Hey everyone,
Im sure you have all heard by now Wisconsin's supposed budget shortfall. And Gov. Walker's claim that in order to help close the budget gap public employee unions will have to give up collective bargaining rights (on all issues except pay increases which will have a mandatory limit set by the state legislature). link
What you may not have heard though was this budget shortfall was created by Gov. Walker himself. Thats right Gov. Walker created the budget "crisis" in order to attack one of the rights favorite whipping boys. Unions and unionized workers. In a Jan 31 memo to legislators on the condition of the state's budget, the Fiscal Bureau determined that Wisconsin would end the year with a 121.4 million dollar (wait for it, wait for it) SURPLUS!!!!! Yes that is right Wisconsin was on track to end the year with a budget surplus! So how did this budget shorfall occur? It is because just days into his new term Gov. Walker and his allies pushed through 140 million in new spending for special interest groups. link link Yeah those financially responsible republicans created the current economic mess Wisconsin now faces. And Walker's solution to the dilema he created? Force public workers to give up hard won collective bargaining rights.
Also while we are on the subject here's a little fun fact for you. Did you know 2/3 (thats 66.6%) of Wisconsin corporations pay NO state income tax?
link
So here we have a crisis engineered by the newly elected Gov. Walker for the sole purpose of reducing wages and benifits of working people in Wisconsin. All during a deep and long recession I might add. So next time you go to the voting booth think about how much republicans like working people. Remember (as always) check out all the links. Research issues on your own. And never take anybody's word (including mine) for it. Thanks
myeviltwinskippy
Friday, February 18, 2011
Thursday, February 17, 2011
Thursday, February 10, 2011
The separation of church and state in the U.S. pt 2
Hey everyone,
In part one of this series we discussed the clauses in the first amendment that are the basis for the separation of church and state. If you have not read that post please scroll down and read it before reading this post. In this post we will discuss,
1) Where did the phrase separation of church and state come from.
2) Why is this relevant to society today.
1) Where did the phrase separation of church and state come from? Isn't that just a liberal, commie, secularist lie spread with the intent to destroy America and attack christians, christianity and people of faith?
No not at all. In fact although the phrase wall of separation between church and state is not in the constitution(as right wingers so love to point out). Part one of this series showed the specific clauses in the first amendment that make up this guiding principal of our government.
The phrase a wall of separation between church and state comes from this Thomas Jefferson quote in his letter to the Danbury Baptists in 1802.
The first amendment (of which the establishment and free exercise clause are a part of) was authored by James Madison. link The bill of rights was ratified by Virginia on December 15 1791 making them the law of the land. link
Our founding fathers knew all to well the dangers of mixing government and religion.
2)Why is this relevant to society today?
Well I think we can all agree that ones faith or lack thereof should be a private matter left up to each citizen to decide for themselves. You wouldn't want the government telling you what t.v. programs to watch, what clothes to wear, what music to listen to would you? Me either. So why would anyone think government mandating a specific religion would be a good idea? Hint those advocating for such a thing are doing it for one of two reasons (and sometimes both). Those reasons being power, and money. Because if they can tell you what religion to observe and how, that gives them almost complete control over every aspect of your life. Because then those mandating it would also claim to speak for and know the will of god. And then questioning them gets turned into questioning god himself. See where this could lead to problems? History is full of examples of government and religion mixing with very very horrific results. Think the crusades, witch burnings, the inquisition, genocide, holy wars etc. (more details on that in part 3 of this series) Does that mean i think religion is bad? Not at all religion and religious people have done a lot of good throughout history. But when mixed with government both government and religion become perverted and inevitably turn bad.
Well that's all for this post. In part three we will discuss people and groups behind the movement to deny and or erase the wall of separation between church and state. What type of government that would give us. And provide historical and modern day examples of those types of governments.
As always follow the links. Do some research on your own (never take anyone's word (including mine) on important subjects such as this) and then please come back here and comment. I really would like other peoples thoughts on this topic and any thoughts on how good or bad of a job I am doing in presenting it to you.
Remember to follow the links, and come back here and comment.
A reminder the comment policy on this site is any and all opinions and views are welcome. This site encourages open, honest and civil debate. What will not be tolerated however, is name calling, threats, ad hominem attacks or bullying (things we should have all outgrown by the time we got out of grade school) And where possible provide links to back up your statements.
Thank you.
myeivltwinskippy :P
In part one of this series we discussed the clauses in the first amendment that are the basis for the separation of church and state. If you have not read that post please scroll down and read it before reading this post. In this post we will discuss,
1) Where did the phrase separation of church and state come from.
2) Why is this relevant to society today.
1) Where did the phrase separation of church and state come from? Isn't that just a liberal, commie, secularist lie spread with the intent to destroy America and attack christians, christianity and people of faith?
No not at all. In fact although the phrase wall of separation between church and state is not in the constitution(as right wingers so love to point out). Part one of this series showed the specific clauses in the first amendment that make up this guiding principal of our government.
