Posts for category ‘Social-Cultural’

I don’t get Glenn Beck’s “Restoring Honor” rally for a multitude of reasons.  One that stands out, though, is the title.  When was America’s honor lost?  Was it when we went to war with Iraq on false pretenses?  Or earlier, when the Supreme Court handed Bush a victory?  Or was it when Bush ignored a memo titled “Osama bin Laden Determined to Attack Inside the US” the summer before 9/11?  Or was it the big giveaways to corporations and the rich to the detriment to the middle class?

No, it couldn’t be those things, or Beck and his ilk would’ve been out in full force against Bush and his Republican allies in Congress.  So when did we lose honor?  Probe the subconscious, and for many, the conscious minds of those in the Restoring Honor crowd.  The only big event I can see that they can be referring to is a black man in the White House.  After all, 50% of Republicans believe Obama, not Bush, passed the Bailout.  Fully 1/3 of Republican believe Obama is a Muslim.  27% of Republicans believe he wasn’t born in America.  It isn’t a stretch to believe that Obama is where we lost the honor in their minds.

Obama is what many in literary circles would call the “Other,” that is an outsider, somebody different than most of us.  That’s pretty obvious, just look at his skin color.  It’s natural for people to fear change and beyond that, to react to it.  Natural, sure.  Right?  Not at all.

Beck used this national platform to call for a theocracy.  Obviously, it’s a Christian one.  This, of course, contrasts with GOP beliefs about Obama, setting them apart even more.  It also helps fuel the fires of division over the Islamic Community Center in New York City.

Beck said we need the country to “turn back to God” to “Look to the Heavens” and “Look to God and make your choice.”  He said we have to get back to the Christian values upon which our nation was founded (it explicitly was not, by the way).  The rally may as well have been a Big Tent Revival.  Beck claimed that staging it on the “I Have A Dream” anniversary was “divine providence.”  I’m glad he knows God’s mind so well.  So how does America restore honor, according to Beck?  By embracing the Christian God.  Thanks for stoking more anti-Islamic sentiment.

This follows, of course, Beck’s statements that Obama has “a deep-seated hatred for white people” and Obama’s worldview was “Marxism disguised as religion.”  People at the rally passed out fliers with Obama depicted with a Hilter mustache.  Nice.  So at Whitestock, Beck railed on about “taking back America” on the anniversary of Martin Luther King, Jr.’s “I Have a Dream” speech.  He also said that everybody gathered would “take back the Civil Rights Movement.”  Who is he taking it back from?  Given the whiteness of the crowd, and the anniversary and location Beck chose, I can only imagine he wants a White America.

Fox went ahead and said there were 500,000 people there.  The actual estimates are closer to 100,000.  Guess how many were white?

Whether Glenn Becks and Sarah Palins of the world will acknowledge it or not (they won’t) all of their anti-Islamic rhetoric is at fault for furor that will and has led to violence against Muslims in this country.  Why am I making that claim?  A man in NYC asked a cabbie if he was a Muslim, then stabbed the cabbie multiple times when the answer was yes.  A mosque in Tennessee was firebombed over the weekend.  A Christian group in Florida is holding “Burn a Koran” Day on 9/11.  Where is hatred of Islam coming from?  The radical right. And national conservative figures play on ignorance and encourage it. Just look at the rhetoric.

Often, people like to call things like the cabbie incident “isolated” but when you have an entire group of people demonizing another, then you’ll have fewer and fewer isolated incidents and more and more of a pattern.

Think of this: a violent outlook, regressive and hostile views toward gays and women, suspicion and disregard of knowledge and science, and fear of pop culture.  What does that describe?  It describes Islamic fundamentalists.

It also sounds like something suspiciously present in American politics.

Government by religion is a staple of Islamic fundamentalism.  In America, how often do we hear right wing figures crooning for a theocracy?  You know, they want our government run on biblical principles.  Not far off from radical Islamic sects.  Simply substitute the Bible for the Koran.  Both have wisdom, but both have passages that relate horrific violence in the name of God.  Both are used to justify a nation governed by the laws of God.

Violence to achieve ideological ends is often encouraged.  Aside from militia organizations like the Minutemen, you have conservatives straight up running for Congress putting out TV commercials calling for armed revolution!  Sharon Angle, Republican Senate candidate in Nevada, said, “The time may be coming for armed response.”  Response to what?  Democratic policies.  How is this okay?

