Monday, June 27, 2005
This is a confusing ruling to me. How is it that monuments on Government land are considered religiously neutral, while displays on in courthouses is an endorsement of religion? This is duplicitous and cowardly, like the split rulings on the U of Michigan race based admission policies a couple years back. Trying to have it both ways so nobody is offended? Seems that way to me.
The part I think is being missed is that the mere existance of a religious symbol is NOT an endorsement of religion, or, by extension, some measure of religious activism. It is a real and relevant reflection of the culture we live in.
If I see Judges wearing black robes am I to be offended by the state sponsoring a fashion statement I find ridiculous? This is absurd, but consistant with the double standard religion is measured by.
The state is not REQUIRED by law to display a religious symbol, but, contrarily, if it is desired by the majority as a legitimate reflection of the culture and practices of the community as a whole, why should it be banned from view, either?
The problem is not religion but religiophobia. We can display many things that are offensive to many people as long as it isn't a Christian or Jewish religious symbol which may offend a tiny minority. This is hypocritical.
I, as a Jew, am not offended by Christian references or symbols because I recognize the majority of people in most areas ARE CHRISTIAN. I, as a minority, DO NOT expect the majority to eliminate all displays that reflect their way of life because I am so sensitive and selfish that I can't even look at it without being offended.
Even atheists ought to be mature enough not to be mortified by the site of a ten commandments display. Nobody says they have to bow to it, or for that matter even pretend to agree with it, since it is really just a repectful reflection of the community and country in which he freely lives his life.
In other words, it is selective censorship to say all Judeo-Christian symbols must be banned at the risk of offending a tiny minority, yet we will allow government moneys to be openly given to defacing or denouncing religion in our public schools and universities, national endowment "art" galleries, and public broadcasting.
This is just flat out wrong.
As we can see, ethnically cleansing the Jews from Gaza is viewed by the terrorists as a beautiful victory over the Zionist enemy. Here's a quote from the article which best sums up the danger of implementing the expulsion:
"There's no reason why these Palestinian leaders should not be allowed to live in the Gaza Strip after its liberation form Israeli occupation," a top Fatah official told The Jerusalem Post. "Israel has no right to ban any Palestinian from entering Palestinian territories."
Thursday, June 23, 2005
The lesson America and Israel must learn is that concessions to terrorist groups, particularly islamic terrorists, only serves to create bigger, stronger and more dangerous terrorist organizations. Moslems must be confronted with absolute force and total destruction before any hope for peace can be actualized. PC target killings are nice, but defeating the street and the mosque is what needs to be done if we are to win the War on Terror.
Unfortunately, we are weak of heart and stomach, while our islamic opponent is consumed with death and destruction. This is not a good combination for victory. We must end this foolish practice of liberal projection if we are to truly succeed in vanquishing the vile moslem enemy.
Wednesday, June 22, 2005
"This gathering makes very clear that more and more soldiers, including Druze soldiers, will disobey orders to evacuate Jews from their homes. This disobedience will be the act that will save the army from itself and from the poisoning order of the Gaza evacuation."The IDF is torn over this big time. I still don't believe the expulsion will ever take place.
Tuesday, June 21, 2005
The real motivation for Euros appeasement of moslems is not a paranoia about appearing to hate Jews, but, instead, that Euros are evangelically prosthelatizing a progressive socialist doctrine throughout the world and have utopian dreams of someday creating a secular egalitarian planet; devoid of God, nationality, race, gender differences, and traditional morality.
The reason, therefore, Euros are so smitten with moslems is they believe they're the last, biggest unwashed population utterly vulnerable to being liberalized in the purest Euro mold. There is this romantic notion that once moslems are exposed to liberalism they'll surely abandon islam and convert to progressive socialism, just like Europeans Left has done with Christianity over the past 200 years.
Thus, the evangelical secularist plan is to eventually spread leftist ideology to every corner of the globe, and converting moslems is their key to realizing their quest for worldwide utopian liberal domination.
