Under Hillry

Almost an unpardonable gaff

Hillary Clinton laughed as the person introducing her omitted “under God” from the pledge of allegiance. Wednesday, during a campaign rally at Camden County College in New Jersey, the woman said, “Only Hillary can bring us together as one nation und, indivisible with liberty and justice for all.” After the woman said “one nation,” she can be heard beginning to say under, but then caught herself. The Daily Caller, through which I found this story, threw in this (Do you think 'under God' ought be admitted) poll. Generally speaking—why bring it up, unless you want to revive an idea promulgated by professional atheists?  I'm just saying.

Judge defends 'Under God'

'UNDER GOD' Sanity

New Jersey Judge David F. Bauman recently dismissed a case orchestrated by a student, his parents, and the American Humanist Association and ruled that hearing the words "under God" during the Pledge of Allegiance does not violate the constitutional rights of atheist students. In his decision released Monday, Bauman brilliantly laid to rest the notion that the phrase can, or should, be erased from America's history. “As a matter of historical tradition, the words ‘under God’ can no more be expunged from the national consciousness than the words ‘In God We Trust’ from every coin in the land, than the words ‘so help me God’ from every presidential oath since 1789, or than the prayer that has opened every congressional session of legislative business since 1787,” the judge wrote in his decision. Bauman added, “The Pledge of Allegiance, in this historical context, is not to be viewed, and has never been viewed, as a religious exercise." The student's lawsuit, filed last year, argued against the phrase being recited during school hours because he felt it singled out atheists and non-believers, making them feel like "second-class citizens." His attorneys argued that hearing the pledge would cause atheist students to feel "just as America’s Jews, Hindus, and Muslims would feel excluded, marginalized and stigmatized if they were told by their government on a daily basis that the United States is one nation ‘under Jesus.’” However, Judge Bauman didn't see it that way. He explained that the various references to God in the nation's history, documents, and practices indicates no endorsement of a specific faith, but simply a recognition to the importance religion has played in the founding of America. The unnamed student tried for equal protection under the New Jersey state constitution, only to be reminded by Bauman that it also references "Almighty God:" Under plaintiffs’ reasoning, the very constitution under which plaintiffs seek redress for perceived atheistic marginalization could itself be deemed unconstitutional, an absurd proposition which plaintiffs do not and cannot advance here. Protecting students from viewpoints and ideas that may offend or upset them is not and has never been the role of public schools in America. Judge Bauman advised the student to remain silent during the Pledge of Allegiance if he so chooses. There are no plans to appeal the decision.  [FULL] There's a huge difference between atheists and "Professional Atheists."  The former, as I know them, are decent and good people.  The Professional Atheist is a Lying MFCS, and I am at war with that lot.  God save them!

Godless and In Charge

Cuomo "Our Rights Do Not Come From God" They come from Obama CNN Talkinghead: 'Our Rights Do Not Come From God' CNN anchor Chris Cuomo debated Alabama Chief Justice Roy Moore over rights and marriage, particularly regarding the recent kerfuffle over same-sex marriage in the Heart of Dixie. When Moore explained that marriage is a matter of law and rights that come from God, Cuomo vehemently disagreed. "Our rights do not come from God, your honor, and you know that. They come from man," Cuomo insisted. Later he added, "That's your faith, that's my faith, but that's not our country. Our laws come from collective agreement and compromise." What utter hogwash. As Moore aptly noted, the Declaration of Independence is the law of the land, and it begins, "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed..." But Cuomo isn't just mistaken. He and his deceased father, Mario, and his brother Andrew, former and current governors of New York, hold a typical leftist view that government and not God creates rights. Therefore, those rights are subject to the whims of politicians because, as Chris Cuomo insisted, "Times change. Definitions change." Such views are dangerous and completely antithetical to the foundation of our country. More... Well, they are the people whose governing principle is "Just make shit up and sign it."

HAND OF GOD SUDDENLY REVEALED?