Sexual repression is a hallmark of radical Islam.  And the radical right.  Both are vehemently opposed, and sometimes violently opposed, to homosexuality, birth control, and women’s reproductive rights.  A woman in control of her own body?  Gasp!  Oh, and on the sexual repression front, that kind of thing has to manifest and, for many on the radical right, it does.  How often do we get a family values candidate soliciting gay sex in an airport bathroom, or trying to have cyber sex with a page, or getting caught in an affair?  And then Jerry Falwell went and blamed 9/11 on the gays.  The hypocrisy and the crazy are all too convoluted to even list.

I could go on.  But encouraging these radical “principles” will only continue to fuel hatred and misunderstanding.  The people wanting to build the mosque, for example, are not evil.  They are not our enemies.  This isn’t white vs. black or Christianity vs. Islam. We need to wake up.  We need to stop feeding hatred.  We need to stop fearmongering.  They are the tools of the Taliban and the radical right needs to stop using them.

The ACLU has gotten involved in the sexting scandal involving a Tunkhannock student. Cue anti-ACLU wingnuts who hate the ACLU without an articulate reason.

This student had her cell phone confiscated by a teacher for using it during school. I teach and this is pretty routine. What happened next is not routine. The principal searched the cell phone, which means that Greg Ellsworth had to turn the student’s phone on, then look for the application that deals with photos, then go through all of the photos. When he did this, he found nude and semi-nude photos of the then seventeen year old girl.

First problem. The principal should never have searched the contents of the phone. This is an invasion of privacy akin to what happened down near Philly, when the district gave students laptops then snapped photos of them in their bedrooms. What’s on a person’s phone is theirs and theirs alone. Yes, that last sentence rhymed and had an inherent rhythm to it, but that’s not the focus here. The principal violated this girl’s right to privacy. She shouldn’t have been on her phone, she was punished by having it taken away. Done deal. But this principal is either a pervert or a voyeur or runs his school like a totalitarian dictator. I wonder if he enjoyed looking at this girl naked? Seems to me like he was looking at child porn, right?

Which brings me to my second point. The Detective in the case, Ide, told the girl she should’ve waited unitl she was 18, then modeled for Playboy. Well, to make that statement, he had to have made a judgment of her physical attributes, which were displayed sans clothes. That means he looked at “child porn” for more than just legal reasons.

Detective Ide and Principal Ellsworth should be fired. At least one is a lecher, and neither understand law or privacy or have the respect necessary to do their jobs in a reasonable and fair way. They both sicken me and are a disgrace to their professions.
Sexting is a stupid practice. Teenagers, and adults for that matter, should avoid it, given the ease with which the digital age allows for this information to get out there. But a teenager taking a photo of herself, for her own purposes or to share with a boyfriend or whatever, shouldn’t be criminal. Teenagers having sex isn’t criminal, is it? No. Now if some lecherous scumbag solicits the teenagers, gets in receipt of these and uses them maliciously, sure, go after them, but not the teenagers. Aside from the fact that teens may not understand the consequences fully, they have rights.

The ACLU is right to go after this district, the detective, the DA (Skumanick), and anybody else involved in this trampling and disregard of civil liberties.

Arizona, quickly becoming a Teabagger racist, xenophobic paradise, has continued its march to white purity with a brand new law making it okay to fire teachers with funny accents.

Arizona’s Department of Education instructed school districts to remove teachers who speak with accented English. That happened in New York in the 1930s when Eastern European Jews immigrated to the US and wanted to teach. Sorry, no matter how brilliant you are, you don’t talk real good so git.
This is another example of the purging of brown people with funny names. I’ve used those two terms satirically when referring to Arizona. I should’ve added “funny accents” to the litany but the I couldn’t predict the depths to with Arizona would sink.

My bad.

So a Catholic school in Boston has barred the son of a lesbian from attending. Why? Because the child’s mother is a lesbian. This is absurd is so many ways and it’s indicative, as pretty much every church activity is indicative, of why the church cares nothing for its flock when dogma is concerned. This child is being punished because of his mother. The church is against murder. Should the children of murderers be barred from the church?

To quote H.L. Mencken: “Religion is fundamentally opposed to everything I hold in veneration — courage, clear thinking, honesty, fairness, and, above all, love of the truth.”