This is where the Jews come in. Jews are both the devoted allies as well as the natural enemies of the left, and have from the beginning been the fly in the progressive's ointment which they can't figure out what to do with. You see, only the Jew cannot be assimilated fully enough to be accepted as true leftists on any level, yet, despite this fact, the majority of Jews desperately continues to seek this unattainable admittance.
So, why is the Jew blocked from the door on the Left?
First of all, is the Jew's chosen status. Being somehow different as a race of people is not something that liberals can tolerate. Jews must be willing to completely reject any and all elitist "chosenness" in order to be considered for membership in the egalitarian club. Yet, even such renouncements aren't entirely trusted, as other leftists will always doubt the Jew's willingness to totally assimilate and permanently reject all uniqueness claims. Again, the Jew will never be looked at as an equal partner in secular, egalitarian circles no matter how liberal or self-loathing he may proffess to be.
Second, religion. Jews cannot be permitted to maintain laws of koshrut or any other distinct religious practice and still be a welcomed member of liberal utopian society. Jewish laws are very antithetical to assimilation and liberalism, and, therefore, all ties to traditional Judaism must be completely severed. Even once that is done, however, the concern that Jews will remain closet traditionalists makes them less trusted by most
Third, Nationalism. The Jewish Nation's claim to the Land of Israel is an abomination to liberals. The idea that a people would be Biblically commanded to settle a Land is against everything the Left believes in. That Israel exists today as the Jewish State is the embodiment of why Jews can never be trusted as true progressives, even if the Jews themselves are avowed secular socialists. The Jew is tied to the Land of Israel religiously (an affront to leftists), racially (an affront to leftists), historically (an affront to leftists), and nationally (an affront to leftists), which makes Israel wholly incompatible with liberals even if Israel were led by a socialist government.
Israel simply cannot be a Jewish State and at the same time be accepted by liberals. The latter (Jewish State) disqualifies the former (Israel) from being a country that the utopian left would ever tolerate, much less embrace. The only Israel that would be permissible, though still not entirely acceptable, is one which renounces the all Jewish claims to the Land and becomes entirely secular; devoid of all Jewishness be it
religious, cultural, racial, and ancestral. Though even this much would still be inadequate from the perspective of the evangelical secularists, perhaps it would make Jews at least slightly less repugnant in their eyes.
In other words, the Jew will always be mistrusted by the left for being loyal to something other than the collective assimilated entity created by the European intelligentsia. The Jew is an outsider; a person born different who can never be integrated enough to become part of the whole without an asterisk. Try as he may, the Jew can never run from his identity enough to gain the full secular acceptance so many lust for so desperately.
The result is chronic self-loathing. Jews hate themselves for being born Jewish, and often become downright hostile towards fellow Jews whom they view as culpable in blocking their membership to the inner socialist world. Usually, the self-loathers wrath is directed most hotly towards observant Jews, whom they blame most for keeping them out of the "assimilationist club" with there old, outdated, unenlightened ways.
Hence, since no amount of assimilation by the Jew ever can be enough to truly be embraced as an equal by the socialist liberals, the result is living a no-win life. Holding true to the Torah traditions is an abomination to liberals, while abandoning them to pursue the secular dream is futile. The Jew is, and always will be, an obstacle to the messianic leftist path. We are, in fact, his perpetual conundrum: both the insufferable pest and his reliable scapegoat who just never goes away.
In fact, the Jew's mere existance is a constant, irritating reminder to the leftists that they don't have all the answers after all. Despite the self-loathing "Jewtopian" fantasies, there never has been, and there never will be, a successful marriage between evangelical progressives and the Jews.
Monday, June 20, 2005
I can tell, he may very well be right.
Then again, maybe he's not. Other reports , from Worldnews.net and NewsMax, tell another side to this story, and, though I'm no expert in neurology, there does seem to be plenty of room for reasonable doubt regarding the Medical Examiners autopsy conclusions. Perhaps Terry was indeed simply a doomed vegetable who would never again perceive whether she was alive or dead. Then again, maybe she had a lot more awareness than we'll ever really know and suffered an agonizing and unnecessary death. I honestly don't know, and, if medical and legal experts are themselves in disagreement, I can only assume that nobody really knows for sure.