It's Scientific  Gary Larsen

“ 'Everything we think we know about our universe is wrong?' In the late 1800s, Albert A. Michelson, the first American to win the Nobel Prize in the sciences, devised an experiment to prove the Earth is moving through space, through a medium for bearing light called the “aether.” If he could show that light was slowed down by being fired into an aether headwind, like a swimmer swimming against a stream, Michelson reasoned, it would prove the Earth’s motion through space. But the experiment didn’t work the way he expected. In fact, it proved the opposite. The world of science was baffled. Was the Earth not moving? Eventually, however, another Albert, with the last name of Einstein, developed a theory called special relativity to explain Michelson’s results. It wouldn’t be the last time, a startling new documentary called “The Principle” suggests, that scientists had to scramble to make their theories about space fit observable facts and experiments that didn’t jive with their prevalent understandings. Increasingly, bizarre and unproven theories such as the mysterious “dark matter,” “dark energy,” “multiverses” and the creation of “everything from nothing,” the moviemakers claim, have been thought up to try to make the hard data fit with an underlying assumption science has accepted since the 16th century. But what if instead of dreaming up wild theories to explain away inconsistencies, the moviemakers suggest, scientists allowed the facts to challenge the underlying assumption itself? What if everything science believes about space … is wrong? “The Principle,” which is opening now in select cities around the U.S., boldly challenges the widely accepted Copernican Principle, named after Renaissance astronomer Nicolaus Copernicus. He famously argued Earth revolves around the sun and went further to suggest Earth is in no central or favored place in the universe. We inhabit, in famous cosmologist Carl Sagan’s words, “an insignificant planet of a humdrum star lost in a galaxy tucked away in some forgotten corner of a universe in which there are far more galaxies than people.” Hogwash, the makers of “The Principle” say. “Everything we think we know about our universe is wrong,” the movie’s trailer asserts. Citing Isaac Newton, various current astronomers, Einstein himself and even defenders of the Copernican Principle, the documentary makes the case that the data science is discovering indicate the entire known universe is pointing directly at Earth. “We are in a special place,” argues one of the voices quoted in the documentary. “I do believe that the universe was created by God.” Rick DeLano, writer and producer of “The Principle,” declares the “question of our place in the cosmos is the greatest scientific detective story in all of history.” “The world has been shaped by two great assertions: One places us in the center of it all, and the other one relegates us to utter insignificance. Amazingly, ‘The Principle’ is the first documentary to examine this persistent puzzle at the heart of modern science.” The film traces the “persistent puzzle” from the ancient astronomer Ptolemy, centuries before Copernicus, to today. But rather than assuming science is at odds with religious faith, as in Galileo’s day, “The Principle” assumes the two dovetail. “I have great respect for science,” DeLano said. “Where I become offended is when people ignore the evidence. They haven’t proven that something can come from nothing. “Strong evidence shows there is a special direction in the cosmos, and it points toward Earth. This is a serious claim that could indicate that perhaps the Bible was true in its account of creation … and they’re ignoring it,” he continued. “Experimentation is supposed to be the acid test of an assumption. Experiment trumps all. In the universe, we are told there are no special places – no up, no down, no left, no right. But every experiment tells us we are indeed in a special place, which the scientific community sees as impossible. “For them to even remotely consider that the Bible could be true is a laughable joke. It’s beyond ignorant,” DeLano said. “The arrogance of the scientific atheist is unbelievable. But as the Bible says, ‘Pride [goeth] before a fall.’ “What they don’t understand is that science and theology have the same author: ‘In the beginning, God created the Heavens and the Earth,’” DeLano concluded. “We have the distinct advantage of having the truth on our side.” “The Principle” opened Oct. 24 in select theaters in Chicago with plans to expand to Los Angeles and then to various theaters around the country. Those interested in the film can learn more at its website, ThePrincipleMovie.com. WND Your mileage may differ, but I've long felt that the nutrition, earth and cosmos sciences are like women's fashion; changing with the weather.  Plus, I believe in God.  ”

Non est pax dixit Deus meus impii

“ Washington's Farewell Address Every year since 1896, the Senate has observed Washington's Birthday by selecting one of its members, alternating parties, to read the 7,641-word statement in legislative session.  Delivery generally takes about 45 minutes.  In 1985, Florida Senator Paula Hawkins tore through the text in a record-setting 39 minutes, while in 1962, West Virginia Senator Jennings Randolph, savoring each word, consumed 68 minutes.  At the conclusion of each reading, the appointed senator inscribes his or her name and brief remarks in a black, leather-bound book maintained by the Secretary of the Senate Here are 209 words from that address. Of all the dispositions and habits which lead to political prosperity, religion and morality are indispensable supports. In vain would that man claim the tribute of patriotism, who should labor to subvert these great pillars of human happiness, these firmest props of the duties of men and citizens. The mere politician, equally with the pious man, ought to respect and to cherish them. A volume could not trace all their connections with private and public felicity. Let it simply be asked: Where is the security for property, for reputation, for life, if the sense of religious obligation desert the oaths which are the instruments of investigation in courts of justice ? And let us with caution indulge the supposition that morality can be maintained without religion. Whatever may be conceded to the influence of refined education on minds of peculiar structure, reason and experience both forbid us to expect that national morality can prevail in exclusion of religious principle. It is substantially true, that virtue or morality is a necessary spring of popular government. The rule, indeed, extends with more or less force to every species of free government. Who, that is a sincere friend to it, can look with indifference upon attempts to shake the foundation of the fabric? ”