I got a letter about a pro-medical marijuana rally in Wilkes-Barre. I’m all for legalizing and taxing the hell out of it. Here you are:

“I am writing to inform you about a rally for medical marijuana that will be held in Wilkes Barre on Friday May 7th from 11am to 6pm. It will be held on Public Square and there will be free music, speakers and more. It is a rally intended to help pass House Bill 1393, the bill that would make marijuana medically legal here in PA.”

Allow me to give you some background.  Arizona recently passed a law that allows officers to request somebody provide proof of residence if they are under reasonable suspicion of being in America illegally.  They also passed a law that says presidential candidates must present their birth certificates to get on the ballot.

Let’s look at the latter first, as a stark example of racism.  Arizona didn’t need Bush’s birth certificate when he ran.  Obama’s birth in Hawaii is well-documented, both confirmed by the state and birth announcements in local papers.  So why the distrust over Obama, but not Bush?  Hmm… What’s the starkest difference between them?  Ah.  Obama has brown skin.

So, “reasonable suspicion” of being illegal probably means what?  Pale skin, blond hair, and blue eyes?  Nope, that’s just the Aryan ideal that Arizona’s legislature wants in their state.  As you’ve all no doubt figured out, “reasonable suspicion” means being brown.  And probably having a funny name, too.

J.D. Hayworth, the guy running to the right of John McCain in the Republican Senate primary, said the law is “an opportunity to stand up for our culture.”   Which culture?  America is founded on cultural diversity.  Do you mean white culture?  Of course you do.

Proponents of this law likely point out that freed slaves had to carry paperwork proving they were free pre-Emancipation.  Nothing wrong with that!  Brownies should have to carry paperwork, too!  Ah, but the point isn’t that people shouldn’t be here illegally.  The point is that this will lead to racial profiling, which is illegal.

But some say that there won’t be racial profiling, that the cops just won’t do it.

Aside from me not believing that, local municipalities are allowed, under this law, to sue their local police departments if they believe they are not fully and adequately enforcing this law.  So… to avoid lawsuits the local police will have to question people’s status.   And you’re going to tell me that won’t lead to racial profiling?

This law is a blemish on America.  It violates the Equal Protection clause and it further tries to regulate a federal government’s territory on a state level.  Hopefully it’ll be overturned.

But why am I bringing this up?  Well, aside from the fact that an American state has legalized discrimination, pushing back civil rights to right back before the Civil Rights Act, Pennsylvania has two prominent political figures who just plain love this law.  One, Pat Toomey, is already subhuman in his compassion for others.  But the other is State Representative Daryl Metcalfe, currently running for Lieutenant Governor.  Of course, both are Republicans.

The Republican Party in Pennsylvania has sunk to a level I can’t even begin to describe nor fathom.  This is what it means to be Republican?  To consider oneself patriotic while stepping on people of a different skin color?  I know that Republicans are the Party of White People, but, as a party, they should condemn this racist law and those that support it.

Recently, many articles, columns, and letters-to-the-editor have defended the Catholic Church and particularly the Pope against what apologists see as some sort of left-wing secular attack on religion.

While I’m all for left-wing secular attacks on religion, let’s just back up a second. It’s looking like the Pope knew of sexual abuse, and hid it. It routinely comes out that priests and bishops hide abuse. The Church regularly gets convicted of crimes involving sexual abuse around the world. A few years back, it was Boston, now it’s Ireland, Germany, Italy, and probably just about every country that the Catholic Church exists in.

So… secular attack? How about attacking institutionalized pedophilia-null? You know, the Pope, following that whole Christian thing, instead of defending himself and having his subordinates defend him, should ask forgiveness. Isn’t that what Christians do when they do bad things, like hide or ignore the rape and molestation of children? The church is supposed to be a place of trust, a sanctuary. Evidence points to the contrary.

Philadelphia’s new DA will reduce penalties on those caught with small amounts of marijuana. Offenders will now pay a fine instead of facing jail time. This is good on multiple levels. First off, who cares if people smoke pot? I say legalize it and tax it to hell.

But that won’t happen anytime soon, so the next argument, and one that also affects our pocketbook, is that it will reduce the prison population, which is explosive at this point. Smoking marijuana isn’t a violent offense and should be carrying prison sentences that only serve to strain the system.

The state should follow suit and either amend its prosecutorial policy or the laws outright.