What I do know is that, according to all the experts, she was not dying when the feeding tube was removed, she had not been in physical pain, and she would be still alive today if she was permitted to continue receiving fluids and nutrients. These are the only facts in this case that are indisputable on all sides.
Now, I understand that most people who feel she shouldn't have been allowed to live in such a limited state really do mean well. They sincerely believe it was merciful to have her euthenized under such circumstances, and that euthenizing itself is an act of kindness when the quality of one's life becomes permanently limited to low level or no level cognizance.
The problem is, when we act on those seemingly compassionate impulses we are not giving enough credence to the value that just a little bit of life, or just a little bit of awareness, actually can have. By taking human life on a giant leap into subjective interpretation, we are setting a dangerous future precedent on who lives and who dies.
Every day, children are born severely retarded, or with Downs -- what is to become of them? How about geriatrics who develop sinility or Alzheimers? Are they to be viewed as drains upon civilization that must be eliminated, or do they deserve continued treatment even though the cause may be futile? What about those who are weak and face steep odds at recovering from risky surgeries? Will they be denied the operations because their chances are too poor?
While I do respect the thoughtful intentions of the pro-euthenizing crowd, good intentions alone are not reason enough to allow reckless liberties to be taken at the expense of human life. It is my opinion that Terry Schiavo became a casualty of well intended, but feckless, do-gooders, whose casualness towards death is hazardous to a civilized society, and eventually will unwittingly place all of our lives in a very precarious state.
This is not fundamentalist religion talking, nor is it politician posturing to a constituancy; it is a reasoned and logical approach to what is in the best interests of humanity. Until those on the pro-euthenizing side of the aisle realize this is not just an Evangelical Christian issue, but a universal question about the well being of mankind, they will continue being lost in their blind, knee-jerk hatred for the Religious Right and, therefore, remain unable to engage the matter from a rational, open minded perspective.
Friday, June 17, 2005
Well, I'm sure the Jews that these terrorists kill with their new guns and maps will be relieved to know that at least they weren't blown up by suicide bombers. As we know, performing "good will gestures" to moslems has a brilliant track record (see Oslo, Arafat's return to Ramallah, forfeiting the Temple Mount, etc.) of stopping jihadi terrorism.
What is that definition of insanity again? Oh yea, to keep doing the same thing over and over again expecting there to be a different result. Unbelievable.
Thursday, June 16, 2005
I sense this may be a joke, but it is written as a serious article in FrontPagemag.com, so I'm not sure.
According to the article, leftist freak school board President, Anna Kossett, has created a school district that is a completely disfunctional PC laughingstock. Kossett claims that having a graduation would create too much anxiety for these fragile students, as was determined by the teachers during, yes, "daily anxiety abatement class".
The classrooms are built to look like nests, and the classrooms are referred to as "classwombs." Students are never expected to leave unless they want to, and their claim to fame is that one of their "graduates" sued a taco chain for having "employees of the month" which discriminates against the other employees who are less productive.
The school also abolished all letter and number grades and now uses various shades of blue instead.
I have never seen anything quite like this report. If it is parody I credit the author, Judith Weizner, with a hilarious piece of work. If it is truthful, I shudder to think what the liberals have done in lunatic California could happen everywhere else if we're not careful.
Check it out and let me know your take.
Wednesday, June 15, 2005
A demented, Hannibal Lectoresque abortionist in Kansas put aborted fetuses in his break room fridge and ate them for lunch, which prompted a disgusted legislature to pass regulations requiring abortion clinics to adhere to more strict standards of operation. This bill was subsequently vetoed by abortion rights advocate, Gov. Kathleen Sebelius, because she says, "medical professionals, not legislatures, should set the standards."
Let me get this straight. A doctor EATS ABORTED FETUSES and is shut down by the Board of Health, but the State should still not be allowed to regulate these animals because they can police themselves just fine? The pro-abortion crowd already lost all credibility in my eyes when they championed the inhumane practice of partial birth abortion, but their humanity has been lowered even further now that they have shown they would rather let doctors eat aborted babies for lunch than allow congress to establish basic sanitary conditions of practice for abortion clinics.
