Selective Constitutional Rights

I am alarmed at the continued debate over General Boykin’s comments. James Carroll of the Boston Globe criticizes Boykin’s religious beliefs, “Boykin’s remarks can only inflame Arab perceptions.” He concludes by saying: “In the 21st century, exclusivist religion, no matter how ”mainstream” and no matter how muted the anathemas that follow from its absolutes, is a sure way to religious war.”

Never mind that after 200 years, this country has not started a religious war. Carroll’s point seems to be that General Boykin should not state his religious beliefs because it offends others and they may attack us for those beliefs.

This point is ridiculous. This country was founded through war to protect the right to practice religion freely (among other reasons). This is one of the rights that was important enough to fight for. Now our media expects us to give it up so as not to offend Islamicist.

He also infers the solution is to reject Christianity. Since Christianity is exclusivist and that philosophy only leads to war, then – following the logic – we must reject Christianity if we want to avoid a war with Islamicist.

Why is it Christians must give up their faith? The Islamicist surely won’t. Again we are in the position of rejecting our right to worship freely. People quote the saying that they are willing to die to protect other’s rights to free speech. Journalists are willing to go to jail to protect their rights under freedom of the press. Why are they so willing to deny the right to freely practice our religious beliefs?

General Boykin was right

The amazing controversy over General Boykin’s comments continue. As mentioned previously, one of the comments he made was this one:
“Why are terrorists out to destroy the United States? They’re after us because we’re a Christian nation.”

Was he wrong? The evidence says he wasn’t. The most recent Osama bin Laden tape quotes bin Laden as urging a holy war against American “crusaders” (a reference to the European Crusades in the early part of the last millennium.)

So, tell me. Why are the Generals comments so offensive? According to MSNBC and the LA Times, the truth is wrong.

The Christian bashers are still at it

General Boykin is still being attacked for having Christian beliefs. MSNBC published this indictment, “Despite repeated questions at a Pentagon press conference, [Secretary of Defense, Donald] Rumsfeld declined to condemn Boykin’s statements or to say whether he would take any action.”

Notice the inference. According to the wording, Donald Rumsfeld should be expected to take some action against General Boykin – apparently for the General stating his Christian based beliefs in a Christian church to a Christian audience.

Now the not so Reverend Barry Lynn of Americans United for Separation of Church and State has jumped in to criticize General Boykin. This should once and for all discredit the so-called reverend. If he really was for separation of Church and State, he would criticize news agencies for attacking religious speech made in a church. Instead he criticized the General (again, for making religious speech in a church.)

Clearly, Barry Lynn is a liar. He is more concerned with limiting freedom of religion than in separating Church and State.

But I don’t feel rich

A new study says that taller people will earn about $789 per inch annually more than their shorter counterparts.

So at 6’2″ I should be earning about $2,200 more than my shorter counter parts. It doesn’t seem to be happening.

I wonder what I’m doing wrong? Maybe I should stand on my tiptoes.

You can’t say that in church…

Yesterday MSNBC broke the unbelievably controversial (please note sarcasm) story that a Christian actually believes Christian teachings.

It seems General William Boykin committed the unforgivable sin (to the secular world) of relating his religious beliefs to current events. General Boykin said he believes George W. Bush is in office “because God put him there for a time such as this.”
One of his most egregious statements seems to be, “Why are terrorists out to destroy the United States? They’re after us because we’re a Christian nation.”

In response NBC News military analyst Bill Arkin said, “I think that it is not only at odds with what the president believes, but it is a dangerous, extreme and pernicious view that really has no place.”

So let me get this straight. In a country that has a Constitutional Amendment protecting the right to freely practice one’s religion, General Boykin’s religious view of the world has no place?

Stunning.

It seems Mr. Arkin and his ilk believe in selective Constitutional enforcement. That is we must defend freedom of the press to the death, but freedom of religion? Apparently not so important for Arkin.

No corruption here

Kelly Huston, the place kick holder for the University of Nebraska football team was suspended for one game for punching a University of Missouri fan after last Saturday’s game.

It is difficult to figure out if the University of Nebraska believes Huston did anything wrong. The Cornhuskers coach said, “I truly believe that Kellen did not instigate the situation and that he was simply reacting to what he saw as a dangerous situation coming right at him.”

The athletic director followed up with, “I would never claim that hitting someone is appropriate, but I was not standing in Kellen Huston’s shoes on Saturday night.”

So what is it? It sounds like the “I didn’t kick your dog…besides, it bit me” defense. In this case, Huston shouldn’t hit a fan, but the fan deserved it according to Nebraska. Typical.

To floss or not to floss

The pendulum has swung. Women showing off their thong underwear above their low-rise pants is out of fashion according to some New York designers.

So what is in style? Panty lines. Yep, old-fashioned panties whose lines can be seen through clothes.

So get rid of the thongs and bring on the granny panties.

Columbus – bad, Human sacrifice – good?

Denver seems to be the epicenter of Columbus Day protests. Every year now its the same thing,
“Columbus committed genocide”, “Columbus was a rapist”. Even the Denver Post allows its writer’s to publish factually incorrect stories in saying that Columbus was arrested for allegations of brutality. He was sent back to Spain in chains (probably for disappointment in lack of gold coming back for the New World) but was released with apologies from the King and Queen of Spain.

The bias against Columbus is amazing. It really does come down to hate of Western culture.

The Spaniards did come as conquerors. This was not unique in world history. True, the natives in Latin America were wiped out. Partly due to conquest, partly due to other reasons including disease.

MSN’s Encarta considers this a tragedy because of Latin America’s cultural signficance. I suppose the human sacrifice practiced at the time should have been saved. Here is Encarta’s description Aztec religious practice:

“The sacrificial rituals were elaborate in form, calculated according to the stars to please specific gods at specific times. A victim would ascend the steps of the pyramid. At the top, a priest would stretch the victim across a stone altar and cut out the victim’s heart. The priest would hold the heart aloft to the god being honored and then fling it into a sacred fire while it was still beating. Often many victims were killed at once. In 1487, according to legend, Aztec priests sacrificed more than 80,000 prisoners of war at the dedication of the reconstructed temple of the sun god in Tenochtitlán.”

OK, if we are going to judge Columbus by today’s standards, let’s judge the culture’s he supposedly is responsible for destroying by today’s standards.