Just as an example of why Charter Schools are a total disaster, a Philidelphia Charter school doubles up as a nightclub. Why is that allowed to happen? Well, Harambee Institute of Science and Technology is private, but run with public funds. They are housed in a building with a liquor license. How nice. And since these charters are private, and have little local, state, or federal oversight, they can do whatever they want. In the case of Harambee, at night, people go to the school, get drunk, and, according to a YouTube video, some weed at the school. Party time, baby! Then kids come to the school to learn. Best of both worlds!
In our own region, the Pocono Mountain Charter School doubles up as a church and is run by the church’s ministry. Awesome!

This is why charters are a disaster. Obama is wrong on charters. PA Gov candidates Rohrer and Williams are wrong on charters.

Their existence is a problem.

Both Pro and Anti Health Care Reform protestors are not allowed to protest or demonstrate outside Rep. Chris Carney’s office. Why? Because the owner of the office park says it’s private property.

Okay, if it were fenced in, not open to pedestrians, or were a residential area, I could understand this. But this is a Congressman’s office in an office park where businesses need people to show up. Pedestrian traffic is allowable. But because a person owns this, and it’s a private business holding, despite renting to other businesses, nobody can express opinions or exercise their right to Free Assembly. The owner is collecting a rent check from our government and holding an office of our government. It is pathetic and wrong that people, regardless of belief, cannot protest or make their views known. This reminds me of “Free Speech Zones” during political conventions. Last I checked, America was a Free Speech zone.

This is just another example of our rights being eroded in the name of business. But, hey, according to our Republican Supreme Court, businesses are people, too.

The front page photo of the Times speaks volumes, and I’m glad they put it there. A man with a sign that reads “Carney do not abort us” stands ignorantly by the side of the road. Sure, I’m disparaging these people. Reason doesn’t work with them.

Moving on.

This high drama of protests and teabagging and all of that is a distraction from what’s really going on. The reality of health care is that 44,000 people die per year because they lack health care. The reality is that somebody I care about has a $9,000 hospital bill that he can’t pay because he can’t get a job that has health care, despite having a degree (Steve Solieri ignorantly said he could get a job in another state – newsflash, moving and traveling costs money). The reality is that I am a diabetic and now have a pre-existing condition and would be denied health care if I try to get it on the “free market.” The reality is that the Congressional Budget Office said that health care reform would REDUCE the budget deficit.

What the hell is wrong with these Teabag people?

I’ll tell you. Carney is getting blasted with ads from organization that are corporate funded. They get fancy names like the American Freedom Foundation, or whatever, and then they get donations from business. Then they run ads that mislead, deceive, and play to all of the sad fear that average people have. Outrage is manufactured and maintained by misdirection.

All this “No to Obamacare” garbage is a good example. Obama didn’t write or propose the Senate or House bill. The two chambers wrote their own bills. It isn’t Obamacare. It’s a Senate Bill and a House Bill.

But try telling that to these slaves to the machine. It’s funny, too, because the business world has convinced these people that what’s good for them is actually bad for them.

Ah, the American way.

Selective activism by the local Diocese is a sad indictment of their lack of true passion.  Cindy Sheehan, who lost her son in Iraq and became an anti-war activist, was banned from speaking about the war because of her abortion views.  This is symptomatic of why the church strives for irrelevance.  War is bad, that something Sheehan and the church can agree on.  But demanding 100% purity and concurrence on all things is an impossibility among even the best of friends and the closest families.  So the Church told Sheehan to screw off, because they don’t agree with her on some issues.

The Catholic Church should release a survey asking what each of their members believes about issues like abortion and gay marriage.  If any of them isn’t 100% pure Catholic, then the church, in its attempt to be consistent, should excommunicate them.

If not, then they are refusing to remain in line with “the teaching of the church” as Bill Genello, diocesan spokesman, said.  If they aren’t consistent, then you have to ask, why are they barring Sheehan?  Probably press.  How nice and shallow.

Local Toyota Dealer Greg Gagorik believes that the government is out to get Toyota, because Democrats who are asking questions got union donations.

Firstly, all Democrats get union donations.  Democrats support unions, which in turn support living wages, workers’ rights, etc.

Secondly, Greg needs to remember that Toyota put out a demonstrably bad product.  THAT is why Toyota is taking a hit.  I just watched a story on MSNBC that some of the “fixed” Toyotas are still having the acceleration problem.  Not good.

