities they please, c) choose not to pray, d) pray to the teacher's chosen deity or deities in the teacher's chosen method, or e) refuse to pray to the teacher's deity/deities or with his/her method, resulting in exclusion from a class ritual and singling out for peer and teacher reprisals.
A, B, and C are perfectly permissible, and ought to be, in public schools. What we "secular humanists" (i.e. "people opposed to mandatory indoctrination of our children into someone else's religious beliefs") want to exclude from public schools is a forced choice between D and E. That's it. That's all.
The freedom to practice your faith as you wish does not include the freedom to force everyone else to practice with you. Congressfolk are grown adults and thus can choose to participate in prayer or not with adult authority and adult courage of their convictions (still, I think the Congressional prayer, to be entirely fair, should rotate among all faiths practiced by serving Congressfolk). Nor does anyone force them to serve in Congress, or to attend prayers. Kids in public school are both uniquely vulnerable to peer and teacher pressure, and are required to attend school, whatever their faith. The two situations are not comparable.
GMT's
I made one point in my original letter
"The Congress manages to honor the separation of Church and State while holding fast to the connection between God and State."
which I have reinforced repeatedly.
Not one of you have adressed the point there is a distinction between a acknowledging God and practicing religion.
The disagreement on school prayer has never been between religious people each trying to use the schools to proselytize. The disagreement is between people who understand the values of the Judeo-Christian ethic and secular humanists
I have been told repeatedly that I am a relgious fundamnetalist who trying to impose my religion on others despite the fact that there is no evidence to think anything remotelty like that.
I have been routinley insulted, mocked and ridiculed for a postion I have not taken while the argument I have made is ignored.
It seems to me that the reason most of you post here is that it gives you the opportunity to insult people you do not know, trumpet your own platitudes and mock ideas you do not understand.
You can do all of this while hidden safe in the shadows of anonymity which seems to be more than you can resist.
That is a pathetic state of affairs.
Praise be Allah; praise be Jehovah; praise be Jesus Christ; praise be 9 million other spooks in the sky.
Allah with his creativity of virgins without menses, stools, or urine; Jehovah with goats laden with his chosen people's sins and sent out in the desert to die; Jesus Christ fruit from the womb sired form the "loins of David" transmogrified into a monster god who on his second coming will practice holy genocide:
Anyone who prays needs clinical help. Religion is a mental illness evidenced by the holy horrors committed through the centuries on account of it. Pray all you want: It won't bring peace; it won't grow back a limb; it won't save one person when an airplane falls from a high altitude; it won't detour a natural disaster, and it won't, as intercessory, release any souls from purgatory.
Separation of America's Siamese twins: Church and State is essential to prevent holy horrors.
Posted by Richard Grimes r22037@yahoo.com (ffrf.org and ask for complimentary copy of Freethought Today) on July 5, 2007 10:45 AMAh! Jonesy! You are indeed a wonder!
You remind me of nothing so much as the Queen remarking to Alice about, "having to believe six impossible things before breakfast".
1. "holding fast to the connection between God and State".
2. "distinction between acknowledging God and practicing religion."
3. "disagreement has never been between religious people each trying to use the schools to proselytize."
4. "religious fundamentalist . . . trying to impose my religion on others despite the fact that there is no evidence to think anything remotely like that."
5. "trumpet your own platitudes"
6. "mock ideas you do not understand."
What is really pathetic about it all is, simply, that it is YOUR state of affairs, from just your own last posting. Never mind the reams of previous foolishness over the past weeks.
But, do keep on keeping on. A good belly laugh is very helpful to digestion when breakfast comes around.
Posted by Old Grouch on July 5, 2007 10:48 AMJJ, congresspeople are praying because it is the custom and anyone who had the guts to hold out would be, like any kid in school who did not join prayer, ostracized and written up in the newspapers as atheist politicians..
If a Seventh day Adventist, or Jehovah witness got into Congress, they might not go for public prayer.
This is all about prostelyzing and not about practicing personal religion.
This is all about power and control, not God.
Congress can do what ever it, they, want. Leave the kids alone.
some of those Judeo/Christian values, like stoning people, and killing them if they break the Commandments, make me sick to even think about them.
Come join us in secular humanism where you will not be judged or forced to acknowledge any Deity you don`t care to.
Regarding insults and name calling. Months ago I told a true story of my friend who was denied chemo treatment because she was too far pregnant and the chemo would hurt the fetus. She was also denied an abortion, because she was too far pregnant.
You and John II called me a liar, called my story a pathetic attempt etc.
You along started the mass insulting of me and if you go back and look at the threads you will see that other posters were disgusted with your behavior.
My friend is dead. Her story is true, and you sir are a mean, nasty person.
You did, however, toughen me up and now I can post and be insult resistant.
I don`t expect you to answer the points in this post, you will find one tiny nit and go after that, it you respond at all.
Please spare me the "I would never be a SHumanist" remarks.
Posted by Sharon B. on July 5, 2007 12:00 PMSharon, my condolences on the loss of your friend and her baby. I guess I should not assume that the child died. An excruciating situation.
Katja: "They can a) pray silently to whatever deity or deities they please, b) pray aloud without disturbing others to whatever deity or deities they please, c) choose not to pray, d) pray to the teacher's chosen deity or deities in the teacher's chosen method, or e) refuse to pray to the teacher's deity/deities or with his/her method, resulting in exclusion from a class ritual and singling out for peer and teacher reprisals."
