A Defending Crusader…

The best defense is to be good and offensive…or something like that.

Posts Tagged ‘religion’

A Founding Quote

Posted by Godefroi on April 15, 2010

Inspired by a post at Doctor Bulldog and Ronin, highlighting the idiocy of today’s Liberal (in the worst sense of the word) judiciary; and by my observations of Americans’ general and unfortunate ignorance of history, I bring you a Presidential Proclamation:

Whereas the Congress of the United States, by a joint resolution of the two Houses, have signified a request, that a day may be recommended, to be observed by the People of the United States, with religious solemnity, as a day of public Humiliation, and Prayer; and whereas such a recommendation will enable the several religious denominations and societies so disposed, to offer, at one and the same time, their common vows and adorations to Almighty God, on the solemn occasion produced by the war, in which he has been pleased to permit the injustice of a foreign power to involve these United States;

I do therefore recommend the third Thursday in August next, as a convenient day to be set apart for the devout purposes of rendering to the Sovereign of the Universe and the Benefactor of mankind, the public homage due to his holy attributes; of acknowledging the transgressions which might justly provoke the manifestations of His divine displeasures; of seeking His merciful forgiveness, His assistance in the great duties of repentance and amendment; and especially of offering fervent supplications, that in the present season of calamity and war, He would take the American People under his peculiar care and protection; that he would guide their public councils, animate their patriotism, and bestow His blessing on their arms; that He would inspire all nations with a love of justice and of concord, and with a reverence for the unerring precept of our holy religion [which religion do you think he had in mind…Secularism perhaps?], to do to others as they would require others to do to them [oh wait…which religion teaches that?]; and finally, that , turning the hearts of our enemies from the violence and injustice which sway their councils against us, He would hasten a restoration of the blessings of Peace.

Given at Washington the 9th day of July, in the year of our Lord one thousand eight hundred and twelve.

James Madison.

Not only was it written by the Architect of the Constitution and the man who proposed the Bill of Rights (First Amendment anyone?), but was nearly coincident with the anniversary of the signing of the Declaration of Independence.

Food for thought.

Big Thank-You to Wallbuilders for source material!

Posted in Christianity, Food for Thought, History, Politics | Tagged: , , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

What If?

Posted by Godefroi on April 6, 2010

Hypothetically speaking, what if those crazy “Christianists” took over the government of the Unites States. 

And again hypothetically, what if the new So-Far-Right-They’re-Behind-the-Sunrise Congress appropriated government money (that’s taxes, for any uninformed) and granted – say, $38 Million* – to build a new church somewhere? 

And what if, based on that success, they proceeded to grant a $30-Million-per-year-for-seven-years* boon to a Catholic Priest, SPECIFICALLY  to assist him in evangelizing, and threw in another $89 Million* to build a church?

And then what if, getting even crazier, the Congress started GRANTING LAND to religious institutions, again specifically for evangelism or church-building?

Yeah…what if Congress did all those things?  Those would all be violations of the First Amendment ‘Establishment Clause’ (wall of separation, and all that) right?

Just wondering.

Read the rest of this entry »

Posted in Christianity, Church, Food for Thought, History, Politics | Tagged: , , , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Point to Ponder

Posted by Godefroi on July 22, 2009

This is a short excerpt from David Barton’s little book America:  To Pray or Not To Pray (pp 15-19 in the version I had).  Emphases are mine.

…eight of the nine Justices on the 1962-63 Supreme Court [that is, the Warren Court that Teh One said didn’t go far enough – GdB] had been appointed to the Court following an extended history of political rather than judicial experience. Chief Justice Earl Warren had been the Governor of California for ten years prior to his appointment; Justice Hugo Black had been a U. S. Senator for ten years; Justice Felix Frankfurter had been an assistant to the Secretary of Labor and a founding member of the ACLU; Justice Arthur Goldberg had been the Secretary of Labor; Justice William Douglas was chairman of the Securities and Exchange Commission prior to his appointment. All of the Justices except one had similar political backgrounds. Justice Potter Stewart, a federal judge for four years prior to his appointment, was the only member of the Court with extended federal Constitutional experience prior to his appointment. Interestingly, he was also the only Justice who objected to the removal of prayer and Bible reading.  June 25, 1962, in Engel v. Vitale,  the Supreme Court [Warren court] forbade the inclusion of religious activities in major activities of daily student life by striking down school prayer and Bible reading. Never before in the history of our nation had any branch of our government taken such a stand.

Eight out of the nine “justices” on the Warren Court were UNQUALIFIED for the job.  They were not Constitutional scholars – not even JUDGES – but rather politicians.