The phrase a wall of separation between church and state comes from this Thomas Jefferson quote in his letter to the Danbury Baptists in 1802.
The first amendment (of which the establishment and free exercise clause are a part of) was authored by James Madison. link The bill of rights was ratified by Virginia on December 15 1791 making them the law of the land. link
Our founding fathers knew all to well the dangers of mixing government and religion.
2)Why is this relevant to society today?
Well I think we can all agree that ones faith or lack thereof should be a private matter left up to each citizen to decide for themselves. You wouldn't want the government telling you what t.v. programs to watch, what clothes to wear, what music to listen to would you? Me either. So why would anyone think government mandating a specific religion would be a good idea? Hint those advocating for such a thing are doing it for one of two reasons (and sometimes both). Those reasons being power, and money. Because if they can tell you what religion to observe and how, that gives them almost complete control over every aspect of your life. Because then those mandating it would also claim to speak for and know the will of god. And then questioning them gets turned into questioning god himself. See where this could lead to problems? History is full of examples of government and religion mixing with very very horrific results. Think the crusades, witch burnings, the inquisition, genocide, holy wars etc. (more details on that in part 3 of this series) Does that mean i think religion is bad? Not at all religion and religious people have done a lot of good throughout history. But when mixed with government both government and religion become perverted and inevitably turn bad.
Well that's all for this post. In part three we will discuss people and groups behind the movement to deny and or erase the wall of separation between church and state. What type of government that would give us. And provide historical and modern day examples of those types of governments.
As always follow the links. Do some research on your own (never take anyone's word (including mine) on important subjects such as this) and then please come back here and comment. I really would like other peoples thoughts on this topic and any thoughts on how good or bad of a job I am doing in presenting it to you.
Remember to follow the links, and come back here and comment.
A reminder the comment policy on this site is any and all opinions and views are welcome. This site encourages open, honest and civil debate. What will not be tolerated however, is name calling, threats, ad hominem attacks or bullying (things we should have all outgrown by the time we got out of grade school) And where possible provide links to back up your statements.
Thank you.
myeivltwinskippy :P
Wednesday, February 9, 2011
The separation of church and state in the U.S. pt.1
Hey everyone,
Today is part one in a multi part series about the separation of church and state in the U.S.
The separation of church and state was created by the first two clauses in the first amendment to the constitution.
The first amendment says link
Congress shall make no law respecting the establishment of religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.
Now lets focus on the first two clauses of this amendment, known as the establishment clause, and the free exercise clause.
1) The establishment clause. link
Congress shall make no law respecting the establishment of religion.
This clause has been generally interpreted to prohibit a)the establishment of a national religion by congress or b) the preference by the U.S. government of one religion over the other.
The first approach called "separation" or "no aid"
The second approach called "non preferential" or "accommodation" Both approaches have been used selectively by persons or groups seeking favorable outcomes for their cases but, I believe that both approaches are applicable equally and simultaneously.
2) The free exercise clause. link
,or prohibit the free exercise thereof.
This has been interpreted as government may not interfere with beliefs or opinions (either by preventing them or forcing them on the people). But may interfere with practices that are illegal.
Seems pretty straight forward doesn't it? But as you will read in this series there are many powerful forces working to deny the separation exists and even change the constitution so that those clauses would not exist. But we will cover that in future installments.
Remember to follow the links. Research on your own. And to come back here and comment.
.A reminder the comment policy on this site is any and all opinions and views are welcome. This site encourages open, honest and civil debate. What will not be tolerated however, is name calling, threats, ad hominem attacks or bullying (things we should have all outgrown by the time we got out of grade school) And where possible provide links to back up your statements.
Thank you.
myeivltwinskippy :P
Today is part one in a multi part series about the separation of church and state in the U.S.
The separation of church and state was created by the first two clauses in the first amendment to the constitution.
The first amendment says link
Congress shall make no law respecting the establishment of religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.
Now lets focus on the first two clauses of this amendment, known as the establishment clause, and the free exercise clause.
1) The establishment clause. link
Congress shall make no law respecting the establishment of religion.
This clause has been generally interpreted to prohibit a)the establishment of a national religion by congress or b) the preference by the U.S. government of one religion over the other.
The first approach called "separation" or "no aid"
The second approach called "non preferential" or "accommodation" Both approaches have been used selectively by persons or groups seeking favorable outcomes for their cases but, I believe that both approaches are applicable equally and simultaneously.
2) The free exercise clause. link
,or prohibit the free exercise thereof.
This has been interpreted as government may not interfere with beliefs or opinions (either by preventing them or forcing them on the people). But may interfere with practices that are illegal.
Seems pretty straight forward doesn't it? But as you will read in this series there are many powerful forces working to deny the separation exists and even change the constitution so that those clauses would not exist. But we will cover that in future installments.
Remember to follow the links. Research on your own. And to come back here and comment.
.A reminder the comment policy on this site is any and all opinions and views are welcome. This site encourages open, honest and civil debate. What will not be tolerated however, is name calling, threats, ad hominem attacks or bullying (things we should have all outgrown by the time we got out of grade school) And where possible provide links to back up your statements.