Friday, June 10, 2005
Isn't it about time somebody stopped playing nice with these animals?
Wednesday, June 08, 2005
Of course, he's right. The islamic animals don't see the "good gestures" of prison releases, land giveaways, expelling Jews from their homes, etc., as acts of kindness for which they'll reciprocate. Quite the opposite. They see it as weakness on the part of the enemy and are motivated to escalate the terrorism. This is clear from the growth in Hamas' popularity since Sharon announced his plan to evacuate from Gaza and parts of Judea/Samaria.
Tuesday, June 07, 2005
The question that always pops into my head, though, when I see this happen, is why the moslems are permitted to live there at all? They are sworn enemies of the Jews and only want to see every last Jew driven into the sea while they impose Sharia law over The Land. If you have enemies of the state living right there on your land, why not expel them altogether and end this madness once and for all?
Oy. There is nothing I find more detestable than sending kids to "alternative fornication training" camps. Sex should be the furthest thing from childrens camps, and, yes, that includes heterosexual sex.
My parents would have hit the roof if I went away to camp and when they asked me what we did, I replied: "Well, first we were taught how to put a condom on a dildo. Then we were shown how beautiful it is when women have sex together and men have sex together. Then they told us how great it is when both parents are women or both parents are men. Oh, yea, we also were taught that having a non-Jewish, same-sex life partner is wonderful for diversity, and it makes us extra special. Then they showed us a movie about how gay men love each other and passed out condoms. The best part was when we had sex toy workshop and learned about how wonderful masturbation can make you feel." Unreal.
Read the story at this Link: http://www.jta.org/page_view_story.aspintarticleid=15500&intcategoryid=4
Monday, June 06, 2005
The fact that Jews are being forced to live in dhimmitude in Jerusalem like this is appauling, and is a undeniably the result of the failed policies of appeasement by the Israeli left. The moslems simply must be forcibly expelled from Jerusalem or there will never be peace.
Thursday, June 02, 2005
Why the pussy footing around?
Look, all sane people realize that we are in a civilization war with Islam and the Progressives who love them. Scientologists have been banned in Germany (justifiably), and Nazism has been banned there, too. Religions of human sacrifice are banned in America and beyond, and so are faiths that may include pedophilia, anachrophilia and beastiality.
Islam has proven itself to be no better, or worse still, than any of these banned practices, and, therefore, should not be looked at any more sympathetically. Islam is the absolute belief in mass murder and suicide as the means to coerce infidels to bow to their submission.
We must fight them with absolute ferocity and barbarism until they will unconditionally surrender and renounce the practice of Jihad. No mercy, no compassion. An all out war of dominance of human will is the only answer ... defeat which must be felt at the street level; the household level; and at the mosque level.
The model for victory is the Japanese empire. We annihilated them on an atomic level until the emperor himself bowed at MaCarther's feet. So, too, the Ayatollahs and Sheiks and Mullahs must be broken in the most harsh, the most complete, and the most public of ways. This may seem brutal to the faint of heart, but in the war for survival which the Moslems have already declared through Al Qaida, Hamas, Hezbollah, Islamic Jihad, Moslem Brotherhood, Baathism, etc., etc., and wholly supported by the population masses of the Moslem world, we shall either win total victory or ultimately suffer a total defeat.
You are either with us or against us.
Wednesday, June 01, 2005
Said one jubilant high ranking official, "We are just so proud that all of our efforts to prevent terrorism have finally been given this validation. Anytime you can get the rebuke and condemnation of radical socialists and Islamo-terrorists, like those of Amnesty International, you know you must doing something something right. This is something we'd hoped for for since we started holding Moslem terrorist operatives under detention at Gitmo. The Gulag line was particularly rewarding; really gave us a great sense of satisfaction."
Of course, tragically, those millions of people infected with the terrible degenerative mental disease known as "progressivitis" were incapable of grasping the Amnesty condemnation award, and have suffered great delusions of terrorist sympathy as a result of this report. Our thoughts and prayers go out to these unfortunate individuals on this otherwise joyous occasion.