I think a wonderful byproduct of this is that American car companies are seeing more business go their way.  That supports the American economy and keeps people working in America, unlike profits heading overseas.

But it’s a bit of a stretch to think that the government is targeting Toyota for killing people (27 people died because of their defect, that we know of) in some sort of plot to boost American car sales.

Part of me wants to say it must be a slow news day, that nobody can really want to ever pick up a pen and write a story about a woman who saw Jesus in a sauce bucket.

But another part of me wants to say that the Times is just sad and that “human interest” pieces, which I guess this is, are pathetic attempts to get people reading.  Well, they got me to read.  And then puke.

No, my puke didn’t look like Jesus.  More like Rush Limbaugh, but most large masses of bile usually do.

Jesus and the Virgin Mary, who often desire breaks from saving souls and listening to people pray to them all day, every so often indulge their need for a vacation and, as any major deity would do, find the most mundane object they can transfer their spiritual essence to for a while.  Because their spiritual force is so powerful, when they leave, and go back to Paradise, an imprint of their visit will forever remain.

Hence the pizza bucket.  Or French toast.  Or tortillas.

I would’ve told the people over at Brownie’s to ignore the mold, that’s just his beard.  But they decided to wash out the bucket, because it would be disrespectful and cannibalistic for Jesus to get dumped onto some bread and eaten.

Actually, maybe he wouldn’t mind.

The appointment of the new Bishop of the Diocese of Scranton, Monsignor Bambera, has drawn the ire of SNAP, which is the Survivor’s Network of those Abused by Priests.  Why?  Turns out that, according to the group (this comes courtesy of the Times Leader), “Under oath, Bambera admitted that barely a decade ago, he refused to report a credibly accused predator priest to police, in violation of his diocese’s own child sex abuse policy.”  And then it gets better: “He also admitted relying on the word of an accused priest without even questioning that cleric’s alleged victim.  This decision raises a troubling question: Is it that hard for the Vatican to find good, smart priests who have not concealed horrific crimes against kids?”

Nice.

It is no secret that the Catholic Church, worldwide, has a sordid past, both recently and in history.  Appointing somebody who admittedly believes the reputation of the Church is more important than justice and truth might need to rethink the master they supposedly serve.  Last I checked, Christ didn’t care too much about reputation, and cared more about doing right.

As an atheist, I’m very suspicious of religion, but not dismissive of the philosophical teachings of Christ, whom I find brilliant and a role model, whether or not he existed in the form presented to us.  He advocated helping the poor and needy, he preached of the obligation of the wealthy to give up their wealth, and he preached that people should treat others with the dignity and respect that they wanted afforded to themselves.

So when a supposed follower, so devoted that they swear celibacy (not required by Jesus, by the way), decides to hide truth in favor of maintaining an image, it disgraces the institution.

Don’t Ask Don’t Tell is a shameful policy, and inherently discriminatory. America, land of the free, home of the brave (except if you’re gay, then you can’t marry people you love, visit them in the hospital, or serve your country in foreign wars if you’re a male who goes tanning).

People who want to fight for this country, to die for its ideals and its people, can’t do it if they’re openly gay. Absurd. We’ve lost dozens of military personnel who are fluent in Arabic because they either admitted they were gay, or were outed. Why is this even an issue?

Aside from a recent Research 2000 Poll that said twenty-some percent of Republicans said that gay people shouldn’t be allowed to teach children, most people aren’t that inherently hateful.

If an openly gay serviceman would harm morale, as some argue, then there is a problem with bigotry in the army. That problem is not a gay problem, it is the problem of straights who are intolerant. That would be like punishing black people when whites are racist.

Predictably, Republican Senators have spoken up and said they will fight any change to DADT. They really should say it, instead of hiding behind fluffy “reasoning”: Republican Senators hate gay people, are discriminatory bigots, and only follow law and Constitution (Equal Protection anybody?) when it suits them. And their worst of crime of all: deluding themselves into thinking that they don’t do any of those things.

Gays who want to serve in the military are far braver than Americans that don’t, especially since they want to fight to defend people who don’t respect or outright discriminate against who they are.

The murder of George Tiller, a doctor who performed abortions out in Nebraska should be a cut and dry case. He was murdered in cold blood while in church by Scott Roeder, who is obviously an insane terrorist, but since he’s pro-life, I guess they don’t call it terrorism. Maybe he needs a beard and a Middle Eastern-sounding name.