Today’s courts frequently state that they are compelled by previous decisions to rule in a certain manner, the so-called “Wall of Separation” doctrine being one of them.  Interestingly,

…in Engel v. Vitale, only last year, these principles [the separation of prayer from the classroom] were so universally recognized that the Court, without citation of single case … reaffirmed them. (School Dist. of Abington Township v. Schempp; 374 U.S. 203, 220-221, 1963)

Did you catch that?  The Engel case which banned school prayer did not cite even ONE precedent to back up the ruling.  Stare decisis has become a handy excuse to keep Constitutionally-questionable policies and practices in place.

Let me suggest to any visitors here to read Mr. Barton’s book cited above, or even better one called “Original Intent”.  You will see that the reason the Warren court did not cite any precedents is that the precedents were all against them.

Just something to think about.

Posted in Big Government, Church, Food for Thought, History | Tagged: , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Question

Posted by Godefroi on June 26, 2009

It’s time to test your knowledge of history.  🙂

Who said the following (emphasis is mine):

The First Amendment, however, does not say that in every and all respects there shall be a separation of Church and State …. Otherwise the state and religion would be aliens to each other-hostile, suspicious, and even unfriendly.

I’ll be taking guesses thru the weekend.

UPDATE: No takers eh?  Bummer.

Anyway, the answer is THE UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT, in Zorach v. Clauson, 343 U.S. 306.

Posted in History, Politics | Tagged: , , , , | 4 Comments »

Flight 93 Blogburst: A Door Swinging Shut

Posted by Godefroi on June 22, 2009

Alec writes:

Two blogburst posts in a week? This one is running up against a Tuesday deadline (when the EPA’s comment period ends) so there isn’t much choice.

The EPA’s proposed war against CO2 is tangentially related to our issue. It is state imposition of green religion, while we are facing state imposition of an Islamic shrine on the Flight 93 crash site. These tangential relations are one way to spread the word, and I figure a bunch of you are probably concerned about the imposition of green religion too.

EPA comment period closes Tues: tell ‘em no state-establishment of CO2-phobic religion
Only a couple more days to let the EPA know what you think of its proposed war against CO2. Just click on the little yellow “add comments” balloon. The following is a comment (ending at “sincerely”) that you can copy and paste. (If you choose to roll your own, feel free to leave it here too.)

Dear EPA:

There is overwhelming statistical evidence that the primary driver of natural temperature change is solar-magnetic activity, yet the solar flux is completely omitted as an influence on climate in all four IPCC assessments and in the Obama administration’s new “Climate Change Impacts in the United Sates” report. This omission is rationalized on grounds that the existing theories of how solar activity affects climate are still formative. The scientific method rejects this rationalization. Observational evidence is supposed to trump theory, not vice versa, but the IPCC is using theory (its distrust of existing theories of the mechanism by which solar-magnetic activity drives global temperature), as an excuse for ignoring the overwhelming evidence that solar-magnetic DOES drive global temperature. Not all religions are anti-scientific, but the demonstrably anti-scientific nature of CO2 alarmism proves that it IS religion, not science.

EPA regulations are supposed to be science based. Imposing restrictions based on an anti-scientific religious doctrine would not just violate the EPA’s mandate, but would violate the constitutional prohibition on state establishment of religion.

Solar-magnetic warming: theory and evidence

The sunspot-temperature theory is actually looking pretty solid. It is known that a strong solar-magnetic flux shields the earth from high energy cosmic rays which otherwise, according to the theory of Henrik Svensmark and Friis-Christensen, would ionize the atmosphere, seeding cloud formation. Thus the solar wind in effect blows the clouds away, giving the earth a sunburn.

Whatever the precise mechanism, researchers have found that solar-magnetic activity “explains” statistically about 60-80 percent of global temperature change on all time scales going back hundreds of millions of years. On the decadal time scale, see the seminal 1991 paper by Christensen and Lassen (“Length of the Solar Cycle: An Indicator of Solar Activity Closely Associated with Climate”) and the 2003 isotope study by Usoskin et al (“Solar activity over the last 1150 yrs: does it correlate with climate?”), which found: “a correlation coefficient of about .7 – .8 at a 94% – 98% confidence level.”

For longer time scales, see the 2003 paper by Shaviv and Veiser (“Celestial driver of Phranerozoic climate?”), which found that found that the cosmic ray flux explains statistically about 75% of global temperature variation over the last 550 million years.

Omitted variable fraud

Solar activity was at “grand maximum” levels from 1940 and 2000 which, given the historical correlation between solar activity and temperature, could easily explain most or all late 20th century warming. When the IPCC and others omit the solar-magnetic variable from their models, any warming effect of solar activity gets misattributed to whatever correlated variables ARE included in their models.

By sheer coincidence, CO2 reached its own “grand maximum” levels (at least compared to the rest of the Holocene) in the second half of the 20th century. Thus in the alarmist models, whatever warming effect the omitted solar-magnetic variable is responsible for gets misattributed to CO2.

