I Voted

Have you?

Constitution?

The following Democratic senators voted to kowtow to our sovereign ruler, the mighty Emperor W:

Bayh – Carper – Conrad – Feinstein – Innouye – Johnson – Kohl – Landrieu – Lincoln – McCaskill – Mikulski – Nelson (FL) – Nelson (Neb.) – Pryor – Rockefeller – Salazar – Webb.

I would love to live in an America where the government actually was bound to the constitution.

Have They Read This?

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

4th amendment, folks. The presumptive presidential nominees from the two major parties are both U.S. senators who have sworn to uphold this amendment and the constitution to which it belongs. They are both preparing to pass legislation which seems to ignore this. *Sigh.*

Note – This post is loosely based on this article.

It’s All Because the Gays Are Getting Married

Day of Reason

Today is the National Day of Reason, not to be confused with the federally funded, annual abuse of the constitution’s establishment clause, the National Day of Prayer, which happens to fall on the same day (the first Thursday in May).

What’s wrong with a National Day of Prayer? Among other things:

The National Day of Prayer violates the First Amendment of the US Constitution because it asks federal and local government entities to set aside tax dollar supported time and space to engage in religious ceremonies. This results in unconstitutional governmental support of religion over no religion.

Why not focus on something we can all participate in? Let’s celebrate a National Day of Reason!

Gay Adoption Ruling Advances Family Equality

Gays can finally adopt. In Europe, that is. Human Rights Watch has an article on a new European Court of Human Rights ruling that says “Sexual orientation should not be a factor in determining the best interest of the child…Prejudice should never interfere with giving children the care and love they deserve.”

The court, ruling on January 22, 2008 in the case of E.B. v. France, held by 10 votes to seven that the French authorities’ refusal of a lesbian’s application to obtain authorization to adopt a child on the grounds of her sexual orientation was unlawful. The court said France had violated Article 14 (prohibition of discrimination) and Article 8 (right to respect for private and family life) of the European Convention on Human Rights.

“This groundbreaking ruling means governments can’t use sexual orientation to stop someone from adopting a child,” said Scott Long, director of the Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender Program at Human Rights Watch. “Adoption decisions should be based on the best interests of the child, uncontaminated by prejudice.”

Read the full article here.

Gays are still routinely denied adoption rights in the US, by the way. Europe continues to be miles ahead.

Sundown Towns

I just read an interesting article on sundown towns. These were communities where African Americans were, ahem, encouraged to leave town before sunset. Often, signs were posted near the town borders bearing messages like, “Nigger don’t let the sun set on you in [insert town name here].”

The article is essentially a review of Sundown Towns: A Hidden Dimension of American Racism. By James W. Loewen. These communities should not be forgotten. I have had many conversations with well-meaning people who assert that racism is a thing of the past and that we’re “beyond all that” these days. I beg to differ. Alabama didn’t repeal its anti-miscegenation law until the year 2000, after all. Racism is alive and well in the hearts and minds of many, if not officially enshrined in law. We must continue to fight against intolerance of all stripes if we are to live up to our potential as one nation, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.

For more info on fighting hatred, try Tolerance.org.

Proof!

Does anyone still think the 2006 election was above-board? There’s now real evidence that it was hacked. The evidence was uncovered by the Election Defense Alliance. Their press release says votes were miscounted so badly they skewed Republican by 4%, or 3 million votes.

The 2006 Edison-Mitofsky Exit Poll was commissioned by a consortium of major news organizations. Its conclusions were based on the responses of a very large sample, of more than 10,000 voters nationwide*, and posted at 7:07 p.m. Election Night, on the CNN website. That Exit Poll showed Democratic House candidates had out-polled Republicans by 55.0 percent to 43.5 percent – an 11.5 percent margin – in the total vote for the U.S. House, sometimes referred to as the “generic” vote.

By contrast, the election results showed Democratic House candidates won 52.7 percent of the vote to 45.1 percent for Republican candidates, producing a 7.6 percent margin in the total vote for the U.S. House — 3.9 percent less than the Edison-Mitofsky poll. This discrepancy, far beyond the poll’s +/- 1 percent margin of error, has less than a one in 10,000 likelihood of occurring by chance.

By Wednesday afternoon the Edison-Mitofsky poll had been adjusted, by a process known as “forcing,” to match the reported vote totals for the election. This forcing process is done to supply data for future demographic analysis, the main purpose of the Exit Poll. It involved re-weighting every response so that the sum of those responses matched the reported election results. The final result, posted at 1:00 p.m. November 8, showed the adjusted Democratic vote at 52.6 percent and the Republican vote at 45.0 percent, a 7.6 percent margin exactly mirroring the reported vote totals.

I would really like to live in a free democracy. I wonder what that’s like.

Science, Evolution, and Creationism

The National Academies of Science have produced a very thorough book on science, evolution, and creationism. It’s called, appropriately enough, Science, Evolution, and Creationism. It’s freely available for online reading or downloading. I’d like to highlight a few things from the Frequently Asked Questions.

One question asks what’s wrong with teaching critical thinking or “controversies” with regard to evolution? Part of the answer is:

There is no scientific controversy about the basic facts of evolution. In this sense the intelligent design movement’s call to “teach the controversy” is unwarranted. Of course, there remain many interesting questions about evolution, such as the evolutionary origin of sex or different mechanisms of speciation, and discussion of these questions is fully warranted in science classes. However, arguments that attempt to confuse students by suggesting that there are fundamental weaknesses in the science of evolution are unwarranted based on the overwhelming evidence that supports the theory. Creationist ideas lie outside of the realm of science, and introducing them in science courses has been ruled unconstitutional by the U.S. Supreme Court and other federal courts.

Another question asks whether it would be “fair” to teach creationism along with evolution. Answer:

Different religions hold very different views and teachings about the origins and diversity of life on Earth. Because creationism is based on specific sets of religious convictions, teaching it in science classes would mean imposing a particular religious view on students and thus is unconstitutional, according to several major rulings in federal district courts and the Supreme Court of the United States.

I found the whole book very interesting and thorough. Go read it!

The Great American Election Charade

I found this over at the Crisis Papers. It’s a very good description of the way our elections are just so much manipulation. Here’s the opening:

In the United States of America, the public selects the candidates of each of the two parties. Several candidates of these parties offer themselves to the citizens of a number of states, the free US press presents the policy positions of the candidates to the public, and the free broadcast media conduct debates in which the issues are openly discussed. Then the states hold primaries and caucuses, in which delegates are chosen by the voters, whereupon the delegates choose the parties’ nominees at open national party conventions.

And little George Washington really did chop down his daddy’s cherry tree.

It gets even better. Check it out.