Or they can be exceptionally good people and not pray at all because they are compassionate, caring and conscientious.
The terrible myth being propagated by people like Jones is that only those who pray, and who pray to Jones' God and pursue Jones' rituals can be good people. It's a destructive ideology born of egocentrism and fear.
Posted by on July 5, 2007 01:13 PMHi Sharon,
I'm sorry to hear that your friend has passed on. I remember the postings; and I thought then how sad it was that a friend's attempt to illustrate the extremely adverse effects of anti-abortionism, by telling us about what was happening to someone close, would be met by the kind of ugliness so typical of Jones in his fanatic insistence to have HIS position triumph.
I'm happy to hear that you have arrived at the state of being "insult resistant", despite the heaviness of the cost.
No. Unfortunately, you can't really expect him to answer your post. He's already gone into the, "poor, abused, picked on, misunderstood, mocked little Jimmy" snivel and whine; which, along with the "It's all your fault", and "The situation is pathetic", shtick, is the start of the tantrum stage.
But, give it a day or so. He'll be back. And just as with whoever - or whatever - be the perennial "Brian Stuckey", there will be another letter, resembling nothing so much as Shakespeare's description of the "tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing."
Work becons. Hell, it stands there and demands! Again, I'm sorry to hear of your loss. And perhaps I'll see you later, on another line of postings. Have a good day.
Posted by Old Grouch on July 5, 2007 01:51 PMHi TEW and Old Grouch. Well, I have made a lot of friends, and found some fellow travelers, in these threads.
Picked up some new ideas and went all ballistic a few times. Good for the heart.
See you all later.
Posted by Sharon B. on July 5, 2007 04:51 PM"Prayer: How to do nothing and still think you're helping"
Sounds like Congress to me.
Posted by Roger on July 5, 2007 05:11 PMSahron B,
I don't remember all the versions of the story but I do remember that your friend was diagnosed with cancer but the doctors in Florida did not realize it was terminal until the later stages of pregnancy. When they did recognize the problem they refused to peform the abortion becasue late term abortions are illegal in Florida
In an early vesrions you wanted to bring her to Colorado where they do perform late term abortions but it was too late.
In the final version she had a miscarriage while in Florida (sorry TEW) and did move to Colorado after the miscarriage for treatment but, again, it was too late.
There may be some truth somewhere in this story but one the whole, it remains an obvious fabrication.
The underlying lie is that therapetuic abortions are illegal at any time during the preganacy anywhere in the US.
We do about 850,000 abortions annually in the US and the vast majority are cases of a helthy mother aborting a healthy fetus.
Actually I hope you are telling lies and are not trying to capitalize on a friends death to curry favor with strangers and make a point.
Posted by James Jones on July 5, 2007 07:50 PM“There is no argument worthy of the name that will justify the union of the Christian religion with the State. Every consideration of justice and equality forbids it. Every argument in favor of free Republican institutions is equally an argument in favor of a complete divorce of the State from the Church. History in warning tones tells us there can be no liberty without it. Justice demands it. Public safety requires it. He who opposes it is, whether he realizes it or not, an enemy of freedom. ” -- Benjamin Underwood, "The Practical Separation of Church & State," an address to the 1876 Centennial Congress of Liberals. Submitted by Richard Grimes (r22037@yahoo) an uptight Risen Ape because some use the pronoun as if they had a tapeworm or rat in their pocket and uptight over those who use the expression "common sense" as if it meant something whereas all it means is spouting of your bias and prejudices. There! Now I feel better. Now revisit 1876 and recycle it to the tyrant in the White House who dreams about declaring a catastrophe so he can assume dictatorship.
Posted by 1876 on July 6, 2007 09:36 AMJJ, for the last time, she had a diagnosis of skin cancer, fast metastizing but too far pregnant for Florida law to allow chemo or abortion.
She miscarried, moved beck to Colorado, had brain surgery twice and died.
My only concession to you is that this was 9 years ago and maybe, just maybe, they didn`t do the type of mid, I never said late, term abortion that takes a couple of days to dilate the cervix. Maybe the doctors were negligent but chemo was denied her.
I had only started posting back then and was blown away by you and John II with the name calling and the smug dismissal of her story.
This is why I am pro-choice, among many other reasons.
"obvious fabrication" is calling me a lier. I often insult you, but I never call you a lier. do I?
In fact other then naming you Robin, I havn`t really done much to upset you. Oh I forgot GITDB
Each version, as you call it, was to clarify a tiny point you pretended not to understand.
Each version was to add information.
Posted by Sharon B. on July 6, 2007 10:35 AMSharon B,
It woud be a really good idea for you to stop telling that story.
Abortion when required for the health of the mother is legal througout the United States and has been for more than 40 years.
Abortion when required for the health of the mother was legal before Roe in Colorada, and, as far as I know, every state.
I do not know of any anti-abortion group that would deprive a pregnant woman of chemotherapy or any other medical treatement as required. If you do know of such a group then you should provide us with their identity.
Meanwhile, abortion should be discussed relative to the reason is exists which is not health but birth control.
The health issue is a diversion from the reality that results in 850,000 abortions - a healthy mother aborting a healthy fetus.
Posted by James Jones on July 6, 2007 02:25 PMJJ, you can apologize at any time for calling me a liar, and I will stop tellling my friends story when I feel the need to.
I t really would be a good idea for you to understand that until viability, the fetus is a possession of the woman.
that is how God set it up.
Posted by Sharon B. on July 8, 2007 06:46 PM