The reason this case is no longer cut and dry is because the judge has decided to allow Roeder to argue that he was doing this in defense of others’ lives, which is only a manslaughter charge. As in, if you murder somebody because of your political beliefs, it’s not really murder, it’s manslaughter and not as much of a crime.

Scott Roeder is a scum and a hypocrite. Murdering somebody isn’t very pro-life, whatever your views on abortion. It is extreme and it is domestic terrorism.

If somebody argued that murdering Bush in 2003, before the invasion of Iraq, would save lives, that probably wouldn’t fly in the court of law. Or Guantanamo, where I’m sure you’d be sent and tortured as an enemy combatant (whatever the hell that is).
The issue isn’t even about pro-life, or pro-choice (actually, I’d argue that I’m pro-life, since I don’t want people to get abortions, but I’m pro-choice, because I think the moral choice belongs to the individual and not the government), it’s about murder. The fact that the judge is allowing this man to argue for a lesser charge glosses over the fact, removes culpability, and justifies a violent, radical agenda against people with whom we should disagree rationally.

But I guess terrorism is cool in some places, if that person is pro-choice.

I’m sure many NEPAers are not frequent fliers, but the increased security at airports warrants a brief word. Currently, people have a 1 in 500,000 chance of being struck by lightning. What are the chances of dying on an airplane in a violent incident? About 22 in 1,000,000,000 (from fivethirtyeight.com statistician Nate Silver).

So, why, then, do we need full body scanners? These machines will allow screeners to see through clothing. You know, those X-Ray goggles teenagers dreamed of in the days of yore? They’re here. And if you want to get on a plane, you have to let people see you naked. Some people believe this is a fair trade, like the government and whatever companies will make money producing this equipment and the people who’ve been intimidated and manipulated by fear-mongering.

In the UK, there are concerns that these scanners violate child pornography laws. That’s a damn good point. So it’s now okay to look at little children naked to preserve our safety? That’s bad enough, but this voyeurism as applied to adults naked is also naughty (and not the good kind of naughty). Most people don’t want strangers looking at them naked, last I checked.

It’s like a strip search without the strip. You keep your clothes on, but still lose your dignity! I love to quote Ben Franklin, and I’ll do it again, “Those who sacrifice freedom for safety deserve neither and lose both.” So we’ll be safe from terrorists, those 22 one of 1 billion who fall victim, but we’ll allow for people to look at little kids naked as long as the lookers are security personnel trained in staring at people naked. That’s okay, somehow.

Wake up, people.

Dunmore, in a clever move, decided that parking is the real reason that a Methadone Clinic shouldn’t go up in their town.  The problem wasn’t misinformation, or a moratorium from Ken Smith, or a “not in my town” mentality, or total denial of a drug problem, or ignorance.

Nope.  It was parking.

The company proposing the clinic, Habit OPCO, will appeal the decision and rightfully so.  Good for them.  They want to help people, whether or not Dunmore does.

Hopefully the area will see a methadone clinic, and addicts will get the treatment they need to reintegrate into society in a healthy and productive way.  Again, these clinics reduce the presence of drug addicts and help reduce drug-related crime.

Wake up, people.

Given the absurd amount of anti-Constitution, pro-Christianity letters-to-the-editor in the Scranton Times today, it’s appropriate to respond with a little context for everybody.

Let’s take a look at a quote the Treaty of Tripoli, signed by John Adams in 1797: “As the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion…”

Wait.  Did he just say “not, in any sense”?  Well, Lordy-loo.  Not even a modicum of the Christian religion?  Well, that just about throws all of these “America is a Christian nation” arguments out the window, doesn’t it?  That’s a Founder’s signature on an official American document.

Thomas Jefferson, in a letter to the Danbury Baptists, wrote, “Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely between man and his god… I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their ‘legislature’ should “make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof,’ thus building a wall of separation between church and State.”  So, religion is personal, not governmental.  And the separation clause in the Constitution creates a wall between religion and government.  That sounds to me like government buildings shouldn’t be having religious displays, which is the impetus for all the letters-to-the-editor today.

The ACLU, rather than being a horned demon, is defending the principles this country was founded upon, while zealots throw those principles out the window in the name of their religion.  Which of the two groups are more dangerous to America, then?