You can find rationalizations for this omitted-variable fraud in every IPCC report. For instance, section 6.11.2.2 of the Third Assessment Report does not question the correlation between solar activity and climate, but dismisses the cosmic-ray cloud THEORY as too speculative to include in their climate models:

At present there is insufficient evidence to confirm that cloud cover responds to solar variability.

But they don’t just leave solar-magnetic activity out of their models. Because their forecasts are based entirely on their climate models, they also leave solar magnetic effects completely out of their climate forecasts, despite knowing that there is SOME mechanism (even if the cosmic-ray/cloud theory turns out to be wrong) by which solar-magnetic activity is the primary driver of global temperature.

The only solar variable they do include is solar output or Total Solar Insolation (from long to short-wave radiation), which does not include the solar-magnetic flux. The Fourth Assessment Report does the same thing, looking only at TSI, as do all of the analyses that follow from these reports. For instance, if you look at he “Natural Influences” subsection of the Obama administration’s new report, you will see on page 16 that the only natural influence listed is “solar output’ (or TSI), which is why it is shown graphically to be so tiny.

Solar output is close to constant over the solar cycle (less than 0.1% variation), which is why it is called “the solar constant.” Because TSI is nearly constant, it cannot account for the many thousands of years of close correlation between solar activity and temperature. That must be coming from the one solar variable that DOES vary with solar activity: the solar magnetic flux. Every IPCC climate scientist knows this, yet they still omit the solar-magnetic variable.

Proof of omission: page 16 graphic from the June 2009 report by U.S. Global Change Research Program (in effect, the NOAA). The only natural warming effect listed is total solar output, which does not include the solar-magnetic flux. Similar graphics can be found in each of the IPCC’s assessment reports, where this analysis originates.

Religion, not science

When the alarmists omit solar-magnetic effects on the grounds that they are not satisfied with with existing theories of HOW these effects work, they are not just committing statistical fraud, but they are contradicting the very definition of science. Observation (the overwhelming correlation between solar activity and global temperature) is supposed to trump theory, not vice versa.

Consider an analogy. Until Einstein developed his theory of general relativity there was no good theory of gravity. Newton had a description of the gravitational force (that it diminishes by the inverse of the square of the distance) but nobody had any sensible account for the mechanism by which massive objects were drawn to each other. Applying the standards of the IPCC, a pre-Einsteinian or pre-Newtonian scientist should have forecast that when a stone is released in the air, it would waft away on the breeze. After all, we understand the force that the breeze imparts on the stone, but we don’t understand this thing called gravity, so we should not include it, even though we observe that heavy objects fall.

That is not science, and neither is CO2 alarmism. Data is supposed to trump Theory. By using theory (the proclaimed insufficiency of solar-magnetic theory) as an excuse to ignore the evidence (where solar activity is known to somehow warm the climate), warming alarmism perverts the scientific method.

That makes it religion in the constitutionally barred sense. Not only is this belief system embraced by millions of people WITHOUT EVIDENCE, but it is embraced in the face of overwhelming contrary evidence. Alarmism about CO2 is not just a religion, it is a demonstrably irrational religion, equivalent to believing that rocks will waft away on the breeze.

EPA is supposed to make science-based rulings. If you regulate CO2 based on demonstrably anti-scientific ideology, it will be an unconstitutional state establishment of religion.

The current cooling trend fits the solar-magnetic theory, not the CO2 theory

All of the major temperature records show that the earth’s average temperature has been falling for ten years now (with the 21 year smoothed temperature falling for five). In this period, CO2 has continued to increase, while the sun has descended into a prolonged solar minimum. This turn in the sun (breaking the coincidental correlation between solar activity and CO2 that existed for the previous 70 years), is rapidly unmasking the hoax of anthropogenic global warming.

It should not take a rare astrological event to unmask an obvious statistical and scientific fraud. Will the EPA now destroy its reputation by codifying the “green” religion at the very moment when the heavens themselves are exposing its dishonesty? If you choose this course, you will be destroying the nation’s economy and the lives of your countrymen in the service of your own anti-scientific religious beliefs, in violation of your oath of office.

Sincerely,

On the subject of state established religion

Blogburst logo, petition

This is also the subject of our blogbursts, trying to stop the Flight 93 Memorial Project from stamping a giant Mecca-oriented crescent on the graves our murdered heroes:

A crescent that Muslims face into to face Mecca is called a mihrab, and is the central feature around which every mosque is built. (Some mihrabs are pointed arch shape, but the archetypical mihrab is crescent shaped.)

The Crescent of Embrace memorial is actually a terrorist memorial mosque, replete with a full complement of typical mosque features, like the minaret-like Tower of Voices that has an Islamic shaped crescent on top and turns out to be a year-round accurate Islamic prayer-time sundial.