Thank you.
myeivltwinskippy :P
separation of chuch and state
Hey everyone,
I've decided to do a multi part series on the separation of church and state. In this series I will cover the history of the separation clause(divided into two clauses known as the establishment cause and free excersise clause) in the first amendment. The importance of this clause. And past and present attacks on this particular clause. What the ramifications have been when church and state mix. And what we can do to insure we never turn into a theocracy here in America. Now this is a huge undertaking and I hope I am up to the challenge. Will be doing reasearch today and will hopefully have my first post for you guys tonight. I leave you with a quote from minister Isaac Backus made in 1773 quote ...."when church and state are seperate, the effects are happy, and they do not at all interfere with each other: but where they have been confounded together, no tongue nor pen can fully describe the michiefs that have ensued." I think that's putting it mildly. Anyway come here often as I will be posting this series in many parts. And as always please share your thoughts, opinions, rants etc in the comments section. Thanks
myeviltwinskippy
I've decided to do a multi part series on the separation of church and state. In this series I will cover the history of the separation clause(divided into two clauses known as the establishment cause and free excersise clause) in the first amendment. The importance of this clause. And past and present attacks on this particular clause. What the ramifications have been when church and state mix. And what we can do to insure we never turn into a theocracy here in America. Now this is a huge undertaking and I hope I am up to the challenge. Will be doing reasearch today and will hopefully have my first post for you guys tonight. I leave you with a quote from minister Isaac Backus made in 1773 quote ...."when church and state are seperate, the effects are happy, and they do not at all interfere with each other: but where they have been confounded together, no tongue nor pen can fully describe the michiefs that have ensued." I think that's putting it mildly. Anyway come here often as I will be posting this series in many parts. And as always please share your thoughts, opinions, rants etc in the comments section. Thanks
myeviltwinskippy
Tuesday, February 8, 2011
Check this out.
Hey everyone,
Check out this link funny and informative. Follow all the links on that page what you learn might suprise you. http://www.fuckthesouth.com/
Check out this link funny and informative. Follow all the links on that page what you learn might suprise you. http://www.fuckthesouth.com/
separation of church and state
Hey everyone,
Now alot of conservatives for years have been saying that the wall of separation between church and state is a fiction invented by liberals to remove god from american life. Nothing could be further from the truth in fact our founding fathers included the separation clause (as it has come to be known) in the first amendment to the constitution not to remove religion but to protect the religious liberties (including freedom from religion) of all citizens. And Thomas Jefferson (our third president) specifically called it a wall of separation between church and state in a letter to the Danbury Baptists. Please follow these links read the articles (and research more for yourself) then come back here and share your thoughts. So remember next time you hear a conservative saying there is no such thing as the wall of separation they are either 1, ignorant of our founding document(and do not deserve to hold office) or 2, purposely misleading low information voters for political gain (and again do not deserve to hold office). http://www.usconstitution.net/xconst_Am1.html Read this amendment carefully. http://www.loc.gov/loc/lcib/9806/danpre.html And read this letter from Thomas Jefferson himself. Hope this clears up any misunderstanding about the separation of church and state. And the real reason behind this clause(hint it not because evil liberal secularlists made it up to attack christians and god).
Now alot of conservatives for years have been saying that the wall of separation between church and state is a fiction invented by liberals to remove god from american life. Nothing could be further from the truth in fact our founding fathers included the separation clause (as it has come to be known) in the first amendment to the constitution not to remove religion but to protect the religious liberties (including freedom from religion) of all citizens. And Thomas Jefferson (our third president) specifically called it a wall of separation between church and state in a letter to the Danbury Baptists. Please follow these links read the articles (and research more for yourself) then come back here and share your thoughts. So remember next time you hear a conservative saying there is no such thing as the wall of separation they are either 1, ignorant of our founding document(and do not deserve to hold office) or 2, purposely misleading low information voters for political gain (and again do not deserve to hold office). http://www.usconstitution.net/xconst_Am1.html Read this amendment carefully. http://www.loc.gov/loc/lcib/9806/danpre.html And read this letter from Thomas Jefferson himself. Hope this clears up any misunderstanding about the separation of church and state. And the real reason behind this clause(hint it not because evil liberal secularlists made it up to attack christians and god).
Monday, February 7, 2011
Reagan
http://www.alternet.org/story/149812/10_things_conservatives_don%27t_want_you_to_know_about_reagan/
A good look into the real president Reagan. Not the god conservatives are making him out to be. Please read and the article then come back here and comment. Thanks
A good look into the real president Reagan. Not the god conservatives are making him out to be. Please read and the article then come back here and comment. Thanks
Is it just me or is anyone else wondering about the attempted deification of Ronald Reagan. Seriously by all standards he was not a great president. I will post examples and links to information on why I think he was actually a very bad president. From his union busting, to raising taxes on the middle and lower class while lowering them on the rich. More to come soon.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)