Outcry over the apparent Islamic symbolism forced the Park Service to make changes. They promised that they would remove the Islamic symbol shapes, but they never did. They call it a broken circle now, but the circle is broken in the exact same places as before.

The unbroken part of the circle, what symbolically remains standing in the wake of 9/11, is still a giant Islamic-shaped crescent, still pointing to Mecca.

To join our blogbursts, just send your blog’s url.

Posted in Flight 93 Blogburst, Politics | Tagged: , , , , | Leave a Comment »

A Founding Thought

Posted by Godefroi on August 19, 2008

Most people, when considering the beliefs of Thomas Jefferson, would consider him a Deist, that is, one who believes in God but also that God does not interfere in the affairs of the world. 

If God does not meddle in mortal matters, then the following idea expressed in Jefferson’s Notes on the State of Virginia makes no sense.

“God who gave us life gave us liberty. And can the liberties of a nation be thought secure when we have removed their only firm basis, a conviction in the minds of the people that these liberties are a gift from God?  That they are not to be violated but with His wrath?  Indeed I tremble for my country when I reflect that God is just, and that His justice cannot sleep forever.”

What reason is there to tremble for America if God doesn’t get involved?

The Truth is that God cares for His creation, and He is active in it. 

Jefferson’s last sentence bears remembering in these licentious times of rampant immorality.  “God Bless America” may be our wish, but it’s certainly within His realm of authority to do otherwise…and woe to us when He does.

Posted in Food for Thought, History | Tagged: , , , , , , | 2 Comments »

A Founding Thought

Posted by Godefroi on August 5, 2008

Wisdom from John Jay, first Chief Justice of the United States.
“The Bible is the best of all books, for it is the word of God and teaches us the way to be happy in this world and in the next. Continue therefore to read it and to regulate your life by its precepts.”   
Interesting and sad, is it not, that our recent Supreme Court justices have so distanced the Court, the government, and us, from America’s religious foundations.

Posted in Christianity, Food for Thought, Politics | Tagged: , , | 1 Comment »

A Founding Thought

Posted by Godefroi on July 28, 2008

A little quiz.  Who said:

“An appeal to arms and the God of hosts is all that is left us. But we shall not fight our battle alone. There is a just God that presides over the destinies of nations. The battle sir, is not of the strong alone. Is life so dear or peace so sweet as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it almighty God.”

Stumped?  Here’s a clue, the final words of this paragraph:

” I know not what course others may take, but as for me, give me liberty, or give me death.”

I’m going to try to make this a regular feature here…thoughts from our Founding Fathers.  I trust it will be enlightening.

Posted in Christianity, Food for Thought, History | Tagged: , , , | Leave a Comment »

Open Letter Deconstruction

Posted by Godefroi on October 18, 2007

In the Name of God, the Compassionate, the Merciful,

And may Peace and Blessings be upon the Prophet Muhammad

 

In this opening of the letter, the signatories have already shown their hand. They use the term “God”, instead of Allah, in order to show the commonality they’re proclaiming…this may be honest, or it may be an attempt at disarming the reader. In any case, the subsequent sentence about Muhammad shows that their contention remains that Islam is superior to other beliefs.

 

In the Name of God, the Compassionate, the Merciful,

Do not contend with people of the Book except in the fairest way (The Holy Qur’an, al-Ankabut, 29:46)

 

The whole verse is (Arberry): Dispute not with the People of the Book save in the fairer manner, except for those of them that do wrong; and say, ‘We believe in what has been sent down to us, and what has been sent down to you; our God and your God is One, and to Him we have surrendered.’

 

Notice that the authors of the letter left out the rest of the verse. Who’s cherry-picking? By definition, since we are Christians rather than Muslims, we are doing wrong. And of course, this verse was abrogated by the infamous sura 9:29 (Yusuf Ali): Fight those who believe not in God nor the Last Day, nor hold that forbidden which hath been forbidden by God and His Apostle, nor acknowledge the religion of Truth, (even if they are) of the People of the Book, until they pay the Jizya with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued.

 

There is no compulsion in Religion (sura 2:256)

You mention that “according to the experts” the verse which begins, There is no compulsion in religion (al-Baqarah 2:256) is from the early period when the Prophet “was still powerless and under threat,” but this is incorrect. In factthis verse is acknowledged to belong to the period of Quranic revelation corresponding to the political and military ascendance of the young Muslim community

 

This is true, except that this is in the first of the Medinan suras, when Muhammad was still trying to ingratiate himself with the Jewish tribes. This, again, was overridden by 9:29, which is in the last (or possibly second-to-last) of the suras written.

Read the rest of this entry »

Posted in Christianity, Church, Deception, Dhimmitude, Food for Thought, Jihad, News | Tagged: , , , , , | Leave a Comment »